Growing entrepreneurial ecosystems Public intermediaries, policy learning, and regional innovation (original) (raw)
Related papers
Challenging the triple helix model of regional innovation systems: A venture-centric model
International Journal of Technoentrepreneurship, 2008
We offer a critical analysis of the triple helix model as a preferred basis for innovation systems. From a review of the research on innovation systems, it is argued that most models fail to include the entrepreneur and the innovator, as those models are macro-level concepts. It is suggested that this exclusion is a reason for low levels of entrepreneurial activity. We argue that the concepts of the entrepreneur and the innovator need to be treated as separate constructs. Structured interviews show that the key elements of the triple helix model such as governments, universities, and industries are not well integrated despite various efforts. The study shows that entrepreneurs and potential innovators (scientists and researchers) feel excluded or avoid involvement with government actors. The study questions the existing top-down triple helix model of innovation systems, as it discards the entrepreneurs. We offer a competing model based on reversed causation (a true bottom-up) double helix model.
2000
Metaphors matter. Conventional wisdom argues that best practices in developing a regional innovation system dictate a bottom-up focus that emphasizes innovators and entrepreneurs, yet we see considerable resources deployed in top-down approaches that emphasize institutional actors. The rise of a potent metaphor, the "Triple Helix" has contributed this seeming disconnect. We argue here for a more bottom-up Double Helix model by re-visiting a larger qualitative study aimed at developing a regional innovation system in Scandinavia to increase growth venture development, one that has chosen an approach more consistent with the "triple helix" metaphor. Results based on in-depth interviews show that entrepreneurs and potential innovators (scientists and researchers) feel excluded, or even avoid, involvement with governmental actors. Technology-based business concepts are not emerging and new firms are not being created. The study questions the existing top-down Triple Helix model of innovation systems as, by necessity, it discards the entrepreneurs, as opposed to the competing model, a true bottom-up (or supervenient) double helix model. Policy makers for years have been trying to come up with means to increase economic growth. This is driven by the desire to increase employment and taxable income. While entrepreneurship and innovation are sources of economic growth and prosperity governmental policy makers have determined that they can promote venture creation and innovation on regional bases as a solution to unemployment or reduced tax revenues. The idea is new firms will generate a significant growth in higher salary employment-the modern replacement for a 'smokestack industry'. This perception also assumes that new firms employ lots of persons, and that technology based new firms also pay higher prevailing wages. The cold reality is quite different. Most would-be entrepreneurs never succeed in creating organizations, not even half of all potential founders succeed in creating an enterprise, most firms start small are short-lived or at best remain small, change little, if at all (Aldrich & Auster, 1986). Only 3 percent grow beyond 100 persons (Duncan & Handler, 1994, Reynolds & White, 1997, Aldrich & Martinez, 2001) most never add any employees. In fact some entrepreneurs actually do not want to hire employees, preferring often to outsource all but the most critical aspects of their operations. Policy makers thus are seeking how to create jobs entrepreneurially. Despite these not so encouraging numbers, policy makers continue to seek economic growth by endorsing entrepreneurship and innovation as one of the few viable alternatives available to them. Hence, to meet the policy maker's wishes to increase employment there is obviously a
Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and Regional Policy: A Sympathetic Critique
Regional policies for entrepreneurship are currently going through a transition from increasing the quantity of entrepreneurship to increasing the quality of entrepreneurship. The next step will be the transition from entrepreneurship policy towards policy for an entrepreneurial economy. The entrepreneurial ecosystem approach has been heralded as a new framework accommodating these transitions. This approach starts with the entrepreneurial actor, but emphasizes the context of productive entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship is not only the output of the system, entrepreneurs are important players themselves in creating the ecosystem and keeping it healthy. This research briefing reviews the entrepreneurial ecosystem literature and its shortcomings, and provides a novel synthesis. The entrepreneurial ecosystem approach speaks directly to practitioners, but its causal depth and evidence base is rather limited. This article provides a novel synthesis including a causal scheme of how the framework and systemic conditions of the ecosystem lead to particular entrepreneurial activities as output of the ecosystem and new value creation as outcome of the ecosystem. In addition it provides a framework for analysing the interactions between the elements within the ecosystem. This offers a much more rigorous and relevant starting point for subsequent studies into entrepreneurial ecosystems and the regional policy implications of these.
Regional Systems of Innovation in Canada: Two Case Studies
2006
The need for the development of regional innovation systems is widespread and recognised in many countries. Quite a few studies have examined individual clusters with the purpose of identifying their essential components and of determining the conditions in which they may arise and prosper. In most of the literature however, it is recognized that there is little firm knowledge about their development process, and about the ways in which they can be promoted and fostered. The "path specificity" of their developments seems to hinder attempts at identifying specific measures that can promote their appearance and growth in contexts different from those where they already have. Canada's effort in this endeavour, however, seems to be paying off, since the country can boast of several burgeoning innovation clusters, some of which seem to be responding to specific policy measures at the regional level. In this study we have aimed at elucidating the structure and dynamics of two innovation clusters in British Columbia: the biotechnology innovation cluster, and the fuel cell innovation cluster, in order to gain a better understanding of their structure, their dynamics, and the way in which they respond to specific efforts by their actors and promoters
Local Economy: The Journal of the Local Economy Policy Unit, 2019
This paper explores public policy’s role and capability in fostering the emergence and evolution of entrepreneurial ecosystems. While the entrepreneurial ecosystem approach has focused on the ingredients and essentials of entrepreneurial ecosystems, the policy-focused dimensions are lacking, and especially insights derived through the “real world” policy efforts to develop entrepreneurial ecosystems. This paper contributes to the discussion by focusing on various actors’ roles in supporting entrepreneurship and facilitating interaction and collaboration within entrepreneurial ecosystems by taking a participatory action research approach to study the case of ecosystem-based policy in Finland. Findings illustrate that public policy may incubate and facilitate entrepreneurial ecosystems through regionally embedded actors. Through well-designed, sustainable and leadership-based innovation services, entrepreneurs are linked to co-creation processes, data, infrastructure and competencies ...
