for Journals by Title or ISSN
for Articles by Keywords

Publisher: (Total: journals)

The Journal TOCs for this publisher/subject is currently unavailable. Please visit later.
Similar Journals
Journal Cover
Journal of Enterprising Communities People and Places in the Global Economy
Number of Followers: 1  
  Hybrid Journal Hybrid journal (It can contain Open Access articles)
ISSN (Print) 1750-6204
This journal is no longer being updated because:
    RSS feed has been removed by the publisher
  • Guest editorial
    • Pages: 86 - 91
      Abstract: Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Volume 12, Issue 2, Page 86-91, May 2018.

      Citation: Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy
      PubDate: 2018-05-23T08:42:43Z
      DOI: 10.1108/JEC-02-2018-0017
  • Technology and talent: capturing the role of universities in regional
           entrepreneurial ecosystems
    • Pages: 92 - 116
      Abstract: Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Volume 12, Issue 2, Page 92-116, May 2018.
      Purpose This paper describes the entrepreneurial ecosystems of three public research universities involved in the National Science Foundation (NSF) Midwest I-Corps TM (trademark symbol) Node. It presents a synthesis of programming, functional structure, commonly referenced university metrics and their limitations in measuring impact on commercialization and regional development. Design/methodology/approach Based on current literature, university data and discussions with entrepreneurship leaders at the University of Michigan/Ann Arbor, University of Illinois/Urbana Champaign and Purdue University, this paper provides an overview and analysis of entrepreneurial resources and education initiatives. Findings University contributions to entrepreneurial ecosystems can be described with respect to infrastructure and leadership, technology and talent and culture of innovation. Four main university entities are responsible for driving entrepreneurship initiatives. Identification of these entities, their respective activities and their outcomes allows us to propose a framework for analyzing and measuring university entrepreneurial ecosystem impact. Practical implications The paper describes the variety of university-based entrepreneurial initiatives believed to contribute to university entrepreneurial vibrancy and ultimately regional development. It identifies ecosystem stakeholders and provides a framework for examining their role and impact for continuous development. Originality/value The research complements prior reviews and empirical studies of university-wide entrepreneurial ecosystems by focusing on programming within and across institutions according to four dimensions (academic, research administration, technology transfer and community engagement) with respect to technology and talent development. It describes similarities across institutions and limitations associated with measuring impact. It provides a foundation for future empirical research related to the impact of NSF I-Corps and entrepreneurial programming in academic settings.
      Citation: Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy
      PubDate: 2018-05-23T08:42:48Z
      DOI: 10.1108/JEC-08-2017-0070
  • The entrepreneurial ecosystem and born globals: the Estonian context
    • Pages: 117 - 138
      Abstract: Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Volume 12, Issue 2, Page 117-138, May 2018.
      Purpose The purpose of this study is to develop a framework of the elements of the entrepreneurial ecosystem in the context of born global start-ups. The study also applies this framework to uncover the ecosystem elements that impact start-ups during their initial phases of discovery and validation. Design/methodology/approach The authors used an online survey questionnaire sent out to several Estonian start-ups. Based on the responses, a dataset was developed and analysed using STATA and t-test methodology. Findings The analysis resulted in the identification of seven systemic ecosystem elements as the main factors impacting the launch and ten elements impacting the growth of born global start-ups. The systemic elements that comprise the ecosystem’s strengths and weaknesses were also identified. Research limitations/implications The cross-sectional nature of the survey method and the single-country context are noted as limitations of the study and offer future research potential for longitudinal settings, for mixed method studies and for comparative country data. Practical implications The study suggests that start-ups should function in a more collective manner to create platforms, promote one another’s products and services where possible and launch collective initiatives to enhance their visibility in the global context. Born globals should engage with their local entrepreneurial ecosystem, while remaining aware of its relative strengths and weaknesses for supporting internationalisation. Social implications Although the local ecosystem involves many stakeholders, this study helps identify key stakeholders that should be focused on by the government. Doing so will help create an increasingly comprehensive ecosystem at the national level – one that functions efficiently in supporting growth-seeking enterprises such as born globals. Originality/value This study combines the two research streams of the entrepreneurial ecosystem and born globals by directly connecting them with systemic elements. This study is, to our knowledge, the first to combine the two, thus making an added contribution by highlighting macro- and micro-viewpoints, with the former lacking in research on born globals and the latter in research on ecosystems. Thus, the present study helps in bringing venture creation and local ecosystem development research closer to each other.
