The Start-Up Location Decision and Regional Determinants

  • Frank LaschEmail author
  • Frank Robert
  • Frédéric Le Roy
  • Roy Thurik
Part of the Advances in Spatial Science book series (ADVSPATIAL)


An important stream of literature in the past 20 years focuses on the impact of new firm formation, i.e., entrepreneurship, for the economic development of regions and nations. Addressing the importance of small business and new firm formation for economic growth (Audretsch 1995), a considerable outpouring of literature presented empirical evidence criticizing (Robson 1996) or confirming the “job generation process” theory and resulted in putting entrepreneurship at the forefront of research in an so-called “entrepreneurial” economy (Audretsch and Thurik 2000). The phenomenon of entrepreneurship is examined at various levels of analysis, such as individuals, firms, regions, or nations (Wennekers and Thurik 1999). Davidson and Wiklund (2001) argue that entrepreneurship research is dominated by micro-level analysis, mainly using the firm or the individual level of analysis. Reviewing nine peer-reviewed entrepreneurship journals, Chandler and Lyon (2001) find that only a small part of research designs focuses on the industry or macro-environment level. Davidson and Wiklund (2001) observe that the micro-level dominance increased over time, while the share of the aggregate level declined. Ucbasaran et al. (2001) call for more research on the existence of different and contrasting environmental conditions for entrepreneurship (see also Thurik 2009). But while the challenge of explaining how and why new firms emerge in regions or socioeconomic contexts raised much debate and resulted in an increasing body of literature, a certain number of gaps prevail.


Human Capital Knowledge Spillover Firm Formation Firm Survival Entrepreneurial Capital 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



Earlier versions of this paper have been read at Regensburg, Covilhã, Valencia. Frank Lasch, Frank Robert, and Frédéric Le Roy are members of the Labex Entrepreneurship, Montpellier, France. This “laboratory of excellence” is part of a French government fund recognizing and promoting performing research initiatives in human and natural sciences. Frank Lasch and Frank Robert are also involved in the chair Entrepreneurship & Innovation of the Labex initiative. The work on the present version benefited from Roy Thurik’s research visits to Montpellier.


