Different causes of closure of Small Business Enterprises: alternative models for competing risks survival analysis

IF 0.6 Q4 STATISTICS & PROBABILITY Electronic Journal of Applied Statistical Analysis Pub Date : 2020-02-05 DOI:10.1285/I20705948V13N1P211
C. Caroni, F. Pierri
{"title":"Different causes of closure of Small Business Enterprises: alternative models for competing risks survival analysis","authors":"C. Caroni, F. Pierri","doi":"10.1285/I20705948V13N1P211","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We examine the time until closure of Small Business Enterprises in Umbria, Italy between 2008 and 2013, and the factors that influence it. Earlier analysis, using Cox regression, considered failure (closure) from any cause. However, there are different reasons for inactivity: voluntary winding-up (1808 of 15184 firms in our data, 59.3% of the 3049 failures); bankruptcy (236, 7.7%); and closure without action by creditors or courts (1005, 33.0%). While the earlier analysis provides a valuable overall picture, it is also interesting to ex- amine the separate causes, their rates of occurrence and which factors influence them separately. We do this using competing risks analyses, employing both of the regression methods that are prominent in the literature, based on cause-specific and sub-distribution hazard functions (Fine-Gray model). Furthermore, a proportional odds model was used to estimate cumulative incidences of failure by cause. Data included the firm's year of foundation, location, legal form and sector of activity. Financial indexes were constructed from annual balance sheets. The date and reason for closure were recorded if the firrm ceased activity. Findings included major differences between types of firm; for example, cooperatives had greatly increased hazards for winding-up (HR of 2.44 and 2.61 in the two approaches) but greatly reduced hazards for closure (0.48 and 0.45) compared to publicly traded companies. All-causes analysis averaged these strong effects into an insignicant one (1.05). Coefficients from the proportional odds model were similar to those from the Fine-Gray model, but have the advantage of interpretability.","PeriodicalId":44770,"journal":{"name":"Electronic Journal of Applied Statistical Analysis","volume":"13 1","pages":"211-228"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Electronic Journal of Applied Statistical Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1285/I20705948V13N1P211","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"STATISTICS & PROBABILITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

We examine the time until closure of Small Business Enterprises in Umbria, Italy between 2008 and 2013, and the factors that influence it. Earlier analysis, using Cox regression, considered failure (closure) from any cause. However, there are different reasons for inactivity: voluntary winding-up (1808 of 15184 firms in our data, 59.3% of the 3049 failures); bankruptcy (236, 7.7%); and closure without action by creditors or courts (1005, 33.0%). While the earlier analysis provides a valuable overall picture, it is also interesting to ex- amine the separate causes, their rates of occurrence and which factors influence them separately. We do this using competing risks analyses, employing both of the regression methods that are prominent in the literature, based on cause-specific and sub-distribution hazard functions (Fine-Gray model). Furthermore, a proportional odds model was used to estimate cumulative incidences of failure by cause. Data included the firm's year of foundation, location, legal form and sector of activity. Financial indexes were constructed from annual balance sheets. The date and reason for closure were recorded if the firrm ceased activity. Findings included major differences between types of firm; for example, cooperatives had greatly increased hazards for winding-up (HR of 2.44 and 2.61 in the two approaches) but greatly reduced hazards for closure (0.48 and 0.45) compared to publicly traded companies. All-causes analysis averaged these strong effects into an insignicant one (1.05). Coefficients from the proportional odds model were similar to those from the Fine-Gray model, but have the advantage of interpretability.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
小企业倒闭的不同原因:竞争风险生存分析的替代模型
我们研究了2008年至2013年间意大利翁布里亚小企业倒闭的时间,以及影响倒闭的因素。早期的分析使用Cox回归,考虑了任何原因的失败(倒闭)。然而,不活跃有不同的原因:自愿清盘(在我们的数据中,15184家公司中有1808家,3049家倒闭公司中有59.3%);破产(236,7.7%);以及在没有债权人或法院采取行动的情况下关闭(1005,33.0%)。虽然早期的分析提供了一个有价值的整体情况,但也有兴趣了解单独的原因、发生率以及哪些因素分别影响它们。我们使用竞争风险分析来完成这项工作,使用文献中突出的两种回归方法,基于特定原因和亚分布风险函数(Fine Gray模型)。此外,使用比例优势模型来估计因原因导致的累积故障发生率。数据包括该公司成立年份、地点、法律形式和活动领域。财务指数是根据年度资产负债表构建的。如果firrm停止活动,则记录关闭的日期和原因。调查结果包括公司类型之间的主要差异;例如,与上市公司相比,合作社倒闭的风险大大增加(两种方法的HR分别为2.44和2.61),但倒闭的风险却大大降低(0.48和0.45)。所有原因分析将这些强烈影响平均为微不足道的影响(1.05)。比例优势模型的系数与精细格雷模型的系数相似,但具有可解释性的优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
14.30%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Exploratory Data Analysis of Accuracy of US Weather Forecastes Extended asymmetry model based on logit transformation and decomposition of symmetry for square contingency tables with ordered categories Generalized Quasi Lindley Distribution: Theoretical Properties, Estimation Methods, and Applications Almost unbiased ridge estimator in the count data regression models Does the elimination of work flexibility contribute to reducing wage inequality? Empirical evidence from Ecuador
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1