All for one? The Paycheck Protection Program distribution disparity

Jill R. Kickul, Mark D. Griffiths, Colleen C. Robb, L. Gundry
{"title":"All for one? The Paycheck Protection Program distribution disparity","authors":"Jill R. Kickul, Mark D. Griffiths, Colleen C. Robb, L. Gundry","doi":"10.1108/jepp-03-2021-0027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeGiven the previous research on the disparities of lending rates and their relationship with lending institutions for women-owned and minority-owned businesses, the study poses the research question: How much Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) funding was distributed to women-owned and minority-owned businesses in comparison to other firms? Additionally, as the purpose of the PPP funding was to assist small businesses in retaining their workforce, the authors pose a second research question: Of those who received PPP funding, how many jobs on average were retained? And importantly related to our first research question, are there differences across gender and race in the average number of jobs retained?Design/methodology/approachThis is one of the first empirical studies with an initial sample size of 661,218 loans from July 2020 that examines whether the United States PPP had the intended impact to save jobs in small businesses and to examine any reported differences across gender and race in loans issued and jobs saved.FindingsThe authors find that significant differences exist between women- and men-owned businesses across all five loan categories, with male-owned firms receiving over 80% of PPP loans. However, women-owned firms saved more jobs on average across all but the largest loan category. Significant differences were also found between minority- and White-owned businesses with minority-owned businesses generally saving more jobs on average across most loan categories.Research limitations/implicationsA limitation of this study pertains to certain missing data that were not reported by participants. While a participant may have included their gender, they may not have included their race. Therefore, the varying sets of data may not be a reflection of the same individuals. Additionally, the industries were not included in this analysis, which may shed light on the job creation differences across gender and race.Practical implicationsMany of the industries that have been significantly impacted have been the tourism, restaurant and hospitality sectors, and knowing “where the money was allocated” can assist policymakers in allocating additional funds to those businesses, especially those who did not receive funding in the initial first waves of PPP.Originality/valueThis is one of the first empirical studies that examine over 600,000 loans and found that women-owned firms saved more jobs across all loan categories except the largest loans. Significant differences were also found between minority- and White-owned businesses with minority-owned businesses generally saving more jobs on average across most loan categories.","PeriodicalId":44503,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jepp-03-2021-0027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

PurposeGiven the previous research on the disparities of lending rates and their relationship with lending institutions for women-owned and minority-owned businesses, the study poses the research question: How much Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) funding was distributed to women-owned and minority-owned businesses in comparison to other firms? Additionally, as the purpose of the PPP funding was to assist small businesses in retaining their workforce, the authors pose a second research question: Of those who received PPP funding, how many jobs on average were retained? And importantly related to our first research question, are there differences across gender and race in the average number of jobs retained?Design/methodology/approachThis is one of the first empirical studies with an initial sample size of 661,218 loans from July 2020 that examines whether the United States PPP had the intended impact to save jobs in small businesses and to examine any reported differences across gender and race in loans issued and jobs saved.FindingsThe authors find that significant differences exist between women- and men-owned businesses across all five loan categories, with male-owned firms receiving over 80% of PPP loans. However, women-owned firms saved more jobs on average across all but the largest loan category. Significant differences were also found between minority- and White-owned businesses with minority-owned businesses generally saving more jobs on average across most loan categories.Research limitations/implicationsA limitation of this study pertains to certain missing data that were not reported by participants. While a participant may have included their gender, they may not have included their race. Therefore, the varying sets of data may not be a reflection of the same individuals. Additionally, the industries were not included in this analysis, which may shed light on the job creation differences across gender and race.Practical implicationsMany of the industries that have been significantly impacted have been the tourism, restaurant and hospitality sectors, and knowing “where the money was allocated” can assist policymakers in allocating additional funds to those businesses, especially those who did not receive funding in the initial first waves of PPP.Originality/valueThis is one of the first empirical studies that examine over 600,000 loans and found that women-owned firms saved more jobs across all loan categories except the largest loans. Significant differences were also found between minority- and White-owned businesses with minority-owned businesses generally saving more jobs on average across most loan categories.
