Motivation for and objective of the special issue
In the last 20 years, entrepreneurship scholars have focused on the systemic and contextual determinants of entrepreneurship, leading to the emergence of the entrepreneurial ecosystem (EE) research field (Acs et al., 2017; McMullen, 2018; Cavallo et al., 2019; Wurth et al., 2023). Valuable theoretical, methodological, and empirical contributions have advanced our knowledge of how ecosystems’ macro-level dimensions (e.g., formal institutions, culture and social norms, resource endowment) can foster productive entrepreneurship (i.e., macro-level outcomes) (Audretsch and Belitski, 2017; Colombo et al., 2019; Feldman et al., 2019; Guerrero et al., 2021; Stam and Van de Ven, 2021; Abootorabi et al., 2021). However, EE research’s tendency to focus on macro-level factors has hindered theoretical advancement on the key underlying dynamics of new venture creation and growth. Indeed, our understanding of the microfoundations of EEs is limited (Roundy and Lyons, 2023; Cosenz et al., 2023). Microfoundations extend beyond the simple notion of 'bringing individuals back in' (e.g., Roundy and Lyons, 2023). They entail linking micro-level factors (e.g., actors, structures, and processes) to macro-level outcomes (Cosenz et al., 2023; Felin et al., 2015; Coleman, 1990). Apart from a few exceptions (e.g., Acs et al., 2014; Feldman et al., 2022; Rocha et al., 2021), advancing methods and theory on microdynamics and their link with macro-level factors and outcomes remains a core challenge for progressing the EE debate (Cosenz et al., 2023; Kim et al., 2016).
Advancing our knowledge of microfoundations of EEs is crucial for the field's development for two primary reasons (Cosenz et al., 2023). First, from a theoretical perspective, the emphasis on the ecosystem as the primary unit of analysis has diverted attention from the individual- and firm-specific factors that constitute the essence of every ecosystem (Felin and Foss, 2023). Without clear foundations, the EE becomes an ambiguous "umbrella concept" (Stam, 2015). Second, from a policy perspective, the limited understanding of microfoundations of EEs has partially hindered research attempts to provide actionable policy insights (Rocha et al., 2021).
Therefore, a call for research focusing on the micro foundations of EEs and micro-macro links represents a unique opportunity to advance entrepreneurship theory by leveraging and integrating theoretical lenses and insights from disciplines as diverse as strategic management, economic geography, behavioral economics, social psychology, and policy science, among others (in addition to entrepreneurship).
The theme of the Special Issue: Exemplar list of research questions
We welcome submissions that shed light on the microfoundations of EEs. To improve our understanding of the functioning and outcomes of EEs, we need to carefully consider the incentives and capabilities of individual actors (e.g., entrepreneurs, business angels, venture capitalists, university officers, policymakers), investigate how these actors interact with each other, and explore the structures and processes that facilitate (or hinder) these interactions. We also need to investigate how macro-level factors (e.g., laws and regulations, social norms, policy schemes) shape these actors’ collective behavior. Indeed, bridging micro factors all the way up to macro factors and outcomes, and vice-versa is at the heart of the microfoundations of EEs (Barney and Felin, 2013; Felin et al., 2012; Coleman, 1990).
Below, we propose an exemplary list of research questions. We encourage scholars to expand our current understanding of EEs by investigating the following two links that ground the microfoundations of EEs and are still not well understood: macro–micro and micro–macro (arrows 1 and 3 in Coleman, 1990). The examples are intended to offer guidance on the scope and research questions suitable for the Special Issue without aiming to be comprehensive.
Macro–Micro
- How do EE macro-level factors (i.e., regulation and social norms, resources, governance) influence the learning and transformation of individuals and organizations (Cope, 2005; Politis, 2005) through changes in structures and processes (Felin et al., 2015; Kim et al., 2016)?
- How do external shocks – such as the 2008 global financial crisis or the COVID-19 pandemic, affect EEs’ primary components (i.e., individuals, structures, and processes) (Siegel and Guerrero, 2021)?
- How can EE outcomes (e.g., the birth of scalable new firms) drive changes in EEs’ primary components? Does EE success breed the success of its components (Isenberg, 2010)? What are the boundary conditions that make it happen?
- Which macro-level characteristics of EEs (e.g., the supply of financial and human capital, social norms favoring trust, favorable regulation) attract entrepreneurs and investors from other EEs, and which ones repel them, favoring re-localization (Bryan and Guzman, 2023)?
