Madeira's Entrepreneurship and the Shift in Incentive Strategies

International Journal of Current Science Research and Review ISSN: 2581-8341 Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V8-i10-06, Impact Factor: 8.048 IJCSRR @ 2025 www.ijcsrr.org 4922 *Corresponding Author: Sérgio Jesus Teixeira Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 Available at: www.ijcsrr.org Page No. 4922-4936 Madeira’s Entrepreneurship and the Shift in Incentive Strategies José Fábio Sobrinho1, Roberta Oliveira Melim2, Sérgio Jesus Teixeira3 1,2,3 Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Madeira, Funchal, Portugal ABSTRACT: This study aims to evaluate the evolution of the incentive strategies of the Instituto de Emprego da Madeira, IP-RAM (IEM), which translated means Madeira Employment Institute, and their impact on the number of approved projects, jobs created and promoters/entrepreneurs that emerged. It also aims to evaluate the characteristics of the jobs created, promoters or nonpromoters, their evolution, and interconnection with the literature review. In order to analyze the evolution of the entrepreneurship programs of the Madeira Employment Institute, and the characteristics of the jobs and promoters (unemployed entrepreneurs who apply for an entrepreneurship program), secondary data obtained from its annual balance reports (Emprego e Coesão Social - Breve Balanço reports), from 2011 to 2022, available on the institution's website, at https://www.iem.madeira.gov.pt/estatisticas-anuais/, where data were obtained for the period between 2009 and 2022, using a quantitative methodology and where they demonstrate the different types of programs that the Madeira Employment Institute had or has throughout the period under analysis. Global analysis of entrepreneurship programs for the unemployed in recent years, their evolution over time, and the perception of whether the objectives of government institutions are being met, as well as the analysis of the jobs created, entrepreneurs or non-entrepreneurs, depending on their characteristics. One of the main objectives of the Madeira Employment Institute is being fulfilled, which is to rationalize resources in a better way, giving greater focus to the creation of jobs globally, as well as confirming some propositions of the revision of literature, among the articles analyzed, namely in terms of the characteristics of the jobs created, promoters or non-promoters, verifying a greater propensity for entrepreneurship among male individuals who were young adults, as well as the evolution of the jobs created in terms of level of education, which has been increasingly high. This study contributes to a possible basis for a comparative analysis between regions and institutions that work to encourage entrepreneurship, as well as to understand which aspects government entities should still work on, in order to improve their results. KEYWORDS: Unemployed, Entrepreneurship, Employment, Evolution, IEM, Programs INTRODUCTION Government policies play a key role in propensity for entrepreneurship, both nationally and internationally, as well as regionally. A region that does not promote measures to support entrepreneurship, or that hinders, through its laws, policies and culture, the entrepreneurial intention, tends not to be as competitive as those that facilitate its existence, which may lead to that in economic terms it becomes distance more and more. In economic aspects, the problems of unemployment also stand out, which not only concerns a social problem, but also the regional competitiveness previously mentioned. In this context, it is intended to study the evolution of government policies implemented in the Autonomous Region of Madeira, through the regional Employment Institute, namely the programs created themselves, to encourage the entrepreneurship of the unemployed, as well as to study the evolution over time of the jobs created, promoters or non-promoters, and the propensity for entrepreneurship, or for entering the labor market according to its characteristics (gender, educational qualifications, age and previous professional experiences), interconnecting it with the literature review . The present study will have as analysis timeline the period between 2009 and 2022. