Knowledge created outside the firm, but within the same region, is a key enabler of high-growth firms. This paper develops an entrepreneurial ecosystems conceptual framework focussing on knowledge spillovers and regional absorptive capacity, to account for interregional differences in high-growth firm rates. This is tested using panel data from 378 regions in Great Britain. Knowledge creation (SME-engaging and research-intensive universities, innovative firms) and knowledge spillovers (primarily through vertically related industries) reveal to be of key importance. Other key regional enablers of high growth firms pertain to entrepreneurship culture, talent, intermediate services, networks, finance and demand growth.
AcsZ. J.MuellerP. (2008). Employment effects of business dynamics: Mice, Gazelles and Elephants. Small Business Economics, 30(1), 85–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-007-9052-3
3.
AcsZ. J.AudretschD. B.LehmannE. E. (2013). The knowledge Spillover theory of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 41(4), 757–774. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-013-9505-9
4.
AcsZ. J.StamE.AudretschD. B.O’ConnorA. (2017). The lineages of the entrepreneurial ecosystem approach. Small Business Economics, 49(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9864-8
AlvedalenJ.BoschmaR. (2017). A critical review of entrepreneurial ecosystems research: towards a future research agenda. European Planning Studies, 25(6), 887–903. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2017.1299694
7.
AlvesA. C.FischerB. B.VonortasN. S. (2021). Ecosystems of entrepreneurship: Configurations and critical dimensions. Annals of Regional Science, 67(1), 73–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-020-01041-y
8.
Anyadike-DanesM.BonnerK.HartM. (2009). Measuring business growth: high growth firms and their contribution to employment in the UK. Research Report MBG/35. NESTA.
AudretschD. B. (2012). Determinants of high-growth entrepreneurship. Report prepared for the OECD/DBA International Workshop on ―High-growth firms: local policies and local determinants.
11.
AudretschD. B.BelitskiM. (2017). Entrepreneurial ecosystems in cities: Establishing the framework conditions. Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(5), 1030–1051. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9473-8
12.
AudretschD. B.BelitskiM. (2021). Towards an entrepreneurial ecosystem typology for regional economic development: the role of creative class and entrepreneurship. Regional Studies, 55(4), 735–756. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2020.1854711
13.
AudretschD. B.LehmannE. (2005a). Mansfield’s missing link: The impact of knowledge Spillovers on firm growth. Journal of Technology Transfer, 30(1), 207–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-004-4367-6
14.
AudretschD.LehmannE. (2005b). Does the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship hold for regions?Research Policy, 34(8), 1191–1202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.03.012
15.
AudretschD.B.DohseD. (2007). Location: A neglected determinant of firm growth. Review of World Economics/Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 143(1), 79–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10290-007-0099-7
16.
BackmanM. (2014). Human capital in firms and regions: Impact on firm productivity. Papers in Regional Science, 93(3), 557–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/pirs.12005
17.
BaeJ.KooJ. (2008). The nature of local knowledge and new firm formation. Industrial and Corporate Change, 18(3), 473–496. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtn017
18.
BahramiH.EvansS. (1995). Flexible re-cycling and high-technology entrepreneurship. California Management Review, 37(3), 62–89. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165799
19.
BallotG.FakhfakhF.TaymazE. (2001). Firms’ human capital, R&D and performance: A study on French and Swedish firms. Labour Economics, 8(4), 443–462. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0927-5371(01)00038-0
20.
BarringerB. R.JonesF. F.NeubaumD. O. (2005). A quantitative content analysis of the characteristics of rapid-growth firms and their founders. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(5), 663–687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2004.03.004
21.
BartelsB. (2009). Beyond fixed versus random effects: A framework for improving substantive and statistical analysis of panel, time-series cross-sectional, and multilevel data. Society for Political Methodology.
22.
BellA.JonesK. (2014). Explaining fixed effects: Random effects modeling of time-series cross-sectional and panel data. Political Science Research and Methods, 3(1), 133–153. https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2014.7
23.
BenjaminD. J.BergerJ. O. (2019). Three recommendations for improving the use of p-values. The American Statistician, 73(Suppl1), 186–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2018.1543135
24.
BERR (2008). High growth firms in the UK: Lessons from an analysis of comparative UK performance. BERR Economics Paper No. 3. Department for Business Enterprise & Regulatory Reform.
25.
BIS, (2014). Estimating innovation spillovers: An international sectoral and UK enterprise study. BIS Research Paper No. 178. Department of Business, Innovation and Skills.
26.
BishopP. (2012). Knowledge, diversity and entrepreneurship: A spatial analysis of new firm formation in great Britain. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 24(7-8), 641–660. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2011.617786
27.
