Exploring Entrepreneurial Ecosystems in Developed Countries: A Systematic Review

Globally, entrepreneurial ecosystems (EEs) have gained attention as enablers of innovation and entrepreneurship. This paper explores entrepreneurial ecosystems in developed countries. Entrepreneurship is a globally important phenomenon for economic development and addressing socio-economic challenges such as unemployment, inequality, and poverty. Systematic literature review (SLR), with the aid of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) approach was used in the items selection process. A final sample of 28 primary articles was used. Additionally, bibliometric analysis was conducted using VOSviewer software to determine publication patterns and citation trends. More relevant and recent articles were incorporated into the bibliometric analysis to improve the results. Isenberg’s six domains of entrepreneurial ecosystems framework, supported by the Dynamic capabilities (DC) theory underpinned the study. Results show that though entrepreneurial ecosystems are prevalent, they face many challenges. However, opportunities are also available but may be difficult to access. Globally, scholars agree that entrepreneurial ecosystems enhance economic development, and they help to solve socio-economic challenges such as unemployment, inequality, and poverty. This paper recommends that entrepreneurial ecosystems should be fostered in all regions to promote economic development and provide solutions to solve socio-economic problems. Local and global leaders should invest in the development of entrepreneurial ecosystems to promote economic development. The original value is based on exploring the dynamic nature of entrepreneurial ecosystems in the global environment using a developed country perspective. The findings provide important insights to policymakers and other stakeholders for developing strategies and interventions for enhancing economic growth through entrepreneurship. Plain Language Summary How businesses collaborate in developed countries The purpose of the paper is to explore entrepreneurial ecosystems in developed countries. Entrepreneurship is a globally important phenomenon for economic development and addressing socio-economic challenges such as unemployment, inequality, and poverty. Systematic literature review (SLR) and bibliometric analysis (using VOSviewer software) were used as research methods. Isenberg’s six domains of entrepreneurial ecosystems framework, supported by the Dynamic capabilities (DC) theory underpinned the study. Results show that though entrepreneurial ecosystems are prevalent, they face many challenges, but opportunities are available. Entrepreneurial ecosystems should be fostered in all regions to promote economic development and provide solutions to solve socio-economic problems. The findings provide important insights to policymakers and other stakeholders for developing strategies and interventions for enhancing economic growth through entrepreneurship.


