The dynamics of entrepreneurial ecosystemsCall is open from 1 July 2018
Deadline for submissions: 28 February 2019
Entrepreneurial activity exhibits significant geographical variations within and across countries, both in terms of start-ups and scale-ups. As entrepreneurs typically found their businesses in the localities in which they are already living and working, and businesses, once they have started trading, rarely move to distant locations, this suggests that some geographical environments are more conducive to entrepreneurship while others inhibit it.
The concept of entrepreneurial ecosystems (EEs) has emerged in recent years as a framework to understand the nature of places in which entrepreneurial activity flourishes. Spigel (
2017Spigel, B. 2017. “The Relational Organization of Entrepreneurial Ecosystems.” Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice 41 (1): 49–72.
[Crossref],
[Web of Science ®], ,
[Google Scholar]) defines entrepreneurial ecosystems as follows: ‘combinations of social, political, economic, and cultural elements within a region that support the development and growth of innovative start-ups and encourage nascent entrepreneurs and other actors to take the risks of starting, funding, and otherwise assisting high-risk ventures’.
However, the existing literature has several shortcomings. Despite some progress (Acs et al.
2017Acs, Z., E. Stam, D. Audretsch, and A.O’Connor. 2017. “The Lineages of the Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Approach.” Small Business Economics: An Entrepreneurship Journal 49 (1): 1–10.
[Crossref],
[Web of Science ®], ,
[Google Scholar]), the concept is under-theorised. It remains unclear how entrepreneurial ecosystems is distinctive from other concepts that seek to explain the geographical concentration of entrepreneurial activity (e.g. clusters, learning regions, regional innovation systems). Much of the literature comprises ‘superficial generalisations … rather than [on] rigorous social science research’ (Stam and Spigel
2017Stam, E., and B. Spigel. 2017. “Entrepreneurial Ecosystems.” In Handbook for Entrepreneurship and Small Business, edited by R.Blackburn, D. De Clercq, J. Heinonen, and Z. Wang. London: Sage.
[Google Scholar], 2). Specifically, empirical studies are static rather than dynamic which does not capture the genesis and evolution of EEs (Mason and Brown
2014Mason, C., and R. Brown. 2014. “Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and Growth Oriented Entrepreneurship.” Background paper prepared for the workshop organised by the OECD LEED Programme and the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs, The Hague, Netherlands.
[Google Scholar]; Mack and Mayer
2016Mack, E., and H. Mayer. 2016. “The Evolutionary Dynamics of Entrepreneurial Ecosystems.” Urban Studies 53 (10): 2118–2133.10.1177/0042098015586547
[Crossref],
[Web of Science ®], ,
[Google Scholar]; Alvedalen and Boschma
2017Alvedalen, J., and R. Boschma. 2017. “A Critical Review of Entrepreneurial Ecosystems Research: Towards a Future Research Agenda.” European Planning Studies 25 (6): 887–903.10.1080/09654313.2017.1299694
[Taylor & Francis Online],
[Web of Science ®], ,
[Google Scholar]). There is little consideration of the context in which entrepreneurial ecosystems emerge (Mack and Mayer
2016Mack, E., and H. Mayer. 2016. “The Evolutionary Dynamics of Entrepreneurial Ecosystems.” Urban Studies 53 (10): 2118–2133.10.1177/0042098015586547
[Crossref],
[Web of Science ®], ,
[Google Scholar]). The network of interactions of individual elements in the EEs has not been sufficiently explored (Motoyama and Watkins
2014Motoyama, Y., and K. K. Watkins. 2014. “Examining the Connections within the Startup Ecosystem: A Case Study of St. Louis.”
http://www.kauffman.org/~/media/kauffman_org/researchreportsandcovers/2014/09/examining_the_connections_within_the_startup_ecosystem.pdf.
[Google Scholar]). And the causal mechanisms are weak: it is not clear how the various elements in entrepreneurial ecosystems enhance entrepreneurship (Alvedalen and Boschma
2017Alvedalen, J., and R. Boschma. 2017. “A Critical Review of Entrepreneurial Ecosystems Research: Towards a Future Research Agenda.” European Planning Studies 25 (6): 887–903.10.1080/09654313.2017.1299694
[Taylor & Francis Online],
[Web of Science ®], ,
[Google Scholar]; Stam and Spigel
2017Stam, E., and B. Spigel. 2017. “Entrepreneurial Ecosystems.” In Handbook for Entrepreneurship and Small Business, edited by R.Blackburn, D. De Clercq, J. Heinonen, and Z. Wang. London: Sage.
