Biotechnology firms face long development cycles and high uncertainty, making survival sensitive to both ecosystem conditions and access to external finance. This study examines whether biotechnology clusters and external funding are associated with lower bankruptcy risk among Swedish biotechnology firms. Using a longitudinal firm-year panel for 2010–2020 (3,770 firms; 22,674 firm- year observations; 207 bankruptcies), we estimate stratified Cox proportional hazards models with one-year lagged covariates and robust standard errors clustered at the firm level. Across model specifications, firms located in biotechnology clusters exhibit a significantly lower hazard of bankruptcy than comparable non-cluster firms. Firms that received external funding also show a substantially lower bankruptcy hazard, and this association is driven primarily by public funding, whereas private funding is not statistically distinguishable from zero. Interaction models provide no evidence that the funding–bankruptcy association is stronger for cluster firms than for non-cluster firms. Proportional- hazards diagnostics indicate time dependence in the cluster effect; a time- varying coefficient specification suggests that cluster advantages are strongest earlier in firms’ trajectories. Overall, the findings highlight the independent roles of cluster context and public funding in supporting biotech firm survival.

Purpose 

This study explores how Swedish biotechnology incubators coordinate and control critical resources through strategic networking. It examines the mechanisms that enable incubators to manage resource flows and identifies the key partners involved in these exchanges within Sweden’s innovation ecosystem. 

Design/methodology/approach 

We analyze strategic practices by a qualitative multiple-case approach, drawing on semi-structured interviews with CEOs and board members from seven major biotechnology incubators in Sweden. Data were analyzed through a qualitative content analysis, combining deductive coding based on the Resource-Based View framework with inductive identification of emerging network actors and interaction patterns. 

Findings 

The analysis reveals four core categories of resources including human, financial, operational, and technological resources acquired through diverse network alliances. Universities, science parks, investors, government agencies, and service providers emerge as key partners in resource acquisition. Incubators employ trust-based relationships, organized interaction mechanisms, specialization strategies, and geographical proximity to sustain and expand these networks. The findings also show variation in incubator business models and highlight how proximity to universities and science parks enhances credibility, resource access, and collaborative opportunities. 

Originality/value 

This paper provides an in-depth understanding of how resource coordination unfolds within biotechnology incubation networks. By integrating theoretical and empirical perspectives, it contributes to the literature on strategic incubator management, with implications for innovation policy and incubator best practice.  

Purpose - This study investigates how Swedish biotechnology entrepreneurs perceive and navigate resource challenges across the early and development stages of firm growth. It focuses particularly on the evolving role of incubators and other support actors and how these influence firm development in science-based entrepreneurship.

Design/methodology/approach - Structured interviews were conducted with 16 biotechnology entrepreneurs in Sweden, comprising eight from early-stage and eight from development-phase firms. The interviews were analyzed thematically to identify patterns in resource constraints, financing experience, institutional support, and incubator engagement across the biotechnology firms’lifecycle.

Findings - Biotechnology firms face shifting resource needs as they grow. Early-stage firms relied heavily on incubators, universities, and public agencies for technical support, legitimacy, and network access, while development-stage firms exhibit greater strategic independence and reduced reliance on incubators. Funding challenges persisted across stages, with public agencies and business angels viewed as the most impactful support actors. The role of incubators is shown to be dynamic, evolving from high-intensity collaborators in early stages to occasional strategic partners in the development phase, offering more targeted support as firms gain internal capabilities and networks. Originality/value - The study contributes to entrepreneurship theory by combining the resource-based view, dynamic capabilities, and social capital theory to explain how biotechnology entrepreneurs perceive and navigate the mobilization and reconfiguration of critical resources. It offers a stage-sensitive view of network-building and strategic adaptation in science-based ventures.

Biotechnology firms operate in a highly innovative and capital-intensive environment, characterized by high levels of R&D, long product development periods, significant regulations, and high levels of uncertainty. These firms rely heavily on intangible assets, such as intellectual capital and innovation. Consequently, intellectual capital and innovation activities play a crucial role in financial strategies and capital structure decisions. This study aims to examine how intellectual capital and innovation activity influence capital structure decisions of biotech firms in Sweden. In this paper, financial data of 1528 companies from 2012 to 2022 were analyzed. Using logistic regression modeling, the results showed that biotech firms with higher intellectual capital are more likely to issue equity whereas those with greater innovation activity tend to rely more on debt financing. These findings underscore the complexities of financial strategy in the biotech sector, emphasizing the need for flexible capital structure management. Moreover, policymakers should focus not only on equity availability but also on ensuring access to debt financing, as both are crucial for sustaining biotech innovation and growth.