Martin Andersson

We examine how the geography of entrepreneurial quality differs from the geography of entrepreneurial quantity by analyzing spatial variation in high-growth firms (HGFs) across Swedish municipalities during 2002–2022. Using longitudinal firm-level data matched to survey measures of local business climate, we compare the determinants of start-up rates and firm scaling. Standard supply- and demand-side factors — population size, human capital and economic structure — are associated with both outcomes, though not uniformly. In contrast, local business climate, capturing entrepreneurs’ assessments of how local authorities function in practice, is a substantially stronger predictor of HGFs than of start-ups. The association is economically meaningful and varies with local economic structure. The findings point to a micro-level mechanism that may link local framework conditions to aggregate outcomes: interactions between growth-oriented firms and local institutions during scaling. These patterns suggest that local institutional conditions are related not only to how many firms are created, but to which firms are able to grow.

Building on a conceptual framework that links work experience to initial startup quality and post-entry performance through selection and treatment mechanisms, we posit that having individuals with work experience in Multinational Enterprises (MNEs) as a part of the initial startup team positively influences the initial startup size and post-entry performance of new firms. Using detailed Swedish data on over 13,000 new firms over the period 2000-2014, we find support for our conceptual framework. The effect of MNE experience on post-entry growth yet depends on the position the individuals had in the MNE. Our results highlight that MNEs are a specific type of firm that serves as breeding grounds and plays a role as ‘anchor’ firms; they support the development of startups by indirectly ‘feeding’ the economy with relevant experiences and skills.

This study empirically examines the drivers of firms’ perceived needs for digital competence, focusing on the role of digital maturity in shaping demand for digital skills. The results reveal divergence dynamics: digitally mature firms, particularly those have AI/automation capabilities, R&D investments, and highly educated workforces, are significantly more likely to anticipate future digital skill needs, especially in decision-making roles. Firm size, innovation orientation, and international exposure also positively influence competence demand, though with varying intensity. Our findings highlight that digital frontier firms are strengthening their strategic investment in digital competence and digital laggard risk falling further behind.

This paper analyzes city system dynamics, based on a theoretical framework relating interaction potentials to agglomeration economies and density externalities. It employs new historical time series data on population size of cities in Sweden over two centuries (1810–2010) and introduces two schematic growth factors: (i) the intra-city potential and (ii) the extra-city potential located in in rings encircling each city. The first factor is measured by each city’s population size, while the second is a vector of distance-discounted population size for each of a city’s urban rings. In this way, we can explain a city’s growth as a function of its interaction potential inside the city, as well as inside the first, second hand third ring. A robust finding is that cities with large ring potentials follow different development paths than those with small ring potentials. We also find clear evidence of structural change between the two centuries 1810–1910 and 1910–2010. In the first period, city growth is positively impacted by the size of the intra-city potential, whereas the same potential dampens or reduces the growth in the second period. Moreover, the ring potentials outside the city tend to switch from having negative growth stimulation in the first period to having positive stimulation in the second period.

It is well established that there is uneven availability of credit across space, in particular for SMEs. The evidence on whether this translates into differences in actual business investments remains scarce. We assess this question by using firm-level data for Swedish firms and estimate the extent to which the average investment-cash flow sensitivities of firms vary across the urban–rural hierarchy. We find that the world of financing is not yet flat for the majority of Swedish SMEs. Companies located in non-metro regions are most dependent on own cash flow in their investments. The results hold for all firms, firms of different sizes, firms operating in low-end services, unaffiliated firms and those belonging to domestic corporations. In contrast, investment-cash flow sensitivity of firms operating in high-tech services and those belonging to a multinational enterprise does not differ geographically. On average, regional investment-cash flow sensitivity is lower in bigger, denser and more educated local labour market regions; it is higher in regions with greater concentration of SMEs.

Software is at the core of digitalisation and is often claimed to play a central role in innovation and in shaping competition across industries and firms. There are yet few studies of the extent and nature of software development across firms. We employ a unique firm-level survey comprising 3,929 firms across Sweden to analyse the distribution and characteristics of firms that invest in software development and the orientation of their investments. The results confirm that software development activities are present in most industries, but heterogeneously distributed across firms. Internal software development is associated with innovation-oriented large firms in high-tech and knowledge-intensive industries, and is often affiliated with MNEs. The results suggest that software development is comparable to R&D investments and constitutes an example of digital innovation. This strengthens the value of studying software development activities to understand how firms invest in and build competitive advantage in the digitalised economy.

Spatial variations in rates of new firm formation are large and spatially persistent over long periods of time. A common explanation of this empirical regularity is so-called local entrepreneurship cultures, which refer to spatially embedded social characteristics that change in slow processes. This paper discusses perspectives on the development of such cultures and focuses on the role of historical industry structures in forming the long-run entrepreneurial character of regions. To illustrate the empirical relevance of arguments and findings in the literature, we use historical data on voting patterns in municipalities in Sweden, as well as indications of their early industrial concentrations, and assess their correlations with present-day entrepreneurial activity. We show that places with a high share of left-wing votes in the period 1917–1948 and early historical presence of heavy industry have lower rates of new firm formation, less positive public attitudes toward entrepreneurship as well as larger average establishment sizes in the twenty-first century. The empirical patterns are consistent with the argument that regions’ historical industry structure is one factor that influences the development of local entrepreneurship cultures.

Economic thought on entrepreneurship goes at least as far back as to Richard Cantillon, Adam Smith and Jean-Baptiste Say in the 18th and 19th centuries, and by some accounts much further back. After being neglected throughout a large part of the 20th century, entrepreneurship research has risen to become one of the most forceful, dynamic and expansionary fields in social sciences, represented by variety of specialized journals and conferences and encompassing several academic sub-disciplines. This monograph attempts to provide an overview of primarily contemporary pioneers in entrepreneurship research who have been instrumental in defining, re-introducing and establishing entrepreneurship as a core research discipline through their seminal scientific endeavors. Besides of the founding fathers of entrepreneurship research, we have identified 45 pioneers from a list of several hundreds of potential candidates. Three of those made their most seminal contributions between the late 1940s and the late 1960s. The remaining 42 contemporary pioneers were decisive for the establishment of the research field. Our ambition is thus to provide answers to how, by whom and when these pioneering contributions were made. By necessity, given how large and diverse the field has become, many researchers and topics have been left out of this review. We humbly recognize that we may have left out researchers who deserve to be mentioned; nevertheless we feel confident that selection of scholars are all worthy pioneers in the entrepreneurship research field.