نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 استاد دانشکدة جغرافیا، دانشگاه تهران
2 دانشیار دانشکدة کارآفرینی، دانشگاه تهران
3 دانشجوی دکتری جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی روستایی- برنامه ریزی فضایی کارآفرینی در مناطق روستایی، دانشکدة جغرافیا، دانشگاه تهران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Extended Abstract:
Review of studies on entrepreneurship ecosystem shows that these studies suffer from some major weaknesses in theoretical and methodological aspects. These problems have led researchers to use the models presented by some researchers and international institutions which usually does not correspond to the regional nature of the research. In this paper, the key elements of entrepreneurship ecosystems and their role have been identified by studying the subject literature and presented a model for solving some problems.
Introduction
Considering the importance of the ecosystem approach to entrepreneurship, the study of researches carried out in this field shows that these studies suffered from some of the major weaknesses in identifying and employing actors in this ecosystem in scientific research and determining their roles. It's a chocolate bar. Also, these problems have led researchers to use models provided by some researchers and international organizations that in some cases are not related to the geographic - regional nature of the research. Therefore, in this paper, attempts have been made to analyze the studies on the ecosystem of entrepreneurship, identifying key actors of this ecosystem and their role and providing a comprehensive model for solving some of the problems mentioned.
Methodology
This study is a descriptive study and according to the method of execution, it is a systematic study which is done by the qualitative meta-analysis method. Of the available papers, 70 items that were required were selected and used in the analyzes.
Results and discussion
One of the weaknesses identified is the results of those articles that quantitatively analyze their data. The results of this type of study usually have zero and one approaches (there are none), and have provided an absolute view of the issues discussed. Another weakness identified is the weakness of the systemic approach in presenting the conclusions. In some of these studies, key elements of entrepreneurship ecosystems have been forgotten. Meanwhile, in analyzing information, various components of the ecosystem are considered to be effective. The third weakness is related to the geography studied in the research. In most studies, their geographic scope is limited to the place of business activity. The fourth weakness also relates to the repetition of the results of most researches and the mention of some obvious issues. At the first level, entrepreneurship ecosystems play four distinct identities. These elements include elements of governance, education, society and the geographical environment. Although there are large areas of activity for the government in the ecosystem, its role depends on the development of the economies of different societies. According to the results of the review of the content of articles written in the field of entrepreneurship ecosystem, there are 9 actors in various political, administrative, social, infrastructural and economic sectors of entrepreneurship. The most important element in the Entrepreneurship Ecosystem is the state element, which has the widest activity basin. According to the results, the main role of the government in the field of entrepreneurship and the framework of entrepreneurship ecosystem can be summarized in three major political, legal, economic and cultural-social spheres; other areas of activity of this element depend on many areas of activity Above mentioned. Through political relations, in many cases, resources are also used to develop entrepreneurship beyond the political boundaries of the world. The performance of universities in the fields mentioned is dependent on the organizational culture that governs them and the degree of administrative-administrative independence. In developed countries, universities that have autonomy in their training curriculum and funding have an appropriate entrepreneurial culture and have a higher quality and wider performance in this area. Meanwhile, three major factors affecting students, professors and their cultural environment, especially in the field of knowledge-based entrepreneurship, are the main components of this ecosystem.
Society is the third most active element of the entrepreneurial ecosystem, which entrepreneurs are part of. The results indicate that the activity of this element is heavily dependent on the activity of the two previous elements (government and educational institutions). This issue also differs in developed and developing societies. In this way, in developed societies, the community plays an active role in soft infrastructure such as networking, clustering, and physical infrastructure, such as creating growth centers, as well as in entrepreneurship education. While in developing countries, the role of society is largely in supplying capital and encouraging entrepreneurship and in the limited form of networking. This seems to be related to the extent to which community participation in the formulation and enforcement of laws is in place.
Clusters, institutions and international institutions and networks, in a variety of fields such as networking, creating entrepreneurial opportunities, entrepreneurial education, innovation, the promotion of entrepreneurship culture, investment and activity Legal issues such as patents and trademarks, consulting, participation in creating physical infrastructure, and the right atmosphere for entrepreneurs are active.
