CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 784Entrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesUniversity-Industry-Government Innovation ModelsHuman Resources and Workforce

Entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial ecosystems

Open access
Malecki, Edward J.·2018·Geography Compass
DOI 10.1111/gec3.12359
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This paper reviews the literature, concepts, and operationalizations of the concept of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Despite some interest at the national level, entrepreneurship is understood to take place in localities or, at most, regions, drawing on local resources, institutions, and networks. Bibliometric evidence shows that usage of the term entrepreneurial ecosystem has overtaken other concepts, such as environments for entrepreneurship, which also highlight the mechanisms, institutions, networks, and cultures that support entrepreneurs. This review addresses several specific topics: the choice of scale, universities as ecosystem hubs, and how such ecosystems evolve. This is followed by suggestions toward an agenda for future research, placing particular attention on methodologies.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/gec3.12359

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Global linkages are important, both to prevent lock-ins from path-dependency and to maintain a high level of innovativeness.

    “Global linkages are important, both to prevent lock-­ ins from path-­ dependency and to maintain a high level of innovativeness (Malecki, 2018 ; Mason & Brown, 2014; Sternberg, 2007).”

    From Toward an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Research Program (2022) · cites this paper as Malecki, 2018

    Section 4 (‘Scale’; page unavailable) says that even city-based entrepreneurial ecosystems need some global links and that distant resources can be critical. The passages found do not say that those links prevent path-dependent lock-in or maintain a high level of innovativeness. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 81

