Configurations of knowledge-intensive entrepreneurial ecosystems

Main Article Content

Andre Cherubini Alves
Bruno Fischer
Nicholas Spyridon Vonortas
Sérgio Robles Reis de Queiroz

Abstract

The dominant discourse on Entrepreneurial Ecosystems (EE) remains focused on the profile of a handful of successful locations. This has hindered a deeper comprehension of the economic mechanisms that shape evo­lutionary trends in entrepreneurial activity and how they operate in distinct places. We propose that EE have regularities, but they can also assume different configurations, i.e., varying combinations of influential dimen­sions. Through fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis, we address this issue with data from the State of São Paulo, Brazil. This research focuses on five EE dimensions: Science & Technology, Human Capital, Market Dynamics, Business Dynamics, and Infrastructure. Findings point at the heterogeneous nature of EE distributed in three different paths. While configurations’ vary in terms of causal conditions, research universities, knowle­dge-intensive jobs and wider credit operations are core-causal conditions. Proximity to the main economic hub appears as a key differentiator among ecosystems.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Article Details

How to Cite
ALVES, A. C.; FISCHER, B.; VONORTAS, N. S.; QUEIROZ, S. R. R. de. Configurations of knowledge-intensive entrepreneurial ecosystems. RAE - Revista de Administracao de Empresas , [S. l.], v. 59, n. 4, p. 242–257, 2019. DOI: 10.1590/S0034-759020190403. Disponível em: https://periodicos.fgv.br/rae/article/view/79998. Acesso em: 27 may. 2024.
Section
Articles

References

Ács, Z., & Armington, C. (2004). Employment growth and entrepreneurial activity in cities. Regional Studies, 38(8), 911-927. doi:10.1080/0034340042000280938

Ács, Z., Autio, E., & Szerb, L. (2014). National systems of entrepreneurship: Measurement issues and policy implications. Research Policy, 43(3), 476-494. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2013.08.016

Ács, Z., Stam, E., Audretsch, D., & O’Connor, A. (2017). The lineages of the entrepreneurial ecosystem approach. Small Business Economics, 49(1), 1-10. doi:10.1007/s11187-017-9864-8

Alvedalen, J., & Boschma, R. (2017). A critical review of entrepreneurial ecosystems research: Towards a future research agenda. European Planning Studies, 25(6), 887-903. doi:10.1080/09654313.2017.1299 694

Armington, C., & Ács, Z. J. (2002). The determinants of regional variation in new firm formation. Regional Studies, 36(1), 33-45. doi:10.1080/00343400120099843

Audretsch, D. (2012). Entrepreneurship research. Management Decision, 50(5), 755-764. doi:10.1108/00251741211227384

Audretsch, D., & Belitski, M. (2017). Entrepreneurial ecosystems in cities: Establishing the framework conditions. Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(5), 1030-1051. doi:10.1007/s10961-016-9473-8

Audretsch, D., & Feldman, M. (1996). R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. The American Economic Review, 86(3), 630-640.

Audretsch, D. B., Heger, D., & Veith, T. (2015). Infrastructure and entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 44(2), 219-230. doi:10.1007/s11187-014-9600-6

Borissenko, Y., & Boschma, R. (2016). A critical review of entrepreneurial ecosystems: Towards a future research agenda. [Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography #16.30]. Utrecht, Holanda: Utrecht University – Urban & Regional Research Centre.

Boschma, R., & Martin, R. (2010). The aims and scope of evolutionary economic geography. [Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography #10.01]. Utrecht, Holanda: Utrecht University – Urban & Regional Research Centre.

Bosma, N., & Sternberg, R. (2014). Entrepreneurship is an urban event? Empirical evidence from European cities. Regional Studies, 48(6), 1016-1033. doi:10.1080/00343404.2014.904041

Bresnahan, T., Gambardella, A., & Saxenian, A. (2001). Old economy inputs for new economy outcomes: cluster formation in the new Silicon Valleys. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(4), 835-860.

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

Carayannis, E., Grigoroudis, E., Campbell, D., Meissner, D., & Stamati, D. (2017). The ecosystem as helix: An exploratory theory-building study of regional co-opetitive entrepreneurial ecosystems as Quadruple/ Quintuple Helix Innovation Models. R&D Management, 48(1), 148- 162. doi:10.1111/radm.12300

Chatterji, A., Glaeser, E., & Kerr, W. (2013). Clusters of entrepreneurship and innovation. [Working Paper 19013]. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper Series.