Introduction
This paper focuses on entrepreneurial ecosystems or entrepreneurship ecosystems (EEs) as a hot topic among entrepreneurs, policymakers, development practitioners, and the media, among other stakeholders (Audretsch et al., 2023;Brooks et al., 2019;Carayannis et al., 2022;Guerrero & Espinoza-Benavides, 2021;Ratten, 2020;E. Stam 2015; F. C. Stam & Van de Ven, 2018;Roundy, 2016).Studies have generally focused on EEs in advanced economies, and their emergence is considered a global phenomenon (Cao & Shi, 2021).The paper adopts a systematic literature review and bibliometrics methods to explore EEs in developed economies.
Recently, the EEs concept has gained much attention from researchers and scholars who are calling for a dynamic and holistic approach to EEs (Fredin & Lide´n, 2020;Roundy, 2016, p. 232;Shwetzer et al., 2019).It is an emerging study area in entrepreneurship and development (Shwetzer et al., 2019).Despite it being traceable to Quinn (1979), Moore (1993Moore ( , 1996)), Bahrami and Evans (1995), Spilling (1996), andCohen (2006), Fredin and Lide´n (2020) argue that the EEs concept is relatively new and untheorized (see also Spigel, 2017).They further argue that it is still in its formative stage, and an analytical framework must be developed to explicate it.Their arguments align with Roundy et al. (2019), who argued that the theoretical framework to guide EEs is still missing.In addition, Brooks et al. (2019) posit that undertheorization has become a generally lingering gap in entrepreneurial ecosystems research, with current models failing to analyze interdependencies between EEs elements.
Researchers' interest in EEs has spawned various studies to understand the concept from various perspectives and its effect on economic growth and development, job creation, poverty alleviation, individual and community welfare, and livelihoods in different regions (Roundy, 2016).Spigel (2017) notes that EEs are essential for making economies resilient through collaborative innovations.Israel's Tel Aviv, the USA's Silicon Valley, and Singapore (named the Entrepreneurs' Paradise by EHL Insights, 2020) are examples of established EEs at the global level (Roundy, 2016).Other areas with EEs include Chattanooga (USA) and Waterloo-Ontario (Canada).Developed countries among the world's top 10 most entrepreneurial economies are Canada, Luxembourg, Ireland, Austria, and the United States (Latona, 2020).
It is not clear when entrepreneurial ecosystems started.A historical check provides different views about the evolution of EEs.They evolved from the 1940s, citing an example of Phoenix's entrepreneurial ecosystem, Arizona (Mack & Mayer, 2016, p. 2119).Ideas behind the development of EEs were realized in the 1980s and 1990s (Stam & van de Ven, 2019).''Entrepreneurial ecosystem emerged only in the 2000s but has become dominant since 2016'' (Malecki, 2018, p. 1).In support, Boutillier et al. (2016) state that it emerged in the early 21st Century.''Researchers, policymakers, and entrepreneurs shifted entrepreneurship ideas from an individualistic perspective toward incorporating the broader territorial spaces.Entrepreneurship studies focused on communities, interrogating the role of society, culture, the economy, politics, institutions, technology, ecology, and other forces on entrepreneurship (Mack & Mayer, 2016;Stam & van de Ven, 2019).Entrepreneurship refers to a collective achievement requiring the involvement of several entrepreneurs (Stam, 2018;Stam & van de Ven, 2019).
The prevalence of EEs is reinvigorating the world's business environment.However, on the one hand, in developing countries, many challenges apply brakes on the progress expected by entrepreneurs.Entrepreneurial support programs are a significant component of building and growing EEs (Biru et al., 2020).Such support programs are commonplace in developed countries.However, they are not always available in developing countries.Research in EEs is less in developing countries than in developed countries (see, e.g., GEM Reports).It is, therefore, important to explore such challenges to open avenues for enhancing EEs.