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
全为一?工资支票保护计划的分配差距
目的鉴于之前对女性所有和少数民族所有企业的贷款利率差异及其与贷款机构的关系的研究,该研究提出了一个研究问题:与其他公司相比,有多少工资支票保护计划资金分配给了女性所有和少数民族所有的企业?此外,由于PPP资金的目的是帮助小企业留住劳动力,作者提出了第二个研究问题:在那些获得PPP资金的人中,平均保留了多少工作岗位?重要的是,与我们的第一个研究问题有关,保留的平均工作岗位数量是否存在性别和种族差异?设计/方法论/方法这是首批实证研究之一,从2020年7月开始,初始样本量为661218笔贷款,考察了美国购买力平价是否对挽救小企业就业产生了预期影响,并考察了所报告的发放贷款和挽救就业方面的性别和种族差异。研究结果作者发现,在所有五种贷款类别中,女性和男性拥有的企业之间存在显著差异,男性拥有的公司获得了超过80%的PPP贷款。然而,除了最大的贷款类别外,女性所有的公司平均节省了更多的工作岗位。少数族裔和白人拥有的企业之间也存在显著差异,少数族裔拥有的企业在大多数贷款类别中平均节省了更多的工作岗位。研究局限性/含义本研究的局限性与参与者未报告的某些缺失数据有关。虽然参与者可能包括了他们的性别,但他们可能没有包括他们的种族。因此,不同的数据集可能不是同一个人的反映。此外,这项分析中没有包括这些行业,这可能会揭示性别和种族之间创造就业的差异。实际影响许多受到重大影响的行业都是旅游业、餐饮业和酒店业,了解“资金分配到哪里”可以帮助决策者向这些企业分配额外资金,尤其是那些在最初的第一波PPP中没有获得资金的企业。独创性/价值这是最早对60多万笔贷款进行调查的实证研究之一,发现除了最大的贷款外,女性所有的公司在所有贷款类别中都保住了更多的工作。少数族裔和白人拥有的企业之间也存在显著差异,少数族裔拥有的企业在大多数贷款类别中平均节省了更多的工作岗位。
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
3.70
自引率
15.80%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: Institutions – especially public policies – are a significant determinant of economic outcomes; entrepreneurship and enterprise development are often the channel by which public policies affect economic outcomes, and by which outcomes feed back to the policy process. The Journal of Entrepreneurship & Public Policy (JEPP) was created to encourage and disseminate quality research about these vital relationships. The ultimate aim is to improve the quality of the political discourse about entrepreneurship and development policies. JEPP publishes two issues per year and welcomes: Empirically oriented academic papers and accepts a wide variety of empirical evidence. Generally, the journal considers any analysis based on real-world circumstances and conditions that can change behaviour, legislation, or outcomes, Conceptual or theoretical papers that indicate a direction for future research, or otherwise advance the field of study, A limited number of carefully and accurately executed replication studies, Book reviews. In general, JEPP seeks high-quality articles that say something interesting about the relationships among public policy and entrepreneurship, entrepreneurship and economic development, or all three areas. Scope/Coverage: Entrepreneurship, Public policy, Public policies and behaviour of economic agents, Interjurisdictional differentials and their effects, Law and entrepreneurship, New firms; startups, Microeconomic analyses of economic development, Development planning and policy, Innovation and invention: processes and incentives, Regional economic activity: growth, development, and changes, Regional development policy.
期刊最新文献
Experiences of women and minoritized US military veteran business owners: descriptive evidence on “vetrepreneur” survival and growth Barriers to scale: the effect of regulations on entrepreneurial strategies in a nascent industry Are shocks to entrepreneurship persistence? Case of a Resource-based economy Examining the antecedents of entrepreneurial propensity: a study among university students in India Context really matters: why do women artisans in the Peruvian context avoid the sole ownership of their enterprises?
×
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