Crescenzi, R., & Rodríguez-Pose, A. (2012). An integrated framework for the comparative analysis of the territorial innovation dynamics of developed and emerging countries. Journal of Economic Surveys, 26(3), 517-533. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6419.2012.00726.x

Delgado, M., Porter, M., & Stern, S. (2010). Clusters and entrepreneurship. Journal of Economic Geography, 10(4), 495-518. doi:10.1093/jeg/lbq010

Di Gregorio, D., & Shane, S. (2003). Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others? Research Policy, 32(2), 209-227. doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00097-5

Dorfman, N. (1983). Route 128: the development of a regional high technology economy. Research Policy, 12(6), 299-316. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(83)90009-4

Duranton, G., & Puga, D. (2002). Diversity and Specialisation in Cities: Why, Where and When Does It Matter? in P. McCann (Ed.). Industrial Location Economics (pp. 151-186). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

Emmenegger, P., Schraff, D., & Walter, A. (2014). QCA, the truth table analysis and large-N survey data: The benefits of calibration and the importance of robustness tests. In: 2nd International QCA Expert Workshop, November, Zurich, Switzerland.

Erina, I., Shatrevich, V., & Gaile-Sarkane, E. (2017). Impact of stakeholder groups on development of a regional entrepreneurial ecosystem. European Planning Studies, 25(5), 755-771. doi:10.1080/09654313.2017.1282077

Feldman, M. (2001). The entrepreneurial event revisited: Firm formation in a regional context. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(4), 861- 891. doi:10.1093/icc/10.4.861

Feldman, M., & Lendel, I. (2011). The emerging industry puzzle: Optics unplugged. In H. Bathelt, M. P. Feldman, & D. F. Kogler (Eds.), Beyond territory: Dynamic geographies of knowledge creation, diffusion, and innovation (pp. 107-148). London, UK, and New York, USA: Routledge.

Fischer, B., Queiroz, S., & Vonortas, N. (2018). On the location of knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship in developing countries: Lessons from São Paulo, Brazil. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 30(5-6), 612-638. doi:10.1080/08985626.2018.1438523

Fiss, P., Sharapov, D., & Cronqvist, L. (2013). Opposites attract? Opportunities and challenges for integrating Large-N QCA and econometric analysis. Political Research Quarterly, 66(1), 191-198. doi:10.1177/1065912912468269e

Fitjar, R., & Rodríguez-Pose, A. (2011). Innovating in the periphery: Firms, values and innovation in Southwest Norway. European Planning Studies, 19(4), 555-574. doi:10.1080/09654313.2011.548467

Florida, R. (2005). The world is spiky: Globalization has changed the economic playing field, but hasn’t leveled it. Atlantic Monthly, 296(3), 48-51.

Florida, R., & Mellander, C. (2014). Rise of the startup city: The changing geography of the venture capital financed innovation [Working Paper n. 377]. Estocolmo, Suécia: Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.

Fritsch, M., Obschonka, M., & Wyrwich, M. (2019). Historical roots of entrepreneurship-facilitating culture and innovation activity: An analysis for German regions. Artigo em preparação.

Glaeser, E. (2014). A world of cities: The causes and consequences of urbanization in poorer countries. Journal of the European Economic Association, 12(5), 1154-1199. doi:10.1111/jeea.12100

Greckhamer, T., Misangyi, V. F., & Fiss, P. C. (2013). The two QCAs: From a small-N to a large-N set theoretic approach. In P. C. Fiss, B. Cambre, & A. Marx (Eds.), Configurational theory and methods in organizational research (pp. 49-75). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.

Gregorio, D. Di, & Shane, S. (2003). Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others? Research Policy, 32(2), 209-227. doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00097-5

Guerrero, M., Urbano, D., Fayolle, A., Klofsten, M., & Mian, S. (2016). Entrepreneurial universities: Emerging models in the new social and economic landscape. Small Business Economics, 47(3), 551-563. doi:10.1007/s11187-016-9755-4

Isaksen, A. (2016). Cluster emergence: Combining pre-existing conditions and triggering factors. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 28(9-10), 704-723. doi:10.1080/08985626.2016.123.9762

Isaksen, A., & Trippl, M. (2017). Innovation in space: The mosaic of regional innovation patterns. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 33(1), 122-140. doi:10.1093/oxrep/grw035

Isenberg, D. (2010). The big idea: How to start an entrepreneurial revolution. Harvard Business Review, 88(6), 40-51.