Conclusion
The results obtained from the review of the theoretical and methodological framework of the articles in compliance with the principles of the paradigm of entrepreneurship ecosystem show that most of the studies carried out in this area have fundamental defects in terms of the ideological framework and the methodology used. The root of this gap is due to the lack of understanding of the concept of ecosystem by entrepreneurship researchers. Among these theoretical gaps, the boundary between the scope of the Entrepreneurship Ecosystem is within the boundaries of an area or country. The attempt to create an entrepreneurial ecosystem is another theoretical gap that has been studied in this area. Studies that have used qualitative methods for data collection and analysis, usually have the results and nature of their work more consistent with the concept of entrepreneurship ecosystem. Only the attention of one or more actors in collecting and analyzing information makes it possible to consider one or a small group of actors as factors and influencers in the entrepreneurship ecosystem. While all components of the ecosystem are effective in its success or failure.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
13. Arabian, A. and Moeidi, F., 2016, Understanding Innovative Strategies for the Creation of Entrepreneurial Ecosystems at Tehran University, Second International Conference on Management and Social Sciences, Dubai, Institute for Managers of the Ideas of the Capital of Vieira, PP. 1-17 (in Persian).
14. Davari, A. and Tavakoli, J., 2017, Development of rural entrepreneurship in accordance with the dimensions of the strategy of entrepreneurship ecosystems, National conference on the study of rural entrepreneurship development strategies in Iran, Hakim Sabzevari University, PP. 1-13 (in Persian).
15. Davari, A.; Saberi, L. and Baqirzad, V., 2017, The Entrepreneurship Environments of Iran by Eisenberg Model, Entrepreneurship Development, Vol. 10, No. 1, PP. 100-120 (in Persian).
16. Farahani, A.; Ghasemi, H. and Mohammadi, N., 2013, Investigating the Environmental Factors Affecting the Entrepreneurial Spirituality of Graduates in Postgraduate Education, Applied Research in Sport Management, Vol. 3, No.7, PP. 61-74 (in Persian).
17. Feizabadi, R. and Lotfi, N., 2016, The Role of the Educational System in the Entrepreneurship Ecosystem and Providing a Model for Entrepreneurial Education in the Educational System of the Country, Fourth Scientific Conference on New Findings of Management Science, Entrepreneurship and Education in Iran, Association for the Promotion of Basic Science and Technology, PP. 1-11 (In Persian).
18. Ghanbarali, R.; Agahi, H.; Alibeigy, A. H. and Zarafshani, K., 2014, The Entrepreneurship Ecosystem Strategy: A New Paradigm for Entrepreneurship Development, Entrepreneurship in Agriculture, Vol. 1, No. 3, PP. 21-38 (in Persian).
19. Ghanbarali, R.; Agahi, H.; Alibeigy, A. H. and Zarafshani, K., 2016, Examining the Content of Policies in Accordance with the Dimensions of Entrepreneurship Ecosystems, Entrepreneurship Development, Vol. 9, No. 1, PP. 39-58 (in Persian).
20. Hosseininia, G. H.; Yaghoobifarani, A. and Afshar, S., 2014, Environmental factors affecting the development of technological entrepreneurship in the electricity industry, Scientific and Research Journal of Quality and Productivity of Iran's Electricity Industry, Vol. 3, No. 5, PP. 8-17 (in Persian).
21. Karimi, S., 2016, Investigating the Impact of Individual and Environmental Factors on the Recognition of Entrepreneurial Opportunities: The Moderating Role of the Entrepreneurship Environment, Iranian Economic and Agricultural Development Research, Vol. 2-47, No. 2, PP. 511-520 (in Persian).
22. Rabiei, A. and Nikravesh, M., 2011, The Study of Environmental Factors Affecting the Development of Entrepreneurship in Knowledge-Based Businesses, Second National Conference on Research and Technology Management, Tehran, Research Institute of Science, Technology and Industry, PP. 1-10 (in Persian).
23. Riahi, P.; Amiri, M.; Sadeghi, S. and Khadami, M., 2017, The Study of the Status of the Entrepreneurship Ecosystem in Iran, Labor Market Management, Vol. 1, No. 12, PP. 85-109 (in Persian).
24. Samadi, M. H.; Samadi, M. H. and Masashmini, M., 2015, Entrepreneurship Development is a step towards the promotion of economic and social objectives of fisheries: the explanation and ranking of effective environmental factors using the Fuzzy Delphi and Fuzzy AHP Approach, Scientific Journal Iranian Fisheries, Vol. 24, No. 3, PP. 125-139 (in Persian).
