Or was it a positive effect of New Zealand's unprecedented period of liberalisation that forced us into entrepreneurship?
Whatever it is, the Aussies share it as well (they came in just behind us) as do the Mexicans and Brazilians.
Much to crow about, but where's the rub? Why haven't we created more wealth in New Zealand? I see two reasons.
For one, the aspirations of our entrepreneurs are modest.
Half of New Zealand's entrepreneurs aim to start a six-person business in the inward-looking service industry focused on the Auckland market.
Only a small percentage of new entrepreneurial firms could be classified as dynamic, export-oriented businesses.
Why such low aspirations? It's the general lack of skills needed for successful new venturing and a tendency to create lifestyle-oriented rather than growth-oriented businesses.
The second reason is the entrepreneurial gap between our high rate of attempts and our low-to-moderate survival rate. Start-up activity does not necessarily equate to success.
This gap must be filled with policies that address these issues. How can we fill the gap?
First, a strong commitment to education is clearly justified.
Schools have a tendency to reinforce the dependency of the job seeker rather than to identify students who will be the country's future job creators.
At primary and secondary levels, more emphasis should be placed on teaching initiative, self-sufficiency, as well as entrepreneurial, opportunity-driven thinking.
At tertiary level, enterprise education should be strongly expanded.
Second, there is no greater initiative a country can take to realise higher levels of entrepreneurial activity than to encourage more of its women to participate and share their success.
For those women predisposed to entrepreneurship but in sectors such as education and social service where opportunities for entrepreneurship are limited, proper training, strong incentives and role models may be effective.
Third, there is technology. Entrepreneurship is the means by which societies extract value from innovations. Increased investment in technology development is associated with higher levels of entrepreneurship.
Fourth, there is culture.
A more difficult but important task involves increasing the social acceptance of entrepreneurship.
We need to encourage toleration of diversity in income and wealth. As long as this diversity reflects appropriate contributions to national economic growth, it should be recognised.
We also need to accept the inevitability of business failures.
Business failure should never be confused with personal failure. At the Macro level, business failures are necessary for the efficient operation and adaptation of the economy.
Benchmarks such as GEM confirm that innovation is part of our national culture.
Now we know that we are also one of the world's most entrepreneurial countries.
With a result like this we might finally realise we're world class globally, not just world-famous in New Zealand.
Many new questions warrant more research. How can we expand the high rate of informal investment in entrepreneurial activity?
What do women entrepreneurs have to teach the rest of us? How can Maori build upon an apparently good base? How can the education system refocus on the needs of entrepreneurs?
If we find a sponsor for next year's research, we plan to focus on these and other questions. As the GEM programme expands the range of participating countries and builds up a longitudinal portrayal of entrepreneurship and its relationship to growth, more precise answers will be forthcoming.
* Professor Howard Frederick is director of Unitec's New Zealand Centre for Innovation & Entrepreneurship.
Unitec's GEM report
nzherald.co.nz/entrepreneur
Full coverage of the GEM Report
