Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A systematic literature review of entrepreneurial ecosystems in advanced and emerging economies

  • Published:
Small Business Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The concept of entrepreneurial ecosystems has been gaining considerable attention during the past decade among practitioners, policymakers, and researchers. However, to date, entrepreneurial ecosystem research has been largely atheoretical and static, and it focused mostly on advanced economies. In this paper, we therefore do two things. We first systematically review entrepreneurial ecosystem literature and propose a conceptual model that explicates three entrepreneurial ecosystem dynamics based on resource, interaction, and governance logics, respectively. We then systematically review empirical studies of emerging economy entrepreneurial ecosystems to build a theoretical framework that highlights their salient features. We reveal three key findings that challenge the direct application of the model vis-à-vis advanced economy entrepreneurial ecosystems to emerging economy entrepreneurial ecosystems: resource scarcities, structural gaps, and institutional voids. Our findings contribute to entrepreneurial ecosystem literature in terms of ecosystem dynamics and contextualizing entrepreneurial ecosystems in emerging economies. We also provide policy implications for emerging countries in fostering new venture creation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/emergingmarketeconomy.asp

References

“*” before the references of papers in the entrepreneurial ecosystems concepts review and “~” before the references of papers in the E4s review

  • *Acs, Z. J., Autio, E., & Szerb, L. (2014). National systems of entrepreneurship: measurement issues and policy implications. Research Policy, 43(3): 476–494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.08.016.

  • *Acs, Z. J., Stam, E., Audretsch, D. B., & O’Connor, A. (2017). The lineages of the entrepreneurial ecosystem approach. Small Business Economics: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9864-8.

  • *Acs, Z. J., Estrin, S., Mickiewicz, T., & Szerb, L. (2018). Entrepreneurship, institutional economics, and economic growth: an ecosystem perspective. Small Business Economics, 51(2): 501–514. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-018-0013-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, R. J., Smart, P., & Huff, A. S. (2017). Shades of gray: guidelines for working with the gray literature in systematic reviews for management and organizational studies. International Journal of Management Reviews, 19(4), 432–454. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adly, A., & Khatib, L. (2014). Reforming the entrepreneurship ecosystem in post-revolutionary Egypt and Tunisia. Stanford: Stanford Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahlstrom, D., & Bruton, G. D. (2006). Venture capital in emerging economies: networks and institutional change. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 30(2), 299–320. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2006.00122.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aidis, R., Estrin, S., & Mickiewicz, T. (2008). Institutions and entrepreneurship development in Russia: a comparative perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 23(6), 656–672. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.01.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alfred, R., & Laura, R. (2016). The Romanian entrepreneurial ecosystem background report. Technopolis Group. Retrieved May 1st, 2019, from the European Commission's Website https://rio.jrc.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/report/KI%20AX%2017%20002%20EN%20N%20Romania_Background.pdf.

  • *Alvedalen, J., & Boschma, R. (2017). A critical review of entrepreneurial ecosystems research: towards a future research agenda. European Planning Studies, 25(6): 887–903. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2017.1299694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amezcua, A. S., Grimes, M. G., Bradley, S. W., & Wiklund, J. (2013). Organizational sponsorship and founding environments: a contingency view on the survival of business-incubated firms, 1994–2007. Academy of Management Journal, 56(6), 1628–1654. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ~Armanios, D. E., Eesley, C. E., Li, J., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2017). How entrepreneurs leverage institutional intermediaries in emerging economies to acquire public resources. Strategic Management Journal, 38(7), 1373–1390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnold, D. J., & Quelch, J. A. (1998). New strategies in emerging markets. MIT Sloan Management Review, 40(1), 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • ~Arruda, C., Nogueira, V. S., & Costa, V. (2013). The Brazilian entrepreneurial ecosystem of startups: an analysis of entrepreneurship determinants in Brazil as seen from the OECD pillars. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 2(3), 17–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arthur, W. B. (1989). Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. The Economic Journal, 99(394), 116–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asheim, B. T., Smith, H. L., & Oughton, C. (2011). Regional innovation systems: theory, empirics and policy. Regional studies, 45(7), 875–891.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Audretsch, D. B., & Belitski, M. (2016). Entrepreneurial ecosystems in cities: establishing the framework conditions. Journal of Technology Transfer: 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9473-8.

  • *Audretsch, D. B., & Link, A. N. (2017). Embracing an entrepreneurial ecosystem: an analysis of the governance of research joint ventures. Small Business Economics, 52(2): 429–436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9953-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., Grilo, I., & Thurik, A. R. (2007). Explaining entrepreneurship and the role of policy: a framework, Handbook of Research on Entrepreneurship Policy. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing, 1–17.

  • *Auerswald, P. E. (2015). Enabling entrepreneurial ecosystems. In D. Audretsch, A. Link, & M. L. Walsok (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of local competitiveness: 54–83. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Auerswald, P. E., & Dani, L. (2017). The adaptive life cycle of entrepreneurial ecosystems: the biotechnology cluster. Small Business Economics, 49(1): 97–117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9869-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Autio, E. (2016). Entrepreneurship support in Europe: trends and challenges for EU policy. Policy Reports. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Autio, E. (2017). Entrepreneurial ecosystems: concepts and policy challenges. London.