  1. Acs ZJ, Braunerhjelm P, Audretsch DB, Carlsson B (2009) The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship. Small Bus Econ 32:15–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aldrich H, Zimmer C (1986) Entrepreneurship through social networks. In: Sexton DL, Smilor RW (eds) The art and science of entrepreneurship. Ballinger, Cambridge, pp 3–23Google Scholar
  3. Almus M, Egeln J, Engel D (1999) Determinanten regionaler unterschiede in der gründungshäufigkeit wissensintensiver dienstleister. Discussion paper no. 99-22. Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung (ZEW), MannheimGoogle Scholar
  4. Anselin L, Varga A, Acs Z (2000a) Geographical spillovers and university research: a spatial econometric perspective. Growth Change 31:501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anselin L, Varga A, Acs Z (2000b) Geographic and sectoral characteristics of academic knowledge externalities. Pap Reg Sci 79:435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Armington C, Acs ZJ (2002) The determinants of regional variation in new firm formation. Reg Stud 36(1):33–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Arrow K (1962) Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for innovation. In: Nelson R (ed) The rate and direction of inventive activity. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 609–626Google Scholar
  8. Audretsch D (1995) Innovation and industry evolution. MIT, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  9. Audretsch DB, Feldman MP (1996) R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. Am Econ Rev 86(3):630–640Google Scholar
  10. Audretsch DB, Fritsch M (1994) The geography of firm birth in Germany. Reg Stud 28(4):359–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Audretsch DB, Keilbach M (2004a) Does entrepreneurship capital matter? Entrepreneurship Theory Pract 28(5):419–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Audretsch DB, Keilbach M (2004b) Entrepreneurship capital and economic performance. Reg Stud 38(8):949–959CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Audretsch DB, Keilbach M (2005) Entrepreneurship capital and regional growth. Ann Reg Sci 39(3):457–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Audretsch DB, Keilbach M (2007) The localization of entrepreneurship capital: evidence from Germany. Pap Reg Sci 86(3):351–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Audretsch DB, Thurik AR (2000) Capitalism and democracy in the 21st century: from the managed to the entrepreneurial economy. J Evol Econ 10(1–2):17–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Audretsch DB, Lehmann EE, Warning S (2004) University spillovers: does the kind of science matter? Ind Innov 11(3):193–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Audretsch DB, Grilo I, Thurik AR (eds) (2007) The handbook of research on entrepreneurship policy. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  18. Bade F-J, Nerlinger E (2000) The spatial distribution of new technology-based firms: empirical results for West Germany. Pap Reg Sci 79:155–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Bellandi M (2001) Local development and embedded large firms. Entrepreneurship Reg Dev 13:189–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Carlsson B, Acs ZJ, Audretsch DB, Braunerhjelm P (2009) Knowledge creation, entrepreneurship, and economic growth: a historical review. Ind Corporate Change 18(6):1193–1229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Chandler GN, Lyon DW (2001) Issues of research design and construct measurement in entrepreneurship research: The past decade. Entrepreneurship Theory Pract 25(4):101–113Google Scholar
  22. Cooper AC (1985) The role of incubator organizations in the founding of growth-oriented firms. J Bus Venturing 1:75–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Davidson P, Wiklund J (2001) Levels of analysis in entrepreneurship research: Current research practice and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory Pract 25(4):81–99Google Scholar
  24. De Propris L (2002) Types of innovation and inter-firm co-operation. Entrepreneurship Reg Dev 14:337–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Engel D, Fier A (2000) Does R&D-infrastructure attract high-tech start-ups? Discussion paper no. 00-30. Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung (ZEW), MannheimGoogle Scholar
  26. Evans DS, Leighton LS (1990) Small business formation by unemployed and employed workers. Small Bus Econ 2(4):319–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Feldman MP (2001) The entrepreneurial event revisited: firm formation in a regional context. Ind Corporate Change 10(4):861–891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fischer MM, Varga A (2003) Spatial knowledge spillovers and university research. Ann Reg Sci 37:303–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Florida R, Gates G (2001) Technology and tolerance: the importance of diversity to high-technology growth. Brookings Institution, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  30. Folta TB, Cooper AC, Baik Y (2006) Geographic cluster size and firm performance. J Bus Venturing 21:217–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Foti A, Vivarelli M (1994) An econometric test of the self-employment model: the case of Italy. Small Bus Econ 6(2):81–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Freytag A, Thurik AR (2007) Entrepreneurship and its determinants in a cross-country setting. J Evol Econ 17:117–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Fritsch M, Slavtchev V (2007) Universities and innovation in space. Ind Innov 14(2):201–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Garnsey E, Heffernan P (2005) High-technology clustering through spin-out and attraction: the Cambridge case. Reg Stud 39(8):1127–1144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Gertler MS (2003) Tacit knowledge and the economic geography of context, or the undefinable tacitness of being (there). J Econ Geogr 3:75–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Greenan N (1994) L’organisation du travail dans les PMI se distingue-t-elle de celle des grandes entreprises? Econ Stat 271/272:87–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Guesnier B (1994) Regional variation in new firm formation in France. Reg Stud 28:347–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hansen EL (1995) Entrepreneurial networks and organizational growth. Entrepreneurship Theory Pract 19(4):7–19Google Scholar
  39. Huffmann D, Quigley JM (2002) The role of universities in attracting high tech entrepreneurship: a Silicon Valley tale. Ann Reg Sci 36:403–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. INSEE (Institut National de la Statistique et des Études Économiques) (2000) L’économie française. Edition 2000–2001, Livre de Poche - Références. Hachette, ParisGoogle Scholar