25. Adomako, S.; Danso, A. and Ampadu, E., 2015, Institutional outlook of the entrepreneurial climate in Ghana, International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 42, No. 6, PP. 566-582.
26. Amouri, A.; Sidrat, S.; Boudabbous, S. and Boujelbene, Y.,2016, Effects of the Entrepreneurial Environment on Tunisian Individuals’ Decision to Start a Business,International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention, Vol. 5, No. 4, PP. 52-59.
27. Arruda, C.; Nogueira, V. S. and 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, Vol. 2, No. 3, PP. 17-57.
28. Audretsch, D. B. and Belitski, M., 2017, Entrepreneurial ecosystems in cities: establishing the framework conditions, The Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 42, No. 5, PP. 1030-1051.
29. Bótáné Horváth, N.; Katonáné Kovács, J. and Szőke, S., 2015, Building an entrepreneurial environment in rural regions: a possible way to develop human and social capital, Studies in Agricultural Economics, Vol. 117, No. 1, PP. 20-26.
30. Chatman, D.; Altman, I. and Johnson, T., 2008, Community Entrepreneurial Climate: An Analysis of Small Business Owners Perspectives, Journal of Rural and Community Development, Vol. 3, No. 1, PP. 60-77.
31. Cohen, B., 2006, Sustainable valley entrepreneurial ecosystems, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 15, No.1, PP. 1-14.
32. Collins, P. K., 2015, Building a local design and entrepreneurship ecosystem, Procedia Technology, No. 20, PP. 258-262.
33. Corno, F.; Lal, R. and Colombo, S., 2014, ENTREPRENEURSHIP & NEW VENTURE CREATION KEY ELEMENTS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL ECOSYSTEM FACILITATING THE GROWTH OF ICT ENTREPRENEURS IN ITALY, European Scientific Journal, ESJ, Vol. 10, No.10, PP. 330-345.
34. Crane, F. G. and Meyer, M., 2006, The entrepreneurial climate in Canada: The entrepreneur’s viewpoint, Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, Vol. 19, No.3, PP. 223-231.
35. Dangi, M. R. M.; Ismail, A. H.; Johari, R. J. and Noor, R. M., 2017, Entrepreneurial Environment On Internationalization Initiatives: Malaysian SMEs Perspectives. PP. 78-85.
36. de Souza, L. L. F.; Gerhard, F.; La Rovere, R. L. and Câmara, S. F., 2016, Entrepreneurship and creation of new business: key factors of Brazilian entrepreneurial ecosystem, Revista de Negócios, Vol. 20, No.4, PP. 30-43.
37. Entezari, Y., 2015, Building knowledge-based entrepreneurship ecosystems: Case of Iran, Procedia-social and behavioral sciences, Vol. 195, PP. 1206-1215.
38. Erina, I.; Shatrevich, V. and Gaile-Sarkane, E., 2017, Impact of stakeholder groups on development of a regional entrepreneurial ecosystem, European Planning Studies, Vol. 25, No.5, PP. 755-771. Evans, D., 2013, Who Do You Know? Developing and Analyzing Entrepreneur Networks: An Analysis of the Entrepreneurial Environment of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia (No. USMA-NSC-14-002). MILITARY ACADEMY WEST POINT NY NETWORK SCIENCE CENTER (NSC).
39. Fernandez, M. T.; Blanco Jiménez, F. J. and Cuadrado Roura, J. R., 2015, Business incubation: innovative services in an entrepreneurship ecosystem, The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 35, No. 14, PP. 783-800.
40. Frederick, H. H., 2015, The role of universities as entrepreneurship ecosystems in the era of climate change: A new theory of entrepreneurial ecology, Jurnal Intelek, Vol. 6, No. 2.
41. Fuerlinger, G.; Funke, T. and Fandl, U., 2015, The role of the state in the entrepreneurship ecosystem: insights from Germany, Triple Helix, Vol. 2, No. 1, PP. 1-26.
42. Galkina, T. and Kock, S., 2009, AN INFLUENCE OF THE NATIONAL ENTREPRENEURIAL ENVIRONMENT ON ENTREPRENER'S NETWORK ACTIVITIES, Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, Vol. 29, No. 7, PP. 1-5.
43. Gangi, Y. A. and Timan, E., 2013, An empirical investigation of entrepreneurial environment in Sudan, World Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, Vol. 9, No. 2/3, PP. 168-177.