  1. Alvedalen, J., & Boschma, R. (2017). A critical review of entrepreneurial ecosystems research: Towards a future research agenda. European Planning Studies, 25, 887-903.
  2. Andersson, M., & Henrekson, M. (2015). Local competitiveness fostered through local institutions for entrepreneurship. In D. B. Audretsch, A. N. Link, & M. L. Walshok (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of local competitiveness (pp. 145-190). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  3. Andersson, M., & Koster, S. (2011). Sources of persistence in regional start-up rates-Evidence from Sweden. Journal of Eco- nomic Geography, 11, 179-201.
  4. Ardichvili, A., Cardozo, R., & Ray, S. (2003). A theory of entrepreneurial opportunity identification and development. Journal of Business Venturing, 18, 105-123.
  5. Auerswald, P. E. (2015). Enabling entrepreneurial ecosystems. In D. B. Audretsch, A. N. Link, & M. L. Walshok (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of local competitiveness (pp. 54-83). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  6. Auerswald, P. E., & Branscomb, L. M. (2003). Valleys of death and Darwinian seas: Financing the invention to innovation tran- sition in the United States. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29, 227-239.
  7. Bahrami, H., & Evans, S. (1995). Flexible re-cycling and high-technology entrepreneurship. California Management Review, 37(3), 62-89.
  8. Beugelsdijk, S. (2007). Entrepreneurial culture, regional innovativeness and economic growth. Journal of Evolutionary Econom- ics, 17, 187-220.
  9. Brown, R., & Mason, C. (2017). Looking inside the spiky bits: A critical review and conceptualisation of entrepreneurial eco- systems. Small Business Economics, 49, 11-30.
  10. Bruno, A. V., & Tyebjee, T. T. (1982). The environment for entrepreneurship. In C. A. Kent, D. L. Sexton, & K. H. Vesper (Eds.), Encyclopedia of entrepreneurship (pp. 288-307). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  11. Brush, C., de Bruin, A., & Welter, F. (2009). A gender-aware framework for women's entrepreneurship. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, 1, 8-24.
  12. Carlsson, B. (2016). Industrial dynamics: A review of the literature 1990-2009. Industry and Innovation, 23, 1-61.
  13. Cooke, P. (2007). Regional innovation, entrepreneurship and talent systems. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 7, 117-139.
  14. Cukier, D., Kon, F., & Lyons, T.S. (2016). Software startup ecosystems evolution: The New York City case study. 2nd Interna- tional Workshop on Software Startups, IEEE International Technology Management Conference, Trondheim.
  15. Decker, R. A., Haltiwanger, J., Jarmin, R. S., & Miranda, J. (2016). Where has all the skewness gone? The decline in high- growth (young) firms in the U.S. European Economic Review, 86, 4-23.
  16. Dubina, I. N., Campbell, D. F. J., Carayannis, E. G., Chub, A. A., Grigoroudis, E., & Kozhevina, O. V. (2017). The balanced devel- opment of the spatial innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystem based on principles of the systems compromise: A conceptual framework. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 8, 438-455.
  17. Ensign, P. C., & Farlow, S. (2016). Serial entrepreneurs in the Waterloo ecosystem. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 5, 20.
  18. Fazio, C., Guzman, J., Murray, F., & Stern, S. (2016). A new view of the skew: A quantitative assessment of the quality of American entrepreneurship. Cambridge, MA: MIT Laboratory for Innovation Science and Policy.
  19. Feld, B. (2012). Startup communities: Building an entrepreneurial ecosystem in your city. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
  20. Feldman, M., & Francis, J. L. (2006). Entrepreneurs as agents in the formation of industrial clusters. In B. Asheim, P. Cooke, & R. Martin (Eds.), Clusters and regional development: Critical reflections and explorations (pp. 115-136). London: Routledge.
  21. Feldman, M. P. (1994). The university and economic development: The case of Johns Hopkins University and Baltimore. Eco- nomic Development Quarterly, 8, 67-76.
  22. Fernandez Fernandez, M. T., Blanco Jimenez, F. J., & Cuadrado Roura, J. R. (2015). Business incubation: Innovative services in an entrepreneurship ecosystem. Service Industries Journal, 35, 783-800.
  23. Fischer, M. M., & Nijkamp, P. (2009). Entrepreneurship and regional development. In R. Capello, & P. Nijkamp (Eds.), Handbook of regional growth and development theories (pp. 182-198). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
  24. Flora, J. L., Sharp, J., & Flora, C. (1997). Entrepreneurial social infrastructure and locally initiated economic development in the nonmetropolitan United States. The Sociological Quarterly, 38, 623-645.
  25. Fornahl, D. (2003). Entrepreneurial activities in a regional context. In D. Fornahl, & T. Brenner (Eds.), Cooperation, networks and institutions in regional innovation systems (pp. 38-57). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
  26. Fritsch, M., & Wyrwich, M. (2017). The effect of entrepreneurship on economic development-An empirical analysis using regional entrepreneurship culture. Journal of Economic Geography, 17, 157-189.
  27. Garnsey, E., & Heffernan, M. (2005). High-technology clustering through spin-out and attraction: The Cambridge case. Regional Studies, 39, 1127-1144.
  28. Hayter, C. S., Lubynsky, R., & Maroulis, S. (2016). Who is the academic entrepreneur? The role of graduate students in the development of university spinoffs. Journal of Technology Transfer. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9470-y. · DOI
  29. Hunt, R. A., & Kiefer, K. (2017). The entrepreneurship industry: Influences of the goods and services marketed to entrepre- neurs. Journal of Small Business Management. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12329. · DOI
  30. Isenberg, D. (2010). How to start an entrepreneurial revolution. Harvard Business Review, 88(6), 40-50.
