China’s drive to encourage start-ups at universities could place undue risk on some students driven to open ventures without sufficient backing, especially if they come from less privileged backgrounds.
New findings “raise ethical questions about the mass promotion of entrepreneurship in the absence of concrete support or due considerations of those who fail”, say researchers from The Education University of Hong Kong (EdUHK), the University of Hong Kong and the International Centre for Higher Education Innovation (ICHEI) in Shenzhen.
“Unemployed graduate to the next Jack Ma? A counter-narrative to the entrepreneurship movement in higher education”, a paper published this month in Higher Education, refers to the internet tycoon who founded the e-commerce giant Alibaba, despite a less-than-stellar early academic record. Mr Ma is now upheld as a rags-to-riches icon, and was cited as an inspiration by some students interviewed for this study.
“As higher education has expanded in recent years, there is a growing expectation that universities do more to demonstrate their economic contribution to societies,” Ewan Wright, an assistant professor in the department of education policy and leadership at EdUHK and co-author of the paper, told Times Higher Education. “It is hoped that students can take up new roles as successful entrepreneurs”, as a way to boost both economic growth and the employment prospects of graduates, he said. “Yet, such hopes do not always filter down smoothly to universities and their students.”
Despite “planting seeds” about an “exciting career option and way to contribute to the country’s development”, the reality behind China’s initiative was that mass entrepreneurship among students is “unlikely to be realised”, the paper says.
“We are not arguing that universities should discourage students from starting a business – rather that students should be made aware of the risks and, when promoted, given appropriate guidance and resources,” Dr Wright said.
A 2015-16 initiative required all Chinese universities to increase entrepreneurial activity and for all undergraduates to complete credit-bearing entrepreneurship courses.
However, the paper says that institutions lacked qualified faculty, while “curriculum reform” largely involved renaming or expanding existing courses.
Meanwhile, funding for undergraduates is scarce. At one university, seed money was only RMB1,000 to 1,500 (£110 to £167). After that, students were expected to spend RMB80,000 before they could reach another level of start-up funding.
The researchers interviewed 100 final-year undergraduates from two universities in Guangdong, a province bordering Hong Kong and Macau, which together make up the government’s Greater Bay Area technology hub plan. They chose humanities and social sciences students, in order to garner perspectives from those who may be “less clear” entrepreneurship candidates.
Students were initially enthusiastic about entrepreneurship, a sentiment that was “most common among potentially vulnerable groups” from rural or economically depressed areas. They looked forward to a “better life by pursuing individual passions, interests and freedom in a career”.
However, many said that instructors had no entrepreneurship experience or know-how. “Then, when that class has finished, you are left by yourself. You cannot get help from them,” said one economics student.
Of the 100 interviewees, 86 dismissed opening a business as a “remote possibility”.
Of the 14 students who tried or planned to open a business, six failed. One did not want to admit to her parents that she had lost her personal savings. Another spent so much time on his start-up that he graduated a year late.
Those from “economically disadvantaged backgrounds…may be most vulnerable to the negative impact of business failure”, Dr Wright said.
The remaining eight who remained positive about entrepreneurship still lacked concrete business plans.