      Citation: Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy
      PubDate: 2018-05-23T08:41:57Z
      DOI: 10.1108/JEC-08-2017-0056
  • Non-farm proprietorship employment by US metropolitan area
    • Pages: 139 - 157
      Abstract: Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Volume 12, Issue 2, Page 139-157, May 2018.
      Purpose The entrepreneurial process is a result of an interaction between an individual entrepreneur and the surrounding entrepreneurial ecosystem. The purpose of this paper is to determine whether US metropolitan areas with disproportionately high shares of entrepreneurs are systematically linked to particular attributes of the entrepreneurial support system' Design/methodology/approach In this paper, non-farm proprietorship (NFP) employment data from the US Bureau of Economic Analysis is used as a dependent variable proxy for entrepreneurship. NFP data are widely used in the entrepreneurship literature. Data on all independent variables were obtained from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey and the Bureau of Labor Statistics by metropolitan area and subject to a stepwise linear regression analysis. Findings The relative share of NFP employment by metropolitan area exhibited a strong positive relationship with percentage of employment in finance, insurance and real estate, median age, percentage of Hispanic population and median home value. It is argued that the combination of significant predictors captures both out-of-necessity self-employment (e.g. low-skilled Hispanic and aging populations) and a self-employment of opportunity (e.g. access to capital). Practical implications Public policies focused on nurturing entrepreneurial ecosystems must account for these divergent explanatory frameworks when attempting to encourage NFP employment. Originality/value The paper has an explicit spatial context that tends to be overlooked in the traditional entrepreneurship literature. The focus on out-of-necessity versus opportunity-based entrepreneurship, and how it is shaped by some key predictors at the metropolitan scale, is a relatively new angle.
      Citation: Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy
      PubDate: 2018-05-23T08:42:07Z
      DOI: 10.1108/JEC-07-2017-0043
  • Entrepreneurial ecosystem: do you trust or distrust'
    • Pages: 158 - 177
      Abstract: Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Volume 12, Issue 2, Page 158-177, May 2018.
      Purpose The purpose of the paper is to examine the role of trust and distrust in social networks within the entrepreneurial ecosystem and to develop a conceptual scheme of the impact of trust and distrust on productive and unproductive entrepreneurship. Design/methodology/approach This study develops a conceptual scheme, founded on the social capital and resource-based view of a firm, by exploring the impact of trust and distrust on entrepreneurial behavior in a social network. Findings As the paper indicates, trust within an entrepreneurial ecosystem has a positive impact on productive entrepreneurship, while distrust within the ecosystem is expected to be unproductive and destructive (or potentially illegal) to an economy. Research limitations/implications The research implication of this paper is that it connects levels of trust and distrust within the ecosystem to the type of the behavior exhibited by entrepreneurs leading either to productive or unproductive entrepreneurial endeavors. As this study is based on the theoretical review resulting in a conceptual scheme, it requires further investigation of proposed interactions. Practical implications This paper offers strategic alternatives for entrepreneurs seeking to enhance future endeavors by strengthening trust within social networks for the mutual benefits of the ecosystem and businesses within it. Social implications This study highlights the importance of two social constructs of trust and distrust in maintaining existing and developing future ecosystems. It also reviews potential outcomes of entrepreneurial behavior and their impact on economies. Originality/value This research examines both trust and distrust (two separate social constructs) as significant predictors of future outcomes in the entrepreneurial ecosystem that go beyond productive entrepreneurship.