Geographical environments differ from country to country, with some being more conducive to entrepreneurial activities while others inhibit them (Audretsch et al., 2018).For example, on the other hand, exploitable opportunities are visible, but prevailing conditions greatly influence these in different spatial settings.Developed countries tend to have expanded versions of EEs because of available supports and resources barely available in developing countries.For example, the famous Silicon Valley is in the United States of America (USA).Because of its first-mover advantage, Silicon Valley has attained first-tier EEs status.This status recognizes its hyper-competitiveness, wide scope, strong university linkages, vibrant venture capital system, high technology (HiTech) and well-developed knowledge infrastructure (Mack & Mayer, 2016).Geographically, Silicon Valley is a ''60-mile strip in the Bay Area between San Francisco and San Jose'' (Ester, 2017, p. 21).In addition, it is ''the world's premier high-tech hotspot for innovation and entrepreneurship'' (Ester, 2017, p. 21).Its ability and magnetic effect of attracting high-tech start-ups, it became the global leader in hosting many start-ups entrepreneurs (Ester, 2017).Most high-tech companies such as Apple, Google, Oracle, Hewlett-Packard, Cisco, WhatsApp, Facebook, Uber, Twitter, Instagram, and LinkedIn are headquartered in ''the Valley.''Immigrant entrepreneurship plays a critical collaborative role in ''the valley.''According to Ester (2017, p. 22), ''There is no Silicon Valley without its highly educated army of immigrant coders, software engineers, and technologists.''A combination of high-tech activities has made Silicon Valley an innovative epicenter.
The giant Silicon Valley was perhaps responsible for persuading entrepreneurship stakeholders to work collaboratively for improved results (Audretsch et al., 2018, p. v).They further argue that since ''it takes a village to raise a child, it also takes an ecosystem to build and foster an entrepreneur'' (see O'Connor et al., 2018, p. 1;Peters et al., 2021).Ratten (2020, p. 627) stated that ''Entrepreneurial ecosystems are at an exciting stage of development when everyone is interested in it, yet it is still somewhat elusive.This means for researchers there is still much to do on how to measure the concept and then how to implement it in practice.''Our paper, therefore, contributes to academic debates in entrepreneurial ecosystems.Policy-makers, researchers, funders, communities, and entrepreneurs still need to understand this novel concept hence the need for further debates since many gaps still exist (Carayannis et al., 2022;Ratten, 2020) Furthermore, an understanding of the intellectual landscape of entrepreneurial ecosystems helps stakeholders to determine regions that still need to be developed (Audretsch et al., 2023;Guerrero & Espinoza-Benavides, 2021;Ratten, 2020;Roundy, 2016).Bibliometric analysis of authors and co-author analysis will help researchers to identify potential research networks or communities for possible collaborations.
This paper conceptualizes the concept, and related concepts, constructs, and terminologies by providing an analysis of EEs from many perspectives provided by different researchers.Isenberg's six domains of entrepreneurial ecosystems framework, supported by the Dynamic capabilities (DC) theory was used to underpin the study.Systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis methods were used in this paper to provide answers to the pre-determined research questions relating to EEs.
To explore the EEs in developed countries, this paper was guided by the following research questions: RQ1: What is the prevalence of entrepreneurial ecosystems?RQ2: What are the challenges and opportunities of entrepreneurial ecosystems?RQ3: How do entrepreneurial ecosystems promote economic development?RQ4: What are the possible strategies for mitigating challenges faced by entrepreneurial ecosystems?
The remainder of the paper is framed as follows; the following section discusses the study's concepts.The second section elaborates on the systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis methodologies applied herein.The third section presents the results from the analysis to answer the predetermined questions.Penultimately, a discussion is provided, suggesting directions for future studies.Finally, conclusions and recommendations are provided to close the paper.

