We use the theory of organizational ecology to study how governmental venture capital (GVC) affects the investment behavior of private venture capital (PVC). Because of its objectives and dominant competencies, GVC is a unique organizational species that occupies a different niche than PVC. GVC is conceived to establish mutualistic relations with PVC. Accordingly, the greater the presence of GVC in a venture capital (VC) ecosystem, the more PVC investors should be attracted toward GVC’s niche. We consider several relevant niche dimensions at the company (age and size), industry (biotechnology), and regional (competitiveness) levels. Our analysis of 1,239 PVC investments in Europe confirms most of our predictions.
AnnoniP.DijkstraL. (2013). EU Regional Competitiveness Index - RCI 2013. doi:10.2788/61698.
2.
ArmourJ.CummingD. J. (2006) The legislative road to Silicon Valley. Oxford Economic Papers58(4): 596–635. doi:10.1093/oep/gpl007.
3.
BaumJ. A. C.SilvermanB. S. (2004) Picking winners or building them? Alliance, intellectual, and human capital as selection criteria in venture financing and performance of biotechnology startups. Journal of Business Venturing19(3): 411–436. doi:10.1016/S0883-9026(03)00038-7.
4.
BergerA. N.UdellG. F. (1990) Collateral, loan quality and bank risk. Journal of Monetary Economics25(1): 21–42. doi:10.1016/0304-3932(90)90042-3.
5.
BertoniF.ColomboM. G.QuasA. (2015) The patterns of venture capital investment in Europe. Small Business Economics45(3): 543–560. doi:10.1007/s11187-015-9662-0.
6.
BertoniF.GrohA. P. (2014) Cross-border investments and venture capital exits in Europe. Corporate Governance: An International Review22(2): 84–99. doi:10.1111/corg.12056.
7.
BertoniF.MartíJ. (2011). Financing entrepreneurial ventures in Europe: The Vico Dataset(SSRN eLibrary No.1939855). SSRN eLibrary.doi:10.2139/ssrn.1904297.
8.
BertoniF.TykvováT. (2015) Does governmental venture capital spur invention and innovation? Evidence from young European biotech companies. Research Policy44(4): 925–935. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2015.02.002.
9.
BranderJ. A.DuQ.HellmannT. F. (2015) The effects of government-sponsored venture capital: International evidence. Review of Finance19(2): 571–618. https://doi.org/10.1093/rof/rfu009.
10.
BrutonG. D.FriedV. H.ManigartS. (2005) Institutional influences on the worldwide expansion of venture capital. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice29(6): 737–760. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.00106.x.
11.
CarpenterR. E.PetersenB. C. (2002) Capital market imperfections, high-tech investment, and new equity financing. Economic Journal112(477): F54–F72. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00683.
12.
CarrollG. R.HannanM. T. (1989) Density delay in the evolution of organizational populations: A model and five empirical tests. Administrative Science Quarterly34(3): 411, doi:10.2307/2393151.
13.
CarrollG. R.HannanM. T. (2000) The demography of corporations and industries, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
14.
ChenH.GompersP. A.KovnerA.LernerJ. (2010) Buy local? The geography of venture capital. Journal of Urban Economics67(1): 90–102. doi:10.1016/j.jue.2009.09.013.
15.
ColomboM. G.CummingD. J.VismaraS. (2016) Governmental venture capital for innovative young firms. Journal of Technology Transfer41(1): 10–24. doi:10.1007/s10961-014-9380-9.
16.
ColomboM. G.D’AddaD.PirelliL. H. (2016) The participation of new technology-based firms in EU-funded R&D partnerships: The role of venture capital. Research Policy45(2): 361–375. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2015.10.011.
17.
CummingD. J.DaiN. (2010) Local bias in venture capital investments. Journal of Empirical Finance17(3): 362–380. doi:10.1016/j.jempfin.2009.11.001.
18.
CummingD. J.JohanS. (2009) Pre-seed government venture capital funds. Journal of International Entrepreneurship7(1): 26–56. doi:10.1007/s10843-008-0030-x.
