Optimists contend that crowdfunding, in which project backers use online campaigns to assemble numerous small donations, can democratize access to finance, but there are legitimate concerns that this funding approach remains discriminatory. Drawing on recent readings emphasizing the geographic components of Bourdieu’s field theory, we argue the relationship between crowdfunding teams’ resources and crowdfunding success is mediated by spatial capital—the ability to draw capital from other social spaces due to geographic context. We use logistic regressions predicting success rates for 134,098 campaigns launched in the USA on the Indiegogo platform between 2009 and 2015, combined with other spatial data, to model the relationship between spatial capital and other success predictors. Our models suggest spatial context mediates the relationship between resources and success. Rural areas, in particular, have lower success rates than urban areas, and affluent areas have the highest success rates. Given that only around 10% of Indiegogo campaigns are fully funded, spatial inequalities place significant limits on who can benefit from crowdfunding campaigns, suggesting crowdfunding may not democratize access to finance, as optimists hope.
AgrawalACataliniC, andGoldfarbA (2014)
Some simple economics of crowdfunding.Innovation Policy and the Economy14(1): 63–97.
2.
AgrawalACataliniC, andGoldfarbA (2015)
Crowdfunding: Geography, social networks, and the timing of investment decisions.Journal of Economics & Management Strategy24(2): 253–274.
3.
Allison TH, Davis BC, Short JC et al. (2015) Crowdfunding in a Prosocial Microlending Environment: Examining the Role of Intrinsic Versus Extrinsic Cues. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 39(1): 53–73. Available at: http://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12108.
4.
BarbiMBigelliM (2017)
Crowdfunding practices in and outside the US.Research in International Business and Finance42: 208–223.
5.
BeaverstockJVHallS, andWainwrightT (2013)
Servicing the super-rich: New financial elites and the rise of the private wealth management retail ecology.Regional Studies47: 834–849.
6.
BelleflammePLambertT, andSchwienbacherA (2014)
Crowdfunding: Tapping the right crowd.Journal of Business Venturing29(5): 585–609.
7.
BieriDS (2015)
Crowdfunding the city: The end of “cataclysmic money”?Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space47: 2429–2435.
8.
BotermanWR (2012)
Residential mobility of urban middle classes in the field of parenthood.Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space44: 2397–2412.
9.
BourdieuP (1986) Forms of capital. In: RichardsonJF (ed.) Handbook of Theory of Research for the Sociology of Education. Nice R (transl.).
Westport, CT:
Greenwood Press, pp. 241–258.
10.
BourdieuP (1990a) In Other Words: Essays Towards a Reflexive Sociology. Adamson M (transl.).
Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press.
11.
BourdieuP (1990b) The Logic of Practice. Nice R (transl.).
Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press.
12.
BourdieuP (1993) The Field of Cultural Production. Johnson R (ed.). New York: Columbia University Press.
13.
BourdieuP (1996) The State Nobility: Elite Schools in the Field of Power. Clough LC (transl.).
Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press.
14.
BourdieuP (1998) Practical Reason: On the Theory of Action.
Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press.
15.
BourdieuP (1999) Site effects. In: FergusonPPEmanuelSJohnsonJ, andWarynST (transl.) The Weight of the World: Social Suffering in Contemporary Society.
Stanford, CA:
University of California Press, pp.123–129.
16.
BourdieuP (2000) Pascalian Meditations. Nice R (transl.).
Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press.
17.
BourdieuP (2005) The Social Structures of the Economy. Turner C (transl.).
Malden, MA:
Polity Press.
18.
BourdieuP (2018)
Social space and the genesis of appropriated physical space. Wacquant L (transl.). International Journal of Urban and Regional Research42(1): 106–114.
19.
BourdieuPWacquantL (1992) An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology.
Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
20.
BridgeG (2006)
It’s not just a question of taste: Gentrification, the neighbourhood, and cultural capital.Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space38: 1965–1978.
21.
BrownRMawsonSRoweA, et al. (2018)
Working the crowd: Improvisational entrepreneurship and equity crowdfunding in nascent entrepreneurial ventures.International Small Business Journal36(2): 169–193.
22.
BunyanSCollinsA, andTorrisiG (2016)
Analysing household and intra-urban variants in the consumption of financial services: Uncovering “exclusion” in an English city.Journal of Consumer Policy39: 199–221.
23.
CameronACGelbachJB, andMillerDL (2011)
Robust inference with multiway clustering.Journal of Business & Economic Statistics29(2): 238–249.
24.
CaseyES (2001)
Between geography and philosophy: What does it mean to be in the place-world?Annals of the Association of American Geographers91(4): 683–693.
25.
ChenHGompersPKovnerA, et al. (2010)
Buy local? The geography of venture capital.Journal of Urban Economics67(1): 90–102.
26.
ColomboMGFranzoniC, andRossi-LamastraC (2015)
Internal social capital and the attraction of early contributions in crowdfunding.Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice39(1): 75–100.
27.
CookACGFalconbridgeJR, andMuzioD (2012)
London’s legal elite: Recruitment through cultural capital and the reproduction of social exclusivity in City professional service fields. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space44: 1744–1762.