  • Autio, E., & Fu, K. (2015). Economic and political institutions and entry into formal and informal entrepreneurship. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 32(1), 67–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-014-9381-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Autio, E., & Levie, J. (2017). Management of entrepreneurial ecosystems. In G. Ahmetoglu, T. Chamorro-Premuzic, B. Klinger, & T. Karcisky (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of entrepreneurship: 423–450. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Autio, E., & Rannikko, H. (2016). Retaining winners: can policy boost high-growth entrepreneurship? Research policy, 45(1), 42–55 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.06.002.

  • *Autio, E., Kenney, M. F., Mustar, P., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. T. (2014a). Entrepreneurial innovation: the importance of context. Research Policy, 43(7): 1097–1108.: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.01.015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Autio, E., Rannikko, H., Handelberg, J., & Kiuru, P. (2014b). Analyses on the Finnish high-growth entrepreneurship ecosystem. Aalto University publication series BUSINESS + ECONOMY, 1/2014, 1–85

  • *Autio, E., Nambisan, S., Thomas, L. D. W., & Wright, M. (2018). Digital affordances, spatial affordances, and the genesis of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 12(1): 72–95. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1266.

  • Batjargal, B., Hitt, M. A., Tsui, A. S., Arregle, J.-L., Webb, J. W., & Miller, T. L. (2013). Institutional polycentrism, entrepreneurs’ social networks, and new venture growth. Academy of Management Journal, 56(4), 1024–1049.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett-Page, E., & Thomas, J. (2009). Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: a critical review. BMC Medical Research Methodology 9(1), 59.

  • Baumol, W. J. (1990). Entrepreneurship: productive, unproductive, and destructive. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5, Part 1), 893–921.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, M., & Albu, M. (1999). Knowledge Systems and technological dynamism in industrial clusters in developing countries. World Development, 27(9), 1715–1734 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(99)00073-X.

  • *Bell-Masterson, J., & Stangler, D. (2015). Measuring an entrepreneurial ecosystem. Available at SSRN: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2580336.

  • Bergek, A., Jacobsson, S., Carlsson, B., Lindmark, S., & Rickne, A. (2008). Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: a scheme of analysis. Research Policy, 37(3), 407–429 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.12.003.

  • Birch, D. (1979). The job generation process. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boettke, P. J., & Coyne, C. J. (2009). Context matters: institutions and entrepreneurship. Foundations and Trends® in Entrepreneurship, 5(3), 135–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bramann, J. U. (2017). Building ICT entrepreneurship ecosystems in resource-scarce contexts: learnings from Kenya’s “Silicon savannah”. In B. Ndemo & T. Weiss (Eds.), Digital Kenya: an entrepreneurial revolution in the making (pp. 227–264). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-57,878-5_8.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • *Brown, R., & Mason, C. (2017). Looking inside the spiky bits: a critical review and conceptualisation of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Small Business Economics, 49(1): 11–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9865-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Bruns, K., Bosma, N., Sanders, M., & Schramm, M. (2017). Searching for the existence of entrepreneurial ecosystems: a regional cross-section growth regression approach. Small Business Economics, 49(1): 31–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9866-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Obloj, K. (2008). Entrepreneurship in emerging economies: where are we today and where should the research go in the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2007.00213.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruton, G. D., Filatotchev, I., Si, S., & Wright, M. (2013). Entrepreneurship and strategy in emerging economies. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 7(3), 169–180. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cao, Z., & Autio, E. (2018). Entrepreneurial ecosystems in emerging economies (E4s): what is similar and what is different? Academy of Management Proceedings, 2018(1), 17341. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2018.17341abstract.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Carayannis, E. G., Provance, M., & Grigoroudis, E. (2016). Entrepreneurship ecosystems: an agent-based simulation approach. Journal of Technology Transfer: 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9466-7.

  • *Cavallo, A., Ghezzi, A., & Balocco, R. (2018). Entrepreneurial ecosystem research: present debates and future directions. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-018-0526-3.

  • Chaminade, C., & Vang, J. (2008). Globalisation of knowledge production and regional innovation policy: supporting specialized hubs in the Bangalore software industry. Research Policy, 37(10), 1684–1696 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.08.014.

  • Child, J., Lu, Y., & Tsai, T. (2007). Institutional entrepreneurship in building an environmental protection system for the People’s Republic of China. Organization Studies, 28(7), 1013–1034. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840607078112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Cohen, B. (2006). Sustainable valley entrepreneurial ecosystems. Business Strategy and the Environment, 15(1): 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Colombelli, A., Paolucci, E., & Ughetto, E. (2017). Hierarchical and relational governance and the life cycle of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Small Business Economics, 52(2): 505–521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9957-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, D. J., Mulrow, C. D., & Haynes, R. B. (1997). Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Annals of internal medicine, 126(5), 376–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crevoisier, O. (2004). The innovative milieus approach: toward a territorialized understanding of the economy? Economic geography, 80(4), 367–379.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Cukier, D., Kon, F., & Lyons, T. (2016). Software startup ecosystems evolution: the New York City case study. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Software Startups.

  • Czarnitzki, D., & Delanote, J. (2012). Young innovative companies: the new high-growth firms? Industrial and Corporate Change, 22(5), 1315–1340. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dts039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dai, N., Jo, H., & Kassicieh, S. (2012). Cross-border venture capital investments in Asia: selection and exit performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(6), 666–684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2011.04.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidsson, P., & Honig, B. (2003). The role of social and human capital among nascent entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(3), 301–331 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(02)00097-6.