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ENTREPRENEURSHIP Based on the works of Joseph A. Schumpeter, Howard H. Stevenson, Peter F. Drucker, William B. Gartner, Saras D. Sarasvathy, Scott A. Shane, Eric Ries, Julian Birkinshaw and Shaker A. Z. S. A. Mega, we can see that entrepreneurship it is widely recognized as an important driver of economic growth, job creation and innovation (Table I). Schumpeter, one of the most influential economists of the 20th century, emphasized the role of the entrepreneur in driving economic growth through innovation. Stevenson, in turn, considered entrepreneurship as a search for opportunities beyond International Journal of Current Science Research and Review ISSN: 2581-8341 Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V8-i10-06, Impact Factor: 8.048 IJCSRR @ 2025 www.ijcsrr.org 4923 *Corresponding Author: Sérgio Jesus Teixeira Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 Available at: www.ijcsrr.org Page No. 4922-4936 controlled resources. Drucker argued that entrepreneurship involves creating something new and distinctive, while Gartner explored the distinction between entrepreneurship and small business ownership. More recent authors, such as Sarasvathy, introduced concepts such as the effect and use of resources and partnerships to create enterprises. Shane emphasized the importance of access to capital and other resources for entrepreneurs, while Ries advocated using what-if methodologies to reduce risk and increase the success rate. Birkinshaw explored the challenges of entrepreneurship in large organizations, while mega investigated the role of social entrepreneurship in addressing global challenges. Understanding these authors' ideas and perspectives contributes to a better understanding of the challenges and opportunities faced by entrepreneurs, highlighting their contribution to economic and social progress. Table I. Definitions of Entrepreneurship by different authors Author Definition of Entrepreneurship Year Joseph A. Schumpeter It is a process of creative destruction, in which entrepreneurs introduce disruptive innovations, move away from old production methods and create new products, processes and markets, causing economic and social changes. 1942 Howard H. Stevenson It is the process of creating, launching and growing new projects, which involves identifying and exploiting opportunities, acquiring and allocating resources, innovation, leadership and management, with the aim of creating value and generating economic and social impact. . 1985 Peter F. Drucker It is the search for opportunities, based on existing and/or new resources, with the aim of creating economic and social value, involving the identification, evaluation and exploitation of opportunities, resource allocation, risk taking and decision making. in uncertain environments. 1986 William B. Gartner It is a social and economic process, which involves identifying and exploiting opportunities, creating and growing new ventures, and generating economic and social value. 1988 Scott A. Shane It is the process of identifying and exploiting opportunities, based on the resources, skills and experiences of entrepreneurs, with a view to creating and growing new ventures, innovation and generating economic and social value. 2003 Saras D. Sarasvathy It is a decision-making process, based on an approach that involves identifying and exploiting opportunities, taking risks, learning from action, and adapting to environmental conditions and contingencies. 2008 Eric Ries It is a mutual process of experimentation, learning and adaptation, which involves the continuous creation and validation of hypotheses, the development of innovative products and services, and the search for value creation, based on constant feedback from the market and users. 2011 Julian Birkinshaw It is a process of creating, developing and implementing new ideas and opportunities, within or outside existing organizations, with the aim of improving performance and competitiveness. 2012 Van Gelderen et al., It is a dynamic process that involves identifying and taking advantage of business opportunities, resource allocation and value creation. 2015 Tavassoli et al., Entrepreneurship can be defined as the identification, evaluation and exploitation of opportunities for the creation of economic, social or cultural value through the creation of new companies or through innovation in existing companies. 2021 PROPENSITY FOR ENTREPRENEURSHIP ACCORDING TO CHARACTERISTICS Entrepreneurship propensity refers to an individual's inclination or predisposition to initiate and manage an entrepreneurial project. It is a multidimensional construction that encompasses several cognitive, affective and behavioral characteristics that differentiate entrepreneurs from non-entrepreneurs. Scholars have extensively investigated the factors that shape the propensity for entrepreneurship, including demographic variables, personal factors, environmental factors, and cultural values. For example, several studies have shown that individuals with a higher level of education, professional experience and financial resources are more likely to become entrepreneurs (Shane, 2003; van Praag and Versloot, 2007). Likewise, personality traits such as self-efficacy, locus of control and risk-taking have been shown to be positively correlated with