Literature Review
The literature review is essential to analyze, explain, and explore phenomena.Additionally, it is vital for identifying the knowledge gaps in the extant literature and answering predetermined research questions to enhance the gap-filling process.

The Concepts, Terminologies, and Contexts
Ecosystems and Entrepreneurial Ecosystems.The concept of EEs was hybridized from two constructs, ''ecosystems '' and ''entrepreneurship.'' In 1935 Arthur Tansley coined the term ''ecosystem,'' explaining the biotic assemblage of the ecological environment (Beugre´2016).In other words, an ecosystem refers to a community of interacting living organisms (biotic), non-living physical materials (abiotic) and their environment, living in a symbiotic relationship (Beugre´, 2016;Neumeyer & Corbett, 2017;Stam, 2015;Tsujimoto et al., 2018).Beugre´(2016) further states that biologists and ecologists agree that the complex and dynamic interaction between the organisms and the environment has an impact on both the environment and the organisms themselves.Merriam-Webster Inc (2020) describes an ''ecosystem'' as ''the complex of a community and its environment functioning as an ecological unit.''The interaction of different species creates various relationships, such as predator-prey and/or symbiosis, to create and maintain stability in the ecosystem (Neumeyer & Corbett, 2017).The interdependencies are dynamic and evolving, thus determining the overall system's functioning.
Furthermore, Cavallo et al. (2019Cavallo et al. ( , p. 1295) provided a detailed description of the word ecosystem as follows: ''Etymologically, the term ecosystem is composed of the Greek words ''o¨¢ixo¨¢ §''-''eco'', which means ''home''-and ''systhma'' -''system'', which means ''complex'', and so it evokes both a sense of hospitality and acceptance and of complexity.An ecosystem is, therefore, a complex system hosting some entities.'' As a biological analogy, the ecosystem concept was used by scholars such as Marshall in 1898, Alchian in 1950, andNelson andWinter in 1982 in the non-biological fields of management and economics (Cavallo et al., 2019).Moore (1993) suggested that ''.a company be viewed not as a member of a single industry but as part of a business ecosystem that crosses a variety of industries.''Moore is regarded as the pioneer in using the concept of ''ecosystems'' in competitive business dynamics (Neumeyer & Corbett, 2017;Malecki, 2018).Quinn's (1979, p. 19) use of the concept of ''individual entrepreneurial ecosystem'' is acknowledged by very few scholars such as (Cavallo et al., 2019).Quinn (1979) used the concept to suggest how large enterprises can develop largescale strategies and innovations to overcome challenges.Later in 2004, Iansiti and Levien introduced it in strategic management (Cavallo et al., 2019).The penetration of the ''ecosystem'' concept in the management field of study resulted in various types of ecosystems, such as university-based ecosystems, business ecosystems, organizational ecosystems, industrial ecosystems, innovation ecosystems, sector-based ecosystems, IT ecosystems and digital ecosystems (Cavallo et al., 2019;Tsujimoto et al., 2018).In 1995, Bahrami and Evans used the term ''ecosystem'' in their entrepreneurship study in Silicon Valley, thus re-introducing it in the entrepreneurship field of study.Spilling's (1996, p. 91) works introduced the term ''entrepreneurial system,'' referring to ''the complexity and diversity of actors, roles, and environmental factors that interact to determine the entrepreneurial performance of a region or locality'' (see also Roundy et al., 2018, p. 2).Spilling's term became the forerunner of the term ''entrepreneurial ecosystem'' (Malecki, 2018, p. 5).Prahalad's (2005) works are also recognized for using the concept of the ecosystem in business.''The ecosystem for wealth creation and market-based ecosystem'' were used as frameworks to express how actors can come together to create wealth through marketing activities in a symbiotic relationship (Prahalad, 2005, p. 64).Prahalad (2005, p. 65) expressed that a business system is the heart of wealth creation.In addition, the marketbased ecosystem framework facilitates a symbiotic relationship among actors in creating wealth together.Various individuals and institutions coexist and complement each other in resilient and flexible fashions to achieve a dynamic equilibrium in their wealth-creation activities.Coexistence has the potential to maximize collaborative action, thus producing helpful information and knowledge and sharpening economic intelligence for business success (Boutillier et al., 2016, p. 54).
Another example is where Teece (2007) referred to an ecosystem as ''.the community of organizations, institutions, and individuals that impact the enterprise and the enterprise's customers and supplies'' (p.1325).Like living organisms within a biological or ecological ecosystem, members in a business ecosystem interact and share the spinoffs of the holistic network (Beugre´, 2016).The metaphor has gained traction and acceptability in the field of entrepreneurship, leading to the development of the ''entrepreneurial ecosystems'' concept also called ''entrepreneurship ecosystem'' (Malecki, 2018, p. 2).
Recently, the ecosystem concept has been gaining traction as scholars use it to explain the interplay between business enterprises and their contexts.It has attracted much attention (Alvedalen & Boschma, 2017;Audretsch et al. 2023;Cao & Shi, 2021;Guerrero & Espinoza-Benavides, 2021;Malecki, 2018).Scholars agree that entrepreneurship is the engine of economic growth in the global economy (Cavallo et al., 2019(Cavallo et al., , p. 1291)).They view the entrepreneurial ecosystem as a ''systemic view of entrepreneurship, " enhancing high-growth entrepreneurship (p.1291).
The EEs concept's growing popularity has led scholars into in-depth investigations.For example, in their research, Cavallo et al. (2019Cavallo et al. ( , p. 1291) established an increasing trend in the number of journal articles on ''Entrepreneurial Ecosystems'' in the SCOPUS academic database.Figure 2 represents their findings on the journal articles and conference proceedings as of September 2017.
The trend indicates that the debate on EEs is still ongoing (Cavallo et al., 2019).This implies that the field of study is still a virgin ground for further research contributions.Boutillier et al. (2016, p. 44) compiled a comprehensive characteristic definition of EEs by stating that: ''The entrepreneurial (or business) ecosystem is characterised by the diversity of players which comprise it and through their shared objectives and skills.It is a system of heterogeneous independent players who, in so-called ''coopetition'', establish a common strategic interest by sharing resources, skills and norms/standards of strategic behaviour, which take many forms (technological standards, shared know-how, shared visions, informal rules, etc.'' (Boutillier et al., 2016, p. 48).
From the definition, the diversity of players refers to all individuals and institutions involved in entrepreneurship, such as entrepreneurs, banks, universities, the government, and customers.The actors or players share skills, knowledge, and resources to achieve a common objective of wealth creation, as discussed by Prahalad (2005).These players work collaboratively, sharing several things, to achieve a common strategic objective.In place of rivalry or cutthroat competition, ''coopetition'' is used to create a business environment that benefits all the players of the ecosystem.Such ''coopetition'' builds synergism among the actors, thus creating a formidable entrepreneurial ecosystem that allows business sustainability.
EEs are similar to concepts such as innovation systems, industrial parks, science parks, export processing zones (EPZs), industrial districts, and clusters (Malecki, 2018, p. 7).Various definitions of EEs can be drawn from the literature.Following their historical trajectory, it is important to provide some selected definitions of the concept.Table 1 provides selected definitions of EEs from the extant literature to demonstrate the definitional variousness of the concept and its variants.Table 1.Entrepreneurial Ecosystems: Selected Definitions.