- How can urban space design influence EE actors' behavior and favor the development of gender and ethnic minority-friendly EEs (Dutta et al., 2022)?
- How do EEs shape a common identity among different actors (entrepreneurs, employees, investors, public officers), thus reducing agency and transaction costs within and across organizations (Thompson et al., 2017)?
- How do entrepreneurial structures and processes and individual and firm-level actions foster EE framework conditions and outcomes (Shi and Shi, 2022)?
- How does technology transfer management and academic entrepreneurship affect EEs and their associated outcomes (Siegel and Wright, 2015)?
- How do EE actors' characteristics (e.g., academic vs. corporate entrepreneurs) and diversity (e.g., education, prior experience, presence of minority groups) affect EE framework conditions and outcomes (Colombo and Piva, 2012; Rocha et al., 2021)?
- How do external enablers (e.g., platforms, AI) influence individuals, structures, and processes, thus altering EE framework conditions and outcomes (Davidsson et al., 2020; Autio et al., 2018; Davidsson, 2015)?
- Does high employment mobility within EEs (e.g., across firms, between firms, universities, investors, and public policy bodies) ensure high dynamism, capability enrichment, and innovation within EEs? Or is it a source of conflicts and distrust (e.g., increasing knowledge misappropriation risks, generating conflicts of interest), thus magnifying transaction costs and reducing the effectiveness of EEs?
We encourage submissions of empirical and conceptual papers that can provide a unique perspective using diverse methodological approaches, and interdisciplinary co-author teams.
Guest editors:
David Audretsch, Indiana University Bloomington, Bloomington, Indiana, USA (daudrets@indiana.edu)
Angelo Cavallo, Polytechnic University of Milan, Milan, Italy (angelo.cavallo@polimi.it)
Massimo Colombo, Polytechnic University of Milan, Milan, Italy (massimo.colombo@polimi.it)
Philip T. Roundy, The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA (philip-roundy@utc.edu)
Erik Stam, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands (e.stam@uu.nl)
JBV editor
Mirjam Knockaert, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium (mirjam.knockaert@ugent.be)
Manuscript submission information:
The Journal of Business Venturing’s submission system will be open for submissions to our Special Issue from January 1st, 2026. When submitting your manuscript to Editorial Manager, please select the article type “VSI: Entrepreneurial Ecosystems” and indicate the manuscript is for consideration in “The Microfoundations of Entrepreneurial Ecosystems” special issue. Please submit your manuscript before February 1st, 2026. The team will organize a special issue workshop in Milan (Italy) for authors who entered the revision process.
Contributors should follow the directions contained in the JBV manuscript submission guidelines: Guide for authors - Journal of Business Venturing - ISSN 0883-9026 | ScienceDirect.com by Elsevier
All papers will be reviewed according to the standard policies of the Journal of Business Venturing. It is anticipated that the special issue will be published in 2027.
References:
Abootorabi, H., Wiklund, J., Johnson, A. R., & Miller, C. D. (2021). A holistic approach to the evolution of an entrepreneurial ecosystem: An exploratory study of academic spin-offs. Journal of Business Venturing, 36(5), 106143.
Acs, Z. J., Autio, E., & Szerb, L. (2014). National systems of entrepreneurship: Measurement issues and policy implications. Research Policy, 43(3), 476-494.
Acs, Z. J., Stam, E., Audretsch, D. B., & O’Connor, A. (2017). The lineages of the entrepreneurial ecosystem approach. Small Business Economics, 49, 1-10.
Audretsch, D. B., & Belitski, M. (2017). Entrepreneurial ecosystems in cities: establishing the framework conditions. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 42, 1030-105
Autio, E., Nambisan, S., Thomas, L. D., & Wright, M. (2018). Digital affordances, spatial affordances, and the genesis of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 12(1), 72-95.
Barney, J. A. Y., & Felin, T. (2013). What are microfoundations?. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(2), 138-155
Bryan KA. & Guzman J. (2023). Entrepreneurial Migration. The Review of Economics and Statistics. DOI: https://doi-org.proxy.library.ju.se/10.1162/rest_a_01381.
Cavallo, A., Ghezzi, A., & Balocco, R. (2019). Entrepreneurial ecosystem research: Present debates and future directions. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 15, 1291-1321.
Coleman, J. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
Colombo, M. G., & Piva, E. (2012). Firms’ genetic characteristics and competence-enlarging strategies: A comparison between academic and non-academic high-tech start-ups. Research Policy, 41(1), 79-92.