entrepreneurial intentions (Zhao et al., 2005; Rauch and Frese, 2007). International Journal of Current Science Research and Review ISSN: 2581-8341 Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V8-i10-06, Impact Factor: 8.048 IJCSRR @ 2025 www.ijcsrr.org 4924 *Corresponding Author: Sérgio Jesus Teixeira Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 Available at: www.ijcsrr.org Page No. 4922-4936 In terms of personal factors, gender and age are particularly relevant. Verheul et al. (2005) and Marlow, S., & McAdam, M. (2013) suggest that women are less likely to be involved in entrepreneurial activities than men. Several factors have been pointed out to explain this gender disparity, including the presence of gender stereotypes, which can limit women's opportunities in areas such as funding, access to networks and public recognition. In addition, they point out that women also face challenges related to the balance between work and personal life, which can make it difficult to reconcile their entrepreneurial activities with other responsibilities. Regarding age, Reynolds et al. (2005) suggest that the propensity for entrepreneurship is higher among young adults and decreases with age. This pattern can be explained by a greater willingness of young adults to take risks and explore new business opportunities. In addition, Shane (2009) points out that age can affect individuals' willingness to take financial and personal risks, as well as their ability to acquire resources and skills necessary for entrepreneurship. However, Bosma et al. (2012) state that it is important to note that these trends may vary according to the cultural and socioeconomic context. For example, in countries where employment opportunities are limited, the propensity for entrepreneurship may be higher across all age groups and genders. Additionally, environmental factors such as access to entrepreneurial networks, availability of finance and regulatory frameworks have also been shown to influence the propensity for entrepreneurship (Gnyawali and Fogel, 1994; Reynolds et al., 2005). Finally, cultural values such as individualism, innovation and propensity for risk are also preponderant for the progress of entrepreneurship, with studies indicating that individuals from countries with higher levels of these values are more likely to become entrepreneurs (Hofstede, 2001; Estrin et al., 2013). Despite extensive research on the subject, there is still an ongoing debate among scholars about the exact nature of the relationship between these factors and the propensity for entrepreneurship. Some argue that there are significant individual differences in entrepreneurial propensity that cannot be fully explained by demographic or psychological factors (Gartner, 1988). Others suggest that the role of culture and environment should be further considered in understanding entrepreneurship propensity (Shane and Venkataraman, 2000). Briefly, the propensity for entrepreneurship is a complex and multidimensional construction that encompasses several individual, environmental and cultural factors. While much remains to be learned about the nature and determinants of entrepreneurial propensity, existing research highlights the importance of individual traits, environmental factors, and cultural values in shaping entrepreneurial intentions and behaviors. FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE ENTREPRENEURSHIP Entrepreneurship is a complex activity that involves the creation and development of new businesses, products or services. The scientific literature has pointed out several factors that influence both the decision to become an entrepreneur and the success of the enterprise. According to Shane and Venkataraman (2000), the business environment is one of the most significant factors that influence entrepreneurship. Well-established companies in a given area can inhibit the emergence of new ventures, while areas with less business development can stimulate it. In addition, government policies such as tax incentives and training programs for entrepreneurs can also affect entrepreneurship (Audretsch et al., 2015). Social capital is another relevant factor for entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurs with a solid, quality network of contacts tend to be more successful than those who don't. The collaboration and support of other entrepreneurs, investors and mentors can help to overcome the initial challenges and increase the chances of success, being corroborated by authors such as Adler and Kwon (2002) and Burt (1997). The authors Audretsch et al. (2015) also point out that the level of education also influences entrepreneurship. The higher the educational level of the entrepreneur, the more likely he is to succeed in relation to the others. In this way, education can