  31. Isenberg, D. (2014). What an entrepreneurship ecosystem actually is. Harvard Business Review blog, May 12.
  32. Jennings, J. E., & Brush, C. G. (2013). Research on women entrepreneurs: Challenges to (and from) the broader entrepreneur- ship literature? Academy of Management Annals, 7, 663-715.
  33. Karatas-Ozkan, M., Anderson, A. R., Fayolle, A., Howells, J., & Condor, R. (2014). Understanding entrepreneurship: Challeng- ing dominant perspectives and theorizing entrepreneurship through new postpositivist epistemologies. Journal of Small Business Management, 52, 589-593.
  34. Kingma, B. (2014). Creating a dynamic campus-community entrepreneurial ecosystem: Key characteristics of success. In A. C. Corbett, D. Siegel, & J. A. Katz (Eds.), Advances in entrepreneurship, firm emergence and growth (Vol. 16: Academic entrepre- neurship: Creating an entrepreneurial ecosystem) (pp. 97-114). Bingley: Emerald Group.
  35. Lawton Smith, H. (2016). Entrepreneurial regions in theory and policy practice. In R. Shearmur, C. Carrincazeaux, & D. Doloreux (Eds.), Handbook on the geographies of innovation (pp. 334-350). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
  36. Lester, R. K., & Piore, M. J. (2004). Innovation-The missing dimension. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  37. Lichtenstein, G. A., & Lyons, T. S. (2001). The entrepreneurial development system: Transforming business talent and commu- nity economies. Economic Development Quarterly, 15, 3-20.
  38. Lichtenstein, G. A., & Lyons, T. S. (2006). Managing the community's pipeline of entrepreneurs and enterprises: A new way of thinking about business assets. Economic Development Quarterly, 20, 377-386.
  39. Lichtenstein, G. A., Lyons, T. S., & Kutzhanova, N. (2004). Building entrepreneurial communities: The appropriate role of enterprise development activities. Journal of the Community Development Society, 35(1), 5-24.
  40. Lowe, N. J., & Feldman, M. P. (2017). Institutional life within an entrepreneurial region. Geography Compass, 11(3), e12306.
  41. Lyons, T. S., Alter, T. R., Audretsch, D., & Augustine, D. (2012). Entrepreneurship and community: The next frontier of entre- preneurship inquiry. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 2(1), article 1.
  42. Mack, E. A., & Qian, H. (Eds.) (2016). Geographies of entrepreneurship. Abingdon: Routledge.
  43. Mahroum, S. (2016). Black swan start-ups: Understanding the rise of successful technology business in unlikely places. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  44. Malecki, E. J. (2009). Geographical environments for entrepreneurship. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 7, 175-190.
  45. Malecki, E. J., & Spigel, B. (2017). Innovation and entrepreneurship. In H. Bathelt, et al. (Eds.), Elgar companion to innovation and knowledge creation. (pp. 625-637). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
  46. Manimala, M. J., & Wasdani, K. P. (2014). Emerging economies: Muddling through to development. In M. J. Manimala, & K. P. Wasdani (Eds.), Entrepreneurial ecosystem: Perspectives from emerging economies (pp. 3-53). Berlin: Springer.
  47. Mason, C. (2008). Entrepreneurial dynamics and the origin and growth of high-tech clusters. In C. Karlsson (Ed.), Handbook of research on innovation and clusters (pp. 33-53). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
  48. Mayer, H. (2005). Taking root in the Silicon Forest: High-technology firms as surrogate university in Portland, Oregon. Journal of the American Planning Association, 71, 318-333.
  49. Moore, J. F. (1993). Predators and prey: A new ecology of competition. Harvard Business Review, 71(3), 75-86.
  50. Motoyama, Y., & Knowlton, K. (2017). Examining the connections within the startup ecosystem: A case study of St. Louis. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2016-0011. · DOI
  51. Mulas, V., Minges, M., & Appelebaum, H. (2015). Boosting tech innovation ecosystems in cities: A framework for growth and sustainability of urban tech innovation ecosystems. Washington, DC: World Bank; abridged version in Innovations: Technol- ogy, Governance, Globalization, 11(1-2), 98-125.
  52. Muntean, S. C. (2013). Wind beneath my wings: Policies promoting high-growth oriented women entrepreneurs. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, 5, 36-59.
  53. Nauwelaers, C. (2011). Intermediaries in regional innovation systems: role and challenges for policy. In P. Cooke (Ed.), Handbook of regional innovation and growth (pp. 467-481). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
  54. Nylund, P. A., & Cohen, B. (2017). Collision density: Driving growth in urban entrepreneurial ecosystems. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 13, 757-776.
  55. O'Connor, A., & Reed, G. (2015a). Promoting regional entrepreneurship ecosystems: The role of the university sector in Australia. In P. Davidsson (Ed.), Conference Proceedings, Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research Exchange Confer- ence 2015 (pp. 772-788). Adelaide: Queensland University of Technology.
  56. Pages, E. R., Freedman, D., & Von Bargen, P. (2003). Entrepreneurship as a state and local economic development strategy. In D. M. Hart (Ed.), The emergence of entrepreneurship policy: Governance, start-ups, and growth in the U.S. knowledge economy (pp. 240-259). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  57. Qian, H., Acs, Z. J., & Stough, R. R. (2013). Regional systems of entrepreneurship: the nexus of human capital, knowledge and new firm formation. Journal of Economic Geography, 13, 559-587.
  58. Rice, M. P., Fetters, M. L., & Greene, P. G. (2014). University-based entrepreneurship ecosystems: A global study of six educational institutions. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 18, 481-501.
  59. Rice, M. P., & Habbershon, T. G. (2007). Introduction. In M. P. Rice, & T. G. Habbershon (Eds.), Entrepreneurship: The engine of growth (Vol. 3: Place) (pp. ix-xxv). Westport, CT: Praeger.
