German Panel of Nascent Entrepreneurs

Part of the International Studies in Entrepreneurship book series (ISEN, volume 27)


The overall objective of the German Panel of Nascent Entrepreneurs (GEPANE) is to identify those determinants that either turn nascent entrepreneurs into actual entrepreneurs (owner managers of new firms or “young entrepreneurs”) or lead to a discontinuation of the original start-up idea. These factors may be broken down into person-related determinants, environmental determinants, and organizational determinants. As such, the project covers more or less three partly overlapping areas that capture most of the recent research on nascent entrepreneurs and related panels: characteristics of nascent entrepreneurs, antecedents, and characteristics of the new venture creation process; and explaining new venture creation process outcomes (see Davidsson and Gordon 2009).


  1. Brixy U, Hundt C, Sternberg R (2010) Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM). Country Report Germany 2009 (in German). Hannover: Institut für Wirtschafts- und Kulturgeographie, Universität Hannover, Nürnberg: Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung der Bundesagentur für Arbeit (IAB)Google Scholar
  2. Carter NM, Gartner WB, Reynolds PD (1996) Exploring start-up event sequences. J Bus Ventur 11(3):151–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Davidsson P, Gordon, SR (2009) Nascent entrepreneur(ship) research: a review. MimeoGoogle Scholar
  4. Diochon M, Menzies TV, Gasse Y (2003) Insight into the dynamics of Canadian nascent entrepreneurs’ start-up effort and the role individual factors play in the process, Proceedings of the 20th CCSBE/CCPME Conference, Victoria British Columbia, 11, November 6–8 (cited after Parker/Belghitar 2006)Google Scholar
  5. Gartner WB (1985) A framework for describing and classifying the phenomenon of new venture creation. Acad Manag Rev 10(4):696–706Google Scholar
  6. Koellinger P, Minniti M, Schade C (2007) I Think I Can I Think I Can: A study of entrepreneurial behavior. J Econ Psychol 28(3):502–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Parker SC, Belghitar Y (2006) What happens to nascent entrepreneurs? An econometric analysis of the PSED. Small Bus Econ 27(1):81–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Porter ME, Schwab K (2008) The global competitiveness report 2008–2009. World Economic Forum, Geneva, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  9. Reynolds PD (2007) New firm creation in the United States: A PSED I overview. Found Trends Entrep 3:1–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Reynolds PD, Bosma N, Autio E, Hunt S, De Bono N, Servais I, Lopez-Garcia P, Chin N (2005) global entrepreneurship monitor: data collection and implementation 1998–2003. Small Bus Econ 24:205–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Sternberg R, Klose B (2001) Evaluation of the “Programme to financially support spin-offs from universities of Northrhine Westphalia” (PFAU). Final Report, 8 October 2001. Köln, Universität zu Köln, Wirtschafts- und Sozialgeographisches Institut ( (in German)
  12. Sternberg R, Wohlfart F (2006) Evaluation of the “Programme to financially support spin-offs from universities of Northrhine Westphalia” (PFAU). Final Report, 15 May 2006. Hannover, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Institut für Wirtschafts- und Kulturgeographie ( (in German)
  13. Sternberg R, Hundt C, Stockinger D (2010) Scientific assessment of the programme “Junge Innovatoren” (Young Innovators) of the Ministry of Science, Research and Art of Baden-Württemberg. Final Report, 28 February 2010. Hannover, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Institute of Economic and Cultural Geography (in German)Google Scholar
  14. Van Gelderen M, Bosma N, Thurik R (2001) Setting up a business in the Netherlands. Working Paper: ERIM Report Series Reference No. ERS-2001-15-STR, = 370874
  15. Wien A (2009) Existenzgründung. München, OldenbourgCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer New York 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Employment ResearchNurembergGermany

Personalised recommendations