  • *Desai, S., & Motoyama, Y. (2015). The regional environment: Indianapolis-insights from high-growth companies. Available at SSRN: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2660938.

  • Djankov, S., La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (2002). The regulation of entry. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(1), 453–517.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doloreux, D. (2002). What we should know about regional systems of innovation. Technology in society, 24(3), 243–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Du, J., & Mickiewicz, T. (2016). Subsidies, rent seeking and performance: being young, small or private in China. Journal of Business Venturing, 31(1), 22–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2015.09.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ~Du, W. Y., Pan, S. L., Zhou, N., & Ouyang, T. H. (2018). From a marketplace of electronics to a digital entrepreneurial ecosystem (DEE): the emergence of a meta-organization in Zhongguancun, China. Information Systems Journal, 28(6), 1158–1175. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ~Dutt, N., Hawn, O., Vidal, E., Chatterji, A., McGahan, A., & Mitchell, W. (2016). How open system intermediaries address institutional failures: the case of business incubators in emerging-market countries. Academy of Management Journal, 59(3), 818–840.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., de Mello, J. M. C., & Almeida, M. (2005). Towards “meta-innovation” in Brazil: the evolution of the incubator and the emergence of a triple helix. Research Policy, 34(4), 411–424 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.01.011.

  • Ewens, M., Nanda, R., & Rhodes-Kropf, M. (2018). Cost of experimentation and the evolution of venture capital. Journal of Financial Economics, 128(3), 422–442.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Feld, B. 2012. Startup communities: building an entrepreneurial ecosystem in your city. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, M., & Zoller, T. D. (2012). Dealmakers in place: social capital connections in regional entrepreneurial economies. Regional Studies, 46(1), 23–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Filatotchev, I., Liu, X., Lu, J., & Wright, M. (2011). Knowledge spillovers through human mobility across national borders: evidence from Zhongguancun Science Park in China. Research Policy, 40(3), 453–462 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.01.003.

  • *Freeman, C. (2002). Continental, national and sub-national innovation systems—complementarity and economic growth. Research Policy, 31(2): 191–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00136-6.

  • Fuentelsaz, L., Maícas, J. P., & Mata, P. (2018). Institutional dynamism in entrepreneurial ecosystems, Entrepreneurial Ecosystems (pp. 45–65). Springer.

  • ~Fuerlinger, G., Fandl, U., & Funke, T. (2015). The role of the state in the entrepreneurship ecosystem: insights from Germany. Triple Helix, 2(1), 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • ~GALI, & Deloitt. (2017). Accelerating startups in emerging markets: insights from 43 programs. Global Accelerator Learning Initiative in collaboration with Deloitte. Retrieved May 1st, 2019, from: https://www.galidata.org/assets/report/pdf/Accelerating%20Startups%20in%20Emerging%20Markets.pdf.

  • Ge, J. H., Stanley, L. J., Eddleston, K., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2017). Institutional deterioration and entrepreneurial investment: the role of political connections. Journal of Business Venturing, 32(4), 405–419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2017.04.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghani, E., Kerr, W. R., & O’Connell, S. (2014). Spatial determinants of entrepreneurship in India. Regional Studies, 48(6), 1071–1089. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2013.839869.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ~Gonzalez-Uribe, J., & Leatherbee, M. (2014). Business accelerators: evidence from Start-up Chile. Available at SSRN: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2651158.

  • ~Goswami, K., Mitchell, J. R., & Bhagavatula, S. (2018). Accelerator expertise: understanding the intermediary role of accelerators in the development of the Bangalore entrepreneurial ecosystem. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 12(1), 117–150. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2017). An introduction to systematic reviews. London, UK: Sage Publications.

  • Greenhalgh, T., Robert, G., Macfarlane, F., Bate, P., Kyriakidou, O., & Peacock, R. (2005). Storylines of research in diffusion of innovation: a meta-narrative approach to systematic review. Social Science & Medicine, 61(2), 417–430.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Groth, O. J., Esposito, M., & Tse, T. (2015). What Europe needs is an innovation-driven entrepreneurship ecosystem: introducing EDIE. Thunderbird International Business Review, 57(4): 263–269. https://doi.org/10.1002/tie.21709.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ~Guerrero, M., & Urbano, D. (2017a). The dark side of entrepreneurial ecosystems in emerging economies: exploring the case of Mexico. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2017(1), 12941. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2017.12941abstract.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ~Guerrero, M., & Urbano, D. (2017b). The impact of Triple Helix agents on entrepreneurial innovations’ performance: an inside look at enterprises located in an emerging economy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 119, 294–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.06.015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Haines, T. (2016). Developing a startup and innovation ecosystem in regional Australia. Technology Innovation Management Review, 6(6): 24–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haltiwanger, J., Hyatt, H., McEntarfer, E., & Sousa, L. (2012). Business dynamics statistics briefing: job creation, worker churning, and wages at young businesses. Worker Churning, and Wages at Young Businesses (November 1, 2012).

  • Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1977). The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82(5), 929–964.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Harrison, R. T., & Leitch, C. (2010). Voodoo institution or entrepreneurial university? Spin-off companies, the entrepreneurial system and regional development in the UK. Regional Studies, 44(9): 1241–1262. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343400903167912.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: international differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoskisson, R. E., Eden, L., Lau, C. M., & Wright, M. (2000). Strategy in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3), 249–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Intarakumnerd, P., Chairatana, P.-A., & Tangchitpiboon, T. (2002). National innovation system in less successful developing countries: the case of Thailand. Research Policy, 31(8), 1445–1457 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00074-4.

