Understanding what fosters - and hinders - firm formation and growth at the metropolitan level across the United States is a challenge.
We conclude that the local conditions favouring high-growth firms are likely to be different from those favouring new firms in general, and that these conditions differ significantly in urban and rural areas and by industrial sectors.
Income growth, a mix of higher paying industries, and more banks per capita are associated with a smaller presence of these types of firms, all else equal.
Zero-inflated negative binomial regressions indicate that these firms exist in counties with larger average establishment size, higher educational attainment and more natural amenities. We draw on the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship to motivate our regression model, and augment this theory with additional regional features that have been found to be important in the firm location literature. This study, with support from the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, focuses on three major sets of questions about HGFs: 1) How are HGFs defined? 2) Where are HGFs located-geographically, in terms of industrial sectors, and within business cycles? and 3) How are HGFs connected to their regional entrepreneurial ecosystem?Ĭounty-level location patterns of INC5000 companies provide one map of American entrepreneurship and innovativeness, and understanding the local factors associated with these firms’ emergence is important for stimulating regional economic growth and innovation. If firms classified as high-growth differ based on the definition used (a very likely outcome), serious concerns arise surrounding the validity and appropriateness of funding and policy decisions. Third, definitions may encourage public and private funding decisions based on high-growth classification.
THE ASCENT DALLAS HOW TO
Second, as the focus of economic development policy has shifted towards entrepreneurship in recent years, the issue of how to define and identify HGFs has become even more important for practitioners. First, the literature provides a wide array of HGF definitions, creating a confusion surrounding the concept and an opportunity for comparative analysis. These findings provide profound implications for the policy of regional development.Įxamining HGF definitions is interesting and important for several reasons. All results point in the same direction: The research function of the university has been overstated, and the teaching function of the university has been underappreciated. Furthermore, we test the roles of university beyond those explicit, direct measures of spin-offs and patents by analyzing the firm formation rate and firm growth rate at the regional level, as well as the sources of growth at the company level.
THE ASCENT DALLAS SERIES
In this article, we propose to investigate this subject more systematically by triangulating three methods: 1) national-scale regression models with Business Dynamics Statistics and National Establishment Time Series data, 2) a regional survey of IT and life science firms in four so-called “second tier regions,” and 3) a microeconomic firm-level analysis based on interviews with founders of technology intensive firms.
THE ASCENT DALLAS LICENSE
Another set of studies that have challenged the effect of universities at the nationwide scale and demonstrated its disproportionately small impact of universities, but their scope is limited to spinoffs, patents, and license activities. However, they are based on case studies of individual universities or regions, and the findings currently cannot be generalized. At the same time, we have observed a fair number of counter-evidentiary studies, demonstrating several regions that do not thrive despite strong research universities or other patterns of development in the absence of research universities. There is a general understanding that university plays a crucial role in regional development under the current age of knowledge economy.
0 kommentar(er)
