亚开行-亚洲发展中的数字创业景观：全球数字创业系统指数的启示（英）

DIGITALENTREPRENEURSHIP

LANDSCAPESINDEVELOPINGASIA

INSIGHTSFROMTHEGLOBALINDEXOFDIGITAL

ENTREPRENEURSHIPSYSTEMS

ErkkoAutio,YothinJinjarak,ÉvaKomlósi,DonghyunPark,LászlóSzerb,

andMónikaTiszberger

NO.720

ADBECONOMICS

April2024

WORKINGPAPERSERIES

ASIANDEVELOPMENTBANK

ADBEconomicsWorkingPaperSeries

DigitalEntrepreneurshipLandscapesinDevelopingAsia:InsightsfromtheGlobalIndexofDigital

EntrepreneurshipSystems

ErkkoAutio,YothinJinjarak,ÉvaKomlósi,

DonghyunPark,LászlóSzerb,

andMónikaTiszberger

No.720|April2024

TheADBEconomicsWorkingPaperSeries

presentsresearchinprogresstoelicitcommentsandencouragedebateondevelopmentissuesinAsiaandthePacific.Theviewsexpressed

arethoseoftheauthorsanddonotnecessarilyreflecttheviewsandpoliciesofADBor

itsBoardofGovernorsorthegovernmentstheyrepresent.

ErkkoAutio(erkko.autio@imperial.ac.uk)isaprofessor

andChairinTechnologyVenturingatImperialCollege

BusinessSchool.ÉvaKomlósi(komlosieva@ktk.pte.

hu)isaresearchfellow,LászlóSzerb(szerb.laszlo@

ktk.pte.hu)isaprofessor,andMónikaTiszberger

(tiszbergerm@ktk.pte.hu)isanassociateprofessorat

theUniversityofPécs.YothinJinjarak(yjinjarak@adb.

org)isasenioreconomistattheEastAsiaDepartment

andDonghyunPark(dpark@)isaneconomic

advisorattheEconomicResearchandDevelopment

ImpactDepartment,AsianDevelopmentBank.

ASIANDEVELOPMENTBANK

CreativeCommonsAttribution3.0IGOlicense(CCBY3.0IGO)

©2024AsianDevelopmentBank

6ADBAvenue,MandaluyongCity,1550MetroManila,Philippines

Tel+63286324444;Fax+63286362444

Somerightsreserved.Publishedin2024.

ISSN2313-6537(print),2313-6545(electronic)

PublicationStockNo.WPS240095-2

DOI:

/10.22617/WPS240095-2

TheviewsexpressedinthispublicationarethoseoftheauthorsanddonotnecessarilyreflecttheviewsandpoliciesoftheAsianDevelopmentBank(ADB)oritsBoardofGovernorsorthegovernmentstheyrepresent.

ADBdoesnotguaranteetheaccuracyofthedataincludedinthispublicationandacceptsnoresponsibilityforany

consequenceoftheiruse.ThementionofspecificcompaniesorproductsofmanufacturersdoesnotimplythattheyareendorsedorrecommendedbyADBinpreferencetoothersofasimilarnaturethatarenotmentioned.

Bymakinganydesignationoforreferencetoaparticularterritoryorgeographicareainthisdocument,ADBdoesnotintendtomakeanyjudgmentsastothelegalorotherstatusofanyterritoryorarea.

ThispublicationisavailableundertheCreativeCommonsAttribution3.0IGOlicense(CCBY3.0IGO)

/licenses/by/3.0/igo/.Byusingthecontentofthispublication

,youagreetobeboundbythetermsofthislicense.Forattribution,translations,adaptations,andpermissions,pleasereadtheprovisionsandtermsofuseat

/terms-use#openaccess

.

ThisCClicensedoesnotapplytonon-ADBcopyrightmaterialsinthispublication.Ifthematerialisattributed

toanothersource,pleasecontactthecopyrightownerorpublisherofthatsourceforpermissiontoreproduceit.ADBcannotbeheldliableforanyclaimsthatariseasaresultofyouruseofthematerial.

