Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The lineages of the entrepreneurial ecosystem approach

  • Published:
Small Business Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In its most abstract sense, an ecosystem is a biotic community, encompassing its physical environment, and all the interactions possible in the complex of living and nonliving components. Economics has always been about systems that explain differential output and outcomes. However, economics has generally ignored the role of entrepreneurship in economic systems, just as entrepreneurship studies have largely overlooked the role of systems in explaining the prevalence and performance of entrepreneurship. The entrepreneurial ecosystem approach has the promise to correct these shortcomings. Its two dominant lineages are the regional development literature and the strategy literature. Both lineages share common roots in ecological systems thinking, providing fresh insights into the interdependence of actors in a particular community to create new value. But studies of both regional development and strategic management have largely ignored the role of entrepreneurs in new value creation. In this paper, we will outline contributions to the entrepreneurial ecosystem approach and conclude with a promising new line of research to our understanding of the emergence, growth, and context of start-ups that have achieved great impact by developing new platforms.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Even though most of the spatial econometric analyses of industrial clusters have focused on the spatial concentration of single industries (Glaeser et al. 1992), more recently, they started focusing on related industries (Frenken et al. 2007).

  2. Also see https://info.kpmg.us/content/dam/info/tech-innovation/disruptive-tech-2017-part1.pdf

References

  • Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2013). Why nations fail: the origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. Crown Business.

  • Acs, Z. J., & Audretsch, D. B. (1988). Innovation in large and small firms: an empirical analysis. American Economic Review, 78, 678–690.

    Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z. J., Astebro, T., Audretsch, D., & Robinson, D. T. (2016). Public policy to promote entrepreneurship: a call to arms. Small Business Economics, 47(1), 35–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z. J., Autio, E., & Szerb, L. (2014). National systems of entrepreneurship: measurement issues and policy implications. Research Policy, 43(1), 476–494.

  • Acs, Z. J, Estrin, S., Mickziewicz, T. & Szerb, L. (2017). Institutions, entrepreneruship and growth: the role of national entrepreneruial ecosystems, London School of Economics, SSRN. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2912453.

  • Adner, R. (2017). Ecosystem as structure. an actionable construct for strategy. Journal of Management, 43(1), 39–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adner, R., Oxley, J. E., & Silverman, B. S. (Eds.). (2013). Collaboration and competition in business ecosystems. Advances in Strategic Management, Volume 30. Bingley: Emerald.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adner, R., & Kapoor, R. (2010). Value creation in innovation ecosystems: how the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations. Strategic Management Journal, 31(3), 306–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anselin, L., Varga, A., & Acs, Z. J. (1997). Local geographic spillovers between university research and high technology innovations. Journal of Urban Economics, 42, 422–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amin, A., & Thrift, N. (1994). Globalization, institutions, and regional development in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., & Lehmann, E. E. (2014). Corporate governance and entrepreneurial firms. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 10(1/2), 1–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., Kuratko, D., & Link, A. (2015). Making sense of the elusive paradigm of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 45(4), 713–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Autio, E., & Thomas, L. (2014). Innovation ecosystems. The Oxford Handbook of Innovation Management, (pp 204–288). Oxford: Oxford Universitys Press, not scientific publishers

  • Autio, E., & Thomas, L. D. W. (2016). Tilting the playing field: towards an endogenous strategic action theory of ecosystem. In S. Nambisan (Ed.), Tilting the playing field: towards an endogenous strategic action theory of ecosystem creation. New Jersey: World Scientific Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auerswald, P. & Dani. (2017). The adaptive lifecycle of entrepreneurial ecosystems: the biotechnology cluster, Small Business Economics (this issue).

  • Bain, J. S. (1959). Industrial organization. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becattini, G. (1990). The Marshallian industrial district as a socio-economic notion. In F. Pyke, G. Becattini, & W. Sengenberger (Eds.), Industrial districts and inter-firm co-operation in Italy. Geneva: International Institute for Labour Studies.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown & Mason, (2017) “Looking inside the spiky bits: a critical review and conceptualization, small business economics (this issue).

  • Bruns, Bosma, N., Sanders, M. & Schramm (2017), Searching for the existence of entrepreneurial ecosystems, small business economics, (this issue).

  • Coase, R. (1937). The nature of the firm. Economica, new series, 4(16), 386–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, P., Gomez Uranga, M., & Etxebarria, G. (1997). Regional innovation systems: institutional and organizational dimensions. Research Policy, 26, 475–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, S., Haltiwanger, J., & Schuh, D. (1996). Job creating and job destruction. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, D. S., & Schmalensee, R. (2016). Matchmakers: the new economics of multisided platforms. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felf, B. 2012. Start-up communities: Building an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem in your city. John Wiley & Sons, NJ.

  • Florida, R. (2004). The rise of the creative class. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frenken, K., Van Oort, F., & Verburg, T. (2007). Related variety, unrelated variety and regional economic growth. Regional Studies, 41(5), 685–697.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gawer, A., & Cusumano, M. A. (2002). Platform leadership: how Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco drive industry innovation. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaeser, E. J., Kallal, H. D., Scheinkman, J. A., & Shleifer, A. (1992). Journal of Political Economy, 100(6), 1126–1152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henrekson, M., & Johansson, D. (2008). Competencies and institutions fostering high-growth firms. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 5(1), 1–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henrekson, M., & Sanandaji, T. (2014). Small business activity does not measure entrepreneurship. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(5), 1760–1765.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iansiti, M., & Levien, R. (2004). The keystone advantage: what the new dynamics of business ecosystems mean for strategy, innovation, and sustainability. Cambridge: Harvard Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isenberg, D. (2010). How to Start an Entrepreneurial Revolution, Harvard Business Review, June, 41–51.