      Citation: Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy
      PubDate: 2018-05-23T08:42:23Z
      DOI: 10.1108/JEC-07-2017-0050
  • It takes all kinds: understanding diverse entrepreneurial ecosystems
    • Pages: 178 - 198
      Abstract: Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Volume 12, Issue 2, Page 178-198, May 2018.
      Purpose This paper aims to explore the dynamics of entrepreneurial ecosystems with both rural and urban features, as well as the varied system requirements of differing types of entrepreneurs within such an ecosystem. Design/methodology/approach Using a mixed-methods case study approach, the study examined the Roanoke–Blacksburg region in western Virginia. Researchers conducted quantitative analysis of entrepreneurial metrics and network relationships, as well as qualitative analysis of data collected through entrepreneur surveys and stakeholder interviews. Findings Findings suggest entrepreneurs of different types faced disparate challenges and uneven access to resources and networks. Innovation-driven “gazelle” enterprises (IDEs) had numerous growth-related resource needs, including angel, venture and scale-up funding; prototyping equipment and facilities; and translational research by local universities. Small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) required more entrepreneurial education programming, subsidized main street office space and clearer pathways through the government regulatory system. A key finding was also concerned with the different ways by which IDEs and SMEs accessed key resources within the ecosystem, illustrated through social network analysis, and supported through qualitative feedback. Research limitations/implications Study findings were limited by a relatively low survey response rate from some entrepreneur demographic segments, particularly minorities. Originality/value The study represents an in-depth, multi-methods approach that offers insight into two under-researched areas in the ecosystem literature: the dynamics of urban – rural ecosystems and the varied system requirements of different entrepreneur types. The paper includes three overarching recommendations for policy and practice: improved collection and sharing of regional metrics; differentiated approaches to entrepreneurial support based on entrepreneur type; and enhanced efforts to advance inclusive entrepreneurship.
      Citation: Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy
      PubDate: 2018-05-23T08:42:17Z
      DOI: 10.1108/JEC-08-2017-0064
  • The political ecology of university-based social entrepreneurship
    • Pages: 199 - 219
      Abstract: Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Volume 12, Issue 2, Page 199-219, May 2018.
      Purpose This paper aims to explore the potential agency of university-based social entrepreneurship ecosystems (U-BSEEs) from a political ecology perspective. It addresses how higher education institutions can leverage their embedded role within a community to foster social entrepreneurship, by leveraging adult learning theories of andragogy and heutagogy in (social) entrepreneurship education. Design/methodology/approach This empirical study interviewed ten senior-level academics in the USA, the UK, Ireland and Australia with practical experience in the (social) entrepreneurship and social innovation space. Qualitative methods of structured interviews, coding and analysis were used as an appropriate procedure to examine the political ecology of U-BSEEs and the interconnectedness of its actors. Findings Key findings included criticisms of higher educations’ role in society; financial resources and university impact on stakeholders; the potential of student-based initiatives and programs leveraging andragogy and ideally heutagogy adult learning theories; and changes universities could implement to become key actors of U-BSEEs. Student engagement and cross-disciplinary work is apparently the modus operandi to successful university based ecosystem development. Research limitations/implications Research limitations included sample size and lack of junior and mid-level academic perspectives; surveys could be conducted in future research on the topic to generate quantitative data to strengthen findings. Implications of the research suggest that universities possess the necessary resources and personnel to serve as keystone actors of an ecosystem, but currently do not leverage the expertise available to them. Practical implications All respondents concurred that focusing on students as change agents, and building social entrepreneurship education programs could foster a trophic cascade of increased collaboration, economic growth, political capital and social good in the local and regional ecosystem. Originality/value This study is original in its attempt to build on the entrepreneurship ecosystem literature by considering the agency of U-BSEEs from a political ecology lens.
