Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Entrepreneurship development vs. reluctance in applying for the European Union funds: A case study on the example of the Mazovian Region in Poland


The main objective of the article is to investigate why entrepreneurs from the Mazovian region are not eager to apply for the EU funds. The authors asked the following research questions: Why are the entrepreneurs reluctant to apply for the EU funds? How (if) has the situation changed comparing the 2007-2013 and the 2014-2020 perspectives? What should be changed from the side of the EU perspective? In the research a qualitative method – direct interview with entrepreneurs – was used. 171 entrepreneurs were interviewed. Purposive sampling was used. The authors chose the companies, which fulfilled the following conditions: they were interested in applying for the EU funds; they had experience in getting support from the European Union; they perceive themselves as “innovative”. All enterprises were from the Mazovian region in Poland. It was stated that a large number of companies wants to apply for the EU funds, but they cannot do it due to many factors such as the necessity to include own funds; no interest to participate in any project; the willingness to purchase the apparatus or appliance or too high bureaucracy. The best way to make the EU funds available for the companies is to meet their problems and expectations first. It should be done in the form of consultations between the government and business world. Such consultations would bring ideas, which topics should be included into the proposed programmes. The originality of this work lies in studying factors, which make the entrepreneurs from the Mazovian region impossible to apply for the EU funds. It is very important to recognise them as the 2014-2020 perspective offers a huge amount of money, which can be well spent by the entrepreneurs, if they managed with hampering factors.