19.
CummingD. J.MacintoshJ. G. (2006) Crowding out private equity: Canadian evidence. Journal of Business Venturing21(5): 569–609. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2005.06.002.
20.
Da GbadjiL.GaillyB.SchwienbacherA. (2015) International analysis of venture capital programs of large corporations and financial institutions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice39(4): 1213–1245. doi:10.1111/etap.12105.
21.
Da RinM.HellmannT. F.PuriM. (2013) A survey of venture capital research. Handbook of the Economics of Finance2(PA): 573–648. doi:10.1016/B978-0-44-453594-8.00008-2.
22.
del-PalacioI.ZhangX. T.SoleF. (2012) The capital gap for small technology companies: Public venture capital to the rescue?Small Business Economics38(3): 283–301. doi:10.1007/s11187-010-9275-6.
23.
DevigneD.ManigartS.WrightM. (2016) Escalation of commitment in venture capital decision making: Differentiating between domestic and international investors. Journal of Business Venturing31(3): 253–271. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2016.01.001.
24.
DevigneD.VanackerT. R.ManigartS.PaelemanI. (2011) The role of domestic and cross-border venture capital investors in the growth of portfolio companies. Small Business Economics40(3): 553–573. doi:10.1007/s11187-011-9383-y.
25.
DiMasiJ. A.GrabowskiH. G. (2007) The cost of biopharmaceutical R&D: is biotech different?Managerial and Decision Economics28(4–5): 469–479. doi:10.1002/mde.1360.
26.
DimovD.GedajlovicE. (2010) A property rights perspective on venture capital investment decisions. Journal of Management Studies47(7): 1248–1271. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00905.x.
27.
DobrevS. D.KimT.HannanM. T. (2001) Dynamics of niche width and resource partitioning. American Journal of Sociology106(5): 1299–1337. doi:10.1086/320821.
28.
EcholsA.TsaiW. (2005) Niche and performance: the moderating role of network embeddedness. Strategic Management Journal26(3): 219–238. doi:10.1002/smj.443.
GieseckeS. (2000) The contrasting roles of government in the development of biotechnology industry in the US and Germany. Research Policy29(2): 205–223. doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00061-X.
33.
GueriniM.QuasA. (2016) Governmental venture capital in Europe: Screening and certification. Journal of Business Venturing31(2): 175–195. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2015.10.001.
34.
HallB. H.LernerJ. (2010) The financing of R&D and innovation. Handbook of the Economics of Innovation1: 609–639.
35.
HallenB.KatilaR.RosenbergerJ. (2014) Unpacking social defenses: A resource-dependence lens on technology ventures, venture capital, and corporate relationships. Academy of Management57(4): 1078–1101.
36.
HannanM. T.CarrollG. R. (1992) Dynamics of organizational populations: Density, legitimation, and competition, New York: Oxford University Press.
37.
HannanM. T.FreemanJ. H. (1977) The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology82(5): 929–964. Retrieved fromhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/2777807.
38.
HigginsM. J.StephanP. E.ThursbyJ. G. (2011) Conveying quality and value in emerging industries: Star scientists and the role of signals in biotechnology. Research Policy40(4): 605–617. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2011.01.006.
39.
JääskeläinenM. (2012) Venture capital syndication: Synthesis and future directions. International Journal of Management Reviews14(4): 444–463. doi:10.2139/ssrn.1406989.
40.
JääskeläinenM.MaulaM. V. J.MurrayG. C. (2007) Profit distribution and compensation structures in publicly and privately funded hybrid venture capital funds. Research Policy36(7): 913–929. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2007.02.021.
41.
JengL. A.WellsP. C. (2000) The determinants of venture capital funding: Evidence across countries. Journal of Corporate Finance6(3): 241–289. doi:10.1016/S0929-1199(00)00003-1.
42.
JunkuncM. T. (2007) Managing radical innovation: The importance of specialized knowledge in the biotech revolution. Journal of Business Venturing22(3): 388–411. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2006.04.004.