BogasP.BarbosaN. (2015). High-growth firms: What is the impact of region-specific characteristics? In: BaptistaRLeitãoJ (eds) Entrepreneurship, Human Capital, and Regional Development: Labor Networks, Knowledge Flows, and Industry Growth (pp. 295–308). Springer International Publishing.
28.
BosJ. W. B.StamE. (2014). Gazelles and industry growth: A study of young high-growth firms in The Netherlands. Industrial and Corporate Change, 23(1), 145–169. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtt050
29.
BrownR.LeeN. (2014). Funding issues confronting high growth SMEs in the UK. ICAS. ISBN 9781909883055
30.
BrownR.MasonC. (2017). Looking inside the spiky bits: A critical review and conceptualisation of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Small Business Economics, 49, 11-30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9865-7.
31.
BrownR.MawsonS. (2016). The geography of job creation in high growth firms: The implications of ‘growing abroad’. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 34(2), 207–227. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263774X15614152
32.
BrownR.MawsonS.MasonC. (2017). Myth-busting and entrepreneurship policy: The case of high growth firms. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 29(5-6), 414–443. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2017.1291762
CameronC. A.TrivediP. K. (2005). Microeconometrics: Methods and Applications. Cambridge University Press.
35.
CarpenterR. E.PetersenB. C. (2002). Is the growth of small firms constrained by internal Finance?Review of Economics and Statistics, 84(2), 298–309. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465302317411541
36.
CassiaL.ColombelliA. (2008). Do universities knowledge spillovers impact on new firm’s growth? Empirical evidence from UK. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 4(4), 453–465. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-008-0084-1
37.
CertoS. T.WithersM. C.SemadeniM. (2017) A tale of two effects: Using longitudinal data to compare within- and between-firm effects. Strategic Management Journal, 38(7), 1536–1556. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2586
38.
CharronN.LapuenteV.AnnoniP. (2019) Measuring quality of government in EU regions across space and time. Papers in Regional Science, 98(5), 1925–1953. https://doi.org/10.1111/pirs.12437
39.
ChrismanJ. J.McMullanW. E. (2000). A Preliminary assessment of outsider assistance as a knowledge resource: The longer-term impact of new venture counseling. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 24(3), 37–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225870002400303
40.
CoadA.RaoR. (2008). Innovation and firm growth in high-tech sectors: A quantile regression approach. Research Policy, 37(4), 633–648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.01.003
41.
CohenW.M.LevinthalD. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393553
42.
ColombelliA. (2016). The impact of local knowledge bases on the creation of innovative start-ups in Italy. Small Business Economics, 47(2), 383–396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-016-9722-0
43.
ColombelliA.QuatraroF. (2018). New firm formation and regional knowledge production modes: Italian evidence. Research Policy, 47(1), 139–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.10.006
44.
ColombelliA.KrafftJ.QuatraroF. (2013). High-growth firms and technological knowledge: Do gazelles follow exploration or exploitation strategies?Industrial and Corporate Change, 23(1), 261–291. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtt053
45.
ColomboM. G.D’AddaD.PivaE. (2010). The contribution of university research to the growth of academic start-ups: An empirical analysis. Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(1), 113–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-009-9111-9
46.
CombsJ. G. (2010). Big samples and small effects: Let’s not trade relevance and rigor for power. Academy of Management Journal, 53(1), 9–13. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.48036305
47.
ContentJ.FrenkenK.JordaanJ. A. (2019). Does related variety foster regional entrepreneurship? Evidence from European regions. Regional Studies, 53(11), 1531–1543. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2019.1595565
48.
CooperA. CGimeno-GasconF. J.WooC. Y. (1994). Initial human and financial capital as predictors of new venture performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 9(5), 371–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(94)90013-2
49.
CorrenteS.GrecoS.NicotraM.RomanoM.SchillaciC. E. (2019). Evaluating and comparing entrepreneurial ecosystems using SMAA and SMAA-S. Journal of Technology Transfer, 44(2), 485–519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-018-9684-2
50.
DaunfeldtS-O.HalvarssonD. (2015). Are high-growth firms one-hit wonders? Evidence from Sweden. Small Business Economics, 44(2), 361–383. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-014-9599-8
51.
DaunfeldtS. O.ElertN.JohanssonD. (2014). The Economic contribution of high-growth firms: Do policy implications depend on the choice of growth indicator?Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, 14(3), 337–365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10842-013-0168-7
52.
DelgadoM.PorterM. E.SternS. (2016). Defining clusters of related industries. Journal of Economic Geography, 16(1), 1-38. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbv017.