Colombo, M. G., Dagnino, G. B., Lehmann, E. E., & Salmador, M. (2019). The governance of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Small Business Economics, 52, 419-428
Cope, J. (2005). Toward a dynamic learning perspective of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(4), 373-397.
Cosenz, F., Noto, G., & Cavallo, A. (2023). Understanding the Microfoundations of Entrepreneurial Ecosystems: Toward a Value-Based Method and Theory. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 10.1109/TEM.2023.3275097
Davidsson, P. (2015). Entrepreneurial opportunities and the entrepreneurship nexus: A re-conceptualization. Journal of business venturing, 30(5), 674-695.
Davidsson, P. (2023). Ditching discovery-creation for unified venture creation research. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 47(2), 594-612.
Davidsson, P., Recker, J., & Von Briel, F. (2020). External enablement of new venture creation: A framework. Academy of Management Perspectives, 34(3), 311-332.
Dutta, S., Armanios, D. E., & Desai, J. D. (2022). Beyond spatial proximity: The impact of enhanced spatial connectedness from new bridges on entrepreneurship. Organization Science, 33(4), 1620-1644.
Feldman, M., Fleming, L., Heaton, S., Desai, S., & Teece, D. (2022). Uncommon methods and metrics for local entrepreneurial ecosystems. Research Policy, 51(9), 104583.
Feldman, M., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2019). New developments in innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystems. Industrial and Corporate Change, 28(4), 817-826.
Felin, T., & Foss, N. (2023). Microfoundations of ecosystems: The theory-led firm and capability growth. Strategic Organization, 21(2), 476-488.
Felin, T., Foss, N. J., & Ployhart, R. E. (2015). The microfoundations movement in strategy and organization theory. Academy of Management Annals, 9(1), 575-632
Felin, T., Foss, N. J., Heimeriks, K. H., & Madsen, T. L. (2012). Microfoundations of routines and capabilities: Individuals, processes, and structure. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 1351-1374.
Guerrero, M., Liñán, F., & Cáceres-Carrasco, F. R. (2021). The influence of ecosystems on the entrepreneurship process: a comparison across developed and developing economies. Small Business Economics, 57(4), 1733-1759
Isenberg, D. J. (2010). How to start an entrepreneurial revolution. Harvard Business Review, 88(6), 40-50.
Kim, P. H., Wennberg, K., & Croidieu, G. (2016). Untapped riches of meso-level applications in multilevel entrepreneurship mechanisms. Academy of Management Perspectives, 30(3), 273-291.
McMullen, J. S. (2018). Organizational hybrids as biological hybrids: Insights for research on the relationship between social enterprise and the entrepreneurial ecosystem. Journal of Business Venturing, 33(5), 575-590.
Politis, D. (2005). The process of entrepreneurial learning: A conceptual framework. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(4), 399-424.
Rocha, A., Brown, R., & Mawson, S. (2021). Capturing conversations in entrepreneurial ecosystems. Research Policy, 50(9), 104317.
Roundy, P. T., & Lyons, T. S. (2023). Where are the entrepreneurs? A call to theorize the microfoundations and strategic organization of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strategic Organization, 21(2), 447-459.
Shepherd, D. A., Souitaris, V., & Gruber, M. (2021). Creating new ventures: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 47(1), 11-42.
Shi, X., & Shi, Y. (2022). Unpacking the process of resource allocation within an entrepreneurial ecosystem. Research Policy, 51(9), 104378.
Siegel, D. S. & Wright. M. (2015). Academic entrepreneurship: Time for a rethink?” British Journal of Management, 26(4), 582-595.
Siegel, D. S., & Guerrero, M. (2021). The impact of quarantines, lockdowns, and ‘reopenings’ on the commercialization of science: micro and macro issues. Journal of Management Studies, 58(5), 1389-1394
Stam, E. (2015). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and regional policy: a sympathetic critique. European Planning Studies, 23(9), 1759-1769.
Stam, E., & Van de Ven, A. (2021). Entrepreneurial ecosystem elements. Small Business Economics, 56, 809-832.
Thompson, T. A., Purdy, J. M., & Ventresca, M. J. (2018). How entrepreneurial ecosystems take form: Evidence from social impact initiatives in Seattle. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 12(1), 96-116.
Wurth, B., Stam, E., & Spigel, B. (2023). Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Mechanisms. Foundations and Trends® in Entrepreneurship, 19(3), 224-339.