44. Goetz, S. J. and Freshwater, D., 2001, State-level determinants of entrepreneurship and a preliminary measure of entrepreneurial climate, Economic Development Quarterly, Vol. 15, No.1, PP. 58-70.
45. Goi, H. C. and Takeru, O. H. E., 2010, Entrepreneurship Ecosystem in ASEAN Universities Based on COBLAS Program.
46. Grichnik, D. and Vogel, P., 2014, Essay. The Swiss Entrepreneurship Ecosystem: From Innovation to Market.
47. Guan, X. L. and Gao, B., 2014, Study on Interspecific Coordination Effect within the Entrepreneurship Ecosystem, In Applied Mechanics and Materials, Vol. 675, PP. 1032-1035. Trans Tech Publications.
48. Harrison, R. T. and Leitch, C., 2010, Voodoo institution or entrepreneurial university? Spin-off companies, the entrepreneurial system and regional development in the UK, Regional Studies, Vol. 44, No. 9, PP. 1241-1262.
49. Hechavarria, D. M. and Ingram, A., 2014, A review of the entrepreneurial ecosystem and the entrepreneurial society in the United States: An exploration with the global entrepreneurship monitor dataset, Journal of Business and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 26, No. 1, PP. 1-36.
50. Holienka, M., 2015, Entrepreneurial Environment in Slovakia: Multi-Perspective Comparison with Innovation-Driven Economies, Procedia Economics and Finance, Vol. 34, PP. 437-444.
51. Isenberg, D., 2011, When big companies fall, entrepreneurship rises, Harvard Business Review )http://blogs.hbr.org/2013/03/when-big-companies-fall-entrep(
52. Kabbaj, M.; EL OUAZZANI ECH HADI, K. H. A. L. I. D.; Elamrani, J. and Lemtaoui, M., 2016, A Study Of The Social Entrepreneurship Ecosystem: The Case Of Morocco, Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, Vol. 21, No.04, PP. 1650021-21.
53. Kantis, H. D. and Federico, J. S., 2012, Entrepreneurial Ecosystems in Latin America: the role of policies, International Research and Policy Roundtable (Kauffman Foundation), Liverpool, UK. 3-19.
54. Kline, C. and Milburn, L. A., 2010, Ten categories of entrepreneurial climate to encourage rural tourism development, Annals of Leisure Research, Vol. 13, No. 1-2, PP. 320-348.
55. Kline, C.; Hao, H.; Alderman, D.; Kleckley, J. W. and Gray, S., 2014, A spatial analysis of tourism, entrepreneurship and the entrepreneurial ecosystem in North Carolina, USA, Tourism Planning & Development, Vol. 11, No. 3, PP. 305-316.
56. Li, W.; Du, W. and Yin, J., 2017, Digital entrepreneurship ecosystem as a new form of organizing: the case of Zhongguancun, Frontiers of Business Research in China, Vol. 11, No.1, P. 5.
57. Lindsay, V.; Ashill, N. and Victorio, A., 2007, An institutional view of local entrepreneurial climate, Journal of Asia entrepreneurship and sustainability, Vol. 3, No.1, PP. 1-31.
58. Mack, E. and Mayer, H., 2016, The evolutionary dynamics of entrepreneurial ecosystems, Urban Studies, Vol. 53, No.10, PP. 2118-2133.
59. Mason, C. and Brown, R., 2014, Entrepreneurial ecosystems and growth oriented entrepreneurship, Final Report to OECD, Paris, 30, No. 1, PP. 77-102.
60. McKague, K.; Wong, J. and Siddiquee, N., 2017, Social franchising as rural entrepreneurial ecosystem development: the case of krishi utsho in Bangladesh, The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Vol. 18, No.1, PP. 47-56.
61. Mura, L., 2016, Human resources management in global entrepreneurial environment, PP. 418-427.
62. Nath, Chimun Kumar,2008, Creating entrepreneurial environment through NGO: A case study , International NGO Journal, Vol. 3, No. 8, PP. 130-142.
63. Neck, H. M.; Meyer, G. D.; Cohen, B. and Corbett, A. C., 2004, An entrepreneurial system view of new venture creation, Journal of Small Business Management, 42, No.2, PP. 190-208.
64. Nistorescu, T. and Fundeanu, D., 2017, Emprical Research on the characterristics of clusters in romania and the impact on the entrepreneurial environment, Management & Marketing Journal, Vol. 15, No. 1, PP. 23-39.