the Mazovian region, entrepreneurship, EU funds, reluctance, project proposal



  1. Acs, Z., Braunerhjelm, P., Audretsch, D., Carlsson, B. (2009). The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economic. 32(1), 15-30.
  2. Aivazian, V.A., Ge, Y., Qiu, J. (2005). The impact of leverage on firm investment: Canadian evidence. Journal of Corporate Finance. 11(1–2), 277-291.
  3. Andersson, U., Dasí, A., Ram, M., Pedersen, T. (2016). Technology, innovation and knowledge: The importance of ideas and international connectivity. Journal of World Business. 51(1), 153-162.
  4. Annoni, P., Dijkstra, L. (2013). EU Regional Competitiveness Index. JRC Scientific and Policy Reports. European Commission.
  5. Audretsch, D., Keilbach, M. (2004). Entrepreneurship capital and economic performance. Regional Studies. 38 (8), 949-959.
  6. Autio, E., Kenney, M., Mustar, P., Siegel, D., Wright, M. (2014). Entrepreneurial innovation: The importance of context. Research Policy. 43(7), 1097-1108.
  7. Bettiol, M., De Marchi, V., Di Maria, E., Grandinetti, R. (2013). Determinants of market extension in knowledge-intensive business services: evidence from a regional innovation system. European Planning Studies. 21(4), 498-515.
  8. Capello, R., Kroll, H. (2016). From theory to practice in smart specialisation strategy: emerging limits and possible future trajectories. European Planning Studies. 24(8), 1393-1406.
  9. Clark, J., Guy, K. (1998). Innovation and competitiveness: a review: practitioners' forum. Technology Analysis Strategic Management. 10 (3), 363-395.
  10. Commission Regulation (EU) No 1407/2013 of 18 December 2013 on the application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to de minimis aid. Official Journal of the European Union, L. 352.
  11. Duda, J. (2012). Role and importance of technological credits in financing of innovative investments by small and medium-sized enterprises in Poland and lesser Poland. AGH Managerial Economics. 12, 25-40.
  12. Dziemianowicz, W., Mackiewicz, M., Zaleski, J. (2012). Konkurencyjność Mazowsza i jej uwarunkowania. Trendy Rozwojowe Mazowsza. 5.
  13. European Commission (2015). European Structural and Investment Funds 2014-2020. Official texts and commentaries. Regional and Urban Policy.
  14. European Commission. (2013). National/Regional Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS3).
  15. European Commission (2015a). Support to SMEs – Increasing Research and Innovation in SMEs and SME Development. Ex post evaluation of Cohesion Policy programmes 2007-2013, focusing on the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the Cohesion Fund (CF).
  16. Fereira, J.M., Raposo, J.J., Rutten, M., Varga, A. (2013). Cooperation, clusters, and Knowledge transfer. Universities and Firms towards regional competitiveness. Springer.
  17. Freel, M.S. (2007). Are small innovators credit rationed? Small Business Economics. 28(1), 23-35.
  18. Grabher, G., Ibert, O., Flohr, S. (2008). The neglected king: the customer in the new knowledge ecology of innovation. Economic Geography. 84(3), 253-280.
  19. Grant Thornton. (2013). National Economy Chamber, Barriers of the company development. Report of the survey conducted during the 2nd Forum of Entrepreneurs Grant Thornton. Warsaw.
  20. Griffith, R., Redding, S., Van Reenen, J. (2004). Mapping the two faces of R&D: productivity growth in a panel of OECD industries. Review of Economics and Statistics. 86(4), 883-895.
  21. Hall, G., Hutchinson, P.J., Michaelas, N. (2000). Industry effects on the determinants of unquoted SMEs' capital structure. International Journal of the Economics of Business. 7, 297-312.
  22. Herrera, M.E. (2016). Innovation for impact: Business innovation for inclusive growth. Journal of Business Research. 69(5), 1725-1730.
  23. [access on 07.09.2016].
  24. [access on 07.09.2016].
  25. Huarng, K.H., Yu, T.H.K. (2011). Entrepreneurship, process innovation and value creation by a non-profit SME. Management Decision. 49(2), 284-296.
  26. Hutton, W., Nightingale, P. (2011). The Discouraged Economy. Big Innovation Centre, London.
  27. Ibrahim, S., Fallah, M., Reilly, R. (2009). Localized sources of knowledge and the effect of knowledge spillovers: an empirical study of inventors in the telecommunications industry. Journal of Economic Geography. 9, 405-431.
  28. Janasz, W., Leśkiewicz, I. (1995). Identyfikacja i realizacja procesów innowacyjnych w przedsiębiorstwie. Uniwersytet Szczeciński, Szczecin.
  29. Jaworska, A. (2016). Porównanie perspektyw finansowych 2007-2013 i 2014-2020 w Unii Europejskiej na przykładzie Polski. Olsztyn.
  30. Jucevičius, R., Galbuogienė, A. (2014). Smart specialisation: towards the potential application of the concept for the local development. Procedia – Social and Behavioural Sciences. 156, 141-145.
  31. Lee, S.J., Park, G.M., Yoon, B.G., Park, J.W. (2010). Open innovation in SMEs: an intermediated network model. Research Policy. 39(2), 290-300.
  32. Massimo, G., Colombo, D., Pirelli, H.L. (2016). The participation of new technology-based firms in EU-funded R&D partnerships: The role of venture capital. Research Policy. 45(2), 361-375.
  33. McCann, P., Ortega-Argiles, R. (2016). Smart Specialisation, Entrepreneurship and SMEs: issues and challenges for a results-oriented EU regional policy. Small Business Economics. 46(4), 537-552.
  34. Mina, A., Lahr, H., Hughes, A. (2013). The demand and supply of external finance for innovative firms. Industrial and Corporate Change. 22(4), 869-901.
  35. Muscio, A. (2010). What drives the university use of technology transfer offices? Evidence from Italy. Journal of Technology Transfer. 35(2), 181-202.
  36. Ponds, R., van Oort, F., Frenken, K. (2010). Innovation, spillovers and university –industry collaboration: an extended knowledge production function approach. Journal of Economic Geography. 10(2), 231-255.
  37. Rusu, M. (2013). Smart specialization a possible solution to the new global challenges. Procedia Economics and Finance. 6, 128-136.
  38. Schneider, C. & Veugelers, R. (2010). On young highly innovative companies: why they matter and how (not) to policy support them. Industrial and Corporate Change. 19(4), 969-1007.
  39. Scholleova, H., Hajek, J. (2014). Effectiveness of innovation support from EU Funds Program. Procedia – Social and Behavioural Sciences. 156, 529-532.
  40. Stoner J. (2011). Management. Polish Economic Publishing. Warszawa.
  41. Staniewski, M., Nowacki, R., Awruk, K. (2016). Entrepreneurship and innovativeness of small and medium-sized construction enterprises. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal. 12(3), 861-877.
  42. Titman, S., Wessels, R. (1988). The determinants of capital structure choice. The Journal of Finance. 43, 1-19.
  43. Tloczynski, D. (2016). Development policy of Warsaw Chopin Airport in the Light of the European Funds for 2014–2020. Procedia Engineering. 134, 408-414.
  44. Tödtling-Schönhofer, H., Polverari, L., Bachtler, J. (2012). Barriers for applicants to structural funding. European Union.
  45. Tomczyk, U. (2014). Jak w Polsce prowadzi się własny biznes? Cała prawda o najważniejszym sektorze polskiej gospodarki. Nastroje gospodarcze wśród mikro- i małych firm w II połowie 2013 r. i i połowie 2014 r. Instytut Badań i Analiz.
  46. Van Looy, B., Debackere, K., Andries, P. (2003). Policies to stimulate regional innovation capabilities via university – industry collaboration: an analysis and an assessment. R&D Management. 33(2), 209-229.
  47. Wilson, K., Silva, F. (2013). Policies for seed and early finance: findings from the 2012 OECD financing questionnaire. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers. OECD Publishing. 9.
  48. Wostner, P. (2008). The micro-efficiency of EU Cohesion Policy. European Policy Research Paper, No 64, EPRC, Glasgow.


Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.