28.
CopelandAJ (2015)
A multimodal analysis of faith-related giving rhetoric on Indiegogo. Heidelberg Journal of Religions on the Internet9: 1–18.
29.
CoppockS (2013)
The everyday geographies of financialisation: Impacts, subjects and alternatives.Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society6: 479–500.
30.
CresswellT (1996) In Place—Out of Place: Geography, Ideology, and Transgression.
Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
31.
CresswellT (2002)
Bourdieu’s geographies: In memorium.Environment and Planning D: Society and Space20: 379–382.
32.
DavidsonRPoorN (2015)
The barriers facing artists’ use of crowdfunding platforms: Personality, emotional labor, and going to the well one too many times.New Media & Society17(2): 289–307.
33.
EttlingerN (2016)
The governance of crowdsourcing: Rationalities of the new exploitation.Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space48(11): 2162–2180.
34.
FaulconbridgeJRHallS (2014)
Reproducing the City of London’s institutional landscape: The role of education and the learning of situated practices by early career elites.Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space46: 1682–1698.
35.
Florida R and Mellander C (2017) Rise of the startup city: The changing geography of the venture capital financed innovation. California Management Review 59(1): 14–38.
36.
ForsbergS (2019)
“The right to immobility” and the uneven distribution of spatial capital: Negotiating youth transitions in northern Sweden.Social & Cultural Geography20(3): 323–343.
37.
GalsterGTurnerLM (2017)
Status discrepancy as a driver of residential mobility: Evidence from Oslo.Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space49(9): 2155–2175.
38.
GerberEMHuiJ (2013)
Crowdfunding: Motivations and deterrents for participation.ACM Transactions on Computer–Human Interaction20(6): 34–2.
39.
GuentherCJohanS, andSchweizerD (2018)
Is the crowd sensitive to distance? How investment decisions differ by investor type.Small Business Economics50(2): 289–305.
40.
HadjimichalisC (2006)
Non-economic factors in economic geography and in “new regionalism”: A sympathetic critique.International Journal of Urban and Regional Research30(3): 690–704.
41.
HallS (2011)
Geographies of money and finance II: Financialization and financial subjects.Progress in Human Geography36(3): 403–411.
42.
HarringtonB (2016) Capital without Borders: Wealth Managers and the One Percent.
Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
43.
HochstenbachC (2018)
Spatializing the intergenerational transmission of inequalities: Parental wealth, residential segregation, and urban inequality.Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space50(3): 689–708.
44.
HoltL (2008)
Embodied social capital and geographic perspectives: Performing the habitus.Progress in Human Geography32(2): 227–246.
45.
HornufLSchweinbacherA (2018)
Market mechanisms and funding dynamics in equity crowdfunding.Journal of Corporate Finance50: 556–574.
46.
HuangXYangY, andLiuY (2018)
Spatial capital or cultural capital? The residential choice of gentrifiers in Xuanwumen, Beijing.Journal of Housing and the Built Environment33(2): 319–337.
47.
HugginsRThompsonP (2017)
Networks and regional economic growth: A spatial analysis of knowledge ties.Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space49(6): 1247–1265.
LangleyP (2008) The Everyday Life of Global Finance: Saving and Borrowing in Anglo-America.
New York:
Oxford University Press.
51.
LangleyPLeyshonA (2017a)
Capitalizing on the crowd: The monetary and financial ecologies of crowdfunding.Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space49(5): 1019–1039.
52.
LangleyPLeyshonA (2017b)
Platform capitalism: The intermediation and capitalisation of digital economic circulation.Finance and Society3(1): 11–31.
53.
LeyD (2003)
Artists, aestheticisation and the field of gentrification.Urban Studies40(12): 2527–2544.
54.
LeyshonABurtonDKnightsD, et al. (2004)
Towards an ecology of retail financial services: Understanding the persistence of door-to-door credit and insurance providers.Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space36: 625–645.
55.
LeyshonASignorettaPKnightsD, et al. (2006)
Walking with moneylenders: The ecology of the UK home-collected credit industry.Urban Studies43: 161–186.
56.
LinMViswanathanS (2016)
Home bias in online investments: An empirical study of an online crowdfunding market.Management Science62(5): 1393–1414.
57.
MaceA (2017)
Spatial capital as a tool for planning practice.Planning Theory16(2): 119–132.
58.
MasonCMHarrisonRT (2002)
The geography of venture capital investments in the UK.Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers27(4): 427–451.
59.
MedcalfeSKThompsonMA (2017)
Further evidence on the geographical concentration of venture capital investments.Letters in Spatial and Resources Sciences10(2): 229–235.
60.
Minnesota Population Center (2011) National Historical Geographic Information System: Version 2.0.
Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota. Available at: https://www.nhgis.org (Accessed 15 January 2017).
61.
MitraTGilbertE (2014) The language that gets people to give: Phrases that predict success on Kickstarter. In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work & social computing. CSCW ‘14. New York, USA: ACM pp.49–61.
62.
MollickE (2014)
The dynamics of crowdfunding: An exploratory study.Journal of Business Venturing29(1): 1–16.
