Search results

This paper aims to deal with different experts’ perceptions of entrepreneurial ecosystems (EEs) from central to non-central regions to evaluate if there was any evolution (or involution), comparing the results with those of a previous similar study on Chile from 2013, and it follows to replicate and improve our knowledge of the entrepreneurial opportunities.

One of the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor surveys, the National Experts’ Survey, was applied to a sample of N = 1,555 key informants in Chile at 11 regions. The author used non-parametric statistics to compare the differences between centrally and non-centrally located experts.

The results indicate an evolution of the Chilean entrepreneurial ecosystem in an effort to homologate the entrepreneurial opportunities at non-central regions since the last study published in 2013. The financial support and physical infrastructure conditions were perceived to be more favorable in central regions, whereas the general government policies and entrepreneurial education at primary and secondary levels were perceived to be more favorable in non-central regions.

This research aims to contribute to filling the gap from the regional EEs’ perspective in emerging economies by comparing the results of the study on Chile with data from the previous government (2007–2009) providing an updated study of it (2015–2018) using the entrepreneurial framework conditions. It is relevant because the government established the “StartUp Chile” program that positioned the country as an innovation hub in Latin America since 2010.

The entrepreneurial ecosystem approach tries to understand the mechanisms underlying new business creation and helps develop tools, governmental policies and support systems that enhance the outcomes of entrepreneurship activities. To ensure a better understanding of those mechanisms, this study aims to contrast regional policies in emerging economies that are designed to foster local new business creation and development.

One of the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor’s surveys, the National Experts’ Survey, was applied to a sample of N = 675 key informants in Mexico at ten entities, seven of whom were categorized as non-centrally located. The authors used non-parametric statistics to compare the differences between centrally and non-centrally located experts.

The main results indicate that non-centrally located experts perceive their regions to be in a worse position than centrally located experts in terms of government policies regulation, post-school education and commercial and physical infrastructure, but surprisingly in a better position regarding financial access, general government policy, government programs, primary and secondary education, R&D transfer, market dynamism and openness and cultural and social norms.

These findings have policy implications for all levels of government in Mexico, which must prioritize the homologation of opportunities for people in both large and small cities.

The replication of a Chilean study contributes to the empirical literature of regional entrepreneurial ecosystems in emerging economies.

This chapter examines experts’ perceptions of the conditions of their entrepreneurial ecosystems to analyse women’s disadvantages, identify which conditions can improve in comparison to men in Latin America, and if the level of development of their country affects the support women entrepreneurs have. The study is based on regional data collected in Chile and Mexico with one of the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor surveys between 2015 and 2018. With a total sample of N = 2,230 male and female experts, the author uses principal component analysis and non-parametric statistics to compare means between genders and also women in different countries. First, male and female experts’ perceptions are compared at the macrolevel and then total women as a subsample are compared between the women experts’ perceptions by country at the mesolevel. At the macrolevel, the results show a clear perceived disadvantage for women entrepreneurs in all conditions except internal market dynamics. At the mesolevel, the findings show that support for women entrepreneurs is better in most conditions for Mexico, which is a less developed country, in comparison to Chile for this case. This chapter goes from studying the general to the particular issues causing gender gaps in entrepreneurial ecosystems in developing Latin American countries. The dataset used represents the biggest data-gathering project in the field of entrepreneurship for the region.

The entrepreneurial education has obtained special attention by researchers hoping to develop better entrepreneurship programmes that may result in higher entrepreneurial activity outputs of students. The culture on its own is one of the main determinants, among others, of the entrepreneurial activities undertaken in different countries. In that sense, this research contributes to a greater understanding of the relationship between culture and entrepreneurial education. Using one of the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor’s surveys, the National Experts’ Survey, the authors used Structural Equation Models to analyse the sample of N =  445 experts in Mexico as an effort to achieve a consensus about which of these two constructs is dependent on the other, ‘entrepreneurial education’ or ‘cultural and social norms’. The results of this chapter show that in Mexico there is an influence of the cultural and social norms on entrepreneurial education at all levels, primary, secondary, and superior. Nevertheless, an important limitation of the study was that it does not differentiate between private and public education, but yet it contributes to the understanding of the less visible entrepreneurial educational levels in the literature. This chapter aims with the phenomena of how teaching entrepreneurship works by analysing the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor’s social environment variable effect on entrepreneurial education. This research contributes to the evidence that the teaching practice under the socio-cultural dimension enables to detect the continuity factors to make an educational transformation.

Universities are increasingly looking at entrepreneurship as a way to bridge theory and practice. This is important in these challenging times when unexpected events and occurrences take place. It is becoming more important for universities to respond in an entrepreneurial manner to new trends to capitalise on learning and research opportunities. The aim of this chapter is to discuss how universities are acting in an entrepreneurial way by responding to educational and social challenges. This will help to understand fruitful new areas of teaching, research, service and engagement that can occur in a university setting based on entrepreneurial thinking.