DemirR.WennbergK.McKelvieA. (2017). The strategic management of high-growth firms: A review and theoretical conceptualization. Long Range Planning, 50(4), 431–456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2016.09.004
55.
Department for Business, Energy, and Industrial Strategy (2020) Professional & business services sector: Creating further demand and growth outside. BEIS Research Paper Number 2020/006.
56.
Department of Culture, Media and Sport. (2016). Creative industries economic estimates. Department of Culture, Media and Sport.
57.
DesrochersP.LeppäläS. (2011). Opening up the ‘Jacobs Spillovers’ black box: Local diversity, creativity and the processes underlying new combinations. Journal of Economic Geography, 11(5), 843–863. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbq028
58.
DesrochersP.SautetF. (2008). Entrepreneurial policy: The case of regional specialization vs. spontaneous industrial diversity. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(5), 813–832. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2008.00257.x
59.
DuJ.BonnerK. (2017). Fast-growth firms in the UK: Definitions and policy implications. Enterprise Research Centre (ERC) Research Paper, 63.
60.
EssletzbichlerJ. (2015). Relatedness, industrial branching and technological Cohesion in US metropolitan areas. Regional Studies, 49(5), 752–766. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2013.806793
61.
EstrinS.KorostelevaJ.MickiewiczT. (2013). Which institutions encourage entrepreneurial growth aspirations?Journal of Business Venturing, 28(4), 564–580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2012.05.001
62.
FanJ. P. H.LangL. H. P. (2000). The measurement of relatedness: An application to corporate diversification. The Journal of Business, 73(4), 629–660. https://doi.org/10.1086/209657
63.
FeldB. (2012). Startup communities: Building an entrepreneurial ecosystem in your city.Wiley.
64.
FloridaRMellanderC.StolarickK. (2008). Inside the black box of regional development—human capital, the creative class and tolerance. Journal of Economic Geography, 8(5), 615–649. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbn023
65.
FloridaR. L. (2002). The rise of the creative class: and how it’s transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life. Basic Books.
66.
FotopoulosG.StoreyD. J. (2017). Persistence and change in interregional differences in entrepreneurship: England and Wales, 1921–2011. Environment and Planning A, 49(3), 670–702. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X16674336
67.
FotopoulosG.StoreyD. J. (2019). Public policies to enhance regional entrepreneurship: another programme failing to deliver?Small Business Economics, 53(1), 189–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-018-0021-9
FrenkenK.Van OortF.VerburgT. (2007). Related variety, unrelated variety and regional economic growth. Regional Studies, 41(5), 685–697. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343400601120296
70.
FritschM.WyrwichM. (2014). The long persistence of regional levels of entrepreneurship: Germany, 1925–2005. Regional Studies, 48(6), 955–973. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2013.816414
71.
GilbertB. A.McDougallP. P.AudretschD. B. (2006). New venture growth: A review and extension. Journal of Management, 32(6), 926–950. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206306293860
72.
GlaeserE. L.KallalH. D.ScheinkmanJ.ShleiferA. (1992). Growth in cities. Journal of Political Economy, 100(6), 1126–1152. https://doi.org/10.1086/261856
GrillitschM.NilssonM. (2019). Knowledge externalities and firm heterogeneity: Effects on high and low growth firms. Papers in Regional Science, 98(1), 93–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/pirs.12342
75.
GuisoL.SapienzaP.ZingalesL. (2004). Does local financial development matter?Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119(3), 929–969. https://doi.org/10.1162/0033553041502162
76.
HaltiwangerJ.JarminR. S.MirandaJ. (2013). Who creates jobs? Small versus large versus young. Review of Economics and Statistics, 95(2), 347–361. https://doi.org/10.1162/REST_a_00288
77.
HarrisonR.JaumandreuJ.MairesseJ.PetersB. (2014). Does innovation stimulate employment? A firm-level analysis using comparable micro-data from four European countries. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 35, 29–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijindorg.2014.06.001
HenreksonM.JohanssonD. (2009). Competencies and institutions fostering high-growth firms. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 5(1), 1–80, https://doi.org/10.1561/0300000026
80.
HenreksonM.JohanssonD. (2010). Gazelles as job creators: a survey and interpretation of the evidence. Small Business Economics, 35(2), 227–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-009-9172-z
81.
HoangH.AntoncicB. (2003). Network-based research in entrepreneurship: A critical review. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(2), 165–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(02)00081-2
82.
HölzlW. (2014) Persistence, survival, and growth: A closer look at 20 years of fast-growing firms in Austria. Industrial and Corporate Change, 23(1), 199–231. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtt054
83.