Author (year)
Term used Definition(s) Quinn (1979) Individual entrepreneurial system ''The notion that historically, western societies largely relied on the individual inventor/entrepreneur for many of their startling innovations could be used to solve problems of the future.''Moore (1993) Business ecosystem ''In a business ecosystem, companies coevolve capabilities around an innovation: they work cooperatively and competitively to support new products, satisfy customer needs, and eventually incorporate the next round of innovations.''Moore (1996) Business ecosystem ''An economic community supported by a foundation of interacting organisations and individuals which produce goods and services of value to customers.Over time, they coevolve their capabilities and roles and tend to align themselves with the directions set by one or more central companies.The ecosystem leader enables members to move toward shared visions to align their investments and to find mutually supportive roles.''(p.26) Spilling (1996) Entrepreneurial system ''The complexity and diversity of actors, roles, and environmental factors that interact to determine the entrepreneurial performance of a region or locality.''(p.91).Lo ¨fsten and Lindelo ¨f ( 2003 (continued) Theoretical Reflection.Researchers such as Moore (1993), Bihrami and Evans (1995), Cohen (2006), Isenberg (2010Isenberg ( , 2011)), Rahabattulah Khan (2013), Koltai (2016), and Spigel (2017), among others, contributed immensely to the discourse on EEs.Several scholars have argued that EEs are theoretically underdeveloped.Theoretical explanations are still found at an infant stage with bits and pieces of models that attempt to explain the characteristics, processes, outlook, composition of stakeholders, and measurements.Different theoretical perspectives still need to be integrated to understand the concept.This theoretical section briefly discusses some models that have been used to explain EEs.The selected models include Bahrami and Evans' (1995) (Boutillier et al., 2016;Khattab & Al-Magli, 2017;Koltai, 2016;Stough, 2017), World Economic Forum (WEF) eight-pillar model (Foster et al., 2013), Funke's entrepreneurial ecosystem canvas (Funke, 2015;Segers, 2015), and Chapman & Company's Chapco Method (Chapman, 2020;Gehling, 2019) which supports business associations (Branham, 1964).Isenberg's six domains model is used to underpin the study hence it will be discussed in detail.In the strict scientific sense, the models mentioned are not theories per se, but can be used to provide a theoretical reflection.To support Isenberg's framework, the Dynamic capabilities (DC) theory was used to strengthen the theoretical underpinning.
Isenberg's Six Domains Model.Isenberg developed the six domains of entrepreneurial ecosystems in 2010.The consolidated domains are policy, finance, culture, support, human capital, and markets.The six-domains diagram helps explain EEs (Isenberg, 2011;Isenberg & Onyemah , 2016).However, he acknowledges a weakness that it does not show a lack of causal paths or arrows that indicate the causal relationship between the factors (Isenberg, 2011;Spigel, 2017; Figure 3).
The six domains or pillars of EEs are briefly discussed below: (i) Policy refers to the rules and regulations provided by the government and other support institutions to foster entrepreneurialism (Brooks et al., 2019).
Policies vary from one country to the next.Isenberg (2011) argues that there is ''no policy silver bullet.''Most policies of developed countries, although different, such as Australia, Ireland,    The Dynamic Capabilities (DC) Theory.''Dynamic capabilities (DC) theory emerged as both an extension to and a reaction against the inability of the resource-based view (RBV) to interpret the development and redevelopment of resources and capabilities to address rapidly changing environments'' (Bleady et al., 2018, p. 1).This theory was proposed by Teece (Rashid & Ratten, 2021; see also Teece, 2007;Teece et al., 1997).The theory is based on the competencies and capabilities of entrepreneurs to respond to volatile environments such as pandemics and economic shocks.DCs are based on three important areas of action including sensing (the ability to identify opportunities and trends to stay ahead of environmental dynamics), seizing (entrepreneurs' ability to act opportunities with agility and dicsivenes), and transforming (the capability to (Rashid & Ratten, 2021; the capability to effectively reconfigure or redeploy resources in pursuance of identified opportunities; Rashid & Ratten, 2021;Roundy & Fayard, 2019;Teece, 2007;Teece et al., 1997).Competencies and capabilities help entrepreneurs in entrepreneurial ecosystems to predict opportunities and challenges and then use existing resources to embrace the opportunities and at the same time address the challenges.The COVID-19 pandemic for example induced lockdowns and entrepreneurs were forced to adapt to new ways of doing business, such as embracing digital technologies.
As an extension of the RBV theory, DCs help entrepreneurs to identify opportunities, maintain competitive advantage and improve resilience during uncertainty (Bleady et al., 2018;Rashid & Ratten, 2021).According to Verbeke (2020), DCs help ''entrepreneurs in integrating the technology, business and strategy in a complex environment'' (cited in Rashid & Ratten, 2021, p.461).Isenberg's six domains are strengthened by the competencies and capabilities explicated by the DC theory.The DC framework allows entrepreneurs to address current market problems in the market by enabling them to redesign their business models in line with the volatile environment thus improving the vibrancy of the EEs (Roundy & Fayard, 2019).