  • Jacobides, M. G., Knudsen, T., & Augier, M. (2006). Benefiting from innovation: value creation, value appropriation and the role of industry architectures. Research Policy, 35(8), 1200–1221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, W., Badr, Y., & Biennier, F. (2012). Digital ecosystems: challenges and prospects. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Management of Emergent Digital EcoSystems (117–122). ACM.

  • Kuratko, Fisher, Bloodgood & Hornsby. (2017). The Paradox of New Venture Legitimation in an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem, Small Business Economics (this issue).

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, C., & Brown, R. (2013). Creating good public policy to support high-growth firms. Small Business Economics, 40(2), 211–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. (2015). Campus as frontier: high growth student at U.S. colleges and universities. Doctoral Dissertation, School of Public Policy, George Mason University, Fairfax Virginia.

  • Miller, D. & Acs, Z. J. (2017). The Campus as Entrepreneurial Ecosystem: The University of Chicago, Small Business Economics (this issue).

  • Moore, J. F., (1993). Predators and Prey: A New Ecology of Competition, Harvard Business Review, 71(30, 76.

  • Moore, J. (1996). The death of competition: leadership and strategy in the age of business ecosystems. New York: HarperBusiness.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, G. G., & Van Alstyne, M. W. (2005). Two-sided network effects: a theory of information product design. Management Science, 51(10), 1494–1504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitelis, C. (2012). Clusters, entrepreneurial ecosystem co-creation, and appropriability: a conceptual framework. Industrial and Corporate Change, 21(6), 1359–1388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (1998). On competition. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rochet, J. C., & Tirole, J. (2003). Platform competition in two-sided markets. Journal of the European Economic Association, 1(4), 990–1029.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rochet, J.-C., & J. Tirole. (2006). Two-sided markets: where we stand, Rand Journal of Economics, 37(3).

  • Shane, S., & Venkatraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25, 217–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stam, E. (2015). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and regional policy: a sympathetic critique. European Planning Studies. 1–11.

  • Stam, E. (2013). Knowledge and entrepreneurial employees: a country level analysis. Small Business Economics, 41(4), 887–898.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stam, E., & Spigel, B. (2017). Entrepreneurial ecosystems. In R. Blackburn, D. De Clercq, J. Heinonen, & Z. Wang (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Small Business and Entrepreneurship. London: SAGE. forthcoming.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stam, E. & Saberi, S. (2017). Unicorns around the globe. StartupJuncture.

  • Stangler, D., & Bell-Masterson, J. (2015). Measuring an entrepreneurial ecosystem. Kansas City: Kauffman Foundation Research Series on City, Metro, and Regional Entrepreneurship.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stenholm, P., Acs, Z. J., & Wuebker, R. (2013). Exploring country level institutional arrangements on the rate and type of entrepreneurial activity. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(1), 176–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sussan, F. & Acs, Z.J. (2017). The digital entrepreneurial ecosystem, Small Business Economics, (this issue).

  • Tansley, A. J. (1935). The use and abuse of vegetational concepts and terms. Ecology, 16, 284–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terjesen, S., Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B., Hechavarria, D., Stam, E., and White, R. (2017) Entrepreneurial ecosystems: the search for performance, University of Tampa, unpublished.

  • Turner, F. (1894) The Significance of the frontier in American history. Madison: State Historical Society of Wisconsin

  • Uzunca, B., Sharapov, S., & Tee, R. (2016). Competition and cooperation in ecosystems: how industry evolution and governance inseparability shape value capture over time. Working paper.

  • Williamson, P., & De Meyer, A. (2012). Ecosystem advantage. California Management Review, 55(1), 24–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., & Nambisan, S. (2011). Entrepreneurship in global innovation ecosystems. AMS Review, 1(1), 4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Bilgehan Uzunca for useful suggestions on an earlier version of this introduction.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. George Mason University, 3351 Fairfax Dr., MS 3B1, Arlington, VA, 22201, USA

    Zoltan J. Acs

  2. Utrecht University School of Economics, Kriekenpitplein 21-22, PO Box 80125, Utrecht, TC, 3508, The Netherlands

    Erik Stam

  3. Saïd Business School, University of Oxford, Kriekenpitplein 21-22, PO Box 80125, Oxford, TC, 3508, United Kingdom

    Erik Stam

  4. Institute for Development Strategies, Indiana University, 1315 E 10th Avenue, SPEA Suite 201, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA

    David B. Audretsch

  5. The University of Adelaide, Level 5, Nexus 10 Building Cnr Pulteney St and North Terrace, Adelaide, SA, 5005, Australia

    Allan O’Connor

Authors
  1. Zoltan J. Acs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Erik Stam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David B. Audretsch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Allan O’Connor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zoltan J. Acs.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Acs, Z.J., Stam, E., Audretsch, D.B. et al. The lineages of the entrepreneurial ecosystem approach. Small Bus Econ 49, 1–10 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9864-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9864-8

Keywords

JEL

Search

Navigation