The Effects of Government‐Sponsored Venture Capital: International Evidence

Brander, James A.; Du, Qianqian; Hellmann, Thomas

doi:10.2139/ssrn.1573257

Cited by 25 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In other research papers by Brander et al (2014), Cumming and Johan (2009) and , it has been said that firms funded by government VCs get significantly less total funding than other ones. As to the syndication with private VCs, there are contradicting results in some cases that the government VCs perform better than private VCs Cumming, 2007) and vice versa Johan, 2009, Munari and[5].…”

Section: Do Government Venture Capitals Contribute To Their Portfolios?mentioning

confidence: 92%

“…In syndication with private VCs, six related peer-reviewed papers confirm a positive correlation with exits (Brander et al, 2014;, growth of portfolios (Grilli and Murtinu, 2014a;Grilli and Murtinu, 2014b), innovation (Bertoni and Tykvová, 2015) and staging (Brander et al, 2014). On the overview of previous research, it can be noted that many government VCs seem to contribute to less exits of portfolios.…”

Section: Do Government Venture Capitals Contribute To Their Portfolios?mentioning

confidence: 94%

“…While there are studies that government VCs crowd-in private VCs in the market (Brander et al, 2014;Cumming and Li, 2013), they crowd-out private VCs (Cumming and MacIntosh, 2006) or crowd-out other government VCs (Cumming and Johan, 2009). Also, there are researches that it is not sure if government VC crowd-in or -out other VCs (Leleux and Surlemont, 2003), that they do not crowd-out at least (Cumming, 2014), and that they only can solve relatively modest market failures (Jääskeläinen et al, 2007).…”

Section: Do Government Venture Capitals Contribute To Their Portfolios?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Japanese government venture capital: what should we know?

Kirihata

2018

APJIE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to discuss the implication of Japanese government venture capital (VC) policies for future research and to provide basis for policymakers and practitioners. Design/methodology/approach This is an academic literature review of available peer-reviewed publications on government VC policies. This paper discusses and analyses the current state and issues of the Japanese government VC policies regarding three research questions: What do Japanese government VCs do? Do they contribute to their portfolios? and Do they contribute to the development of VC market? Findings There are mainly two findings in this paper: It is effective to establish a complementary relationship with private VCs for Japanese government VCs to contribute to their portfolios; Japanese government should simultaneously continue to make and review policies for the VC market, the stock market, the entrepreneur sector and the environment surrounding them by its strategic long-term commitment to contribute to the development of VC market and new technology-based firms in Japan. Originality/value As there are only a few studies on recently strengthened Japanese government VC policies, this paper provides an in-depth discussion on these Japanese VC policies, which can be used for future research and as a valuable resource for policymakers and practitioners.

show abstract

Section: Do Government Venture Capitals Contribute To Their Portfolios?mentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Do Government Venture Capitals Contribute To Their Portfolios?mentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Do Government Venture Capitals Contribute To Their Portfolios?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Japanese government venture capital: what should we know?

Kirihata

2018

APJIE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to them, the biggest mistake of government programs is that they do not mandate the most successful private sector vc fund manager companies to manage the state funds. Brander, Du, and Hellmann (2015) analysed an international database and found that companies who received vc funds provided by both the government and the private sector, received more funds overall. In those cases, funds also had a higher chance for a success-324 management · volume 12 ful exit compared to firms that only received either public or private investments.…”

Section: Evaluating the Government Interventions: International Expermentioning

confidence: 99%

Government Sponsored Venture Capital: Blessing Or Curse?

Jáki¹,

Molnár²,

Walter³

2017

MNG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Young companies with growth opportunities face serious problems when it comes to financing. The private venture capital (vc) market fails to provide sufficient funding for this segment. First, we present the main characteristics of start-up companies and market failures that can lead to government intervention. These failures include asymmetric information embodied in the business plan; high transaction costs of the investment process from the investment decision to the exit; and positive externalities in the economy, as the government prefers other goals than profit realization. Government participation is categorized as direct or indirect intervention. We present international studies showing that indirect government intervention can have both beneficial and negative effects on the vc market. Finally, the Hungarian government's participation and intervention are evaluated on the domestic vc market.

show abstract

“…During the past four decades, over forty countries have implemented policy attempting to create local VC industries (Brander et al 2014;Klingler-Vidra 2015;Wright et al 2005). Partly stemming from these policy attempts, VC has spread widely, as has the limited partnership as an organisational form (Aizenman and Kendall 2008;Guler and Guillen 2010;Mayer et al 2005;Megginson 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Policies for financing entrepreneurship through venture capital: learning from the successes of Israel and Taiwan

Klingler-Vidra

Kenney

Breznitz

2016

IJIRD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The success of Silicon Valley as a hub for rapid-innovation growth has motivated policy-makers around the world to initiate policies trying to mimic it. These policy initiatives raise the question of whether globalisation should encourage innovation policy-makers to aim for institutional convergence and close imitation, or for institutional hybridisation and local experimentation. This paper explores this question by focusing on venture capital creation policy. Using two national cases, Israel and Taiwan, we show that policy effectiveness was not the result of simple imitation. Instead, policy performance is determined by degree of fit with local financial conditions and the position of the local ICT industry within global production networks. We then consider the implications of our study for understanding the development of national VC industries and the industries they fund with the primary message being that there is no singular model for venture capital market development. Instead, policy-makers need to understand the local context with its assets and liabilities. Of particular importance are local financing conditions, firm capabilities, and the existing position of local firms within the global production networks of the ICT industry.2

show abstract

The Effects of Government‐Sponsored Venture Capital: International Evidence

Cited by 25 publications

References 34 publications

Japanese government venture capital: what should we know?

Japanese government venture capital: what should we know?

Government Sponsored Venture Capital: Blessing Or Curse?

Policies for financing entrepreneurship through venture capital: learning from the successes of Israel and Taiwan

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About