Systematic Literature Review
A systematic literature review is defined as; ''[a] review of a formulated question that uses systematic and explicit methods to identify, select, and critically appraise relevant research, and to collect and analyse data from the studies included in the review.Statistical methods (meta-analysis) may or may not be used to analyse and summarise the results of the included studies'' (Cochrane Collaboration, 2005, p. 45).
Because systematic reviews follow well-defined, logical, and transparent ways of synthesizing findings, they are considered the ''gold standard'' for extant literature reviews (Boland et al., 2017, p. 2).Therefore, extant EEs literature is surveyed to provide answers to the predetermined research questions and achieve the stated objectives.
Journal Articles Selection.The journal selection process was done using search engines to identify peer-reviewed articles.Using search terms, articles for the systematic literature review were identified.The search process was guided by Boolean operators or connectors, search strings, and the inclusion/exclusion criteria (See Table 2).Boolean search allows a combination of keywords and synonyms with the operators to get relevant results.Boolean operators ''AND,'' ''NOT,'' and ''OR'' were used to pass search strings to the search engines and achieve inclusion and exclusion.

Results and Discussion
This section answers the predetermined questions about EEs in developed countries based on selected primary studies.Primary sources selected following the systematic literature review protocol were read and analyzed to extract relevant data.A summary of primary journal articles reviewed and other publications are represented in Appendix A. Document identifiers are listed as A1 to A28.
Research Question 1: What Is the Prevalence of Entrepreneurial Ecosystems?
Data from selected primary studies were extracted and analyzed to provide answers to the question of the prevalence of EEs in developed countries.
As illustrated in Table 4, the prevalence of EEs is high in developed countries.All documents (100%) confirmed many EEs in developed countries.It was noted that in some countries, different terms are used to describe entrepreneurial ecosystems.The terms used are clusters, science parks, industrial parks, business parks/zones, innovation zones, incubators, start-up hubs, and export processing zones.For example, in China, Shenzhen, a replica of Silicon Valley, is referred to as an Export Processing Zone, yet its equivalent (Silicon Valley) is called an EE.

Bibliometric Analysis
To further explicate the prevalence and dynamics of entrepreneurial ecosystems in developed countries, bibliometric analysis methods were applied.Bibliometric analysis is a scientific technique that ''summarizes large quantities of bibliometric data to present the state of the intellectual structure and emerging trends of a research topic or field'' (Donthu et al., 2021, p. 287).It has the capability to handle large amounts of data.The advancement of science in the development of databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, and PubMed has made it popular.In addition, the advancement in creation of bibliometric software such as VOSviewer, Gephi, Leximamncer (Donthu et al., 2021), RStudio, Biblioshiny, and CiteNet has enhanced its usage and effectiveness.This paper used VOSviewer software to analyze data on entreprenuerial ecosystems, extracted from the Dimensions database.
Data Extraction and Analysis.Using the search string: ''entrepreneurial ecosystems or entrepreneurship ecosystems AND developed countries,'' and limiting to open access articles published between 2014 to 2023, there were 10,842 document results.Data analysis was performed using graphs and map visualizations using Dimensions analytical views functionality and VOSviewer software.The analyzes performed were (i) Number of publications per year (Figure 5) (ii)Bibliometric coupling (analysis) and authors (unit of analysis) (Figure 6).(iii) Co-authorship analysis (Figure 7).(iv) Bibliometric coupling of countries (Figure 8).and (vi) Bibliometric coupling of organizations (Figure 9).