65. Ortiz-Medina, L.; Fernández-Ahumada, E.; Lara-Vélez, P.; Taguas, E. V.; Gallardo-Cobos, R.; del Campillo, M. C. and Guerrero-Ginel, J. E., 2016, Designing an accompanying ecosystem to foster entrepreneurship among agronomic and forestry engineering students. Opinion and commitment of university lecturers, European Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 41, No. 4, PP. 393-410.
66. Pawitan, G.; Widyarini, M. and Nawangpalupi, C. B., 2016, Indonesian entrepreneurship profile in term of ecosystem and activity: potency and challenge.
67. Petrenko, E; Iskakov, N.; Metsyk, O. and Khassanova, T., 2017, Ecosystem of entrepreneurship: risks related to loss of trust in stability of economic environment in Kazakhstan, Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, Vol. 5, No. 1, PP. 105-115.
68. Rahatullah Khan, M., 2013, Mapping entrepreneurship ecosystem of Saudi Arabia, World Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, Vol. 9, No.1, PP. 28-54.
69. Redd, T. C., 2015, Entrepreneurial Climate: The Role of Online Social Networks in the Entrepreneurial Ecosystem.
70. Roundy, P. T., 2016, Start-up Community Narratives: The Discursive Construction of Entrepreneurial Ecosystems, The Journal of Entrepreneurship, Vol. 25, No. 2, PP. 232-248.
71. Soomro, R. B., Mohammad, K. and Muhammad, F., 2016, An Empirical Investigation of the Entrepreneurial Environment: Evidence from GEM Pakistan Data, Salu-commerce and Economics Reviev, Vol. 2, No. 02, PP. 76-95.
72. Spigel, B., 2017, The relational organization of entrepreneurial ecosystems, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 41, No.1, PP. 49-72.
73. Stam, E., 2015, Entrepreneurial ecosystems and regional policy: a sympathetic critique, European Planning Studies, Vol. 23, No.9, PP. 1759-1769.
74. Suresh, J. and Ramraj, R., 2012, Entrepreneurial ecosystem: Case study on the influence of environmental factors on entrepreneurial success, European Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 4, No. 16, PP. 95-101.
75. Szerb, L.; Acs, Z. J.; Ortega-Argilés, R. and Komlosi, E., 2015, The entrepreneurial ecosystem: the regional entrepreneurship and development index.
76. Szerb, L.; Lafuente, E.; Horváth, K. and Páger, B., 2017, The relevance of quantity and quality entrepreneurship for regional performance: The moderating role of the entrepreneurial ecosystem.
77. Valdez, J., 1988, The entrepreneurial ecosystem: toward a theory of new business formation, Small Business Institute Director’s Association. SBIDA.
78. Wadee, A. A. and Padayachee, A., 2017, Higher Education: Catalysts for the Development of an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem, or… Are We the Weakest Link?, Science, Technology and Society, Vol. 22, No. 2, PP. 284-309.
79. Zamberi Ahmad, S. and Xavier, S. R., 2012, Entrepreneurial environments and growth: evidence from Malaysia GEM data, Journal of Chinese Entrepreneurship, Vol. 4, No. 1, PP. 50-69.
80. Zapalska, A. M.; Dabb, H. and Perry, G., 2003, Environmental factors affecting entrepreneurial activities: Indigenous Maori entrepreneurs of New Zealand, Asia Pacific Business Review, Vol. 10, No. 2, PP. 160-177.
81. Zhang, J. and Liu, Q., 2006, Comparative Analysis of Entrepreneurial Environment Based on GEM Framework: The Evidence from Guangzhou and Changchun, Education and training, Vol. 3, No. 2.42, PP. 2-38.
82. Zhang, Y. and Lai, X., 2014, June, Analysis on Influencing Factors of Entrepreneurial Environment of College Students Based on PEST Model, In 3rd International Conference on Science and Social Research (ICSSR 2014), Atlantis Press.
83. Zhao, X., 2011, The causes and countermeasures of Chinese graduate entrepreneurship dilemma: Based on the analysis of entrepreneurship cases and entrepreneurial climate, Journal of Chinese Entrepreneurship, Vol. 3, No.3, PP. 215-227.
84. Zondo, R. W. D., 2016, The influence of entrepreneurship ecosystem for sustainable growth on the rural small and micro retail businesses: case study.
)