Exploring competing perspectives on government-driven entrepreneurial ecosystems: lessons from Centres for Creative Economy and Innovation (CCEI) of South Korea
Abstract
Recent research suggests competing aspects of how to promote an entrepreneurial ecosystem for sustainable economic growth from a linear entrepreneurial ecosystem to non-linear ones involving diverse stakeholders beyond the dichotomy between state and market. Competing views and interests embedded in these multiple stakeholders can contribute to understanding how an entrepreneurial ecosystem can emerge, flourish and vanish. However, little systematic research has explored what aspects multiple stakeholders have for a new rising entrepreneurial ecosystem. This paper, relying on Q-methodology, explores different perspectives of stakeholders surrounding the Centres for a Creative Economy and Innovation (CCEIs) in South Korea. Application of Q-methodology with a qualitative and statistical approach allows us to clarify various competing stakeholder perspectives on entrepreneurial ecosystems embodied by the 17 government driven CCEIs. We found six different views on how to evaluate the role and function of the CCEIs deeply connected with strong state intervention and big conglomerate companies (BCCs): (1) the BCC-led CCEI ecosystem, (2) the CCEI own ecosystem, (3) a strong critic of the state-led CCEI ecosystem, (4) a negative viewpoint on the politics-led CCEI ecosystem, (5) the state-led CCEI ecosystem and (6) a strong critic of the current Korean venture capital system.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Interplay of government initiatives, institutions, and human capital with other ecosystem elements enables the formation of new ventures.
“as well as the interplay of government initiatives (Jung et al., 2017 ), institutions ( Öner & Kunday, 2016 ), and human capital ( Qian et al., 2013) with other ecosystem elements enables the formation of new ventures.”
From Toward an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Research Program (2022) · cites this paper as Jung et al., 2017
Cites
The entrepreneurial state: debunking public vs. private sector myths
(2014) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.51-3359 · Cited by 2,297 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Toward an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Research Program
Wurth, B., Stam, E., & Spigel, B. (2022) · Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice · doi:10.1177/1042258721998948 · Cited by 789 · see citing works
“…ecosystems support the university spin-offs ( Harrison & Leitch, 2010; Johnson et al., 2019 ) as well as the interplay of government initiatives (Jung et al., 2017 ), institutions ( Öner & Kunday, 2016 ), and human capital ( Qian et al., 2013) with other ecosystem elements enables the formation…”
Building sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems: A holistic approach
Theodoraki, C., Dana, L.-P., & Caputo, A. (2022) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.11.005 · Cited by 297 · see citing works
- Authors
- Jung, K., Eun, J.-H., & Lee, S.-H.
- Affiliations
- Seoul National University (KR)
- Korea Institute of Public Affairs, Graduate School of Public Administration, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
- Southern Illinois University Carbondale (US)
- Corresponding author
- Jung, Kwangho
- Venue
- European Planning Studies
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2017-02-02
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 827-847
- ISSN
- 0965-4313 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-5944
- OpenAlex
- W2583902934
- Cited by
- 38
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4
- FWCI
- 4.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- European Planning Studies (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Seoul National University Open Repository (Seoul National University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Entrepreneurship Studies and Influences
- Social Sciences › Urban Studies › Cultural Industries and Urban Development
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › University-Industry-Government Innovation Models
- Keywords
- entrepreneurial ecosystems, stakeholder perspectives, state intervention, state-market dichotomy, creative economy, South Korea
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