Pleasecontactpubsmarketing@ifyouhavequestionsorcommentswithrespecttocontent,orifyouwishtoobtaincopyrightpermissionforyourintendedusethatdoesnotfallwithintheseterms,orforpermissiontousetheADBlogo.

CorrigendatoADBpublicationsmaybefoundat

/publications/corrigenda

.

Note:

Inthispublication,“$”referstoUnitedStatesdollars.

ABSTRACT

Digitalizationtransformshowentrepreneurspursueopportunities.Tounderstandthistransformativeimpactonentrepreneurship,wepresenttheGlobalIndexofDigitalEntrepreneurshipSystems(GIDES),acompositeindicatordevelopedtoassesstheperformanceofthedigitalentrepreneurialecosystematthenationallevel.Toaddressexistingconceptualgaps,GIDESconcurrentlymonitorsthegeneral,structuralanddigitalframeworkcontextssupportingdigitalentrepreneurship.Thedigitalframeworkconditions,describingthegenerallevelofdigitalizationoftheeconomy,affectentrepreneurialactivitythroughtheirimpactongeneralandsystemicframeworkconditions.Unliketraditionalentrepreneurshipormostentrepreneurialecosystemmeasures,GIDEStakesasystemicapproachutilizingthePenaltyforBottleneck(PFB)algorithmtospotbottlenecksconnectingelementsthatcouldpotentiallydegradeoverallsystemperformance.WithGIDES,weprovideameasureofthedigitaltransformationofentrepreneurshipforpolicymakerswhowanttoimprovethequalityandproductivitypotentialoftheentrepreneurialresourceallocationdynamicintheircountries.Forillustration,GIDESprofilesthedigitalentrepreneurshipsystemsof113countries,withaspecialfocuson21

indevelopingAsia.

Keywords:entrepreneurship,digitalization,digitalentrepreneurshipecosystem,

compositeindicator,GIDES,Asiandevelopingcountries

JELcodes:L26,O32,O33,O57

1.Introduction

Digitaltechnologyisradicallyreshapingourworld.Therearestudiesmeasuringcountries’progressindigitization,helpingunderstandtheirpositionintheneweraofdigitalcompetition(e.g.,DEDI,DESI,orNRI

1

).Whileacknowledgingthevalueofthesestudies,itisessentialtostressthatdigitaltechnologiesdirectlytransformentrepreneurshipbychangingthelandscapeofopportunitiesandhowentrepreneurspursuethem.Theintegrationofthesetechnologiesleadstothedigitaltransformationofbusinesses,promptingthemtotransformtheiroperations,enablingthemtoadapttoenhancecompetitiveness,efficiency,andcustomersatisfaction(Fitzgeraldetal.2014,Liuetal.2011,Nambisanetal.2019,Vial2019).Thistransformationisembodiedindigitalentrepreneurship(DE),whichreferstobusinessesthattakeadvantageofdigitaltechnologiesintheiroperations(DavidsonandVaast2010,Hulletal.2007,Nambisan2017).Inlightoftheabove,itmakessensethatDEhasrecentlybecomeanewfocusin

entrepreneurshipresearch(Kollmannetal.2022,Krausetal.2018).

TounderstandDE,itisnecessarytoconsidernotonlytheentrepreneurbutalsotheenvironment(Zaheeretal.2019).Theentrepreneurialecosystem(EE)approachhasgainedwideinterestinentrepreneurshipresearchoverthelastdecade(García-Lilloetal.2023).EEconsistsofinterrelatedactorsandcontextualfactorsinfluencingentrepreneurship(Ácsetal.2014,StamandvandeVen2021).Itisacomplex,self-organizingsystemwithheterogeneouscomponents,non-linearinteractions,and

openboundaries,andwithasensitivitytoinitialconditionsandshocks(Roundyetal.

1DigitalEcosystemDevelopmentIndex(DEDI)byKatzandCallorda(2018);DigitalEconomyandSocietyIndex(DESI)bytheEuropeanCommission(2023);NetworkReadinessIndex(NRI)byDuttaandLanvin(2022).

