Entrepreneurial ecosystems: Multiple domains, dimensions and relationships

Stephens, Simon; McLaughlin, Christopher; Ryan, Leah; Catena, Manuel; Bonner, Aisling

doi:10.1016/j.jbvi.2022.e00344

Cited by 10 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Building on this work, other studies have highlighted that improving the entrepreneurial ecosystem requires addressing the weakest elements or 'bottlenecks' (Aliabadi, Ataei & Gholamrezai, 2022;Szerb et al, 2022), but in some cases stronger elements can also compensate for weaker ones (Godley, Morawetz & Soga, 2021). This is rooted in the complex nature of ecosystems (Leendertse, Schrijvers & Stam, 2021;Stephens et al, 2022) and their potentially chaotic evolution (Cloutier & Messeghem, 2022). This has also implications for the governance of ecosystems, which is an iterative process that relies on effective management of relationships, communication ties with local and national agendas and a shared collaborative culture (Knox & Arshed, 2022).…”

Section: Interdependencies Within Entrepreneurial Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 88%

Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Mechanisms

Wurth¹,

Stam²,

Spigel³

2023

FNT in Entrepreneurship

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Entrepreneurial ecosystems have developed from a powerful idea and concept into a transdisciplinary research program, increasing our understanding into entrepreneurship-led development and providing actionable knowledge for improving the conditions for entrepreneurship and development. In this paper we take stock of the progress to date and synthesize the findings of 181 empirical scientific entrepreneurial ecosystem studies with a systematic literature review. We organized the review around five key mechanisms that explain the nature and development of entrepreneurial ecosystems: (1) interdependence of its elements, (2) upward causation explaining entrepreneurial ecosystem outputs and (3) outcomes, (4) downward causation and path dependence, and (5) inter-ecosystem links. We summarize the findings and outline opportunities for research and discuss policy implications in the light of a transdisciplinary entrepreneurial ecosystem research program. This paper is of interest for scholars of all academic disciplines that provide knowledge that is relevant for the understanding of entrepreneurial ecosystems, entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship-led development, but also for all stakeholders involved in the development of entrepreneurial ecosystems.

show abstract

Section: Interdependencies Within Entrepreneurial Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 88%

Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Mechanisms

Wurth¹,

Stam²,

Spigel³

2023

FNT in Entrepreneurship

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, for the sake of the current study, the researcher is adopting Isenberg's view (2011) that the ecosystem is composed of core domains, which are policy, markets, finance, culture, support, and human capital. Those six domains have been the base of many studies and models described and discussed the ecosystem (Stephens et al, 2022).…”

Section: Entrepreneurship Ecosystemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The third part aimed at discovering women's perception of the ecosystem, hence included statements about the six elements of the ecosystem (Isenberg, 2010) which are finance, policy, human capital, markets, support, and culture. The statements were adapted from the work of Stam (2018), Stephens et al (2022) and National Experts Survey by the Global entrepreneurship Monitor (Elam et al, 2021). Each statement in the online questionnaire was rated on a 5-point Likert scale, from "totally disagree" to "totally agree".…”

Section: Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Entrepreneurship Ecosystem in Egypt through a Gender Lens

Hattab

2023

JEPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: According to the Egyptian Start-up Ecosystem Report (ITIDA, 2021), Egypt has one of the foremost start-up ecosystems on Africa, both in terms of levels of start-up activity and inward investments. Yet the county lags in terms of women’s participation in founding start-ups. According to the latest Global Entrepreneurship Monitor report for Egypt, the entrepreneurial activity rate for women was 5.7%, while that of Egyptian men was 16.7%, despite women’s positive attitudes towards entrepreneurship. Methodology: The current research has an exploratory nature and aims at analysing entrepreneurship ecosystem in Egypt through a gender lens to highlight the factors that are hindering Egyptian women from exploiting the different elements of the ecosystem. To achieve this, it adopts the exploratory research approach combining semi-structured interviews with ten women entrepreneurs chosen using expert sampling and an online survey distributed via Egyptian entrepreneurs’ online communities. Findings: Analysis shows that Egyptian women entrepreneurs do not believe that the ecosystem discriminates against them, but there are some practices that are gender-insensitive which poses challenges to women hence impact their presence and activities within the ecosystem. Unique contribution to theory, policy and practice: The results add to the literature of both entrepreneurship ecosystem and women entrepreneurship in Egypt and it provides practical implications to leverage Egyptian women participation in entrepreneurship.

show abstract