This study contributes to the growing body of research on the relationship between founders' age and new venture performance, addressing existing gaps regarding founders approaching or surpassing retirement age. By analyzing comprehensive Swedish administrative data covering all newly incorporated firms and their founders, we first document an inverse U-shaped relationship between founders' age at founding and firm survival, as well as between founders' aging and employment growth. However, our findings reveal significant disruptions in these patterns between ages 60 and 70. Specifically, the relationship between founders' age at founding and firm survival temporarily improves at the conventional retirement age of 65, transitioning into a more nuanced, bimodal M-shaped pattern. In contrast, the relationship between founders' aging and employment growth plateaus around age 65. Using abductive analysis and a regression discontinuity design, we show that the increased firm survival observed after age 65 is influenced by a different selection of entrepreneurs, as individuals with enhanced financial security from pension access, along with previous industry experience and high levels of education, are more likely to start businesses at this stage. 

The literature on diversity has grown rapidly in the last decade. Research from different areas has suggested that diversity is a critical factor in creativity, knowledge generation, innovation, and entrepreneurship at the level of organizations, cities, regions, and whole countries. This chapter introduces the topic of diversity and discusses its role for creativity, knowledge production, innovation, entrepreneurship, and growth in the economy. The discussion of diversity is not meant to be a complete review of the current literature, but rather an overview of some of the main arguments in theoretical as well as empirical literature that puts the chapter contributions in context. Another aim of the introductory chapter is to summarize the individual chapter contributions. 

In a paper published in 2020, Philip McCann gives a qualitative overview of "the Nordic contribution to regional science", which, however, only includes contributions by Swedish regional science researchers. The purpose of this paper is to complement McCann's overview by highlighting Nordic contributions to regional science in the period 1983-2022 through a bibliometric analysis of publications in a set of thirteen regional science journals indexed in Web of Science, using several standard bibliometric tools. Our most interesting and surprising result is that the number of "Nordic" publications in the chosen set of journals has grown more than six times faster than the total number of publications in these journals between 1983-1992 and 2013-2022. This implies that the "Nordic" regional science researchers have increased their "market share" from 1.9 to 9.1 per cent. During the same period, the share of co-authored papers increased from 50.0 to 82.9 per cent and the share of international co-authorships increased from 0 to 50.0 per cent and went from being a mainly intra-European activity to a global activity. This process is also reflected in a certain international influence on the research topics during the four periods analysed, but to a considerable extent it seems that the Nordic regional scientists have pursued their own Nordic research themes. In terms of individual research productivity, there was the expected skewed distribution with a small number of researchers with a large research output. At the institutional level, there were notable changes in the ranking of institutions in terms of number of authorships, but one institution-Ume & aring; University-ranked among the Nordic top-2 in all four periods.

For quite some time, research across various fields has highlighted diversity as a critical factor in fostering creativity, knowledge generation, innovation, and entrepreneurship-at the levels of organizations, cities, regions, and entire countries. The aim of this book is to provide a comprehensive overview of the role of diversity in modern advanced economies, appealing to academics, researchers, and advanced students in disciplines such as business, economics, and geography. The volume brings together contributions and perspectives from both economics and business scholars, offering theoretical insights alongside new empirical research that serves as a foundation for policy recommendations. Organized into four parts, the book comprises 16 individual chapters that address the topics of diversity and place development, workforce and labour market diversity, diversity and entrepreneurship, and regional diversity, innovation, and productivity. The introductory chapter complements with a broad discussion on existing research regarding the role of spatial diversity for creativity, knowledge production, innovation, entrepreneurship, and growth in the economy. Throughout the book, diversity is conceptualized as a multi-faceted phenomenon that can be measured and analysed in various dimensions and within different contexts, demonstrating its significant economic impacts at multiple spatial scales. 

This paper pays homage to Professor Borje Johansson's scientific contributions in general and to the field of regional science particularly through a bibliometric approach, highlighting his publishing and citation record, co-authors and co-editors, as well as his theoretical inspirators, fellow researchers and often cited researchers.

Using data for over four decades, we examine the ageing of Swedish municipalities and if there has been convergence or divergence across time and space, where we differentiate across the urban–rural hierarchy. As migration is claimed to be a moderating factor in the ageing of places, we assess how the share of immigrants relates to ageing patterns. Our findings show that the share of older individuals increases in more peripheral localities and that there has been convergence across municipalities. However, the share of foreign population is negatively related to the ageing profile of a place. © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

In this paper, we review and comment upon the development of the literature on diversity, innovation, and entrepreneurship. In an overview of previous studies and various strands of literatures, we outline and argue that to better understand the intricate dynamic relationships between diversity, innovation, entrepreneurship, and regional development there is a strong need to further develop “the economics of spatial diversity.” We further argue that this development may benefit from combining various literatures based upon sound economic micro-foundations, to develop a more absolute understanding of diversity and fulfill the need of more clear mechanisms for future empirical testing. Obviously, this is important both from a research point of view and in order to provide policymakers with a powerful set of analytical tools. We call for more analytical work and more high-quality empirical studies. With a set of papers, we believe this special issue to provide a contribution in this direction. © 2019, The Author(s).

The purpose of this chapter is to review how industrial policy developed from mainly a ‘passive’ policy focusing market failures to a mainly ‘active’ policy focusing on creating better conditions for growth and international competitiveness. We have discussed the interpretation of the concept of the industrial policy and followed up that discussion with an overview of the arguments for and against the industrial policy. We have highlighted the the-oretical foundations for industrial policy and illustrated the difference between ‘old’ and ʼnew’ industrial policies. We paid particular attention to ‘spatial’ aspect of industrial policy by discussing whether industrial policies should be place-neutral or place-based. The paper ends with a discussion of the difficulties related to the formulation and implementation of industrial policies. © Iréne Bernhard, Urban Gråsjö and Charlie Karlsson 2021.

It is well-known that development is uneven across regions. The current academic and political consensus calls for policy interventions targeted towards a more balanced, inclusive and regionally cohesive growth. Yet, despite decades of sizeable policy efforts, there is no clear evidence of economic and social convergence across regions within countries. Entrepreneurship and innovation are proven to be strong drivers of regional economic development, and therefore they offer a source of potential solutions to the challenges imposed by an adverse international context. However, both entrepreneurial and innovative activity are themselves highly unevenly distributed in space, which might in itself be a main cause of the persistent regional inequalities in both developed and developing countries. A deeper understanding of the drivers and the implications of sub-national disparities in entrepreneurship and innovation is therefore a priority for implementing policies aimed at unlocking the potential of all regions in order to maximize their contribution to national growth and prosperity. In this introductory chapter, we create a background and a foundation for the rest of the chapters in this edited volume. © Iréne Bernhard, Urban Gråsjö and Charlie Karlsson 2021.

Most rural areas face a range of challenges stemming from the loss of their traditional comparative advantages due to mechanisation, automation, and structural change. In comparison to urban regions, these areas face systemic structural problems, such as lower levels of formal education, ageing populations, and a low and shrinking market potential. Rural areas therefore tend to offer a less fertile environment for entrepreneurship than urban areas provide. In this chapter, we will explore various aspects of rural entrepreneurship by analysing how the volume of entrepreneurship varies in rural areas in Sweden depending upon the size of the local market potential and the development level of the local economic milieu. We will further share insights into rural entrepreneurship by analysing the relative shares of distinct types of entrepreneurship by separating unincorporated and incorporated firms and distinguishing new firms with multiple employees from one-employee firms. © 2022 selection and editorial matter, Birgit Leick, Susanne Gretzinger, and Teemu Makkonen.