2

2018).However,SussanandAcs(2017)identifiedagapintheconceptualizationofentrepreneurshipinthedigitalage,pointingoutthattheconceptofEE,whileemphasizingawiderangeofspatialcontexts,doesnotintegratethedigitalcontext.Consequently,theconceptofdigitalentrepreneurialecosystem(DEE)hasemerged,whichintegratesDEandEEconcepts,emphasizingthatthepresenceofDEinaneconomydependsontheentrepreneurialcontext.AcomprehensivereviewbyBejjanietal.(2023)definesDEEas“complexanddynamicsystemscomposedofheterogeneousactorsthatexploitdigitaltechnologiesforvalueco-creationwhilerelyingondigitalinfrastructurethatsupportsgovernancemechanisms,facilitatesaccesstoresources,enablesthedevelopmentof

complementarities,andovercomesspatialboundaries.”(p.8).

TheliteraturedistinguishesthreeperspectivesontherelationshipbetweenDEandEE(Bejjanietal.2023).SomestudiesdefineDEEasadistinctconcept,offeringanexplicitdefinitionandoftenaconceptualmodel(e.g.,Eliaetal.2020,Song2019,SussanandAcs2017).OthersextendtheEEconcepttoincludetheimpactofdigitaltechnologiesinvariouscontextswithoutexplicitlylabelingthemasDEEs(e.g.,Autioetal.2018).The

thirdgroupusesdifferenttermstodescribetheinteractionbetweendigitalizationand

ecosystems(e.g.,“digitalplatform”),indicatingalackofconsensusoninterpretingtheseecosystemsinadigitalcontext.Thisconceptualdiversityseemstobemoreofabarrier

toprogressinmeasurement.

AlthoughEEsfollowauniqueevolutionarypath(Necketal.2004),fromabroaderperspective,commonstructuresandfeaturesthatallowtheircomparativestudycanbeidentified(Szerbetal.2019).GiventheinterrelatednessofEEcomponents,their

measurementrequiresasystemicapproach.Currentmeasuresofcountry-level

3

entrepreneurship,however,oftenfocuson“count”and“prevalence”indices,overlookingthesystemdynamicsanddiverseproductivitypotentialofentrepreneurialactivities.

2

SomepromisingframeworksforprofilingEEexist,buttheyalsolackasystemicapproachandtransparentmethodologicalexplanations.

3

Inaddition,allthesemeasuresfailtocapturethestructuralelementsofEEsintheiroperationalization(Autioetal.2018b).

4

TheGlobalEntrepreneurshipIndex(GEI/GEDI)employsasystemicapproach,wheretheEEcomponentsareconsideredto“co-produce”system-leveloutcomes.

5

ThisisoperationalizedthroughthePenaltyforBottleneck(PFB)algorithm,whichpenalizesstrongEEcomponentsforweakcomponents—orbottlenecks—inbothcomponent-and

index-levelperformance.

ThesehighlightthenecessityforfurtherdevelopmentoftheDEEconcept.However,therearealreadysomenoteworthymeasurementmethodsforstudyingEE,whichprovideapromisingstartingpointfordeterminingthetransformativeeffectsofdigitalizationonentrepreneurship.TheaimofthisresearchwastocreatetheGlobalIndexofDigitalEntrepreneurshipSystems(GIDES).Toovercometheoutlinedconceptualgaps,thisnational-levelcompositeindicatorisbasedonatheoreticalframeworkmodelthat

seekstoreflectthecomplexityofDEthroughaconcurrentassessmentofthegeneral,

structural,anddigitalcontexts.Moreover,toeliminatetheindicatedmeasurement

2Thesemeasuresare:(i)PreferenceforSelf-employment,EuropeanCommission;FlashEurobarometer354(EntrepreneurshipintheEUandbeyond)

http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_354_en.pdf;

(ii)TotalEarly-stageEntrepreneurialActivity(TEA),GlobalEntrepreneurshipMonitor,

/;

and(iii)Start-upRanking,StartupR,

/

(accessed9November2023).

3Theframeworksare:(i)KauffmanFoundation’sEEinitiative(Bell-MastersonandStangler2015);and(ii)EEMeasurementFramework(Stam2015,2018).

4StartupGenome'sGlobalStartupEcosystemIndex

(/)

rankscity-level

ecosystemsbasedontheirperformance,butdoesnotexamineecosystemsateitherthestand-uporscale-upstage.

