Gender and sources of finance in Finnish SMEs: a contextual view

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of gender on the usage of different funding sources in a sample of Finnish small‐ to medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs). The aim is also to embed the results into the country‐context, which is characterized by the long history of women's economic activity and bank‐based capital markets. Design/methodology/approach The database includes variables on terms of credit for the firms' most recent loans and detailed information on the firms' banking relationships. The total number of firm‐year observations in the database is 3,519. The analysis is based on multivariate tests. Findings The funding patterns of women‐owned SMEs (WOS) and men‐owned SMEs (MOS) in the data are different: WOS are more likely to use additional equity investments by current owners as a funding source. They do so at least partly because of their positive attitudes towards this funding source. The results also contradict prior studies, which indicate that MOS have easier access to bank lending. The results suggest that there are no gender‐related differences in the use of bank debt. Also in contrast to prior studies, the paper finds no differences in firm size or profitability between WOS and MOS. Research limitations/implications The results of study both confirm and contradict the results of prior research and the paper suggests that this is due to the context‐specific features of the Finnish labour market and the gender system as well as the bank‐centered financial markets. Practical implications Concerning the issues of gender and finance, policy makers and financial experts in any country should not uncritically rely on the research results arrived at in other countries. Originality/value Only a handful of studies have investigated issues of gender and finance in SMEs embedding the results into the country‐context.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 24 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.