  41. Jacobs J (1969) The economy of cities. Random House, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  42. Johanisson B (1998) Personal networks in emerging knowledge-based firms: spatial and functional patterns. Entrepreneurship Reg Dev 10:297–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Johnson P (2004) Differences in regional firm formation rates: A decomposition analysis. Entrepreneurship Theory Pract 28(4):431–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Jones-Evans D, Thompson P (2009) The spatial dispersion of informal investment at a regional level: evidence from the UK. Eur Plan Stud 17(5):660–675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kangasharju A (2000) Regional variations in firm formation: panel and cross-section data evidence from Finland. Pap Reg Sci 79:355–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Keeble D, Walker S (1994) New firms, small firms and dead firms: spatial patterns and determinants in the United Kingdom. Reg Stud 28:411–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Knoben J, Oerlemans LAG (2006) Proximity and inter-organizational collaboration: a literature review. Int J Manag Rev 8(2):71–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Krugman P (1991) Increasing returns and economic geography. J Polit Econ 99(3):483–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Krugman P (1998) Space: the final frontier. J Econ Perspect 12(2):161–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lasch F, Gundolf K, Kraus S (2007) The impact of unemployment on entrepreneurship: empirical evidence from France. Int J Bus Res VII(2):1–8Google Scholar
  51. Lasch F, Robert F, Le Roy F (2013) Regional determinants of ICT entrepreneurship. Small Bus Econ 40(3):671–686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Lee SY, Florida R, Acs Z (2004) Creativity and entrepreneurship: a regional analysis of new firm formation. Reg Stud 38(8):879–891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lucas RE (1988) On the mechanics of economic development. J Monetary Econ 22(1):3–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Marshall A (1890) Principles of economics. Prometheus Books, Amherst (Reprint)Google Scholar
  55. Meusburger P (2000) The spatial concentration of knowledge. Some theoretical considerations. Erdkunde 54:352–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Nijkamp P (2003) Entrepreneurship in a modern network economy. Reg Stud 37(4):395–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Nijkamp P, Poot J (1998) Spatial perspectives on new theories of economic growth. Ann Reg Sci 32:7–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. O’Gorman C, Bourke S, Murray JA (2005) The nature of managerial work in small growth-orientated businesses. Small Bus Econ 25(1):1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Okamuro H, Kobayashi N (2006) The impact of regional factors on the start-up ratio in Japan. J Small Bus Manag 44(2):310–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Porter M (1990) The comparative advantage of nations. The Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  61. Porter ME (1998) Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard Bus Rev 76(6):77–90Google Scholar
  62. Porter ME, Stern S (2001) Innovation: location matters. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 42:28–36Google Scholar
  63. Reynolds P, Storey DJ, Westhead P (1994) Cross-national comparisons of the variation in new firm formation rates. Reg Stud 28:443–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Robson GB (1996) Unravelling the facts about job generation. Small Bus Econ 8(5):409–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Romer P (1986) Increasing returns and long-run growth. J Polit Econ 94(5):1002–1037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Romer P (1990) Endogenous technological change. J Polit Econ 98(5):71–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Schmude J (1994) Geförderte unternehmensgründungen in Baden-Württemberg. Eine analyse der regionalen unterschiede des existenzgründungsgeschehens am beispiel des eigenkapitalhilfe-programms (1979–1989), Erdkundliches Wissen, no. 114. Steiner, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  68. Simmie J (2002) Knowledge spillovers and reasons for the concentration of innovative SMEs. Urban Stud 39(5–6):885–902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Smallbone D, Kitching J, Athayade R (2010) Ethnic diversity, entrepreneurship and competitiveness in a global city. Int Small Bus J 28(2):174–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Storper M, Venables AJ (2004) Buzz: face to face contact and the urban economy. J Econ Geogr 4:351–370Google Scholar
  71. Thurik AR (2009) Entreprenomics: entrepreneurship, economic growth and policy. In: Acs ZJ, Audretsch DB, Strom R (eds) Entrepreneurship, growth and public policy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 219–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Thurik AR, Carree MA, van Stel A, Audretsch DB (2008) Does self-employment reduce unemployment? J Bus Venturing 23(6):673–686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Tödling F, Wanzenböck H (2003) Regional differences in structural characteristics of start-ups. Entrepreneurship Reg Dev 15:351–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Torre A, Rallet A (2005) Proximity and localization. Reg Stud 39(1):47–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Ucbasaran D, Westhead P, Wright M (2001) The focus of entrepreneurial research: Contextual and process issues. Entrepreneurship Theory Pract 25(4):57–80Google Scholar
  76. Varamäki E, Veslainen J (2003) Modelling different types of multi-lateral co-operation between SMEs. Entrepreneurship Reg Dev 15:27–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Wennekers S, Thurik AR (1999) Linking entrepreneurship and economic growth. Small Bus Econ 13(1):27–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Zwan P van der, Verheul I, Thurik AR, Grilo I (2011) Entrepreneurial progress: climbing the entrepreneurial ladder in Europe and the US. Reg Stud. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2011.598504 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frank Lasch
    • 1
    Email author
  • Frank Robert
    • 1
  • Frédéric Le Roy
    • 2
  • Roy Thurik
    • 3
  1. 1.Research Center, Groupe Sup de Co Montpellier Business SchoolMontpellierFrance
  2. 2.ISEM/MRM-ERFIUniversity of Montpellier IMontpellierFrance
  3. 3.Erasmus University RotterdamRotterdamNetherlands

Personalised recommendations