help in the development of skills necessary for entrepreneurship, such as planning, financial management and leadership. The intrinsic characteristics of the entrepreneur are also important factors. Self-efficacy, that is, the belief that one can perform difficult tasks, is a relevant trait for successful entrepreneurs. Other equally important traits include motivation, perseverance and the ability to take risks. Studies by authors such as Bandura et al., (1999) and McClelland (1961) support the importance of these characteristics. International Journal of Current Science Research and Review ISSN: 2581-8341 Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V8-i10-06, Impact Factor: 8.048 IJCSRR @ 2025 www.ijcsrr.org 4925 *Corresponding Author: Sérgio Jesus Teixeira Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 Available at: www.ijcsrr.org Page No. 4922-4936 It is also relevant to mention the cultural environment, as cultures that value innovation and risk are more likely to have a greater number of entrepreneurs, in contrast to cultures that discourage it, risking compromising the creation of new ventures, as corroborated by Hofstede (2001) and Gundry et al. (2014). Thus, it is essential to understand and identify these factors that prove to be useful for the creation of government policies and practical initiatives, boosting the development of new entrepreneurs. With the aim of corroborating the aforementioned factors, the study by Teixeira et al. (2018) complements this knowledge, analyzing the European panorama and providing understanding of how entrepreneurship factors can vary according to different contexts. The article by Teixeira et al. (2018) reveals that education represents a preponderant factor for entrepreneurial intention in countries like Portugal and Spain, but not in countries like Switzerland and Norway. This indicates that the influence of education may vary according to the cultural and economic context of each country. Furthermore, the article by Teixeira et al. (2018) also suggests that factors such as age, gender, previous entrepreneurial experience and access to finance can influence entrepreneurial intentions, emphasizing the importance of considering them in the analysis of entrepreneurship. GOVERNMENT POLICIES TO SUPPORT ENTREPRENEURSHIP Entrepreneurship has been increasingly recognized as an important force for the global economy. In this context, government policies to support entrepreneurship are essential for the development of new ventures and job creation. One of the most effective policies to support entrepreneurship is the provision of tax incentives. These incentives can include tax breaks for new ventures or tax breaks for companies that create jobs. According to several authors, including Audretsch et al. (2015), these incentives can be fundamental to stimulate the creation of new companies and encourage economic growth. Another important government policy is the availability of financing for new ventures. This could include low-interest loans or grants for new ventures. Some authors, such as Shane and Cable (2002), argue that lack of funding is one of the main barriers to entrepreneurship. Therefore, the availability of affordable finance is critical to supporting new ventures. The creation of education and training programs for entrepreneurs is also an important government policy. These programs may include training courses in business management, marketing, finance and other skills essential to the success of a new venture. Authors such as Brush et al. (2003) and Katz and Green (2009) argue that education and training are key to successful entrepreneurship. The creation of business incubators and accelerators is another important government policy to support entrepreneurship. These institutions provide workspace, business support and access to finance for new ventures. Authors such as Hackett and Dilts (2004) claim that business incubators and accelerators are essential to support the development of new ventures. Finally, creating networks of entrepreneurs and mentors is also an important government policy. These networks offer support and guidance to new entrepreneurs, helping them overcome challenges and develop their entrepreneurial skills. Authors such as Adler and Kwon (2002) and Chesbrough (2010) defend the importance of these networks to support entrepreneurship. In short, government policies to support entrepreneurship can include tax incentives, affordable funding, training and capacity building programs, business incubators and accelerators, and networks of entrepreneurs and mentors. Implementing these policies can be instrumental in supporting new venture creation and economic growth. BACKGROUND IN PORTUGAL AND THE AUTONOMOUS REGION OF MADEIRA Entrepreneurship has been recognized as an important