Is a sustainable loop of economy and entrepreneurial ecosystem possible? a structural perspective

Cao, Guohua; Zhang, Jing

doi:10.1007/s10668-020-00902-y

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 186 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…What is the target of government subsidies? Promoting innovation has become a critical developing target for a nation [ 15 ]. Thus, fostering corporate innovation through government subsidies has become a common practice globally [ 7 , 16 – 19 ].…”

Section: Literature Review and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Financial constraints, government subsidies, and corporate innovation

Wang

Cao

et al. 2021

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To investigate the relationships between financial constraints, government subsidies, and corporate innovation, a semi-logarithmic fixed-effect panel model and mediation effect test were applied, based on the data of Chinese listed companies from 2007 to 2017. We find that (1) financial constraints suppress corporate innovation. (2) Government subsidies are targeted at bailing out firms facing financial constraints. (3) Government subsidies promote corporate innovation (4) Government subsidies partially offset the suppression of financial constraints on innovation. We contribute to the fields of public finance, corporate finance, and corporate innovation by: (1) justifying the government subsidies target strategy as a bailout of corporate financial constraints, (2) verifying the corporate-innovation promotion of government subsidies, thus justifying the efficiency of government subsidies, and (3) showing that different types of innovation benefit differently from subsidies, thus justifying subsidies as a structural innovation engine.

show abstract

Section: Literature Review and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Financial constraints, government subsidies, and corporate innovation

Wang

Cao

et al. 2021

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We posit that contextual factors, such as institutional factors (Doblinger et al, 2019; Martínez‐Fierro et al, 2020; Pacheco et al, 2010), and inter‐firm mechanisms such as trust (Muldoon et al, 2018), the adoption of digital technologies (Pizzi et al, 2022), and the strength of connections (Kanda et al, 2021; Theodoraki et al, 2018;) positively shape outcomes beyond productive entrepreneurship through the development of organizational capabilities. In contrast, low human capital, negative spillovers, uncertainty in government regulation, and high transaction costs negatively shape the development of a sustainability‐oriented ecosystem (Cao & Zhang, 2021; Sunny & Shu, 2019). Specifically, we propose that entrepreneurial support programs shape entrepreneurial behavior and, in turn, productive entrepreneurship (Biru et al, 2021).…”

Section: Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Connecting the dots? Entrepreneurial ecosystems and sustainable entrepreneurship as pathways to sustainability

Chaudhary,

Kaur,

Alofaysan

et al. 2023

Bus Strat Env

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While the exponential growth of entrepreneurial ecosystem research has dramatically increased our understanding of the role of context in entrepreneurial outcomes, our knowledge of entrepreneurial ecosystems and environmentally sustainable entrepreneurship is still fragmented. There is ambiguity on how entrepreneurial ecosystems influence sustainable entrepreneurship and what factors facilitate or constrain sustainable entrepreneurship. We attempt to take stock of the extant scholarship on entrepreneurial ecosystems and synthesize studies examining their linkages with sustainability. We systematically reviewed 77 articles identified in the World of Science and Scopus databases to discuss the main themes. The content analysis uncovered four key themes: (a) how entrepreneurial ecosystems become more sustainable, (b) the role of entrepreneurs, (c) the role of universities, and (d) the outcomes of sustainable ecosystems. The findings reveal that interactions between different actors, including customers, suppliers, institutions, governments, and universities, can result in a sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystem. The novelty of our study arises from integrating extant studies on entrepreneurial ecosystem and sustainability in a systematic and replicable manner. We observed heightened attention to the environmental challenges in ecosystem literature and entrepreneurs' expanded roles in generating ecological and social value. Future studies can further evaluate the effectiveness of entrepreneurial ecosystems to examine whether creating an entrepreneurial ecosystem has a similar value while achieving sustainable development goals across varied contexts.

show abstract

“…As a rather young and hot issue, entrepreneurial ecosystems (EEs) have received attention from scholars in other fields and have been used to study how urban and regional environments affect innovative and entrepreneurial activity [38]. EEs describe a set of interdependent actors and factors that enable productive entrepreneurship through coordination, including the three dimensions of conditions, outputs, and outcomes [39]. The conditions layer consists of EE elements, such as physical infrastructure, formal institutions, and culture, which influence how actors in EEs connect with each other [40], while the outputs layer is considered an entrepreneurial activity, i.e., it is the process by which individuals create opportunities for innovation [41].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Potential for Developing Innovation Districts at the City Scale by Adapting a New Sustainable Entrepreneurial Ecosystems Method

Xu,

Du,

et al. 2023

Buildings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Excellent previous case studies of innovation districts have provided a foundation for the integration of innovation and urban development. However, few researchers have evaluated the potential for developing innovation districts in inner city spaces. In this study, taking Qingdao as an example, the adaptive cycle theory was combined with entrepreneurial ecosystem theory to form a sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystem (SEE) framework, including the three criteria of conditions, outputs, and outcomes. This framework allows for the effective identification of key factors and areas within cities that influence the development of innovation districts. The results showed that the potential for developing innovation districts showed a concentric trend, i.e., higher in the downtown, highest in the suburbs, and lowest in the outer suburbs. Comparative analysis revealed that innovation sources were a key factor in the development of Qingdao’s innovation districts. In terms of cluster analysis, the northern and southwestern clusters in the suburbs were in the conservation (K) phase, and the eastern and downtown clusters were in the exploitation (r), suggesting that the former was the preferred location for innovation districts. This study facilitates the establishment of site-specific innovation districts at key locations to enhance the success of decision making.

show abstract

Is a sustainable loop of economy and entrepreneurial ecosystem possible? a structural perspective

Cited by 5 publications

References 186 publications

Financial constraints, government subsidies, and corporate innovation

Financial constraints, government subsidies, and corporate innovation

Connecting the dots? Entrepreneurial ecosystems and sustainable entrepreneurship as pathways to sustainability

Assessing the Potential for Developing Innovation Districts at the City Scale by Adapting a New Sustainable Entrepreneurial Ecosystems Method

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About