  • *Isenberg, D. J. (2010). How to start an entrepreneurial revolution. Harvard Business Review, 88(6): 40–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Isenberg, D. (2011). The entrepreneurship ecosystem strategy as a new paradigm for economy policy: principles for cultivating entrepreneurship. Babson Entrepreneurship Ecosystem Project, Babson College, Babson Park: MA.

  • *Isenberg, D. (2014). What an entrepreneurship ecosystem actually is. Harvard Business Review, 5.

  • ~Júnior, E. I., Autio, E., Morini, C., Gimenez, F. A. P., & Dionisio, E. A. (2016). Analysis of the Brazilian entrepreneurial ecosystem. Desenvolvimento em Questão, 14(37), 5–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • ~Kantis, H. D., & Federico, J. S. (2012). Entrepreneurial ecosystems in Latin America: the role of policies, International Research and Policy Roundtable (Kauffman Foundation). UK: Liverpool.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, E. (1988). Disintermediation: cutting out the middle man. Intermedia, 16(2), 30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khanna, T., & Palepu, K. (1997). Why focused strategies may be wrong for emerging markets. Harvard Business Review, 75(4), 41–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khanna, T., & Palepu, K. (2000). The future of business groups in emerging markets: long-run evidence from Chile. Academy of Management journal, 43(3), 268–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khanna, T., & Palepu, K. G. (2006). Emerging giants: building world-class companies in developing countries. Harvard Business Review, 84(10).

  • Khanna, T., Palepu, K. G., & Sinha, J. (2005). Strategies that fit emerging markets. Harvard Business Review, 83(6), 4–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Kline, C., Hao, H., Alderman, D., Kleckley, J. W., & Gray, S. (2014). A spatial analysis of tourism, entrepreneurship and the entrepreneurial ecosystem in North Carolina, USA. Tourism Planning & Development, 11(3): 305–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kon, F., Cukier, D., Melo, C., Hazzan, O., & Yuklea, H. (2014). A panorama of the Israeli software startup ecosystem. Available at SSRN: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2441157.

  • *Kshetri, N. (2014). Developing successful entrepreneurial ecosystems: lessons from a comparison of an Asian tiger and a Baltic tiger. Baltic Journal of Management, 9(3): 330–356. https://doi.org/10.1108/Bjm-09-2013-0146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le, N. T. B., & Nguyen, T. V. (2009). The impact of networking on bank financing: the case of small and medium-sized enterprises in Vietnam. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(4), 867–887.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lengyel, B., & Leydesdorff, L. (2011). Regional innovation systems in Hungary: the failing synergy at the national level. Regional Studies, 45(5), 677–693. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343401003614274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, H. Y., & Atuahene-Gima, K. (2002). The adoption of agency business activity, product innovation, and performance in Chinese technology ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 23(6), 469–490. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ~Li, W. J., Du, W. Y., & Yin, J. M. (2017). Digital entrepreneurship ecosystem as a new form of organizing: the case of Zhongguancun. Frontiers of Business Research in China, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s11782-017-0004-8.

  • Lingelbach, D. C., De La Vina, L., & Asel, P. (2005). What's distinctive about growth-oriented entrepreneurship in developing countries?. UTSA College of Business Center for Global Entrepreneurship Working Paper, (1).

  • Liu, X., & White, S. (2001). Comparing innovation systems: a framework and application to China’s transitional context. Research Policy, 30(7), 1091–1114 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00132-3.

  • Liu, X. H., Lu, J. Y., Filatotchev, I., Buck, T., & Wright, M. (2010a). Returnee entrepreneurs, knowledge spillovers and innovation in high-tech firms in emerging economies. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(7), 1183–1197. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2009.50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, X. H., Wright, M., Filatotchev, I., Dai, O., & Lu, J. Y. (2010b). Human mobility and international knowledge spillovers: evidence from high-tech small and medium enterprises in an emerging market. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 4(4), 340–355. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ~Liu, R. Z., Weng, Q. X., Mao, G. F., & Huang, T. W. (2013). Industrial cluster, government agency and entrepreneurial development: a case study of Wenzhou City, Zhejiang Province. Chinese Management Studies, 7(2), 253–280. https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS-Oct-2011-0085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundström, A., & Stevenson, L. A. (2005). Entrepreneurship policy: theory and practice. Boston, MA: Springer.

  • *Mack, E., & Mayer, H. (2016). The evolutionary dynamics of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Urban Studies, 53(10): 2118–2133. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098015586547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mair, J., Martí, I., & Ventresca, M. J. (2012). Building inclusive markets in rural Bangladesh: how intermediaries work institutional voids. Academy of Management Journal, 55(4), 819–850.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Malecki, E. J. (2018). Entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial ecosystems. Geography Compass, 12(3): e12359. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12359.

