Advertisement

In Which Regions Do Governmental, Independent, and Corporate Venture Capital Firms Invest? An Empirical Investigation across 402 German Regions

  • Christian Masiak
  • Christian FischEmail author
  • Joern H. Block
Chapter
Part of the FGF Studies in Small Business and Entrepreneurship book series (FGFS)

Abstract

We analyze the distribution of venture capital (VC) investments across German regions and explore the geographical determinants of these investments. So far, little is known about the regional determinants of governmental (GVC), independent (IVC), and corporate (CVC) VC firms and about whether these types of VC firms invest in different regions. Combining a dataset of 402 German districts, our regressions show that regions with a higher supply of human capital and knowledge creators attract a significantly higher number of GVC investments. Moreover, we find a significant difference in economically weaker regions but do not find a metropolitan bias. Hence, GVC firms do not invest more frequently in rural regions per se and do not prevent regional disparities more often than other types of VC firms. The implications of these findings for high-tech firms and regional policy are discussed.

Keywords

Corporate venture capital Governmental venture capital Independent venture capital Localization Region Venture capital 

References

  1. Agrawal, A., & Henderson, R. (2002). Putting patents in context: Exploring knowledge transfer from MIT. Management Science, 48(1), 44–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anselin, L., Varga, A., & Acs, Z. (1997). Local geographic spillovers between university research and high technology innovations. Journal of Urban Economics, 42(3), 422–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Audretsch, D. B., & Lehmann, E. E. (2005). Does knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship hold for regions? Research Policy, 34(8), 1191–1202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baptista, R., & Swann, P. (1998). Do firms in clusters innovate more? Research Policy, 27(5), 525–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bertoni, F., Ferrer, M. A., & Martí, J. (2013). The different roles played by venture capital and private equity investors on the investment activity of their portfolio firms. Small Business Economics, 40(3), 607–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bertoni, F., & Tykvová, T. (2015). Does governmental venture capital spur invention and innovation? Evidence from young European biotech companies. Research Policy, 44(4), 925–935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Block, J. H., & Spiegel, F. (2013). Family firm density and regional innovation output: An exploratory analysis. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 4(4), 270–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Block, J. H., Thurik, R., & Zhou, H. (2013). What turns knowledge into innovative products? The role of entrepreneurship and knowledge spillovers. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 23(4), 693–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Block, J. H., Cumming, D. J., & Vismara, S. (2017). International perspectives on venture capital and bank finance for entrepreneurial firms. Economia e Politica Industriale, 44(1), 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Block, J. H., Fisch, C., Obschonka, M., & Sandner, P. (2018a). A personality perspective on business angel syndication. Journal of Banking & Finance, 100, 306–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Block, J. H., Colombo, M. G., Cumming, D. J., & Vismara, S. (2018b). New players in entrepreneurial finance and why they are there. Small Business Economics, 50(2), 239–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Block, J., Fisch, C., Vismara, S., & Andres, R. (2019). Private equity investment criteria: An experimental conjoint analysis of venture capital, business angels, and family offices. Journal of Corporate Finance, 58(10), 329–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bottazzi, L., Da Rin, M., & Hellmann, T. (2004). The changing face of the European venture capital industry: Facts and analysis. The Journal of Private Equity, 7(2), 26–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brander, J. A., Du, Q., & Hellmann, T. (2015). The effects of government-sponsored venture capital: International evidence. Review of Finance, 19(2), 571–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chen, H., Gompers, P., Kovner, A., & Lerner, J. (2010). Buy local? The geography of venture capital. Journal of Urban Economics, 67(1), 90–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Colombo, M. G., Cumming, D. J., & Vismara, S. (2016). Governmental venture capital for innovative young firms. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(1), 10–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Colombo, M. G., Luukkonen, T., Mustar, P., & Wright, M. (2010). Venture capital and high-tech start-ups. Venture Capital, 12(4), 261–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Colombo, M. G., & Murtinu, S. (2017). Venture capital investments in Europe and portfolio firms’ economic performance: Independent versus corporate investors. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 26(1), 35–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cooke, P. (2001). Regional innovation systems, clusters, and the knowledge economy. Industrial Change and Corporate Change, 10(4), 945–974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cooke, P., Uranga, M. G., & Etxebarria, G. (1997). Regional innovation systems: Institutional and organisational dimensions. Research Policy, 26(4-5), 475–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Croce, A., Martí, J., & Murtinu, S. (2013). The impact of venture capital on the productivity growth of European entrepreneurial firms: ‘Screening’ or ‘value added’effect? Journal of Business Venturing, 28(4), 489–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cumming, D., & Dai, N. (2010). Local bias in venture capital investments. Journal of Empirical Finance, 17(3), 362–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cumming, D. J., & MacIntosh, J. G. (2003). A cross-country comparison of full and partial venture capital exits. Journal of Banking & Finance, 27(3), 511–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Cumming, D. J., & MacIntosh, J. G. (2006). Crowding out private equity: Canadian evidence. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(5), 569–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Cumming, D. J., & MacIntosh, J. G. (2007). Mutual funds that invest in private equity? An analysis of labour-sponsored investment funds. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 31(3), 445–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Dahlstrand, Å. L. (1999). Technology-based SMEs in the Göteborg region: Their origin and interaction with universities and large firms. Regional Studies, 33(4), 379–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dushnitsky, G., & Lenox, M. J. (2005). When do incumbents learn from entrepreneurial ventures? Corporate venture capital and investing firm innovation rates. Research Policy, 34(5), 615–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Elango, B., Fried, V. H., Hisrich, R. D., & Polonchek, A. (1995). How venture capital firms differ. Journal of Business Venturing, 10(2), 157–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. European Commission. (2011). Regional policy for smart growth in Europe 2020. Accessed August 1, 2018, from http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/information/publications/
  30. Eurostat. (2015). NUTS-nomenclature of territorial units for statistics. Accessed August 1, 2018, from http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/nuts/overview
  31. Fisch, C. (2019). Initial coin offerings (ICOs) to finance new ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 34(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Fisch, C., Hassel, T., Sandner, P. G., & Block, J. H. (2015). University patenting: A comparison of 300 leading universities worldwide. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 40(2), 318–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Florida, R. L., & Kenney, M. (1988). Venture capital, high technology and regional development. Regional Studies, 22(1), 33–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Fried, V. H., & Hisrich, R. D. (1995). The venture capitalist: A relationship investor. California Management Review, 37(2), 101–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Fritsch, M., & Schilder, D. (2008). Does venture capital investment really require spatial proximity? An empirical investigation. Environment and Planning A, 40(9), 2114–2131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Fritsch, M., & Schwirten, C. (1999). Enterprise-university co-operation and the role of public research institutions in regional innovation systems. Industry and Innovation, 6(1), 69–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Giot, P., & Schwienbacher, A. (2007). IPOs, trade sales and liquidations: Modelling venture capital exits using survival analysis. Journal of Banking & Finance, 31(3), 679–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Gompers, P. A. (1995). Optimal investment, monitoring, and the staging of venture capital. The Journal of Finance, 50(5), 1461–1489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Gompers, P., & Lerner, J. (2000, January). The determinants of corporate venture capital success: Organizational structure, incentives, and complementarities. In Concentrated corporate ownership. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  40. Gompers, P., & Lerner, J. (2001). The venture capital revolution. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15(2), 145–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Guerini, M., & Quas, A. (2016). Governmental venture capital in Europe: Screening and certification. Journal of Business Venturing, 31(2), 175–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Gupta, A. K., & Sapienza, H. J. (1992). Determinants of venture capital firms’ preferences regarding the industry diversity and geographic scope of their investments. Journal of Business Venturing, 7(5), 347–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hall, B. H., & Lerner, J. (2010). The financing of R&D and innovation. In Handbook of the economics of innovation. Accessed August 1, 2018, from  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7218(10)01014-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Harding, R. (2000). Venture capital and regional development: Towards a venture capital ‘system’. Venture Capital, 2(4), 287–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Howells, J. R. L. (2002). Tacit knowledge, innovation and economic geography. Urban Studies, 39(5–6), 871–884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Jääskeläinen, M., & Maula, M. (2014). Do networks of financial intermediaries help reduce local bias? Evidence from cross-border venture capital exits. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(5), 704–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kirsch, D., Goldfarb, B., & Gera, A. (2009). Form or substance: The role of business plans in venture capital decision making. Strategic Management Journal, 30(5), 487–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Knockaert, M., Wright, M., Clarysse, B., & Lockett, A. (2010). Agency and similarity effects and the VC’s attitude towards academic spin-out investing. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(6), 567–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Legler, H., & Frietsch, R. (2007). Neuabgrenzung der Wissenswirtschaft – forschungsintensive Industrien und wissensintensive Dienstleistungen. Accessed August 1, 2018, from http://publica.fraunhofer.de/eprints/urn_nbn_de_0011-n-610233.pdf