HowellsJ.BessantJ. (2012). Introduction: Innovation and economic geography: A review and analysis. Journal of Economic Geography, 12(5), 929–942. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbs029
84.
HoxJ. J.MoerbeekM.van de SchootR. (2018). Multilevel Analysis: Techniques and Applications. (3rd ed.) Routledge.
85.
HugginsR.IzushiH.ProkopD.ThompsonP. (2015). Network evolution and the spatiotemporal dynamics of knowledge sourcing. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 27(7-8), 474–499. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2015.1070538
86.
IsenbergD. (2010). The big idea: How to start an entrepreneurial revolution. Harvard Business Review, 88(6), 40-50.
87.
JacobsJ. (1969). The economy of cities. Vintage.
88.
JacqueminA. P.BerryC. H. (1979). Entropy measure of diversification and corporate growth. Journal of Industrial Economics, 27(4), 359–369. https://doi.org/10.2307/2097958
89.
JarilloJ. C. (1989). Entrepreneurship and growth: The strategic use of external resources. Journal of Business Venturing, 4(2), 133–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(89)90027-X
90.
JovanovicB.RobR. (1989). The growth and diffusion of knowledge. Review of Economic Studies, 56(4), 569–582. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297501
91.
LaiM. H. C.KwokO-M. (2015). Examining the rule of thumb of not using multilevel modeling: The “design effect smaller than two” rule. The Journal of Experimental Education, 83(3), 423–438. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2014.907229
92.
LechnerC.DowlingM. (2003). Firm networks: External relationships as sources for the growth and competitiveness of entrepreneurial firms. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 15(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985620210159220
LemelinA. (1982). Relatedness in the patterns of interindustry diversification. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 64(4), 646–657. https://doi.org/10.2307/1923949
96.
LiM.GoetzS. J.PartridgeM.FlemingD. A. (2016). Location determinants of high-growth firms. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 28(1-2), 97–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2015.1109003
97.
LiaoJ.WelschH.StoicaM. (2003). Organizational absorptive capacity and responsiveness: An empirical investigation of growth–oriented SMEs. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(1), 63–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-8520.00032
98.
LockettA.WiklundJ.DavidssonP.GirmaS. (2011). Organic and acquisitive growth: Re-examining, testing and extending penrose’s growth theory. Journal of Management Studies, 48(1), 48–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00879.x
99.
MarshallA. (1920). Principles of Economics. Mcmillan.
100.
MasonC.BrownR. C. (2014). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and growth-oriented entrepreneurship. Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development, 1–38.
101.
MasonG.BishopK.RobinsonC. (2009). Business growth and innovation: the wider impact of rapidly growing firms in UK city-regions. NESTA.
102.
MaulaM.StamW. (2020) Enhancing rigor in quantitative entrepreneurship research. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 44(1), 1059–1090. https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258719891388
103.
MoleK. F.HartM.RoperS.SaalD. S. (2009). Assessing the effectiveness of business support services in England: Evidence from a theory-based evaluation. International Small Business Journal, 27(5), 557–582. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242609338755
104.
MorenoF.CoadA. (2015). High-growth firms: Stylized facts and conflicting results. In: CorbettA. C.KatzJ. A.McKelvieA. (Eds.). Entrepreneurial Growth: Individual, Firm, and Region. Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence and GrowthVol. 17 (pp. 187–230). Emerald.
105.
MotoyamaY. (2014). The state-level geographic analysis of high-growth companies. Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 27(2), 213–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2015.1012795
106.
MotoyamaY.DanleyB. (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. Kauffman Foundation of Entrepreneurship.
107.
MotoyamaY.KnowltonK. (2017). Examining the connections within the startup ecosystem: A case study of St. Louis. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 7(1), 1–32https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2016-0011
108.
MundlakY. (1978). On the pooling of time series and cross section data. Econometrica, 46(1), 69–85. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913646
109.
NicotraM.RomanoM.Del GiudiceMSchillaciC. E. (2018). The causal relation between entrepreneurial ecosystem and productive entrepreneurship: A measurement framework. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 43(3), 640–673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-017-9628-2
110.
PalepuK. (1985). Diversification strategy, profit performance and the entropy measure. Strategic Management Journal, 6(3), 239–255. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250060305
111.
ParkerS. C.StoreyD. J.van WitteloostuijnA. (2010). What happens to gazelles? The importance of dynamic management strategy. Small Business Economics, 35(2), 203–226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-009-9250-2
112.