  • ~Manimala, M. J., & Wasdani, K. P. (2015). Entrepreneurial ecosystem: perspectives from emerging economies. India: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2086-2.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Manolova, T. S., Eunni, R. V., & Gyoshev, B. S. (2008). Institutional environments for entrepreneurship: evidence from emerging economies in Eastern Europe. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(1), 203–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Markley, D. M., Lyons, T. S., & Macke, D. W. (2015). Creating entrepreneurial communities: building community capacity for ecosystem development. Community Development, 46(5): 580–598. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.2015.1041539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markusen, A. (1996). Sticky places in slippery space: a typology of industrial districts. Economic Geography, 72(3), 293–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, A. (1920). Principles of economics. London: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maskell, P. (2001). Towards a knowledge-based theory of the geographical cluster. Industrial and corporate change, 10(4), 921–943.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, C., & Brown, R. (2013). Creating good public policy to support high-growth firms. Small Business Economics, 40(2), 211–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-011-9369-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Mason, C., & Brown, R. (2014). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and growth oriented entrepreneurship, Final Report to OECD, Paris: 1–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKague, K., Wong, J., & Siddiquee, N. (2017). Social franchising as rural entrepreneurial ecosystem development: the case of Krishi Utsho in Bangladesh. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 18(1), 47–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMillan, J., & Woodruff, C. (2002). The central role of entrepreneurs in transition economies. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16(3), 153–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melaas, А., & Zhang, F. (2016). National Innovation Systems in the United States and China. The Center for International Environment and Resource Policy, 36.

  • Mesquita, L. F. (2007). Starting over when the bickering never ends: rebuilding aggregate trust among clustered firms through trust facilitators. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 72–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Miller, D. J., & Acs, Z. J. (2017). The campus as entrepreneurial ecosystem: the University of Chicago. Small Business Economics, 49(1), 75–95.

  • *Motoyama, Y., & Knowlton, K. (2014). Examining the connections within the startup ecosystem: A case study of St. Louis. Working Paper In Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.

  • *Motoyama, Y., & Knowlton, K. (2016). From resource munificence to ecosystem integration: the case of government sponsorship in St. Louis Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 28(5–6): 448–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2016.1186749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Motoyama, Y., Danley, B., Bell-Masterson, J., Maxwell, K., & Morelix, A. (2013). Leveraging regional assets: insights from high-growth companies in Kansas City: Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.

  • *Motoyama, Y., Konczal, J., Bell-Masterson, J., & Morelix, A. (2014). Think locally, act locally: building a robust entrepreneurial ecosystem. Available at SSRN: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2425675.

  • *Motoyama, Y., Fetsch, E., Jackson, C., & Wiens, J. (2016). Little town, layered ecosystem: a case study of Chattanooga. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2771396.

  • *Motoyama, Y., Fetsch, E., & Davis, S. (2017). A new frontier: entrepreneurship ecosystems in Bozeman and Missoula, Montana: Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ndemo, B., & Weiss, T. (2016). Digital Kenya: an entrepreneurial revolution in the making. In Palgrave Studies of Entrepreneurship in Africa. Palgrave Macmillan UK.

  • *Neck, H. M., Meyer, G. D., Cohen, B., & Corbett, A. C. (2004). An entrepreneurial system view of new venture creation. Journal of Small Business Management, 42(2): 190–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, D. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C. (1991). Institutions. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 97–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M. (2000). Business strategies in transition economies. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M. W. (2001). How entrepreneurs create wealth in transition economies. The Academy of Management Executive, 15(1), 95–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (2003). The external control of organizations: a resource dependence perspective. In SERIES: STANFORD BUSINESS CLASSICS. Stanford University Press.

  • Piore, M. J., & Sabel, C. F. (1984). The second industrial divide: possibilities for prosperity. New York, NY: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Pitelis, C. (2012). Clusters, entrepreneurial ecosystem co-creation, and appropriability: a conceptual framework. Industrial and Corporate Change, 21(6): 1359–1388. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dts008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (1998). Clusters and the new economics of competition. Boston: Harvard Business Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puffer, S. M., McCarthy, D. J., & Boisot, M. (2010). Entrepreneurship in Russia and China: the impact of formal institutional voids. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(3), 441–467.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Qian, H., Acs, Z. J., & Stough, R. R. (2012). Regional systems of entrepreneurship: the nexus of human capital, knowledge and new firm formation. Journal of Economic Geography, 13(4): 559–587.

    Google Scholar 

  • Qin, F., Wright, M., & Gao, J. (2017). Are ‘sea turtles’ slower? Returnee entrepreneurs, venture resources and speed of entrepreneurial entry. Journal of Business Venturing, 32(6), 694–706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent2017.08.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramamurti, R., & Hillemann, J. (2018). What is “Chinese” about Chinese multinationals? Journal of International Business Studies, 49(1), 34–48. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-017-0128-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reis, E. (2011). The lean startup. New York, NY: Crown Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, P. D., Bygrave, W. D., Autio, E., Cox, L. W., & Hay, M. (2002). Global entrepreneurship monitor executive report 2002, Kauffman Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership. Kansas City, MO: Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, P., Bosma, N., Autio, E., Hunt, S., De Bono, N., Servais, I., Lopez-Garcia, P., & Chin, N. (2005). Global entrepreneurship monitor: data collection design and implementation 1998–2003. Small Business Economics, 24(3), 205–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • *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 & Innovation Management, 18(5/6): 481–501. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEIM.2014.064722.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Roundy, P. T. (2016). Start-up community narratives: the discursive construction of entrepreneurial ecosystems. The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 25(2): 232–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Roundy, P. (2017). “Small town” entrepreneurial ecosystems: implications for developed and emerging economies. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 9(3), 238–262.

