Explore the vast range of titles available.

The aim of this article is to assess the potential of using scientometric and patentometric indicators as a way of instrumentalizing the selection process of projects for seed capital funding. There is an increasing interest in technology based enterprises for their capacity to contribute to economic and social development, but there is also some difficulty in assessing non-financial criteria associated with technology for the purposes of financial funding. Thus, this research selected the case of the first enterprise invested in by the largest seed capital fund in Brazil, in order to create scientific and technological indicators and to assess the extent to which these indicators may contribute to understanding the market potential of the technology once it is assessed. It was concluded that scientometric and patentometric indicators favour the assessment process for non-financial criteria, in particular those criteria dealt with in this study: technology, market, divestment, and team.

Silicon Valley, Singapore, Tel Aviv--the global hubs of entrepreneurial activity--all bear the marks of government investment. Yet, for every public intervention that spurs entrepreneurial activity, there are many failed efforts that waste untold billions in taxpayer dollars. When has governmental sponsorship succeeded in boosting growth, and when has it fallen terribly short? Should the government be involved in such undertakings at all?Boulevard of Broken Dreamsis the first extensive look at the ways governments have supported entrepreneurs and venture capitalists across decades and continents. Josh Lerner, one of the foremost experts in the field, provides valuable insights into why some public initiatives work while others are hobbled by pitfalls, and he offers suggestions for how public ventures should be implemented in the future. Discussing the complex history of Silicon Valley and other pioneering centers of venture capital, Lerner uncovers the extent of government influence in prompting growth. He examines the public strategies used to advance new ventures, points to the challenges of these endeavors, and reveals the common flaws undermining far too many programs--poor design, a lack of understanding for the entrepreneurial process, and implementation problems. Lerner explains why governments cannot dictate how venture markets evolve, and why they must balance their positions as catalysts with an awareness of their limited ability to stimulate the entrepreneurial sector. As governments worldwide seek to spur economic growth in ever more aggressive ways,Boulevard of Broken Dreamsoffers an important caution. The book argues for a careful approach to government support of entrepreneurial activities, so that the mistakes of earlier efforts are not repeated.

We assess the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on venture capital (VC) investments, documenting a significant decline in investments using a dataset of 39,527 funding rounds occurring before and during the pandemic in 130 countries. In line with our theoretical considerations, we show that this decline is more pronounced for investments characterized by higher uncertainty, namely investments in seed-stage ventures, industries affected more heavily by the COVID-19 crisis, international investments, and non-syndicated investments. Investor prominence partially moderates these effects.Plain English SummaryA new study, investigating 130 countries, finds that COVID-19 influenced the global venture capital landscape in surprising ways. We assess the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on venture capital (VC) investments, documenting a significant decline in investments using a dataset of 39,527 funding rounds occurring before and during the pandemic in 130 countries. Our study shows that this decline is more pronounced for investments in seed-stage ventures, industries affected more heavily by the COVID-19 crisis, international investments, and non-syndicated investments. However, prominent investors are affected differently compared to less prominent VC firms.

The advent of COVID-19 portended a dire liquidity crunch for small firms as traditional external funding sources were severely curtailed. Defying expectations, initial equity crowdfunding (ECF) campaigns not only withstood the pandemic’s onslaught but also saw unprecedented growth in funding volume, investor participation and overfunding. The upshot was that external equity, the traditional funding of last resort, became the first choice. Increased ECF funding especially for seed ventures are likely linked to government-backed loan guarantee schemes that acted as a quality signal for investors. The paper highlights the unanticipated positive synergies between public support mechanisms and private equity dynamics where equity was funding of first choice for many small firms seeking external funding. These developments underscore ECF’s central role in digitally channelling equity capital to small firms during a period of heightened economic uncertainty. Plain English Summary During the pandemic, when physical meetings were restricted, UK equity crowdfunding (ECF) platforms became a crucial lifeline for start-ups, enabling equity financing without face-to-face interactions with investors like business angels. ECF offerings flourished with funding amounts increasing by 15% and investor numbers by 32%. Their success was due to digital due diligence mechanisms that effectively identified high-quality ventures. Moreover, government loan guarantee schemes, including those with full repayment guarantees, provided significant support. Initially, there were concerns about these schemes negatively affecting other finance sources. However, they proved to be a financial lifeline for small firms, enhancing their viability and improving their chances of raising equity capital through Crowdcube. As a result, innovative seed firms thrived during COVID-19 as government aid in the pandemic's first year guaranteed their survival. The main implication is that ECF – a very risky source of finance – flourished during COVID-19 through digital flexibility and government support.

University–industry technology transfer (TT) has become increasingly institutionalized and is supported by numerous reforms and initiatives at the national, regional and university levels. Most countries have implemented a policy mix involving a range of instruments to support the commercialization of research. Still, there is no systematic evidence indicating why the mix of policy instruments differs between countries. This study offers a novel cross-national investigation of the policy mix emphasizing the level of centralization and decentralization of policy instruments. We map and analyze two specific types of public instruments aimed at addressing the so-called funding gap in TT: proof of concept programs (POCs) and university-oriented seed funds (USFs). Based on a survey across 21 European countries, we find that such instruments are widely used but are organized differently depending on the level of implementation of TT practices in the country and the specific type of instrument considered. More precisely, we find a U-shaped relationship between the use of centralized gap-funding instruments and the country’s implementation of TT practices. Moreover, the type of gap-funding instrument (POC or USF) moderates this relationship. We discuss the implications of our findings and suggest that the policy mix of gap-funding instruments evolve with the maturity of the national TT infrastructure.