      Citation: Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy
      PubDate: 2018-05-23T08:42:34Z
      DOI: 10.1108/JEC-08-2017-0068
  • A relational perspective on entrepreneurial ecosystems
    • Pages: 220 - 231
      Abstract: Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Volume 12, Issue 2, Page 220-231, May 2018.
      Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the role of the entrepreneurship center (EC) in the larger entrepreneurial ecosystem. Entrepreneurial ecosystems thrive because of complex interdependencies and dynamic relationships between and among its participants. While the university has often been highlighted as a key player in the entrepreneurial ecosystem, the role of the EC within the university, despite its strategically influential position in stimulating entrepreneurship, has not received sufficient attention in scholarship. Design/methodology/approach The authors attempt to address this gap in scholarship using an expert Delphi panel approach to explore the vital role that the EC plays in ensuring the vibrancy of the regional entrepreneurial ecosystem. In doing so, the authors tackle the question of sustainability of the EC by outlining a structural framework and key job characteristics of the EC director so that it may thrive beyond the tenure of a transformational leader. Findings In analyzing the responses of Delphi panelists and reviewing the theoretical foundations, the authors have identified three areas for discussion: the question of whether the EC director ought to be an academic job, the key skills of an effective EC director and how to sustain the EC after the departure of a transformative leader. Considering the vital role that the EC plays in the university and regional entrepreneurial ecosystems, these questions have importance for the future of the practice of entrepreneurship. Originality/value The role of the EC in the larger regional entrepreneurial ecosystem and the impact of the EC director are subjects that have been largely unaddressed by current scholarship. This is despite the growing number of ECs, the growth of entrepreneurship as a discipline, the desire to foster entrepreneurial universities and the struggle to find suitable EC leadership talent. The EC is critical for bringing together various actors within the regional entrepreneurship ecosystem, creating and maintaining an entrepreneurial culture and fostering co-curricular learning to develop human capital, key benefits that the university provides on top of its research activity.
      Citation: Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy
      PubDate: 2018-05-23T08:43:04Z
      DOI: 10.1108/JEC-10-2017-0081
  • Social-cultural capital in youth entrepreneurship ecosystem: Southeast
    • Pages: 232 - 255
      Abstract: Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Volume 12, Issue 2, Page 232-255, May 2018.
      Purpose This paper aims to explore the contextual role of social-cultural capital in youth entrepreneurship between Malaysia and Lao PDR/Laos, comparing two different entrepreneurial ecosystems designed to identify emergent factors that stimulate and/or stifle the genesis of youth entrepreneurship while identifying similar and divergent entrepreneurial identities and traits among young people from these two sovereign contexts. Design/methodology/approach Utilizing qualitative-based case study design approach, data collections were garnered from 30 informants through in-depth personal interviews, focus group studies coupled with personal observation conducted via purposive cum snowball sampling. Findings Thematic analysis reveals a pattern-based outcome that discloses a variety of inter-related factors within the social network ecosystem that stimulate and sometimes stifle youth entrepreneurship, primarily through the active agency of social-cultural capital. Practical implications Entrepreneurial ecosystem contextual differences between Malaysia and Laos demonstrate the unifying factor of social-cultural capital through social network in stimulating youth entrepreneurship and unveiling practical similarities and differences that can be used to promote youth entrepreneurial endeavors among varying sovereign socio-economic contexts in ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Countries). Originality/value This study specifically focuses on the unambiguous contextual differences of two sovereign entrepreneurship ecosystems. Contextual differences may not necessarily demarcate further the gulf of differences within and between two sovereign entrepreneurship ecosystems but, on the contrary, may close the gap through the dynamic role of social-cultural capital via social network ties in youth entrepreneurship.
      Citation: Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy
      PubDate: 2018-05-23T08:42:11Z
      DOI: 10.1108/JEC-08-2017-0063
School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, UK
Tel: +00 44 (0)131 4513762
Fax: +00 44 (0)131 4513327
Home (Search)
Subjects A-Z
Publishers A-Z
Your IP address:
About JournalTOCs
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-