43.
JunkuncM. T.EckhardtJ. T. (2009) Technical specialized knowledge and secondary shares in initial public offerings. Management Science55(10): 1670–1687. doi:10.1287/mnsc.1090.1051.
44.
KangK.-N.ParkH. (2012) Influence of government R&D support and inter-firm collaborations on innovation in Korean biotechnology SMEs. Technovation32(1): 68–78. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2011.08.004.
45.
KnockaertM.ManigartS.CattoirS.VerstraeteW. (2015) A perspective on the economic valorization of gene manipulated biotechnology: Past and future. Biotechnology Reports6: 56–60. doi:10.1016/j.btre.2015.01.002.
46.
KovnerA.LernerJ. (2015) Doing well by doing good? Community development venture capital. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy24(3): 643–663. doi:10.1111/jems.12100.
47.
LeleuxB.SurlemontB. (2003) Public versus private venture capital: Seeding or crowding out? A pan-European analysis. Journal of Business Venturing18(1): 81–104. doi:10.1016/S0883-9026(01)00078-7.
48.
LernerJ. (1999) The government as venture capitalist: The long-run impact of the SBIR program. Journal of Business72(3): 285–318. doi:10.3905/jpe.2000.319960.
49.
LernerJ. (2002) When bureaucrats meet entrepreneurs: The design of effective “public venture capital” programmes. Economic Journal112(477): F73–F84. doi:10.1111/1468-0297.00684.
50.
LuukkonenT.DeschryvereM.BertoniF. (2013) The value added by government venture capital funds compared with independent venture capital funds. Technovation33(4–5): 154–162. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2012.11.007.
51.
ManigartS. (1994) The founding rate of venture capital firms in three European countries (1970–1990). Journal of Business Venturing9(6): 525–541. doi:10.1016/0883-9026(94)90020-5.
52.
ManigartS.CollewaertV.WrightM.PruthiS.LockettA.BruiningH.LandstromH. (2007) Human capital and the internationalisation of venture capital firms. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal3(1): 109–125. doi:10.1007/s11365-006-0021-0.
53.
MartíJ.QuasA. (2017) A beacon in the night: Government certification of SMEs towards banks. Small Business Economics. 1–17. doi:10.1007/s11187-016-9828-4.
54.
MasonC. M.HarrisonR. T. (2003) Closing the regional equity gap? A critique of the department of trade and industry’s regional venture capital funds initiative. Regional Studies37(8): 855–868. doi:10.1080/0034340032000128767.
55.
MayerC.SchoorsK.YafehY. (2005) Sources of funds and investment activities of venture capital funds: evidence from Germany, Israel, Japan and the United Kingdom. Journal of Corporate Finance11(3): 586–608. doi:10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2004.02.003.
56.
McKelveyB. (1982) Organizational systematics—Taxonomy, evolution, classification, Berkeley: University of California Press.
57.
McPhersonJ. M. (1983) An ecology of affiliation. American Sociological Review48(4): 519–532. Retrieved fromhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/2117719.
58.
McPhersonJ. M.Ranger-MooreJ. R. (1991) Evolution on a dancing landscape: Organizations and networks in dynamic Blau Space. Social Forces70(1): 19–42. doi:10.1093/sf/70.1.19.
59.
MeulemanM.WrightM. (2011) Cross-border private equity syndication: Institutional context and learning. Journal of Business Venturing26(1): 35–48. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.06.003.
60.
PowellW. W.KoputK. W.BowieJ. I.Smith-DoerrL. (2002) The spatial clustering of science and capital: Accounting for biotech firm-venture capital relationships. Regional Studies36(3): 291–305. doi:10.1080/00343400220122089.
SuchmanM. C. (1995) Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review20(3): 571–610. doi:10.5465/AMR.1995.9508080331.
63.
WalkerG.KogutB.ShanW. (1997) Social capital, structural holes and the formation of an industry network. Organization Science8(2): 109–125. doi:10.1287/orsc.8.2.109.