63.
MollickERobbA (2016)
Democratizing innovation and capital access: The role of crowdfunding.California Management Review58(2): 72–87.
64.
MosselsonA (2019) Habitus, spatial capital and making place: Housing developers and the spatial praxis of Johannesburg’s inner-city regeneration. Environment and Planning A. Epub ahead of print February 18, 2019. DOI: 10.1177/0308518X19830970.
65.
NeveuE (2018) Bourdieu’s capital(s): Sociologizing an economic concept. In: MedvetzTSallazJJ (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Pierre Bourdieu.
New York:
Oxford University Press.
66.
PainterJ (2002) Pierre Bourdieu. In: CrangMThriftN (eds) Thinking Space.
New York:
Taylor and Francis, pp.240–260.
67.
PanFZhaoSXB, andWójcikD (2016)
The rise of venture capital centres in China: A spatial and network analysis.Geoforum75: 148–158.
68.
ParhankangasARenkoM (2017)
Linguistic style and crowdfunding success among social and commercial entrepreneurs.Journal of Business Venturing32(2): 215–236.
69.
R Core Team (2018) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing.
Vienna:
R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at: https://www.r-project.org (Accessed 05 October 2018).
70.
RobinXTurckNHainardA, et al. (2011) pROC: An open-source package for R and S+ to analyze and compare ROC curves. BMC Bioinformatics 12(77). Epub ahead of print March 17, 2011. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2105-12-77.
71.
Rodriguez-RicardoYSiciliaM, andLópezM (2018)
What drives crowdfunding participation? The influence of personal and social traits.Spanish Journal of Marketing: ESIC22(2): 163–182.
72.
RupasinghaAGoetzSJ (2008) US County-Level Social Capital Data, 1990–2005.
University Park:
Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development, Pennsylvania State University. Available at: http://aese.psu.edu/nercrd/community/social-capital-resources (Accessed 15 January 2017).
73.
ScruccaLFopMMurphyTB, et al. (2017)
mclust 5: Clustering, classification and density estimation using Gaussian finite mixture models. The R Journal8(1): 205–233.
74.
SenRQuerciaD (2018)
World wide spatial capital.PLOS One13(2): e0190346. Epub ahead of print February 8, 2018. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0190346.
75.
SignoriAVismaraS (2018)
Does success bring success? The post-offering lives of equity-crowdfunded firms.Journal of Corporate Finance50: 575–591.
76.
SorensonOAssenovaVLiGC, et al. (2016)
Expand innovation finance via crowdfunding.Science354(6319): 1526–1528.
77.
SpigelB (2017)
Bourdieu, culture, and the economic geography of practice: Entrepreneurial mentorship in Ottawa and Waterloo, Canada. Journal of Economic Geography17: 287–310.
78.
StadlerMThiesFWesselM, et al. (2014) Erfolg von crowdfunding-kampagnen frühzeitig erkenn: Erfolgsprädiktoren auf Kickstarter and Indiegogo. In: ThomasOTeutebergF (eds) Proceedings der 12. internationalen tagung wirtschaftsinformatik (WI 2015).
Osnabrük, pp.1237–1251.
79.
SternJS (2013) Characteristics of content and social spread strategy on the Indiegogo crowdfunding platform. MA Thesis, University of Texas at Austin, TX, USA.
80.
StevensonRMKuratkoDF, andEustlerJ (2019)
Unleashing main street entrepreneurship: Crowdfunding, venture capital, and the democratization of new venture investments.Small Business Economics52(2): 375–393.
81.
TennekesM (2018)
tmap: Thematic maps in R. Journal of Statistical Software84(6): 1–39.
82.
Texas A&M Geoservices (2015) Tamu Geoservices.
College Station, TX:
Texas A&M University. Available at: http://geoservices.tamu.edu (Accessed 05 February 2016).
83.
ThriftN (2008) Non-representational Theory: Space, Politics, Affect.
New York:
Routledge.
WacquantL (2008) Urban Outcasts: A Comparative Sociology of Advanced Marginality.
Malden, MA:
Polity Press.
86.
WacquantL (2016)
A concise genealogy and anatomy of habitus.The Sociological Review64(1): 64–72.
87.
WacquantL (2018a)
Bourdieu comes to town: Pertinence, principles, applications.International Journal of Urban and Regional Research42(1): 90–105.
88.
WacquantL (2018b) Four transversal principles for putting Bourdieu to work. In: MedvetzTSallazJJ (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Pierre Bourdieu.
New York:
Oxford University Press, pp.645–653.
89.
WacquantLSlaterT, andPereiraVB (2014)
Territorial stigmatization in action.Environment and Planning A46: 1270–1280.
90.
WickhamH (2009) ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis.
New York:
Springer.
91.
YounkinPKuppuswamyV (2018)
The colorblind crowd? Founder race and performance in crowdfunding.Management Science64(7): 3269–3287.
92.
ZookMA (2004)
The knowledge brokers: Venture capitalists, tacit knowledge and regional development.International Journal of Urban and Regional Research28(3): 621–641.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