What networks to support innovation? Evidence from a regional policy framework
siecon.org
We explore how the implementation of a set of policy programmes over a period of six years induced some "emergent" learning effects which had not originally been envisaged by policymakers. This way, we show how policy evaluation can be used not only to assess the expected impact of policy interventions but also to discover their unexpected behavioural effects, and therefore provides an important instrument to guide the design of future interventions.
The role of cross-sector partnerships in the dynamics between places and innovation ecosystems
R&D Management, 2023
The dynamics between places and innovation ecosystems and the role that cross-sector partnerships (CSPs) can play in regenerating places and in revitalizing innovation ecosystems remain poorly theorized. In this study we use two cases-Humber (UK) and Southwest Finland-to develop a conceptual model that demonstrates the vicious and virtuous dynamics between places and innovation ecosystems. We show that CSPs can act as herding spaces-arenas where actors from different organizations get together to address a common purpose and connect with the institutional context-and alter these vicious and virtuous dynamics. Specifically, our findings shed light on four mechanisms that enable CSPs to act as herding spaces and so to help break away from the vicious (vitalizing role) and reinforce the virtuous (nurturing role) dynamics between places and innovation ecosystems: recognition of place-based challenges, improvement or utilization of place attachment, development of purpose ecosystems, and direct engagement in place regeneration activities.
Entrepreneurial Place Strategies: Implementing Enterprise Support and Economic Development Policies
Entrepreneurial Place Strategies: Implementing Enterprise Support and Economic Development Policies", Newbery, R., Baranchenko, Y. and Bell, C. (Ed.) Entrepreneurial Place Leadership: Negotiating the Entrepreneurial Landscape (Contemporary Issues in Entrepreneurship Research, Vol. 15), 2022
In the UK regions that are structurally more vulnerable are less able to respond to economic shocks (McCann, 2017). An economic downturn for a poorer region like the North East of England (Jenkins, Pike, & Tomaney, 2019) will mean it enters recession earlier and emerges from recession later than significantly wealthier regions like London and South East region in England or Amsterdam City region in the Netherlands. We ask, what can be done to improve the impact of policy interventions that support and develop weaker regional economies? Behind this chapter sit two elements of research study: a question, which asks, what if you develop a “great” policy, that is well researched and designed; however, it fails because the people who deliver it don’t have the right culture, values, or knowledge? The second element is that the authors are interested in a range of factors that affect not only policy implementation including entrepreneurship but also economic culture and social capital, looking at the problem from different disciplinary viewpoints (Baker & Welter, 2018). This chapter makes a comparative study between the North East of England and the Amsterdam City region to explore how policy implementation might be improved as other factors of place cannot be easily altered, these factors include major infrastructure, political systems, and budgetary control as well as overall economic wealth. What this means is that practical research and studies have to find factors that can be improved in order to achieve change and a greater economic impact on Places in this context, the North East of England.
Regional Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management: Actors, Helices and Consensus Space
Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy
European Smart Specialization (S3) policies aim to mobilize innovation and entrepreneurial capabilities and to deliver job creation and economic growth through interregional cooperation. The foundation principles for this policy initiative are an entrepreneurial discovery process that aims to mobilize all stakeholders throughout all stages from conception to strategy implementation; government-led policy initiatives for selecting strategic investment priorities; and building triple helix consensus space for regional policy and strategy implementation. However, the key existing gap resides in a proper investigation of such a consensus space that would fulfill the S3 mission. In this context, this paper outlines the key developments in regional innovation and entrepreneurship that have emerged through the process of S3 development and implementation. The discussion starts with an overview of the challenges and barriers and policy response for building place-based consensus space. We look at critical questions that are addressed by national and regional authorities and the localized mobilization of entrepreneurial and innovation capabilities. Our analysis of the regional innovation and entrepreneurial systems focuses on individual actors within the triple helix model of university-industry and government and their interaction for building a consensus space. We conclude the paper with recommendations for enhanced facilitation and orchestration of interregional value chains.
The evolution of regional entrepreneurship policies: “no one size fits all”
The Annals of Regional Science
In the last two decades, entrepreneurship policies have gone through a radical transformation in many parts of the world. New theoretical and empirical approaches have helped to identify better the drivers of entrepreneurial creation, the main actors in the process, and the significant contribution of entrepreneurship to socio-economic prosperity. One of the main conclusions of these new theoretical and empirical approaches is that the drivers and outcomes of entrepreneurship are heavily shaped by place. There is no single ideal entrepreneurship policy formula because entrepreneurial mechanisms take a different form depending on different places. However, concepts such as path dependency, industrial ecology and heritage, connectivity, culture, and intra-and interregional knowledge spillovers are all linked in different ways with regional entrepreneurship in general and the Entrepreneurial Ecosystems literature. This paper discusses the impacts of these different influences on the ev...