  60. Roundy, P. T. (2016). Start-up community narratives: The discursive construction of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Journal of Entrepreneurship, 25, 232-248.
  61. Roundy, P. T. (2017a). Hybrid organizations and the logics of entrepreneurial ecosystems. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, published online 01 June 2017, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-017-0452-9. · DOI
  62. Roundy, P. T. (2017b). Social entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial ecosystems: Complementary or disjoint phenomena? International Journal of Social Economics, 44, 1252-1267.
  63. Roundy, P. T., Brockman, B. K., & Bradshaw, M. (2017). The resilience of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 8, 99-104.
  64. Simatupang, T. M., Schwab, A., & Lantu, D. C. (2015). Introduction [special issue on building sustainable entrepreneurship ecosystems]. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 26, 389-398.
  65. Smilor, R., O'Donnell, N., Stein, G., & Wellborn, R. S. (2007). The research university and the development of high-technology centers in the United States. Economic Development Quarterly, 21, 203-222.
  66. Smilor, R. W., & Feeser, H. R. (1991). Chaos and the entrepreneurial process: Patterns and policy implications for technology entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 6, 165-172.
  67. Smilor, R. W., Gibson, D. V., & Kozmetsky, G. (1989). Creating the technopolis: High-technology development in Austin, Texas. Journal of Business Venturing, 4, 49-67.
  68. Spigel, B. (2017b). Bourdieu, culture, and the economic geography of practice: Entrepreneurial mentorship in Ottawa and Waterloo, Canada. Journal of Economic Geography, 17, 287-310.
  69. Spilling, O. R. (1996). The entrepreneurial system: On entrepreneurship in the context of a mega-event. Journal of Business Research, 36, 91-103.
  70. Stam, E., & Spigel, B. (2017). Entrepreneurial ecosystems. In R. Blackburn, D. De Clercq, J. Heinonen, & Z. Wang (Eds.), Sage handbook for entrepreneurship and small business. in press.
  71. Sternberg, R. (2009). Regional dimensions of entrepreneurship. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 5(4), 211-340.
  72. Sweeney, G. P. (1987). Innovation, entrepreneurs and regional development. New York: St. Martin's Press.
  73. Theodoraki, C., & Messeghem, K. (2017). Exploring the entrepreneurial ecosystem in the field of entrepreneurial support: A multi-level approach. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 31, 47-66.
  74. Theodoraki, C., Messeghem, K., & Rice, M. P. (2017). A social capital approach to the development of sustainable entrepre- neurial ecosystems: an explorative study. Small Business Economics, Published online 24 August 2017: DOI https://doi. org/10.1007/s11187-017-9924-0. · DOI
  75. Van de Ven, A. H. (1993). The development of an infrastructure for entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 8, 211-230.
  76. Van de Ven, A. H., Sapienza, H. J., & Villanueva, J. (2007). Entrepreneurial pursuits of self-and collective interests. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1, 353-370.
  77. Voelker, T. A. (2012). Entrepreneurial ecosystems: Evolutionary paths or differentiated systems? Business Studies Journal, 4(special issue 2), 43-61.
  78. Wallin, A., Still, K., & Henttonen, K. (2016). Entrepreneurial growth ambitions: The case of Finnish technology startups. Tech- nology Innovation Management Review, 6(10), 5-16.
  79. Walshok, M. L., & Shragge, A. (2014). Invention and reinvention: The evolution of San Diego's innovation economy. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
  80. Wolfe, D. A., & Nelles, J. (2008). The role of civic capital and civic associations in cluster policy. In C. Karlsson (Ed.), Handbook of research on innovation and clusters (pp. 374-392). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. World Economic Forum [WEF]. (2013). Entrepreneurial ecosystems around the globe and company growth dynamics: Industry agenda. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
  81. Edward J. Malecki is a professor of Geography at The Ohio State University. An economic geographer, his spe- cializations are in economic development, technology, telecommunications, and entrepreneurship. He is an asso- ciate editor of Entrepreneurship and Regional Development. His most recent book (with Bruno Moriset) is The Digital Economy: Business Organization, Production Processes and Regional Developments (Routledge, 2008). How to cite this article: Malecki EJ. Entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial ecosystems. Geography Compass. 2018;12:e12359. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12359

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Malecki, E. J.
Affiliations
The Ohio State University (US)
Corresponding author
Malecki, Edward J.
ORCID
Malecki, Edward J.
Venue
Geography Compass
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-01-08
Volume
12
Issue
3
ISSN
1749-8198 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1111/gec3.12359
OpenAlex
W2783117961
Cited by
784
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 86 · 2025: 130 · 2024: 106 · 2023: 132 · 2022: 99 · 2021: 79 · 2020: 79 · 2019: 58 · 2018: 14 · 2015: 1
FWCI
77.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Geography Compass (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
Funders
Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Entrepreneurship Studies and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › University-Industry-Government Innovation Models
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Human Resources and Workforce
Keywords
entrepreneurial ecosystems, entrepreneurship, local entrepreneurship, regional entrepreneurship, entrepreneurial environment, scale of analysis, ecosystem evolution, entrepreneurial networks, entrepreneurial culture

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