Number of Publications Per
Year.The graphical visualization (Figure 5) shows an exponential increase in the number of publications from 2014 to 2021which leveled up in 2022.It is noteworthy to know that there were publications in the field prior to 2014.Bibliometric Coupling and Authors.Bibliometric analysis of authors is a technique for mapping authors' similar research interests.It analyzes the patterns of co-citations between authors, thus enhancing future netwokings (Donthu et al., 2021).
Figure 6 is a visualization of the bibliometric coupling of authors.
Table 5 summarizes the top contributors as demonstrated by the number of documents, their links and the total link strength (it quantify the overall strength of connections within the network).Guerrero, Maribel is at the top of the list with 25 document, 53 links, and a total link strength of 12,836.Belitski, Maksim has 20 documents but has the TLS of 14,834, showing how the author has strong connections in the network.
Co-Authorship Analysis.This is a bibliometrics technique used to determine co-authorship relationships and connections thus analyzing the dynamics of author research collaborations.It is a strong tool for analyzing the ''social interactions or relationships among authors'' (Donthu et al., 2021, p. 288).It is a useful tool for examining patterns in research collaborations, identifying possible collaboration opportunities, measuring how research productivity is influenced by collaborations and examining the social interactions in scholarly communities.Researchers, research funders, institutions, and policy-makers seeking can use the findings to explore collaborative networks to foster interdisciplinary research collaborations (Donthu et al., 2021).
The map (Figure 7).shows how authors are orgnaized into clusters, as determined by the different colors.For example, author Audretsch David Bruce is in the green cluster and connected to Belitski Maksim, Guerrero, Maribel, and Acs Zoltan.
Bibliometric Coupling of Countries.A bibliometrics method for the analysis of similarities and collaborations in research between countries.It assesses intellectual links and patterns by identifying shared citations across country-specific publications.Researchers, funders and policy-makers can use the tool to explore potential areas for collaborations in the global landscape and intercountry knowledge.Overall, results generated using  VOSviewer show 6 clusters, 73 items, 2,584 links, and a total link strength of 1,887,226 (Figure 8).
Table 6 summarizes leading countries researching in the field of entrepreneurial ecosystems.The US is at the top followed by China in terms of both number of documents and total links strength.
Bibliometric Coupling of Organizations.A bibliometrics method for the analysis of similarities and collaborations in research between organizations such as research institutes, universities, think-tanks, government institutes, non-governmental organizations, and private companies.It assesses intellectual links and patterns by identifying shared citations across organization specific publications.Researchers, funders, and policy-makers can use the tool to explore potential areas for collaborations among organizations (see Figure 9).
The input into VOSviewer software involved a minimum of five documents and five citations per organization.Of the 2,063 organizations, 243 met the threshold.The leading organizations are listed in Table 7.   Table 7 shows that Northumbia University is at the top with 32 documents, 233 links, and 42,345 total link strength.The University of Beira Interior comes second with respect to documents, it has 31 documents but the TLS of 49,042 which is higher than that of Northumbia University.Organizations can be ranked in terms either the of number of documents or the TLS.
Research Question 2: What Are the Challenges and Opportunities of Entrepreneurial Ecosystems?
Table 9 illustrates the extent of the challenges faced by EEs.Challenges identified from primary studies used in the systematic literature review include barriers to sustainability, the complexity of ecosystems, stiff competition, lack of capital, poor policies for fostering the ecosystems and poor collaboration.From the primary studies, only 36% of the documents mentioned the challenges.The majority, 64%, did not raise any concern about the challenges.They indicated that developed economies have welldeveloped policies and support structures for the growth and survival of EEs.
Opportunities available to entrepreneurs are represented by 50%, demonstrating that entrepreneurial ecosystems can function well in the environments created by stakeholders.The governments make opportunities available, which create enabling environments through policy and support.For example, entrepreneurial support organizations (ESOs) are well-resourced in the UK and the USA and provide vital support to developing and fostering entrepreneurial ecosystems.Collaboration was pointed out as an essential enabler for entrepreneurship growth.
Research Question 3: How Do Entrepreneurial Ecosystems Promote Economic Development?
EEs attract entrepreneurs who will support each other for improved business opportunities.This translates to  The findings proved the prevalence of EEs in developed countries through the use of bibliometrics, showing author, country, and organization research connections.Despite their growth, EEs still face some challenges.The challenges were identified but differed in magnitude and severity from one country to the next.The challenges are associated with Isenberg's (2010Isenberg's ( , 2011) ) six domains (finance, policy, markets, human resources, supports, and culture), complexity, and barriers to sustainability.On the other hand, opportunities are also available within the six domains, innovation, and technology.