driver of economic growth and job creation, and Portugal and the Autonomous Region of Madeira are no exception. In Portugal, there are several public policies and programs to encourage entrepreneurship that aim to encourage the development of startups and innovative businesses (IAPMEI - Agência para a Competitividade e Inovação, I.P., 2023). Among the most important government initiatives are Startup Portugal (Startup Portugal, 2023), which aims to create a stronger and more dynamic entrepreneurial ecosystem across the country, and Portugal Ventures (História, Visão e Valores - Portugal Ventures, 2023), which is a venture capital fund that invests in innovative startups and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) with high growth potential. In the Autonomous Region of Madeira, entrepreneurship has also been an important vector of economic development. AJEM (Associação de Jovens Empresários Madeirenses, 2023), which is the Association of Young Madeiran Entrepreneurs, has International Journal of Current Science Research and Review ISSN: 2581-8341 Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V8-i10-06, Impact Factor: 8.048 IJCSRR @ 2025 www.ijcsrr.org 4926 *Corresponding Author: Sérgio Jesus Teixeira Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 Available at: www.ijcsrr.org Page No. 4922-4936 played a key role in supporting and promoting new companies and startups. AJEM has developed training, mentoring and incubation projects, in addition to establishing partnerships with public and private entities in order to encourage entrepreneurship in the region. Nevertheless, Startup Madeira (Startup Madeira, 2023) is another important initiative in the region, which offers support to entrepreneurs in the form of incubation, acceleration and financing. The business incubator has been central to supporting the creation of new companies in the Autonomous Region of Madeira, as well as helping entrepreneurs to develop their projects and business ideas. It is also relevant to address the various initiatives implemented by the Regional Government of Madeira, in order to stimulate entrepreneurship and improve the business environment. These initiatives include establishing business incubators, financially supporting startups, creating a mentor network and promoting networking events. However, there is still room for improvement in the region's entrepreneurship ecosystem, including developing infrastructure and promoting a stronger entrepreneurial culture. An example of a public institution that adopts measures to encourage entrepreneurship is the Instituto de Emprego da Madeira, IP-RAM (IEM), which translated means Madeira Employment Institute. THE MADEIRA EMPLOYMENT INSTITUTE (IEM) AND ITS PROGRAMS The mission of this public body is “the coordination and implementation of the employment policy in the Autonomous Region of Madeira, promoting the creation and quality of employment and combating unemployment, through the implementation of active measures and actions to promote employment”, and its vision is “to find, at all times, the best answers for those who need support in the area of employment” (Missão, Visão e Valores - IEM, 2023). Unlike the IEFP, that is, the Institute of Employment and Professional Training on the Portugal mainland, IEM focuses mainly on the area of employment, with the part of professional training managed under the supervision of the Regional Secretariat for Education, Science and Technology, through the Instituto para a Qualificação, IP-RAM (IQ, IP-RAM, 2023), which translated means Institute for Qualification, while the Employment Institute, is under the supervision of the Regional Secretariat for Social Inclusion and Citizenship (Instituto de Emprego da Madeira, IP-RAM, 2023). In this sense, the Madeira Employment Institute seeks to combat unemployment in the region, through measures in favor of the population, namely acting as an intermediary institution between companies/entities and workers looking for a job. In addition to the Job Center, the Employment Institute also has an Employment Programs Department, which seeks, through financial incentives granted to companies and/or other entities (directly or indirectly), to provide an opportunity for an internship, occupational program or employment contract, to the unemployed registered in the institution (Instituto de Emprego da Madeira, IP-RAM, 2023). In this way, and in addition to benefiting the registered unemployed, through the offer of a placement, the Employment Institute also emerges as an institution that widely assists companies, since, in addition to being an intermediary in the recruitment of potential workers (by improving the efficiency in the search for human resources), it also provides financial benefits (whether through reimbursements or through