Nigeria’s growing digital health startup ecosystem has a lot of potential to fill in gaps in healthcare delivery, but many of these businesses fail to get off the ground after getting initial funding. This narrative review examines funding patterns from 2019 to 2025 and investigates why seed-stage investment often fails to translate into scaled impact. Investment reports, case studies of prominent Nigerian health-tech startups, and comparative insights from peer markets were synthesized. The analysis finds that despite a surge of seed funding and a record venture capital peak in 2021, few Nigerian digital health startups convert initial success into sustainable growth. Constraining factors include regulatory hurdles, infrastructural deficiencies, market trust barriers, talent gaps, and systemic health-sector limitations, challenges that mere capital infusion cannot overcome. Case narratives (e.g., Helium Health’s regional expansion and 54gene’s post-pandemic collapse) illustrate these dynamics. Key mechanisms to bridge the “post-seed” gap are discussed, ranging from strategic public-private partnerships to specialized follow-on funds, with lessons drawn from ecosystems like Kenya and India. Strengthening support beyond seed stages and addressing non-financial frictions will be crucial for Nigerian health-tech innovators to realize their full scale-up potential.

This work investigates the role of university and PRO-oriented seed funds (USFs)—VC funds with an explicit mission to make investments in academic spin-offs and support technology transfer—as instruments for addressing funding gaps and facilitating the commercialization of academic technologies. We first offer an overview of USFs in Europe, highlighting their heterogeneity and principal characteristics. Second, we exploit a unique data set of 1,497 start-ups (including 733 USF-backed start-ups and another 764 start-ups backed by other VC funds) to analyze how USF-backed companies perform in terms of exit rates, staging, and syndication levels when compared with non-USF-backed companies. Empirical evidence suggests that USF-backed companies perform better in staging and syndication but worse in exit rates. Moreover, our analyses show that, within the group of USF-backed companies, the ones that can attract more follow-on funding and investors are those financed by USFs that are internally managed by a universities/PROs and are linked to universities with high scientific rankings.

Purpose Angel investments are increasingly getting specialized. In recent years, start-ups are raising pre-seed funding before seed-stage funding. Investors in pre-seed and seed-stage companies commonly are angel investors. The purpose of this paper is to understand the differences between these two groups of angel investors. Design/methodology/approach Data for this study obtained from angel funding deals from the sources such as Venture Intelligence, VCCEdge, Keiretsu Forum, Dealcurry and The Chennai Angels. A total of 732 angel investments made by 405 investors during 2014–18 were used in the analysis. Non-parametric tests and regression estimations were used to identify the differences between angel investors investing in pre-seed and seed-stage ventures. An index was developed to measure the extent of syndication in angel investments and used as an independent variable in the regression. Findings There are significant differences between angel investors investing in pre-seed and seed-stage ventures. The results show that angels with more industry-specific experience make a higher proportion of investment in seed-stage ventures. Seed-stage ventures attract investors from Tier-1 cities, whereas the pre-seed stage has higher investors from smaller cities. Though the investment size is smaller, the extent of syndication is greater in pre-seed stage investments. Originality/value To differentiate the angel investments between pre-seed and seed-stage funding, this study uses data from Indian start-ups. Further, this study develops a composite syndication index to measure the extent of syndication in angel investments and assesses its impact on an angel investor’s choice of pre-seed stage investments.

PurposeThe paper focuses on how student entrepreneurs learn from the process of applying for low-threshold seed capital grants of about €2500Design/methodology/approachAn in-depth inductive study was conducted on the seed capital grant initiative TrønderEnergi–Bidraget (TEB). The research design was based on the Zaltman metaphor elicitation technique (ZMET) to capture the interviewees' perceptions about TEB. From the interviews, 596 codes were identified and grouped into 54 categories. The results are illustrated in a consensus map.FindingsTEB is an enabler of student venture creation processes through both the money awarded and activities fostering learning and development. Learning by doing is visible through two processes: 1) repeated writing of applications and 2) “forced” reflective thinking through the steps in the application process. The iterativeness of these processes due to repeated applications to the low threshold initiative is important for learning.Practical implicationsThe authors recommend that university managers and policymakers offer seed funding to student entrepreneurs to ensure that the offering is a low threshold. A low threshold is decisive for generating a positive learning outcome from the application process. The seed funding initiatives should require students to put time and energy into all the integrated processes to make value out of the iterativeness of the processes.Originality/valueThis paper extends the discussion on the additionality of receiving grants by focusing on the process of applying for a grant. This research contributes to the student entrepreneurship literature by suggesting that the design of the application process and forced reflections are important for learning, as well as specifying the antecedents for student motivation for continued entrepreneurial activity in the application process.

This is the first book of its kind to systematically integrate crowdfunding in the entrepreneurial finance research field and extend the current debate to show how crowdfunding can be leveraged as a strategic tool to grow new ventures. Utilising original empirical evidence of companies that have raised funds via crowdfunding, it discusses the value-added services that the crowd provides to entrepreneurs, as well as how and under which conditions crowdfunding helps company development by facilitating subsequent access to critical financial and non-financial resources from external stakeholders. The first part introduces the most popular models and tactics for a successful crowdfunding campaign and illustrates the characteristics of the crowdfunding phenomenon and its evolution across the world during the last decade. The second part of the book, demonstrating how crowdfunding can be a starting point to seed financing, illustrates and discusses how entrepreneurs can use crowdfunding as a strategic tool for accessing subsequent resources from external stakeholders - showing the benefits, beyond capital, that entrepreneurs can gain from the crowd, as well as potential risks. Crowdfunding for Entrepreneurs is particularly useful for academics, advanced undergraduate and postgraduate students in entrepreneurship and innovation, entrepreneurial finance, strategic management, as well as professionals interested in how crowdfunding can be utilised as a strategic tool to create competitive advantage.