Report on: The Future of Public Efforts to Boost Entrepreneurship and Venture Capital

Raise of new high potential business and venture capital is of critical important to economic growth. Considered in-depth rule can affect the opportunity, but many public initiatives are out of control. This article reviews the evidence behind these claims, and criteria that can describe the appropriate and inappropriate policies to encourage efforts capital and entrepreneurial potential. These issues is timely, given the billions of dollars issued by the government to spend to raise a troubled industries such as cars, and public efforts to promptly promote ''green shoots" in areas such as clean technology in the hope of stimulating economic recovery. To understand their importance, we can compare Jamaica and Singapore. Both are relatively small state, population just under 5000000. When Singapore's independence in

1965, 3 years after the establishment of their own, they get their domestic gross product (in U.S. Dollars in 2006) is $ 2,650, while Jamaica has a rate of gross domestic product (in U.S. Dollars in 2006) marginally higher at $ 2,850 per person in Jamaica, slightly higher from the Singapore. Though, four decades later, their position radically diverse: Singapore increased to $31.400 per capita GDP (2006 data, in current dollars), while the figure Jamaica only $4,800. There are many explanations of this issue occurred. After independence, Singapore antagonistically capitalize infrastructure such as ports, subsidized education system, to maintain an open and corruption-free economy, and provide independent wealth funds that make various investments. It also has benefited from its strategic position on major sea lanes leading to and from East Asia. Meanwhile, Jamaica, for many years delayed in political instability, especially the administration of Michael Manley disaster during the 1970's. dramatic shift from the socialist orientation of market economy and back again, with the attendant inflation, economic instability, crippling public debt, and violence, which made the growth and application of long-term constancy of economic policy difficult. The government has tried numerous measures to develop the entrepreneurial sector, such as distribution of public funds for venture investors trying to find in the city state, subsidies for firms in targeted technologies, encourage potential entrepreneurs and mentors for immature efforts, subsidies for leading biotechnology researchers to move their laboratories to Singapore and the award for entrepreneurs who fail (with the hope of reassuring adventuresome).

There are various speculations about government intervention to stimulate either positive or negative. Rationale for the government to make investments on three supports, first and the role of technological innovation to stimulate economic growth is now widely recognized. Economists have suggested a very significant relationship between technological progress and economic prosperity. Based on Morris Abramowitz (1956) that there are two ways to improve economic productivity that is by increasing the number of inputs that go into the production process. For example, by having staff that are able to work until age 67 are more improved productivity and not retired at 62. The second step is to develop new ways to get more output from the same input. Second support is the academic research has emphasized the role of entrepreneurship and venture capital in fostering innovation. Much research has related measures of innovative research findings, for example, and development (R & D) spending, patents, or inventions-size firms. There are three principles that can guide the correct use of measures to strengthen the entrepreneurial that is remember that entrepreneurial activity does not exist in a vacuum, let the market provide direction and resist the temptation to over engineer. Important aspects of entrepreneurship may seem flexible environment for example, the importance of a robust public market for young firms as investments led to the effort. It is important to take a broad perspective and not only address availability of capital but also other components productive arena in which entrepreneurs can to operate. Government programs should reduce the effort to provide assistance in the process of micro-entrepreneurship. Although it is natural to expect that firms and groups that receive subsidies will continue to maintain a local presence or local regional targets for investment, these requirements should be minimal as possible. We can also highlight a number of other matters that are important to success in enhancing entrepreneurship that is by leverage the local academic scientific and research based, respect the need for conformity to global standards, recognize the long lead times with public venture initiatives, avoid initiatives that are too large or too small, understand the importance of global interactions, institutionalize careful evaluation of initiatives, realize that programs need creativity and flexibility and lastly recognize the agency problems are universal and take steps to minimize their danger.

For overall, we can determine businesses can grow as recovery occurs, and higherfunctioning individuals can pursue larger or more complicated plans. Successful entrepreneurs can train other group members, form new groups, locate other sources of investment capital, and gain access to mainstream credit after they have established sufficient savings. Although not insurmountable, several potential challenges exist. State-provided financial incentives are needed to compensate for hesitancy to invest in what is seen as highrisk, low-return enterprises. Public support and private-sector contributions are therefore crucial. Furthermore, loan providers and recipients require training and oversight, because both parties can lose financial viability as a result of mismanagement and capital loss. Finally, loan processing requirements and time delays must be avoided, because lending institutions need to respond quickly to small-scale enterprises that rely on funds at critical junctures. The strategy has potential. In addition to increasing income, life control, confidence, and self-esteem, microcredit can connect members of borrower groups who might otherwise experience a high degree of societal exclusion. These organizations located in the importance of innovation in inspiring economic growth, the role of entrepreneurship firms as instruments of innovation, and historical evidence and theoretical influences suggest that the government can play a role in promoting entrepreneurial. At the same time, many of the barriers exist for the implementation of public programs that effectively with these goals. Challenges faced and principles that can be lead to more effective programs.