  50. Leleux, B., & Surlemont, B. (2003). Public versus private venture capital: Seeding or crowding out? A Pan-European analysis. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(1), 81–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lutz, E., Bender, M., Achleitner, A. K., & Kaserer, C. (2013). Importance of spatial proximity between venture capital investors and investees in Germany. Journal of Business Research, 66(11), 2346–2354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Luukkonen, T., Deschryvere, M., & Bertoni, F. (2013). The value added by government venture capital funds compared with independent venture capital funds. Technovation, 33(4–5), 154–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. MacMillan, I. C., Siegel, R., & Narasimha, P. N. S. (1985). Criteria used by venture capitalists to evaluate new venture proposals. Journal of Business Venturing, 1(1), 119–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Martin, R., Berndt, C., Klagge, B., & Sunley, P. (2005). Spatial proximity effects and regional equity gaps in the venture capital market: Evidence from Germany and the United Kingdom. Environment and Planning A, 37(7), 1207–1231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Mason, C. M., & Harrison, R. T. (2002). The geography of venture capital investments in the UK. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 27(4), 427–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Mason, C. M., & Pierrakis, Y. (2013). Venture capital, the regions and public policy: The United Kingdom since the post-2000 technology crash. Regional Studies, 47(7), 1156–1171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Minola, T., Vismara, S., & Hahn, D. (2017). Screening model for the support of governmental venture capital. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(1), 59–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Mollick, E. (2014). The dynamics of crowdfunding: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Pierrakis, Y., & Saridakis, G. (2017). The role of venture capitalists in the regional innovation ecosystem: A comparison of networking patterns between private and publicly backed venture capital funds. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 1, 1–24.Google Scholar
  60. Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., Bowie, J. I., & Smith-Doerr, L. (2002). The spatial clustering of science and capital: Accounting for biotech firm-venture capital relationships. Regional Studies, 36(3), 291–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rossi, M., Festa, G., Solima, L., & Popa, S. (2017). Financing knowledge-intensive enterprises: Evidence from CVCs in the US. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(2), 338–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sahlman, W. A. (1990). The structure and governance of venture-capital organizations. Journal of Financial Economics, 27(2), 473–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sapienza, H. J. (1992). When do venture capitalists add value? Journal of Business Venturing, 7(1), 9–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Sorenson, O., & Stuart, T. E. (2001). Syndication networks and the spatial distribution of venture capital investments. American Journal of Sociology, 106(6), 1546–1588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Streletzki, J. G., & Schulte, R. (2013). Which venture capital selection criteria distinguish high-flyer investments? Venture Capital, 15(1), 29–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Trester, J. J. (1998). Venture capital contracting under asymmetric information. Journal of Banking & Finance, 22(6–8), 675–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Vinding, A. L. (2006). Absorptive capacity and innovative performance: A human capital approach. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 15(4–5), 507–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wadhwa, A., Phelps, C., & Kotha, S. (2016). Corporate venture capital portfolios and firm innovation. Journal of Business Venturing, 31(1), 95–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Yang, Y., Narayanan, V. K., & De Carolis, D. M. (2014). The relationship between portfolio diversification and firm value: The evidence from corporate venture capital activity. Strategic Management Journal, 35(13), 1993–2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Zacharakis, A. L., & Meyer, G. D. (1998). A lack of insight: Do venture capitalists really understand their own decision process? Journal of Business Venturing, 13(1), 57–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Zellner, A. (1962). An efficient method of estimating seemingly unrelated regressions and tests for aggregation bias. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 57(298), 348–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Zhou, H., Sandner, P. G., Martinelli, S. L., & Block, J. H. (2016). Patents, trademarks, and their complementarity in venture capital funding. Technovation, 47, 14–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christian Masiak
    • 1
  • Christian Fisch
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Joern H. Block
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Trier UniversityTrierGermany
  2. 2.Department of Applied EconomicsSchool of Economics, Erasmus University RotterdamRotterdamNetherlands

Personalised recommendations