Changes

|Has paper status=R and RPublished

The final version was accepted to @article{EGAN2021104292, title = {A framework for assessing municipal high-growth high-technology entrepreneurship policy}, journal = {Research Policy }, pages = {104292}, year = {2021}, issn = {0048-7333}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104292}, url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733321000937}, author = {Edward J. Egan}, keywords = {Entrepreneurship, Ecosystem, Measurement, High-growth high-technology, Venture capital, Ecosystem support organization, Pipeline, Raise rate, Policy cartel}, abstract = {This paper advances a framework for making rudimentary need, impact, and cost–benefit assessments of municipal high-growth high-tech entrepreneurship policy. The framework views ecosystem support organizations like accelerators, incubators, and hubs as components in a city’s venture pipeline. A component’s pipeline size, raise rate, and cost per raise measure its performance. In total, the framework consists of eight objective and reproducible measures based on May 17thquantities and qualities of venture capital investment and 16 definitions of related terms-of-the-art. These measures and definitions are illustrated in 26 real-world policy examples, 2021which assess initiatives in Houston and St. Louis over the last 20 years. The examples reveal an enormous variation in welfare effects, and some policies appear welfare destroying. It was file series v4Many non-6profit organizations claim success (and win awards and acclaim) using non-2:standard measures despite performing at less than half benchmark levels. Policy cartels, which control startup policy in many U.S. cities, also engage in non-market actions to protect their rents.} }

The files are final file series was v4-6-2 in:

The paper uses [[vcdb4VCDB20]] and [[US Startup City Ranking]], as well as a wealth of old McNair material. Sources include (copied to the project folder unless otherwise noted):