Sök

Working paper No. 278: Access to informal venture capital and ambitious entrepreneurship – cross country evidence

PublikationWorking paper
Entreprenörskap, Företagandets villkor, Innovation, Kristina Nyström, Riskkapital, Sofia Avdeitchikova, Tillväxtfinansiering
sa_kn_informal_venture_capital_ambitious_entrepreneurship_278
Ladda ner

Sammanfattning

Many empirical studies have emphasized the importance of institutional venture capital for enabling high growth entrepreneurship and innovation. Yet, there are reasons to believe that provision of informal venture capital will have as significant, if not more significant effect on entrepreneurship. Based on Global Entrepreneurship Monitor data for 33 countries for the years 2001-2010, we study the relationship between the presence of informal investors in a country and the levels of general and ambitious entrepreneurship, defined as entrepreneurs that have intentions to grow their business, internationalize and/or innovate. Some of the main findings are that the overall level of access to informal venture capital is positively related to general entrepreneurship and ambitious entrepreneurship in terms of innovativeness, while access to arms-length money (i.e. informal investments made by work colleagues or strangers) appears to be positively related to ambitious entrepreneurship in terms of job growth expectations. The relationship between availability of arms-length money and the innovativeness of the entrepreneurial activities appears however to be negative.

Related content: Access to Informal Venture Capital and Ambitious Entrepreneurship – Cross Country Evidence

Avdeitchikova, S., & Nyström, K. (2016). Access to informal venture capital and ambitious entrepreneurship – cross country evidence. Ratio Working Paper no. 278. Stockholm: Ratio.


Liknande innehåll

Assessing user perceptions of the interplay between the sharing, access, platform and community‐based economies
Artikel (med peer review)Publikation
Geissinger, A., Laurell, C., Öberg, C., Sandström, C. & Suseno, Y.
Publiceringsår

2020

Sammanfattning

Purpose
Digitally intermediated peer-to-peer exchanges have accelerated in occurrence, and as a consequence, they have introduced an increased pluralism of connotations. Accordingly, this paper aims to assess user perceptions of the interplay between the sharing, access, platform, and community-based economies.

Design/methodology/approach
The sharing, access, platform, and community-based economies have been systematically tracked in the social media landscape using Social Media Analytics (SMA). In doing so, a total material of 62,855 publicly posted user-generated content concerning the four respective economies were collected and analyzed.

Findings
Even though the sharing economy has been conceptually argued to be interlinked with the access, platform, and community-based economies, the empirical results of the study do not validate this interlinkage. Instead, the results regarding user perceptions in social media show that the sharing, access, platform, and community-based economies manifest as clearly separated.

Originality/value
This paper contributes to existing literature by offering an empirical validation, as well as an in-depth understanding, of the sharing economy’s interlinkage to other economies, along with the extent to which the overlaps between these economies manifest in social media.

Bureaucrats or Markets in Innovation Policy? – a critique of the entrepreneurial state
Artikel (med peer review)Publikation
Karlson, N., Sandström, C., & Wennberg, K.
Publiceringsår

2020

Sammanfattning

This paper takes stock of recent suggestions that the state apparatus is a central and underappreciated actor in the generation, diffusion and exploitation of innovations enhancing growth and social welfare. We contrast such a view of “the entrepreneurial state” with theories and empirical evidence of the microeconomic processes of innovation in the modern economy which focus on well-functioning markets, free entry and competition among firms, and independent entrepreneurship as central mechanisms in the creation and dissemination of innovations. In doing so, we identify several deficiencies in the notion of an entrepreneurial state by showing that (i) there is weak empirical support in the many hundreds empirical studies and related meta analyses evaluating the effectiveness of active industrial and innovative policies, that (ii) these policies do not take account of the presence of information and incentive problems which together explain why attempts to address purported market failures often result in policy failures, and that (iii) the exclusive focus on knowledge creation through R&D and different forms of firm subsidies ignores the equally important mechanisms of knowledge dissemination and creation through commercial exploitation in markets. We discuss how a more theoretically well-founded focus on the state as investing in knowledge generation and securing the conditions of free and competitive markets will lead to a more innovative economy.

Working Paper no. 331: Bureaucrats or Markets in Innovation Policy? – A critique of the entrepreneurial state
Working paperPublikation
Karlson, N., Sandström, C. & Wennberg, K.
Publiceringsår

2020

Publicerat i

Ratio Working Paper

Sammanfattning

This paper takes stock of recent suggestions that the state apparatus is a central and underappreciated actor in the generation, diffusion and exploitation of innovations enhancing growth and social welfare. We contrast such a view of “the entrepreneurial state” with theories and empirical evidence of the microeconomic processes of innovation in the modern economy which focus on well-functioning markets, free entry and competition among firms, and independent entrepreneurship as central mechanisms in the creation and dissemination of innovations. In doing so, we identify several deficiencies in the notion of an entrepreneurial state by showing that (i) there is weak empirical support in the many hundreds empirical studies and related meta analyses evaluating the effectiveness of active industrial and innovative policies, that (ii) these policies do not take account of the presence of information and incentive problems which together explain why attempts to address purported market failures often result in policy failures, and that (iii) the exclusive focus on knowledge creation through R&D and different forms of firm subsidies ignores the equally important mechanisms of knowledge dissemination and creation through commercial exploitation in markets. We discuss how a more theoretically well-founded focus on the state as investing in knowledge generation and securing the conditions of free and competitive markets will lead to a more innovative economy.

Visa fler

Ratio är ett fristående forskningsinstitut som forskar om hur företagandets villkor kan utvecklas och förbättras.

Sveavägen 59 4trp

Box 3203

103 64 Stockholm

Postgiro: 382621-1

|

Bankgiro: 512-6578