5DetaileddescriptionoftheindexmethodologyofferedbyÁcsetal.(2014).

4

deficiencies,GIDESoffersasystemicperspectiverootedintheconceptofNationalSystemsofEntrepreneurship(Ácsetal.2014),andutilizesthePFBalgorithmtoidentifyelementshinderingDEEperformance.Inaddition,ecosystemindicesarenottypicallytestedforrobustness,eventhoughcompositeindexcreationhasseveral,notnecessarilyobjective,decisionpoints.Therefore,ouraimisnottherobustnessoftheanalysisitself,butwealsoaddthoseresultstosupporttheindicator.GIDESisusefultoidentifypotential

priorityareasforpolicyintervention.

Thestructureofthispaperisasfollows:section2laysaconceptualgroundworkfortheimpactofdigitalizationonentrepreneurship;section3introducesthestructureofGIDES,explainsitscalculation,andtherobustnessanalysis;andsection4delvesinto

thefindings.Theconcludingsectionsummarizesthestudy’skeytakeaways.

2.TheoreticalBackground

2.1NationalSystemsofEntrepreneurship(NSE)

TounderstandthelevelofDEatacountrylevel,weutilizetheconceptofNationalSystemsofEntrepreneurship(Ácsetal.2014).Accordingtothat,thepursuitofentrepreneurialopportunitybyindividualsdrivesaresourceallocationdynamicatthenationallevelthatallocatesresourcestowardeconomicuses.Thisisnotafrictionlessprocess,asstartinganewbusinessentailsopportunitycosts,sincethehumanandfinancialresourcesallocatedforentrepreneurialopportunitypursuitcannotbesimultaneouslydeployedforalternativepurposes(McMullenandShepherd2006).Inanycountry,theentrepreneurialresourceallocationdynamicisshapedbyamyriadof

individual-leveldecisionsthatmayallocateresourcestoeitherlow-orhigh-productivity

5

uses,includinglow-productivityusessuchassubsistenceentrepreneurshiporhigh-

productivityusessuchasinnovative,high-growthentrepreneurship.Acoreassumptioninourtheorizingisthatthisresourceallocationdynamicultimatelycontributes(ordoesnot)tothecountry’sTotalFactorProductivity(TFP)(Ácsetal.2014).Thisdynamicisshapedbytwokeyconstraints.First,iftheopportunityperceivedbytheentrepreneurturnsouttobeofhighquality,resourceswillhavebeenpushedtowardhighlyproductiveuses,andtheassociatedprofitpotentialensuresthattheentrepreneurwillpersistinthepursuitofopportunity.Alternatively,iftheopportunityturnsouttobeoflowquality,andiftheentrepreneurperceiveshigherearningspotentialinalternativeoccupationalpursuits,theywillabandontheperceivedopportunity.Thenetoutcomeofthesetwomechanismsisthatahigh-qualityentrepreneurialdynamicshouldallocateresourcestowardproductive

usesandthushelpdriveTFPandeconomicdevelopment(Ácsetal.2014).

Dependingonhowcountry-levelframeworkconditionsregulatethisresourceallocationprocess,theprocessmaybemoreorlesseffectiveincontributingtothecountry’sTFP.Empiricalstudiesshowthatacountry’sframeworkconditionsforentrepreneurshipplayakeyroleinregulatingthequalityofentrepreneurialresourceallocationdynamic(AudretschandBelitski2017,AutioandFu2015,Rodríguez-Pose2020).Favorableentrepreneurialframeworkconditionsreducebarrierstostartabusiness

byloweringrisksandfacilitatingresourceaccess(AutioandAcs2010).

Therealizationoftheimportanceofhowsystem-levelframeworkconditionsshape

thequalityoftheentrepreneurialdynamictriggeredtheconceptofEEinentrepreneurship

6

research(Autioetal.2018b).