bonuses), through existing programs (Instituto de Emprego da Madeira, IP-RAM, 2023). In addition to the connection between entities and users, the Employment Institute also gives the unemployed the opportunity to create their own business, that is, to create their own job. In this way, not only are opportunities at the level of employment for third parties given, but this institution also offers opportunities at the level of entrepreneurship, with financial and management support being granted to new companies created, within the scope of these programs (Instituto de Emprego da Madeira, IP-RAM, 2023). During the period under review, from 2009 to 2022, have taken place or are in progress the programs CPE – Creation of Own Employment, PADE – Support Program for Unemployed Entrepreneurs, PEED – Program to Stimulate Entrepreneurship for Unemployed People, CRIEE – Program for the Creation of Companies and Employment and eJovem – Young Entrepreneur Program. Let us now proceed to the explanation of each of the programs in question. CPE - CREATION OF OWN EMPLOYMENT (2001 - CURRENTLY) Governed by Ordinance number 101/2001 of September 6th, published in the Official Journal of the Autonomous Region of Madeira, Series I, number 88, this program to combat unemployment aims at creating one's own employment, upon payment of a International Journal of Current Science Research and Review ISSN: 2581-8341 Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V8-i10-06, Impact Factor: 8.048 IJCSRR @ 2025 www.ijcsrr.org 4927 *Corresponding Author: Sérgio Jesus Teixeira Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 Available at: www.ijcsrr.org Page No. 4922-4936 of the total amount of unemployment benefits, provided that the unemployed person presents a business idea/project that ensures full-time employment, and that demonstrates economic and financial viability, and may even benefit from an extra subsidy called in English “Special Subsidy”, when the overall amount of unemployment benefits proves to be insufficient to carry out the project (IEM, Relatório Emprego e Coesão Social: Breve Balanço 2011, 2012). In this way, this program is very important in combating, not only the unemployment of users who, through articulation between Social Security and the Madeira Employment Institute, can benefit from an entrepreneurship program for the creation of their own job, but also very relevant to increase the levels of entrepreneurship in the Autonomous Region of Madeira, through the creation of new businesses and companies. PADE – SUPPORT PROGRAM FOR UNEMPLOYED ENTREPRENEURS (2009 - 2013) The PADE program was created through Ordinance number 74/2009 of July 10, and aimed to “encourage and support the creation of their own jobs by unemployed people with an entrepreneurial spirit, as well as contributing to the eventual creation of other jobs necessary for the development of the said project”, provided that it was economically, financially and technically viable. Candidates for this program could be unemployed people who found themselves in that situation involuntarily, who had been registered for more than 12 months, or young people aged up to 24 who had not had more than 6 months of professional experience as an employed person. This program, included financial support in the form of non-refundable subsidies, in terms of investment, up to 60% of the eligible investment, and which could be added a reimbursable subsidy, in eligible cases, and in terms of job creation, corresponding to 18 times the minimum monthly wage for each job created. The latter could be increased with bonuses and premiums depending on the characteristics of the workers hired. Unemployed people who were recipients of unemployment benefits should apply for the attribution of the payment of unpaid benefits in a single payment, an amount that enters into the calculation of the investment support granted, in the non-refundable subsidy component (IEM, Relatório Emprego e Coesão Social: Breve Balanço 2011, 2012). PEED – PROGRAM TO STIMULATE ENTREPRENEURSHIP FOR UNEMPLOYED PEOPLE (2013 - 2020) Created through Ordinance number 32/2013, of May 13, PEED maintained the same objective as PADE, the program that replaced it, and included financial support for job creation and investment. This was a very important instrument in view of the increased demand for solutions for entrepreneurship and for creating their own jobs, reflecting “the risk and challenge that unemployed people decided to assume and face”, constituting itself as a response, not only to the problem of unemployment, but also to encourage entrepreneurship. This program allowed access to amounts higher than the CPE, and its creation was carried out with the aim of better rationalizing resources, with greater focus on job creation (IEM, Relatório Emprego e Coesão Social: Breve Balanço 2013, 2014). CRIEE – PROGRAM FOR THE CREATION OF COMPANIES AND EMPLOYMENT (2020 - CURRENTLY) The CRIEE program is governed by Ordinance number 16/2020, of February 6, maintaining the same objective of the PADE and PEED programs, a program that replaced the latter, and also includes financial support for the creation of jobs and investment. Compared to the PEED, the CRIEE program now provides for the possibility for promoters (unemployed entrepreneurs who apply for the program) to attend a training course in the area of management (both in the project analysis phase and in the follow-up phase), when necessary, this expense being eligible. Increases are foreseen in terms of hiring the very long-term unemployed (registered at the employment center for at least 24 months), as well as in terms of job creation in the areas of the blue, green and/or circular economy, and for projects based in rural councils with a resident population of less than 15,000 inhabitants. At the moment, within the scope of this program, the processes of payment to promoters are simplified in just two moments, with the first appearing after the signature of the contract, and the second after the creation of all the proposed jobs and proof of application of allocated amounts (IEM, Relatório 2020: Emprego e Coesão Social - Breve Balanço, 2020). EJOVEM – YOUNG ENTREPRENEUR PROGRAM (2022 - CURRENTLY) eJovem, created by Ordinance number 106/2022 of March 2nd, comes with a special focus on unemployed young people aged between 18 and 29 years old, aiming to stimulate their entrepreneurial spirit and the creation of their own job, integrating prior theoretical training in the area of management (180 hours over 2 months, with the right to subsidize food and transport), financial support for the project to create jobs and companies, and support at the level of consultancy in its implementation where necessary. International Journal of Current Science Research and Review ISSN: 2581-8341 Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V8-i10-06, Impact Factor: 8.048 IJCSRR @ 2025 www.ijcsrr.org 4928 *Corresponding Author: Sérgio Jesus Teixeira Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 Available at: www.ijcsrr.org Page No. 4922-4936 In this way, conditions are provided for young people to acquire the knowledge, skills and abilities necessary to create a project based on a business idea, aiming at its successful implementation and economic growth. Candidates who present a viable investment project, which leads to job creation, are awarded financial support per job created (maximum 4), in the amount equivalent to 10 times the IAS (Social Support Index), with an increase of up to 30% depending on the characteristics of the placement, and financial investment support of up to 15 times the IAS for each job created and up to a limit of four, also being increased in cases where the project falls within the scope of the economy blue, green and/or circular, in the technological area, or if it is located in a municipality with less than 15 thousand residents (IEM, Relatório 2022: Emprego e Coesão Social - Breve Balanço, 2022). METHODOLOGY In order to give color to the analysis of the subject in question, secondary data obtained from the annual balance reports of the Instituto de Emprego da Madeira, IP-RAM (relatórios Emprego e Coesão Social - Breve Balanço), from 2011 to 2022, published on the institution's website, at https://www.iem.madeira.gov.pt/estatisticas-anuais/, where data were obtained for the period between 2009 and 2022, using a quantitative methodology. Data referring to the programs CPE – Creation of Own Employment, PADE – Support Program for Unemployed Entrepreneurs, PEED – Program to Stimulate Entrepreneurship for Unemployed People, CRIEE – Program for Creation of Companies and Employment and eJovem – Young Entrepreneur Program were withdrawn. Table II distinguishes the different programs by their nature and permanence over time, in the period under review from 2009 to 2022. Table II. Distinction of the different IEM programs by their nature, between 2009 and 2022, prepared by the authors, based on the IEM annual balance reports 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Specific program for beneficiaries of unemployment benefits CPE More generic program PADE PEED CRIEE Specific program for young people (did not exist) eJovem Table III shows the evolution of the CPE, PADE, PEED and CRIEE programs between 2009 and 2022, based on the annual balance reports of the IEM (relatórios Emprego e Coesão Social - Breve Balanço), between 2011 to 2022. Although the eJovem program is also part of this article, since this employment program is still very recent, there is still not enough data for it to be included in table III. In terms of execution in 2022, this program