  • *Roundy, P. T., Brockman, B. K., & Bradshaw, M. (2017). The resilience of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 8: 99–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Roundy, P. T., Bradshaw, M., & Brockman, B. K. (2018). The emergence of entrepreneurial ecosystems: a complex adaptive systems approach. Journal of Business Research, 86: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.01.032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rutter, D., Francis, J., Coren, E., & Fisher, M. (2010). SCIE systematic research reviews: guidelines. London: Social Care Institute for Excellence.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Scaringella, L., & Radziwon, A. (2018). Innovation, entrepreneurial, knowledge, and business ecosystems: old wine in new bottles? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 136: 59–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schøtt, T. (2008). The coupling between entrepreneurship and public policy: Tight in developed countries but loose in developing countries. Estudios de economía, 35(2), 195–214.

  • Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations. London: Foundations for organizational science.

    Google Scholar 

  • ~Sheriff, M., & Muffatto, M. (2015). The present state of entrepreneurship ecosystems in selected countries in Africa. African Journal of Economic and Management Studies, 6(1), 17–54. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJEMS-10-2012-0064.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shi, X. (2019). Unpacking entrepreneurial ecosystem health: an entrepreneurial process approach (Doctoral thesis). https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.40125

  • Shi, X., & Shi, Y. (2017). Unpacking entrepreneurial ecosystem health. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2017. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2017.16215abstract.

  • Smallbone, D., & Welter, F. (2001). The distinctiveness of entrepreneurship in transition economies. Small Business Economics, 16(4), 249–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Spigel, B. (2016). Developing and governing entrepreneurial ecosystems: the structure of entrepreneurial support programs in Edinburgh, Scotland. International Journal of Innovation and Regional Development, 7(2): 141–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Spigel, B. (2017). The relational organization of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41(1): 49–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Spigel, B., & Harrison, R. (2018). Toward a process theory of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 12(1): 151–168. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1268.

  • *Spilling, O. R. (1996). The entrepreneurial system: on entrepreneurship in the context of a mega-event. Journal of Business research, 36(1): 91–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Stam, E. (2014). The Dutch entrepreneurial ecosystem. Available at SSRN: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2473475.

  • *Stam, E. (2015). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and regional policy: a sympathetic critique. European Planning Studies, 23(9): 1759–1769. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2015.1061484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Stam, F. (2018). Enabling creative destruction: an entrepreneurial ecosystem approach to industrial policy. USE Working Paper series, 18(05), 1–10.

  • *Stam, F., & Spigel, B. (2016). Entrepreneurial ecosystems, USE Discussion paper series, 16(13), 1–15.

  • *Stam, F., & van de Ven, A. (2018). Entrepreneurial ecosystems: a systems perspective. USE Working Paper series, 18(06), 1-28.

  • Storper, M. (1995). The resurgence of regional economies, ten years later the region as a nexus of untraded interdependencies. European Urban and Regional Studies, 2(3), 191–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stuart, T. E., & Sorenson, O. (2005). Social networks and entrepreneurship, Handbook of entrepreneurship research (pp. 233–252). Springer.

  • ~Subrahmanya, M. H. B. (2017). Comparing the entrepreneurial ecosystems for technology startups in Bangalore and Hyderabad, India. Technology Innovation Management Review, 7(7), 47–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Sussan, F., & Acs, Z. J. (2017). The digital entrepreneurial ecosystem. Small Business Economics: 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9867-5.

  • Tallman, S., Jenkins, M., Henry, N., & Pinch, S. (2004). Knowledge, clusters, and competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 29(2), 258–271. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2004.12736089.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Theodoraki, C., Messeghem, K., & Rice, M. P. (2018). A social capital approach to the development of sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems: an explorative study. Small Business Economics, 51(1), 153–170.

  • Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology 8(1), 45.

  • *Thompson, T. A., Purdy, J. M., & Ventresca, M. J. (2018). How entrepreneurial ecosystems take form: evidence from social impact initiatives in Seattle. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 12(1): 96–116. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilson, D., Lyytinen, K., & Sørensen, C. (2010). Research commentary—digital infrastructures: the missing IS research agenda. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 748–759.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tonoyan, V., Strohmeyer, R., Habib, M., & Perlitz, M. (2010). Corruption and entrepreneurship: how formal and informal institutions shape small firm behavior in transition and mature market economies. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(5), 803–832. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00394.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14(3), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Vogel, P. (2013). The employment outlook for youth: building entrepreneurial ecosystems as a way forward. In Conference Proceedings of the G20 Youth Forum, 2013. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2357856.

  • Vollan, B. (2008). Socio-ecological explanations for crowding-out effects from economic field experiments in southern Africa. Ecological Economics, 67(4), 560–573.

    Google Scholar 

  • ~Wadee, A. A., & Padayachee, A. (2017). Higher education: catalysts for the development of an entrepreneurial ecosystem, or ... are we the weakest link? Science Technology and Society, 22(2), 284–309. https://doi.org/10.1177/0971721817702290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y., Li, J., & Furman, J. L. (2017). Firm performance and state innovation funding: evidence from China’s Innofund program. Research Policy, 46(6), 1142–1161.

