Paulina Ines Rytkönen, Wilhelm Skoglund, Pejvak Oghazi and Daniel Laven
The purpose of this study is shed light on the underlying forces behind entrepreneurship within a regional innovation system (RIS) in a remote rural region. The authors examine…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this study is shed light on the underlying forces behind entrepreneurship within a regional innovation system (RIS) in a remote rural region. The authors examine the following questions: Which are the main underlying forces behind the entrepreneurial process in a rural RIS characterized by traditionally low-tech, small-scale businesses? How can the development of a low-tech regional innovation system be conceptualized?
Design/methodology/approach
The design of the study is based on entrepreneurship theory. Data analysis followed practices used in phenomenography, a research approach used to analyse and identify commonalities and variations in populations' perceptions of a certain phenomenon. Data are composed using semi-structured interviews and a database composed of company information of all firms in the population.
Findings
A proactive mobilization of regional stakeholders and resources can be an important driving force behind the entrepreneurial process and generation of a rural RIS. Innovation can be generated within low-tech industries turning the rural context into an asset. An RIS in a remote rural context can be initiated and orchestrated by regional authorities, but knowledge brokering and orchestration can also be managed by networks of small-scale businesses brought together by mutual benefit and common interests.
Research limitations/implications
Regional innovation systems theory is most often used to study high-tech industries. But by combining regional innovation systems with rural entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship context theory is a fruitful avenue to understand the role of rural entrepreneurship in regional development, even in remote and peripheral regions. Innovation does not need to entail high-tech international environments; it can appear as the result of efforts in low-tech industries in rural and remote environments. The authors’ findings need to be scrutinized; therefore, the authors call for more research on regional innovation systems in rural environments.
Practical implications
It is possible for regional authorities to orchestrate a development process through the actions of a strong regional agent but also by supporting the creation of networks of small businesses that are built on trust and common interests.
Originality/value
This study contributes to the literature with a new perspective to the study of entrepreneurship and of regional innovation systems. Entrepreneurship research with focus on rural contexts most often highlight limits to entrepreneurship and see entrepreneurship as “just running a business”. A perspective that starts from innovation and innovative behaviour, despite the rural context and embedded resources, helps to generate new knowledge that can enrich the understanding of entrepreneurship and also be the foundation for more precise business development policies in rural settings.
Details
Keywords
Paulina Ines Rytkönen, Pejvak Oghazi and Rana Mostaghel
The aim is to advance the conceptualisation of island entrepreneurship by investigating how the island context, for example, industry characteristics, social context and formal…
Abstract
Purpose
The aim is to advance the conceptualisation of island entrepreneurship by investigating how the island context, for example, industry characteristics, social context and formal and informal institutions, influences the development of artisan food businesses in that context.
Design/methodology/approach
An applied, qualitative and participatory research approach was implemented. Data were collected during a business development process focusing on food artisans in the Åland Islands. In total, 19 business owners participated in the process. Key informants and public officers were interviewed, and the literature was reviewed. Interviews were analysed using phenomenography to identify representative categories, and the literature was analysed using content analysis.
Findings
Island characteristics and context, local institutions, the quality of social capital and gendered institutions influence business activities positively and negatively. Island entrepreneurship entails mobilising agencies to find innovative solutions that enable businesses to overcome obstacles. Most previous research treats business activities as entrepreneurship; however, as self-employment is essential in the island context, it should be highlighted in future studies.
Research limitations/implications
This study illustrates how the island context influences the business development of small firms. Results indicate that local policies (1) benefitting female entrepreneurs, (2) supporting local businesses and (3) promoting locally produced artisan food could generate benefits for the entire artisan food businesses.
Practical implications
Local policies that (1) benefit female entrepreneurs, (2) support local businesses and (3) promote locally produced artisan food have the potential to generate benefits for the entire trade. Policies can benefit from an understanding of the role played by different ecosystem actors. Promoting self-employment can generate benefits for the local entrepreneurial ecosystem by providing agglomeration and helping to solve some challenges caused by the characteristics of islands.
Originality/value
Empirically, this research enhances the knowledge of post-productive responses in the island context. Theoretically, the study advances the conceptualisation of research on the island entrepreneurship context and the local food debate.
Details
Keywords
Paulina Ines Rytkönen and Pejvak Oghazi
The paper contributes to the debate about local food and conceptualization of rural entrepreneurship by analysing the performance of small-scale dairies departing from their…
Abstract
Purpose
The paper contributes to the debate about local food and conceptualization of rural entrepreneurship by analysing the performance of small-scale dairies departing from their relation to innovations, innovative activities and risk.
Design/methodology/approach
The authors use phenomenography to identify representative categories, and to draw conclusions about how these are consistent or different from dominant definitions of rural entrepreneurship and self-employment. The authors conducted semi-structured interviews, participatory workshops and compiled a database of all small-scale dairies established between 1968 and 2020.
Findings
A focus on innovations contributes to differentiate between rural entrepreneurship and self-employment and how these interact in the process of economic growth. Innovations are seldom disruptive. Instead, innovative behaviour is strongly related to business models and to imitation. Social capital and collective action play a key role for the innovative capacity of small businesses, especially to realize disruptive innovations, such as the establishment of a new market.
Research limitations/implications
The innovative capacity of rural businesses can be understood through their ability to break patterns, alter institutions and turn embededdness into assets. Rural entrepreneurship and self-employment are intertwined in the economic growth process.
Practical implications
Innovative behaviour is a significant aspect for firm survival over time, and it is also strongly related to new business models. Most rural firms can be characterized as self-employment, the latter are essential because they provide rural livelihoods and help bring maturity to newly established markets.
Social implications
The right type of support, e.g. adopting enabling industrial regulations and granting access to constructive experiences of others, contributes to the innovative behaviour of small-scale rural firms.
Originality/value
This study differentiates rural entrepreneurship from rural self-employment by analysing the role of innovation. The authors show how innovations and innovative behaviour work their way through the process of economic growth and how innovation can break patterns by turning rural embeddedness into assets; and how innovative behaviour related to self-employments contributes to the creation of value and interacts with entrepreneurship in the process of economic growth.