welcomed 15 young people for theoretical training in management, and is still in an initial phase (IEM, Relatório 2022: Emprego e Coesão Social - Breve Balanço, 2022). Tables IV and V list the distinctions in percentage of jobs created by gender, educational qualifications, age and previous professional experience. International Journal of Current Science Research and Review ISSN: 2581-8341 Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V8-i10-06, Impact Factor: 8.048 IJCSRR @ 2025 www.ijcsrr.org 4929 *Corresponding Author: Sérgio Jesus Teixeira Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 Available at: www.ijcsrr.org Page No. 4922-4936 Table III. Evolution of the CPE, PADE, PEED and CRIEE programs between 2009 and 2022, adapted based on IEM annual balance reports from 2011 to 2022 ¹ Work stations paid in the following year ² It corresponds to the special subsidy granted by the IEM in cases where the amount of unemployment benefits was not sufficient ³ Work stations created that were Promoters 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 CPE Approve d projects 18 21 17 17 17 6 1 2 2 4 1 2 0 1 Approve d jobs (Promote rs) 19 22 17 20 18 6 1 2 2 4 1 2 0 1 Jobs created (Promote rs) ¹ 6 12 18 26 19 4 2 2 2 2 1 2 0 0 Financial execution ² 28.577,41€ 27.050,92€ 29.334,58€ 16.515,17€ 30.549,67€ 5.936,40€ 10.977,57€ 2.954,10€ 13.060,96€ 7.104,00€ 3.758,44€ 0,00€ 0,00€ 0,00€ PADE, PEED and CRIEE Approve d projects 15 37 28 13 20 45 79 84 67 64 51 35 50 49 Approve d jobs 32 75 44 21 48 81 123 163 123 114 91 56 89 85 Jobs created ¹ 22 46 53 19 23 82 110 157 114 91 110 55 76 77 Of which Promoter s ¹ ³ 16 39 30 14 17 55 77 106 64 57 51 36 47 55 Financial execution 210.359,86 € 703.229,86 € 1.057.049,4 7€ 489.415,04 € 464.508,77 € 754.009,52 € 1.051.962,8 7€ 1.947.129,7 7€ 1.142.888,1 7€ 962.425,05 € 1.203.610, 26€ 566.047,99 € 774.219,04 € 890.318,98 € International Journal of Current Science Research and Review ISSN: 2581-8341 Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V8-i10-06, Impact Factor: 8.048 IJCSRR @ 2025 www.ijcsrr.org 4930 *Corresponding Author: Sérgio Jesus Teixeira Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 Available at: www.ijcsrr.org Page No. 4922-4936 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 CPE Male individual (report does not mention) (report does not mention) 83,3% 61,54% 73,68% 100% 100% (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) Level of education Higher (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) 3,85% 10,53% 50% 0% 50% 0% 100% 100% (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) Secondary (report does not mention) (report does not mention) 27,8% 38,46% 52,63% 0% 100% (report does not mention) 0% 0% 0% (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) 3rd cycle (report does not mention) (report does not mention) 44,4% 23,08% 36,84% 25% 0% (report does not mention) 50% 0% 0% (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) 2nd cycle (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) 34,62% 25% 0% (report does not mention) 50% 0% 0% (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) 1st cycle (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) 0% 0% (report does not mention) 0% 0% 0% (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) No schooling (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) 0% 0% (report does not mention) 0% 0% 0% (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) Age 55 years or older (report does not mention) (report does not mention) 11,11% 11,54% 26,32% “All supported unemployed were adults, essentially aged between 25 and 44 years old.” 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) Between 45 and 54 years old (report does not mention) (report does not mention) 38,89% 76,92% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) Between 35 and 44 years old (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) 47,37% 100% 100% 100% 100% (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) Between 25 and 34 years old (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) 0% 0% 0% 0% (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) Between 18 and 24 years old (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) Have previous professional experience (report does not mention) (report does not mention) 100% (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) (report does not mention) Table IV. Evolution in percentage of jobs created (Promoters) by gender, educational qualifications, age and previous professional experience of the CPE program, between 2009 and 2022, adapted based on the IEM annual balance reports from 2011 to 2022, calculated by the authors (with the exception of gender and education data for 2011, which were already indicated in the report as a percentage)