Jucevicius, G., Juceviciene, R., Gaidelys, V., & Kalman, A. (2016). The emerging innovation ecosystems and “valley of death”: Towards the combination of entrepreneurial and institutional approaches. Engineering Economics, 27(4), 430-438. doi:10.5755/j01.ee.27.4.14403

Kraus, S., Ribeiro-Soriano, D., & Schüssler, M. (2018). Fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) in entrepreneurship and innovation research: The rise of a method. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 14(1), 15-33. doi:10.1007/s11365-017-0461-8

Lerner, J. (2002). When bureaucrats meet entrepreneurs: The design of effective public venture capital programmes. The Economic Journal, 112(477), F73-F84. doi:10.1111/1468-0297.00684

Martin, R., & Sunley, P. (2003). Deconstructing clusters: Chaotic concept or policy panacea? Journal of Economic Geography, 3(1), 5-35. doi:10.1093/jeg/3.1.5

Mason, C., & Brown, R. (2014). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and growth oriented entrepreneurship. Recuperado de http://lib.davender.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Entrepreneurial-ecosystems-OECD.pdf

Motoyama, Y., & Danley, B. (2012). An analysis of the geography of entrepreneurship: Understanding the geographic trends of Inc. 500 companies over thirty years at the State and Metropolitan levels. Kansas City, USA: Kauffman Foundation. Recuperado de https://www.kauffman.org/~/media/kauffman_org/research%20reports%20and%20covers/2012/09/inc_geography.pdf

Neto, J., Farias, J. Filho, & Quelhas, O. (2014). Raising financial resources for small and medium enterprises: A multiple case study with Brazilian venture capital funds in the cities of Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo. International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, 8(1), 77-91. doi:10.1504/ijisd.2014.059223

Nicotra, M., Romano, M., Giudice, M., & Schillaci, C. (2018). The causal relation between entrepreneurial ecosystem and productive entrepreneurship: A measurement framework. Journal of Technology Transfer, 43(3), 640-673. doi:10.1007/s10961-017-9628-2

Patton, D., & Kenney, M. (2010). The role of the university in the genesis and evolution of research-based clusters. In D. Fornahl, S. Henn, & M.-P. Menzel (Eds.), Emerging clusters: Theoretical, empirical and political perspectives on the initial stage of cluster evolution (pp. 214- 38). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

Qian, H., & Haynes, K. (2014). Beyond innovation: The small business innovation research program as entrepreneurship policy. Journal of Technology Transfer, 39(4), 524-543. doi:10.1007/s10961-013-9323-x

Radosevic, S., & Yoruk, E. (2013). Entrepreneurial propensity of innovation systems: Theory, methodology and evidence. Research Policy, 42(5), 1015-1038. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2013.01.011

Ragin, C. (1987). Comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Berkeley, USA: University of California Press.

Ragin, C. (2006). Set relations in social research: Evaluating their consistency and coverage. Political Analysis, 14(3), 291-310. doi:10.1093/pan/mpj019

Ragin, C. (2008). Redesigning social inquiry: Fuzzy sets and beyond. Chicago, USA: University of Chicago Press.

Schneider, C. Q., & Wagemann, C. (2012). Set-theoretic methods for the social sciences: A guide to qualitative comparative analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

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

Stam, E. (2015). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and regional policy: A sympathetic critique. European Planning Studies, 23(9), 1759-1769. doi:10.1080/09654313.2015.1061484

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. doi:10.1177/096977649500200301

Stuart, T., & Sorenson, O. (2003). The geography of opportunity: Spatial heterogeneity in founding rates and the performance of biotechnology firms. Research Policy, 32(2), 229-253. doi:1016/ S0048-7333(02)00098-7

Wallsten, S. (2001). An empirical test of geographic knowledge spillovers using geographic information systems and firm-level data. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 31(5), 571-599.

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

World Economic Forum. (2018). These are the world’s most innovative cities, and here’s why. Recuperado de https://www.weforum.org/ agenda/2018/01/worlds-most-innovative-cities-jll/

Artigos mais lidos escritos pelo mesmo(s) autor(es)