Conclusion and Recommendations
The findings conclude that EEs play a critical role in economic growth and development.Further, primary sources reviewed the importance of EEs in enhancing the livelihoods of entrepreneurs and their communities.This paper's contribution is fourfold.First, it possibly will stimulate debates on EEs in developed countries.Despite developed countries being rich, they still need to have strong entrepreneurial ecosystems for the sustainability of their economies.
Second, our paper adds to the extant literature on EEs in developed countries.The focus was on developed countries to check their prevalence, challenges, opportunities, and strategies that could be employed to maintain sustainability.Our second paper will focus on developing countries.It is an attempt to broaden the analysis of EEs from the developed country focus.The bibliometric analysis applied in the paper helped us to observe a considerable number of publications EEs in developed countries yet there is a dearth of similar studies in poor countries.Additionally, many scholars lamented (e.g., Ratten, 2020;Guerrero & Espinoza-Benavides, 2021;Audretsch, Belitski & Guerrero, 2023) that more research is still needed to understand the concept and to develop sound theories which could be used to underpin debates in the field of study.Third, this paper suggests strategies that could be used to strengthen and sustain EEs for economic growth and development.The strategies are hinged on EEs support programs from the government and other stakeholders with regard to finance, markets, human resources, infrastructure, policy and culture.The discussions in this paper may open avenues for government, researchers, financing agencies, and policy-makers to explore innovative ways of supporting and strengthening EEs for entrepreneurship development.
Fourth, this paper contributes to the provision of a foundation for policy formulation.Policy directions will help to promote EEs in different communities for sustainable economic development.Policy-makers have the prerogative to develop a friendly entrepreneurial ecosystems environment for the promotion of entrepreneurship.Literature has identified EEs as a catalyst for rejuvenating and/or sustaining economies.
This paper recommends the formulation and implementation of EEs supportive policy frameworks by governments and other stakeholders to strengthen entrepreneurship in their regions.Researchers, academics, funders, and institutions could support entrepreneurship by coming up with innovative strategies.Communities need to be involved in the EEs development process and entrepreneurs should be put at the center.This paper is not without limitations.Its limitations include the focus on developed economies in a world of emerging and developing economies.Though it might be a daunting task, exploring global EEs could provide unique results because of the complex variations that exist in the world of entrepreneurship.Another limitation stems from the selection of primary articles for the study.The SLR methodology is not exhaustive.However, the further use of bibliometrics helped us to have access to more and newer publications.Bibliometric analysis is capable of handling large amounts of data, allowing a deeper and broader analysis of EEs.Data extracted from the Dimensions database was not developed for scientific bibliometric analysis such that it cannot be exonerated from errors, which could have negatively influenced the results (Donthu, 2021).
Future lines of research could be country or regionalspecific because of numerous spatial variations related to entrepreneurship.Further, comparative studies could also be carried out.Another future line of research relates to using bibliometric data from other databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar.Though Google Scholar is criticized for carrying gray literature, it is an important source of bibliometric data that can be extracted using Harzing's Publish or Perish software (Diepolder et al., 2021;Harzing, 2010).From a theoretical perspective, the field of EEs still suffers from a theoretical lacuna.Future researches on EEs need to focus on developing theories and models that can be effectively used to enhance the development of EEs.Another future research topic is technology and EEs, targeting entrepreneurs, and policy-makers as the world faces dynamic shifts in the field of technology especially the emergence of artificial intelligence (AI).Policy-makers have the responsibility to create conducive environments for the growth and sustainability of EEs.
Tsujimoto et al. (2018) investigated publications on the ecosystem concept in economics, management, and innovation between 1995 and 2014.A growing interest in the use of the concept is represented in Figure 1.
Canada, the UK, Estonia, New Zealand, Finland, Poland, the Netherlands, and Denmark, support, without reservations, the concept of entrepreneurial ecosystems(Brown & Mawson, 2019).Their policies focus on creating entrepreneurial ecosystems to foster entrepreneurship activities in their economies.The sub-elements under the policy are leadership and government.Leadership entails the willingness of leaders to lead, providing unequivocal support, advocacy, and development of entrepreneurship strategy to foster entrepreneurial ecosystems(Morant- Martı´nez et al., 2019).Government entails institutions, the establishment of research institutions, regulatory incentives (such as tax holidays), and venture-friendly legislative frameworks for enhancing EEs(Morant-Martı´nez et al., 2019).(ii) Finance refers to efforts made by governments to create environments that allow entrepreneurs to have access to finance for their businesses.To build vibrant businesses within an ecosystem, entrepreneurs need easy, and fast access to financial capital(Brooks et al., 2019).In developed economies, financial systems are strong enough to create an environment for financial inclusion, making entrepreneurs access financial resources.Angel investors, venture capital companies, microfinance institutions, banks, and public funds providers interact with entrepreneurs to provide the needed resource (finance capital).Well-developed financial markets promote the development of EEs(Lux et al., 2020).(iii) Culture refers to the values systems, norms, traditions and rituals, beliefs, knowledge and stories, food and drink, language, music and arts, and the greater community that play an essential role in influencing behavior and other ways of thinking(Brooks et al., 2019).Hofstede, in 1980 contributed to the definition of culture by comprehensively defining it as ''[.]the collective programming of the mind distinguishing members of a group or category of people from others where the ''category'' can refer to nations and regions within or between nations, ethnic groups, religions, occupations, organisations or genres''(Castillo-Palacio et al., 2017, p. 3).Culture varies with countries, creating different contexts for entrepreneurial activity.It impacts entrepreneurial spirit, orientation, risk-taking behavior, and other essential factors for
is an upgrade of the Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyzes (QUOROM) developed byMoher et al. (1999).After identifying various journal articles, the PRISMA flowchart (Figure4) guided the final selection of articles for the systematic literature review.

Figure 5 .
Figure 5. Number of publications per year.Source.Dimensions database analytics.

Table 2 .
Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria.

Table 5 .
Authorship (Number of Documents, Links, and Total Link Strength).

Table 4 .
The Prevalence of Entrepreneurial Ecosystems in Developed Countries.

Table 6 .
Summary of Results: Selected Countries From the Network.

Table 7 .
Summary: Bibliometric Coupling of Top Organizations.

Table 9 .
Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and Economic Development.

Table 8 .
Challenges and Opportunities of Entrepreneurial Ecosystems.
The searched literature shows that EEs are gaining credence by the day.Their development is important and is attracting the attention of academicians, researchers, research institutes, universities, policy-makers, entrepreneurs, research funders and other stakeholders.This paper was developed as an effort to contribute to the EEs discourse to identify new lines of future research.

Table 10 .
Strategies for Mitigating Challenges.