PattonD.KenneyM. (2005). The spatial configuration of the entrepreneurial support network for the semiconductor industry. R&D Management, 35(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2005.00368.x
113.
PlummerL. A.ParkerS. C.ReyesS. C. (2020). Regional path breaking: The role of industry switching, industry diversity, and new knowledge in new venture exit. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258720952288.
114.
QianH.AcsZ. J. (2013). An absorptive capacity theory of knowledge spillover entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 40(2), 185–197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-011-9368-x
115.
QianH.AcsZ. J.StoughR. R. (2013). Regional systems of entrepreneurship: The nexus of human capital, knowledge and new firm formation. Journal of Economic Geography, 13(4), 559–587. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbs009
116.
QianH. (2010). Talent, creativity and regional economic performance: The case of China. The Annals of Regional Science, 45(1), 133–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-008-0282-3
117.
RaginC. (1987). The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. University of California Press.
RobsonP. J. A.BennettR. J. (2000). SME growth: The relationship with business advice and external collaboration. Small Business Economics, 15(3), 193–208. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008129012953
120.
RochaH. O.SternbergR. (2005). Entrepreneurship: The role of clusters theoretical perspectives and empirical evidence from Germany. Small Business Economics, 24(3), 267–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-005-1993-9
121.
RuttenR. (2022). Applying and assessing large-N QCA: Causality and robustness from a critical realist perspective. Sociological Methods & Research, 51(3), 1211-1243. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124120914955.
122.
SchrijversM.StamE.BosmaN. (2021). Figuring it out: Configurations of high-performing entrepreneurial ecosystems in Europe. Utrecht University School of Economics Working Paper Series 21-05. ISSN: 2666–8238
ShaneS. (2009). Why encouraging more people to become entrepreneurs is bad public policy. Small Business Economics, 33(2), 141–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-009-9215-5
125.
SkrondalA.Rabe-HeskethS. (2004). Generalized latent variable modeling: Multilevel, longitudinal and structural equation models. Chapman and Hall.
126.
SleuwaegenL.RamboerS. (2020). Regional competitiveness and high growth firms in the EU: the creativity premium. Applied Economics, 52(22), 2325–2338. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2019.1686454
SpigelB. (2017). The relational organization of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41(1), 49–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12167
129.
SpigelB. (2020). Entrepreneurial Ecosystems: Theory, Practice and Futures. Edward Elgar.
130.
SpigelB.HarrisonR. (2018). Toward a process theory of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 12(1), 151–168. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1268
131.
SpigelB.KitagawaF.MasonC. (2020). A manifesto for researching entrepreneurial ecosystems. Local Economy, 35(5), 482–495. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269094220959052
SternbergR.von BlohJ.CodurasA. (2019). A new framework to measure entrepreneurial ecosystems at the regional level. Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsgeographie, 63(2), 103–117. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfw-2018-0014
137.
StuetzerM.ObschonkaM.BrixyU.SternbergR.CantnerU. (2014). Regional characteristics, opportunity perception and entrepreneurial activities. Small Business Economics, 42(2), 221–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-013-9488-6
138.
TheilH., (1972). Statistical decomposition analysis: With applications in the social and administrative sciences. North Holland.
139.
UzziB. (1996). The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The network effect. American Sociological Review, 61(4), 674–698. https://doi.org/10.2307/2096399
140.
VanackerT. R.ManigartS. (2010). Pecking order and debt capacity considerations for high-growth companies seeking financing. Small Business Economics, 35(1), 53–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-008-9150-x
WassersteinR. L.LazarN. A. (2016). The ASA statement on p-values: Context, process, and purpose. The American Statistician, 70(2), 129–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2016.1154108
WestlundH.LarssonJ. P.OlssonA. R. (2014). Start-ups and local entrepreneurial social capital in the municipalities of Sweden. Regional Studies, 48(6), 974–994. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2013.865836
WolffE. N.NadiriI. M. (1993). Spillover effects, linkage structure, and research and development. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 4(2), 315–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/0954-349X(93)90022-C
147.
World Economic Forum. (2013). Entrepreneurial ecosystems around the globe and company growth dynamics. World Economic Forum.
148.
WurthB.StamE.SpigelB. (2022). Toward an entrepreneurial ecosystem research program. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 46(3), 729-778. https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258721998948.
149.
WynarczykP.WatsonR. (2005). Firm growth and supply chain partnerships: An empirical analysis of U.K. SME subcontractors. Small Business Economics, 24(1), 39–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-005-3095-0
150.
ZhaoL.AramJ. D. (1995). Networking and growth of young technology-intensive ventures in China. Journal of Business Venturing, 10(5), 349–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(95)00039-B