[Google Scholar]).
Accordingly, this special issue invites papers that address the questions:
• How do the dynamics of people, process and place nurture entrepreneurial behaviour?
• What are place-based dynamics that generate greater entrepreneurial behaviours through managing the inputs and processes that result in entrepreneurial outputs and outcomes?
Entrepreneurial behaviour can be defined broadly within a range of activity including start-up, scale-up, opportunity recognition, economic development, market development, etc.
Specifically, we identify a need for papers that address the following themes:
(1) Papers that focus on individuals within the entrepreneurial ecosystem, investigating how do people work within and interact with firms and institutions in an entrepreneurial ecosystem to bring about the outputs and outcomes that result from entrepreneurial behaviour.
(2) Papers that focus on how the different elements in an entrepreneurial ecosystem interact with one another and how these interactions develop over time? How much path dependency is there in the system?
(3) Papers that focus on the role of networks in the entrepreneurial ecosystem context. Can these interactions be mapped and analyzed? In addition, we also welcome papers that adopt a ‘pipelines’ perspective (Bathelt, Malmberg, and Maskell
2004Bathelt, H., A. Malmberg, and P.Maskell. 2004. “Clusters and Knowledge: Local Buzz, Global Pipelines and the Process of Knowledge Creation.” Progress in Human Geography 28 (1): 31–56.10.1191/0309132504ph469oa
[Crossref],
[Web of Science ®], ,
[Google Scholar]), examining the extent, role and significance of the external networks of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Papers that also consider network tipping points, critical densities and vitality that assist to explain EE behaviour would also be valuable.
(4) Papers that examine the temporal dynamics of entrepreneurial ecosystems. How do they develop over time? What are the causal relationships? What are the processes by which entrepreneurial ecosystems develop and change over time? Why do some emerging entrepreneurial ecosystems fail to develop? And why do some go into decline? And, perhaps drawing on recent work on resilience (e.g. Simmie and Martin
2010Simmie, J., and R. Martin. 2010. “The Economic Resilience of Regions: Towards an Evolutionary Approach.” Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society 3 (1): 27–43.10.1093/cjres/rsp029
[Crossref],
[Web of Science ®], ,
[Google Scholar]; Martin
2011Martin, R. 2011. “Regional Economic Resilience, Hysteresis and Recessionary Shocks.” Journal of Economic Geography 12 (1): 1–32.
[Crossref],
[Web of Science ®], ,
[Google Scholar]; Williams and Vorley
2014Williams, N., and T. Vorley. 2014. “Economic Resilience and Entrepreneurship: Lessons from the Sheffield City Region.” Entrepreneurship & Regional Development 26 (3–4): 257–281.10.1080/08985626.2014.894129
[Taylor & Francis Online],
[Web of Science ®], ,
[Google Scholar]; Boschma
2015Boschma, R. 2015. “Towards an Evolutionary Perspective on Regional Resilience.” Regional Studies 49 (5): 733–751.10.1080/00343404.2014.959481
[Taylor & Francis Online],
[Web of Science ®], ,
[Google Scholar]), what are the processes that result in the revitalisation of entrepreneurial ecosystems that are in decline or moribund.
(5) Papers that address policy issues. Policy-makers are continually searching for instruments that can be implemented to stimulate entrepreneurial activity and have therefore been active in seeing to promote entrepreneurial ecosystems. What roles do governments, non-profit organizations and private companies, as well as key individuals, play in the emergence and growth of entrepreneurial ecosystems and what types of support are in evidence? What is their rationale for intervention? And what has been the effect of intervention? How does policy specifically influence elements of an EE and conversely how do elements of EEs influence policy?
(6) Papers that take into account industry specific EEs and how these develop individually or integrate more broadly into regional or city based EEs. What are the layered effects of EEs and interactions between supra and sub entrepreneurial ecosystems? How does cognitive and geographic distance influence the relationships within and between EEs? What is the effect of global relationships on local and/or industry EE dynamics?
(7) Papers that also consider the methods, data and approaches that support EE research would be highly valued as a means to contribute to building common approaches and developing a research community.
(8) Papers that critique the concept of entrepreneurial ecosystems.