    Google Scholar 

  • *WEF. (2014). Entrepreneurial ecosystems around the globe and early-stage company growth dynamics—the entrepreneur’s perspective. Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wong, P.-K., Ho, Y.-P., & Singh, A. (2007). Towards an “entrepreneurial university” model to support knowledge-based economic development: the case of the National University of Singapore. World Development, 35(6), 941–958 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2006.05.007.

  • Wright, M., Liu, X., Buck, T., & Filatotchev, I. (2008). Returnee entrepreneurs, science park location choice and performance: an analysis of high–technology SMEs in China. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(1), 131–155. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2007.00219.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, J., Si, S., & Wu, X. B. (2016). Entrepreneurial finance and innovation: informal debt as an empirical case. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 10(3), 257–273. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ~Yi, G., & Uyarra, E. (2018). Process mechanisms for academic entrepreneurial ecosystems: insights from a case study in China. Science, Technology and Society, 0971721817744446.

  • Yoo, Y., Boland, R. J., Lyytinen, K., & Majchrzak, A. (2012). Organizing for innovation in the digitized world. Organization Science, 23(5), 1398–1408. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1120.0771.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ~Yusoff, W. F. W., Kian, T. S., Ahmad, A. R., & Jusoh, N. Q. (2018). Fostering the entrepreneurial ecosystem: the roles of government agencies in Malaysia. Advanced Science Letters, 24(5), 3079–3084. https://doi.org/10.1166/asl.2018.11321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Závodská, A., Šramová, V., Rybovič, A., & Jirásek, M. (2014). Developing start-up ecosystem in small cities: case of Žilina and Leipzig City, 9th International Conference on Knowledge Management in Organizations, KMO 2014, Vol. 185 LNBIP (pp. 67–77). Santiago: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08618-7_7.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Y., & Li, H. Y. (2010). Innovation search of new ventures in a technology cluster: the role of ties with service intermediaries. Strategic Management Journal, 31(1), 88–109. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.806.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, H. Y., & Sonobe, T. (2011). Business incubators in China: an inquiry into the variables associated with incubatee success. Economics-the Open Access Open-Assessment E-Journal, 5, CP1. https://doi.org/10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2011-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zittrain, J. L. (2006). The generative internet. Harvard Law Review, 1974–2040.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Business School, Imperial College, London, SW7 2AZ, UK

    Zhe Cao

  2. Antai College of Economics and Management, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, 200030, China

    Xianwei Shi

Authors
  1. Zhe Cao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xianwei Shi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xianwei Shi.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1. Review procedures for search, selection, and exclusion

  1. 1.

    The systematic review of entrepreneurial ecosystems

  1. A.

    Criteria for inclusion for review

    1. a.

      Studies providing theoretical contributions

    2. b.

      Both theoretical and empirical studies

    3. c.

      Focus on entrepreneurial ecosystems

    4. d.

      All years (1970–2018)

  2. B.

    Search method and scope (949)

    1. a.

      A full search of articles within database Web of Science ISI Social Sciences Index

      1. i.

        Focus on title and abstract

      2. ii.

        Search strings (n = 589)

  • TS=((entrep* OR start-up* OR startup*) AND (ecosystem* OR eco-system*))

    1. b.

      Expanded search to guarantee exhaustiveness (n = 360):

      1. i.

        Google scholars first 30 pages (272)

      2. ii.

        ProQuest (9)

      3. iii.

        Snowball (54)

      4. iv.

        Other sources include hand searching, personal contacts, working papers and other gray literature (25)

  1. C.

    Exclusion criteria by theoretical relevance (881)

    1. a.

      Not related to management, business or economics (n = 165)

    2. b.

      Foreign language articles (n = 50)

    3. c.

      Nonpapers, including reports, speeches, call for papers, magazines, and blogs (64)

    4. d.

      Screen title and abstract to exclude studies in which the primary focus is not on entrepreneurial ecosystems (n = 602)

      1. i.

        Single-use, multiple without elaboration, and grammatical coincidence

      2. ii.

        Unrelated discipline such as environmental studies

      3. iii.

        Duplicated studies

      4. iv.

        Pure empirical and descriptive studies that provide little theoretical contribution

      5. v.

        Studies focused on corporate-level open innovation

      6. vi.

        Studies focused on nongeographical ecosystem concepts such as business ecosystems

      7. vii.

        Studies focused on new firm location choice

      8. viii.

        Studies focused on the relationship between entrepreneurship and economic growth

      9. ix.

        Studies focused on only one or two components of entrepreneurial ecosystems, rather than the ecosystem as a whole

      10. x.

        Exclude papers from the same authors that present similar arguments or theories. Keep the representative papers with high citations

      11. xi.

        For gray literature, check the quality by referring to the quality assessment guidance from Adams et al. (2017) and only include articles that are fit-for-purpose, provide contributions and are evaluated by field experts

      12. xii.

        Results unavailable electronically or by other reasonable means

This review resulted in 68 key papers on entrepreneurial ecosystems.

  1. 2.

    The systematic review of empirical studies on E4s

  1. A.

    Criteria for inclusion for review

    1. a.

      Empirical articles including both quantitative and qualitative studies

    2. b.

      All sectors

    3. c.

      All years (1970–2018)

  2. B.

    Search method and scope (36,896)

    1. a.

      A full search of articles within database Web of Science ISI Social Sciences Index

      1. i.

        Focus on title and abstract

      2. ii.

        Search strings (n = 36,886)

        1. 1.

