Advertisement

Small Business Economics

, Volume 38, Issue 3, pp 283–301 | Cite as

The capital gap for small technology companies: public venture capital to the rescue?

  • Itxaso del-Palacio
  • Xiaotian Tina Zhang
  • Francesc Sole
Article

Abstract

In this paper, we analyze effectiveness of public intervention for fostering private venture-capital market in Spain. We use a sample obtained from VentureXpert database, consisting of 755 investments made by 83 Spanish public and private venture capitalists that closed at least one fund between 1997 and 2008. We compare the investments undertaken by private and public investors before and after public venture capital programs were started. We found that Spanish venture-capital market has rapidly developed in the last 10 years and that this development coincides with the establishment of public policies for encouraging technology entrepreneurship. We also found that other factors, such as previous experience of investors and size, have also contributed to fostering more high-risk investments. These results may encourage governments in other countries to start or keep working to promote private venture-capital investments.

Keywords

Venture capital Early stage Start-up Public policy Entrepreneurship 

JEL Classifications

G24 L24 

References

  1. Akerlof, G. A. (1970). The market for lemons: Qualitative uncertainty and the market mechanism. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84, 488–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alemany, L. (2006). Venture Capital in Spain: Evolution, characterisation and economic impact analysis. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Managament, 6(4/5), 412–428.Google Scholar
  3. Alemany, L., & Marti, J. (2006). Do Venture Capitalists’ characteristics affect the performance of the firms they back? Resource Document. SSRN. http://ssrn.com/abstract=886546.
  4. Becker, G. S. (1983). A theory of competition among pressure groups for political influence. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 98, 371–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Benz, M. (2009). Entrepreneurship as a non-profit-seeking activity. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 5, 23–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Birkinshaw, J., Murray, G., & Basten, R. (2002). Corporate venturing: The state of the art and the prospects for the future. London: London Business School.Google Scholar
  7. Bottazzi, L., Da Rin, M., van Ours, J. C., & Berglof, E. (2002). Venture Capital in Europe and the financing of innovative companies. Economic Policy, 34, 229–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Caruana, A., & Ewing, M. T. (2002). Effects of some environmental challenges and centralization on the entrepreneurial orientation and performance of public sector entities. Service Industries Journal, 22, 43–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chang, C. K. N., Stephane, S. S., & Wang, A. J. (2002). The Advanced Technology Program: A public-private partnership for early stage technology development. Venture Capital, 4(4), 363–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cohen, L. R., & Noll, R. G. (1991). The technology pork barrel. Washington: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  11. Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  12. Da Rin, M., Nicodano, G., & Sembenelli, A. (2006). Public policy and the creation of active venture capital markets. Journal of Public Economics, 90, 1699–1723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. De Meza, D. (2002). Overlending. The Economic Journal, 112(2), F17–F31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Del-Palacio, I., Sole, F., & Batista-Foguet, J. M. (2008). University entrepreneurship centres as service businesses. Service Industries Journal, 28, 939–951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dimov, D., & Murray, G. (2007). Determinants of the incidence and scale of seed capital investments by venture capital firms. Small Business Economics, 30(2), 127–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Innovation in Innovation: The Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations. Social Science Information, 42, 33–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. European Commission. (2007). Flash Eurobarometer 192. Conducted by The Gallup Organization: Hungary. Resource Document. European Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_192_en.pdf.
  18. Gert-Jan Hospers, G. J., Desrochers, P., & Sautet, F. (2009). The next Silicon Valley? On the relationship between geographical clustering and public policy. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 5, 285–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gompers, P. A., Kovner, A., Lerner, J., & Scharfstein, D. S. (2006). Skill vs. luck in entrepreneurship and venture capital: Evidence from serial entrepreneurs. NBER Working Paper No. W12592. Resource document. SSRN. http://ssrn.com/abstract=937293.
  20. Gompers, P., & Lerner, J. (1999a). The venture capital cycle. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  21. Gompers, P. A., & Lerner, J. (1999b). What drives venture capital fundraising? doi: 10.2139/ssrn.57935.
  22. Gompers, P. A., & Lerner, J. (1999c). Capital formation and investment in venture capital markets: A report on the NBER and the Advanced Technology Program. Report GCR-99-784. Washingon: Advanced Technology Program, National Institutes of Standards and Technology, U.S. Department of Commerce.Google Scholar
  23. Greenwald, B. C., Stiglitz, J. E., & Weiss, A. (1984). Information imperfections in the capital market and macroeconomic fluctuations. American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 74(1), 94–199.Google Scholar
  24. Griliches, Z. (1992). The search for R&D spillovers. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 94, S29–S47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gripaios, P., & Bishop, P. (2005). Spatial inequalities in UK GDP per head: The role of private and public services. Service Industries Journal, 25, 945–958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jaaskelainen, M., Maula, M., & Seppa, T. (2002). The optimum portfolio of start-up firms in venture capital finance: The moderating effect of syndication and an empirical test. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research. Wellesley, MA: Babson College.Google Scholar
