Working papers
The Entrepreneurial State?Bureaucratic Promotion Incentives and Government VC Risk Preferences
with Yiran Xu
Abstract
We study a core mechanism underlying state entrepreneurship: how bureaucratic promotion incentives shape public officials’ willingness to bear risk. We exploit a sharp institutional feature of the cadre system in China — city mayors become effectively ineligible for further promotion once they reach age 58 — to identify the causal effect of promotion incentives in a regression discontinuity design. We proxy risk preferences using revealed behaviour in government VC investments, focusing on investments that are typically riskier: early-stage deals, deals without private co-investors, and investments in new local industries. We find officials with promotion incentives undertake substantially more government VC investments, with the increase concentrated in these high-risk categories. These effects are robust to balance tests, permutation placebos, and alternative specifications. We then examine longer-run consequences using patent outcomes of government VC-backed firms over the subsequent five years. On average, greater risk-taking does not yield robust improvements in innovation. We further document heterogeneity in treatment effects. Longer-tenured mayors respond less strongly to promotion incentives and generate higher-quality innovation, while less capable mayors respond by taking greater risks, which worsens the average innovation performance of government VC–backed firms.
AEA 2027Econometric Society Winter Meeting 2026CEPR IMO-ESF 2026AOM 2026 (proceedings)Oxford Applied Micro Seminar 2026Oxford Development Workshop 2026
Equity vs. SubsidyThe Rise of Government Venture Capital in China’s Industrial Policy
with Ruilin Cheng and Yiran Xu
Abstract
We study the effects of a mechanical change in industrial policy instrument choice by exploiting China’s 2014 Budget Law, which compulsorily curtailed local subsidies and shifted support towards government venture capital (VC). Using an event-study design with a continuous treatment across prefecture-level cities that differed in pre-amendment subsidy intensity, we estimate the consequences of this substitution. We find the shock increased government VC investment, especially in late-stage deals. It also precipitated a decrease in firm entry—mainly in manufacturing—while entrant quality rose and innovation output was unaffected. The composition of post-shock government VC matters: a higher early-stage or stand-alone share increased entry and amplified innovation. We also find that government VC crowded in private VC, with the effect strongest in locations with a higher share of early-stage government VC investments and lower ex-ante private capital availability. Overall, replacing subsidy tool with equity tool tilted industrial policy towards selectivity and mobilisation of private finance.
AEA 2027*AEDC 2026*CSAE 2026*SALDRU-ERSA 2025Oxford Development Therapy 2025
Work in progress
Policy work & chapters
with Paula Arias, Vanya Georgieva, Rahul Giri, Maria González-Miranda, Ashique Habib, Anne-Charlotte Paret, Tatjana Schulze, Arthur Xie, Weining Xin and Yichen Xu · IMF Working Paper (2026)
with Muhammed Khudadad Chattha · World Bank Policy Research Working Paper (2026)
with Jan David Bakker, Nikhil Datta, Josh De Lyon and Luisa Opitz · in The Economics of Brexit: What Have We Learned?, CEPR
Coverage: Financial Times · The Economist · New York Times · BBC · Reuters · Economics Observatory · The Guardian · The Independent · BBC Radio 4