          TS=((("entrepreneur*”) OR (“new venture*”) OR (“new firm*”) OR (new enterprise*) OR (“startup”) OR (“start-up”) OR (SME*) OR (“small firm*”) OR (“small and medium-sized enterprise*”) OR (“micro and small business*”) OR (“firm formation”) OR (“scale-up”) OR (“scaleup”) OR (stand-up) OR (“business model*”) OR (“scalable business model”) OR (“experimentation”) OR (“lean method”) OR (“lean startup”) OR (“disruption orient*”) OR (“growth oriented”) OR (“entrepreneurial firm*”) OR (“nascent entrepreneur*”) OR (unicorn) OR (digital entrepreneur*”) OR (“digital startup*”))

        2. 2.

          AND ((“emerging econom*”) OR (“emerging-market”) OR (“emerging countr*”) OR Brazil OR Chile OR China OR Colombia OR Hungary OR Indonesia OR India OR Malaysia OR Mexico OR Peru OR Philippines OR Russia OR (“South Africa”) OR Thailand OR Turkey)

        3. 3.

          AND ((institution*) OR (“institution* void*”) OR (cultur*) OR (normative) OR (regulatory) OR (resource*) OR (“institution* gap*”) OR (“institution* failure”) OR (“market failure*”) OR (“intermedia*”) OR (sponsor*) OR (“external factor*”) OR (barrier*) OR (constraint*) OR (“founding environment*”) OR (“resource* gap*”) OR (“resource* scarcit*”) OR (“resource* munificen*”) OR (accelerator*) OR (incubator*) OR (“coworking space*”) OR (“financ*”) OR (“venture capital*”) OR (“angel investor*”) OR (crowdfunding*) OR (“human capital”) OR (“science park*”) OR (“entrepreneur* ecosystem*”) OR (“startup ecosystem”) OR (“start-up ecosystem”) OR (“family business*”) OR (“family-owned business*”) OR (“business group*”) OR (“returnee entrepreneur*”) OR (“transnational entrepreneur*”) OR (“entrepreneur* education”)) OR (“mentor*”) OR (“knowledge spill-over*”))

    2. b.

      Expanded search to guarantee exhaustiveness (n = 10):

      1. i.

        Expand to gray literature that focuses on E4s (Google Scholar first 30 pages and ProQuest)

      2. ii.

        Employ the snowballing technique by browsing through references of potentially relevant articles

      3. iii.

        A focused search of selected key journals to ensure that articles of relevance not using specified keywords are included

        1. 1.

          JBV, ETP, SMJ (top entrepreneurship journal)

        2. 2.

          AMJ, ASQ, and OS (top management journal)

        3. 3.

          SEJ (entrepreneurship journal related special issues not available on Web of Science database)

        4. 4.

          Known special focused journals including Research Policy and Small Business Economics

  3. C.

    Exclusion criteria by theoretical relevance (36,877)

    1. a.

      Reviews, editorials, book reviews, meeting abstracts, news items, discussion, retraction, software review, commentaries, biographical item, speeches, call for papers, magazines, blogs correction, letter, and note (n = 13,360)

    2. b.

      Foreign language articles (n = 1119)

    3. c.

      Not related to management, business, or economics (n = 19,563)

    4. d.

      Screen title and abstract to exclude studies in which the primary focus is not on emerging economy entrepreneurial ecosystems (n = 2833)

      1. i.

        Single-use, multiple without elaboration, and grammatical coincidence

      2. ii.

        Conceptual papers

      3. iii.

        Duplicated studies

      4. iv.

        Unrelated discipline such as environmental studies

      5. v.

        Studies in countries that are not in the list of emerging economies

      6. vi.

        Noncontextual factors such as individual traits, capabilities, self-efficacy, prior knowledge, and sense-making

      7. vii.

        Studies focused on large corporations rather than SMEs and entrepreneurship, e.g., corporate entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship

      8. viii.

        Studies focused on the role of entrepreneurship in economic development and global networks

      9. ix.

        Studies focused on innovation rather than entrepreneurship

      10. x.

        Studies focused on new firm strategies such as marketing, risk management, and talent management strategies

      11. xi.

        Studies focused on new construct and measurement development or validations

      12. xii.

        Studies focused on firm-level capabilities, e.g., entrepreneurial orientation and absorptive capacity

      13. xiii.

        Studies focused on only one or two components of entrepreneurial ecosystems, rather than the ecosystem as a whole

      14. xiv.

        Results unavailable electronically or by other reasonable means

This review resulted in 19 key empirical studies on E4s.

Appendix 2. Entrepreneurial ecosystems dynamics

Table 7 List of formal definitions of entrepreneurial ecosystems
Full size table
Fig. 3
figure 3

Conceptual model of entrepreneurial ecosystems dynamics

Full size image

Appendix 3. Entrepreneurial ecosystems in emerging economies

Table 8 List of key empirical research on entrepreneurial ecosystems in emerging economies
Full size table
Table 9 Theoretical model of entrepreneurial ecosystems dynamics in emerging economies
Full size table
Fig. 4
figure 4

Conceptual model of entrepreneurial ecosystems dynamics in emerging economies

Full size image

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cao, Z., Shi, X. A systematic literature review of entrepreneurial ecosystems in advanced and emerging economies. Small Bus Econ 57, 75–110 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-020-00326-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-020-00326-y

Keywords

JEL Classifications

Search

Navigation