  27. Jaffe, A. B. (1996). Economic analysis of research spillovers and implications for the Advanced Technology Program. Washington: Advanced Technology Program, National Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S. Department of Commerce.Google Scholar
  28. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kanniainen, V., & Keuschnigg, C. (2003). The optimal portfolio of start-up firms in venture capital finance. Journal of Corporate Finance, 9(5), 521–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Karapetrovic, S., & Willborn, W. (2001). ISO 9000 quality management standards and financial investment services. Service Industries Journal, 21(2), 117–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kearney, C., Hisrich, R., & Roche, F. (2008). A conceptual model of public sector corporate entrepreneurship. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 4, 295–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kenney, M. (2000). Understanding Silicon Valley: Anatomy of an entrepreneurial region. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Kirwan, P., van der Sijde, P., & Groen, A. (2006). Assessing the needs of new technology based firms (NTBFs): An investigation among spin-off companies from six European Universities. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 2(2), 173–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lall, S. (1992). Technological capabilities and industrialization. Word Development, 20(2), 165–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Leleux, B., & Surlemont, B. (2003). Public versus private venture capital: Seeding or crowding out? A pan-European analysis. Journal of Business Venturing, 18, 81–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lerner, J. (1999). The government as venture capitalist: The Long-Run Impact of the SBIR Program. Journal of Business, 72(3), 285–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lerner, J. (2002). When bureacrats meet entrepreneurs: The design of effective “Public Venture Capital” programmes. The Economic Journal, 112(2), F73–F84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lockett, A., Murray, G., & Wright, M. (2002). Do UK VCists still have a bias against investment in new technology firms? Research Policy, 31, 1009–1030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lockett, A., & Wright, M. (1999). The syndication of private equity: Evidence from the UK. Venture Capital, 1(4), 303–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Manigart, S., Collewaert, V., Wright, M., Pruthi, S., Lockett, A., Bruining, H., et al. (2007). Human capital and the internationalization of venture capital firms. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 3(1), 109–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Marti, J. (2004/2007). Informe ASCRI 2004/2007, ASCRI: Madrid (Spain), http://www.ascri.org.
  42. Mayer, C., Schoorsb, K., & Yafeh, Y. (2005). Sources of funds and investment activities of venture capital funds: Evidence from Germany, Israel, Japan, and the United Kingdom. Journal of Corporate Finance, 11, 586–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Milken Institute. (2006). Capital Access Index 2006. Best Markets for Business Finance, Conducted by Barth, J. R., Li, T., Phumiwasana, T., Yago, G., Santa Monica, CA: Milken Institute.Google Scholar
  44. Murray, G. C. (1999). Early-stage, venture capital funds, scale economies and public support. Venture Capital, 1(4), 351–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Murray, G. C., & Lott, J. (1995). Have UK venture capitalists a bias against investment in new technology-based firms? Research Policy, 24(2), 283–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Myers, S. C., & Majluf, N. (1984). Corporate financing and investment decisions when firms have information that investors do not have. Journal of Financial Economics, 13, 187–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Nelson, R. R., & Winter, G. S. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge: Belknap Press/Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Nilsson, P. A., Petersen, T., & Wanhill, S. (2005). Public support for tourism SMEs in peripheral areas: The Arjeplog Project, northern Sweden. Service Industries Journal, 25(4), 579–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Peltzman, S. (1976). Towards a more general theory of regulation. Journal of Law and Economics, 19, 211–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pintado, T. R., García, D., & van Auken, H. (2007). Venture capital in Spain by stage of development. Journal of Small Business Management, 45(1), 68–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pissarides, F. (1999). Is lack of funds the main obstacle to growth? EBRD’s experience with small- and medium-sized businesses in central and eastern Europe. Journal of Business Venturing, 14(5–6), 519–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Roberts, E. (1991). High stakes of high tech entrepreneurs: Understanding venture capital decision making. Winter, 9–20.Google Scholar
  53. Stiglitz, J. E., & Weiss, A. (1981). Credit rationing in markets with incomplete information. American Economic Review, 71, 393–409.Google Scholar
  54. Tan, W. L., Williams, J., & Tan, T. M. (2005). Defining the ‘Social’ in ‘Social Entrepreneurship’: Altruism and entrepreneurship. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 1, 353–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tejada, R. (2003). Venture Capital Policy Review: Spain. Working Paper 2003/18, Madrid: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. doi: 10.1787/423325882343.
  56. Valle, M. (2008). Iniciativa Neotec, http://tinyurl.com/nwdgyy.
  57. Wallsten, S. J. (2000). The Small Business Innovation Research program: Encouraging technological innovation and commercialization in small firms? Rand Journal of Economics, 31, 82–100.Google Scholar
  58. Wooldridge, J. (2009). Global Hero. A special report on entrepreneurship. The Economist, Special Report, March 14th.Google Scholar
  59. Web de Capital Riesgo, http://www.webcapitalriesgo.com.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Itxaso del-Palacio
    • 1
  • Xiaotian Tina Zhang
    • 2
  • Francesc Sole
    • 3
  1. 1.Imperial College LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.Saint Mary’s College of CaliforniaMoragaUSA
  3. 3.Innova Program for Entrepreneurship, Technical University of CataloniaBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations