Do crowdfunding returns reward risk? Evidences from clean-tech projects

被引:56
作者
Bento, Nuno [1 ,2 ]
Gianfrate, Gianfranco [3 ]
Groppo, Sara Virginia [4 ]
机构
[1] Inst Univ Lisboa ISCTE IUL, DINAMIACET, Av Forcas Armadas, P-1649026 Lisbon, Portugal
[2] Univ Catolica Portuguesa, Dept Econ Management & Social Sci, P-3504505 Viseu, Portugal
[3] EDHEC Business Sch, Finance, Promenade Anglais 393,BP3116, F-06202 Nice 3, France
[4] Bocconi Univ, Finance, Via Roberto Sarfatti 25, I-20136 Milan, Italy
关键词
Crowdfunding; Clean-tech; Technology risks; Innovation financing; Learning; Renewable energy; STOCK-PRICES; LEARNING RATES; OIL PRICES; ENERGY; CROWD; INNOVATION; DIFFUSION; VENTURES; SUCCESS; MARKETS;
D O I
10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.007
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
The growing literature on crowdfunding has mostly focused on the determinants of campaigns success, as well as on the legal and macroeconomic drivers of the crowdfunding diffusion as a mean to finance innovative projects. Still there are scant evidences on whether the returns for crowdfunders are consistent with the risk profile of crowdfunded projects. By studying 365 European clean-tech projects which raised capital via crowdfunding, we show that once the country risk has been accounted for, the returns are not consistent with the risks related to the technology adopted by the projects. Behavioral factors like bounded rationality or the cultural dimension of investors may explain this apparent mispricing of risks. While projects' returns are, on average, negatively related to risks, we find that projects offering better risk-adjusted returns attract relatively larger average contributions. Our results have important implications for understanding the drivers of crowdfunding returns and its sustainability, and particularly for its diffusion as an instrument to foster the transition to a low-carbon economy.
引用
收藏
页码:107 / 116
页数:10
相关论文
共 82 条
[71]   Evaluating relative benefits of different types of R & D for clean energy technologies [J].
Shayegh, Soheil ;
Sanchez, Daniel L. ;
Caldeira, Ken .
ENERGY POLICY, 2017, 107 :532-538
[72]  
Signori A., 2016, SSRN Working paper 2765488
[73]   A BEHAVIORAL MODEL OF RATIONAL CHOICE [J].
Simon, Herbert A. .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 1955, 69 (01) :99-118
[74]   Wind power in Europe:: A simultaneous innovation-diffusion model [J].
Soderholm, Patrik ;
Klaassen, Ger .
ENVIRONMENTAL & RESOURCE ECONOMICS, 2007, 36 (02) :163-190
[75]  
Thaler R., 2005, ADV BEHAV FINANCE
[76]  
Van Wingerden R., 2011, Fighting for funds: An exploratory study into the field of crowdfunding
[77]  
Wash R., 2011, CROWDFUNDING RETURN, P18
[78]   A review of experience curve analyses for energy demand technologies [J].
Weiss, Martin ;
Junginger, Martin ;
Patel, Martin K. ;
Blok, Kornelis .
TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, 2010, 77 (03) :411-428
[79]   Up-scaling, formative phases, and learning in the historical diffusion of energy technologies [J].
Wilson, Charlie .
ENERGY POLICY, 2012, 50 :81-94
[80]  
Wright T. P., 1936, J AERONAUT SCI, V3, P122, DOI [https://doi.org/10.2514/8.155, DOI 10.2514/8.155, 10.2514/8.155.https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/10.2514/8.155, 10.2514/8.155]