6

AlthoughthereisnouniversaldefinitionforEEs,mostdefinitionsechothenotionofnaturalecologicalecosystems,inthesensethattheyareconsideredregionalcommunitiesofstakeholders,embeddedinagiveneconomic,social,andinstitutionalcontext,thatgenerateasystem-leveloutcomeanalogoustothe“ecosystemservice”generatedbynaturalecosystems(Acsetal.2017,Necketal.2004,Roundyetal.2018,StamandVandeVen2021).Asanovelformofregionalclusters,EEsfacilitatebusinessmodelinnovationandknowledgetransfer,andhelpnewbusinessesaccesstheresourcestheyneedtostartupandscaleup(Autioetal.2018b).Atthenationallevel,NationalSystemsofEntrepreneurshiparecomposedofregional

EEspluscountry-levelframeworkconditionsofentrepreneurship.

2.2DigitalContext

Digitaltechnologieshaveatransformativeimpactonentrepreneurialopportunitiesbyenablingoftenradicalnewwaysforentrepreneurialbusinessestoorganizeforthecreation,delivery,andcaptureofcustomervalue(AutioandRannikko2017,Yooetal.2010).Thisphenomenonhasbeenlargelydrivenbytherapidandwidespreadadoptionofpubliccloudtechnologiesandtheemergenceofan“applicationeconomy”withthenow-universaladoptionofsmartphonesandapplicationstherein.Digitalartifacts,platforms,andinfrastructuresblurfunctional,organizational,andgeographical

boundaries,challengingestablishedbusinesspractices(Hausbergetal.2019).

6FollowingAutioetal.(2018b),wedefineanEEasprimarilyaregional-levelphenomenon,astheregionalcommunityofstakeholderswhocollectivelyfacilitateentrepreneurialstand-up,start-up,andscale-upinagivenregion.Atthenationallevel,weusetheterm:“nationalsystemsofentrepreneurship”todescribethebroaderconstellationofcountry-levelfactorsthatshapethecountry’sentrepreneurialresourceallocationdynamic(Ácsetal.2014).

7

Autioetal.(2018b)observedthatdigitalizationshapesentrepreneurshipandEEsthroughthecreationofnoveldigitalaffordances,whichallowentrepreneurstoperformentirelynewfunctionsanddiscovernewwaysoforganizing.Throughthecreationofdigitalaffordances,digitaltechnologiescanenhanceinteractionsandcoordinationbetweenindividualsandorganizations,therebyopeningnewopportunitiesforvaluecreation,delivery,andcapture—i.e.,businessmodelinnovation(AmitandZott2001).Thefirm’sbusinessmodeldefineshowitengageswithitsvariousstakeholdersforvalueco-creatinginteractions.Digitalaffordanceshelpenhance,extend,andenrichthevalueco-creationpotentialofsuchinteractions.Insodoing,digitalizationpotentiallyhelpsboost

theproductivitypotentialoftheentrepreneurialresourceallocationdynamicincountries.

DigitalizationplaysanimportantroleinfosteringregionalEEsandnationalentrepreneurshipsystemsbyactingasoneofthelinkingmechanismsbetweentheirconstituentelements.ThisrecognitionhaspromptedtheconceptofDEE(Rautetal.,2021).Primarilyaregionalphenomenon,theDEEisdefinedasanopen,looselyconnected,demand-driven,self-organized,andparticipatoryenvironmentinwhicheachparticipantisproactiveandsensitivetotheirownutilityandgain(ChangandWest2006).Itdescribesasysteminwhichparticipants(actors,institutions,andorganizations)andtheirrelationshipsaremutuallysupportivetoincreasetheirutility,gainadvantage,andfacilitateknowledgetransfer(Audretschetal.2023,Lietal.2012).TheDEEfocusesonnewtechnologicalprocessesattheintersectionofbusinessanddigitalsystems(Autioet

al.2018a,Nambisan2017).

PolicyconclusionssuggestthatinthecontextofaDEE,astrongerandmore

dynamiceconomyrequiresnotonlythedevelopmentofdigitalphysicalinfrastructure,but

8

alsothebalanceddevelopmentofallelementsofregionalEEsandnational-levelsystemsofentrepreneurship.Thedevelopmentofthedigitaleconomyisinfluencedbyregulationsthatcreateafavorablebusinessenvironment,specificskillsthathelppeopleand

businessestouseadvanceddigitaltechnologies,andeffectiveinstitutionsthatsupport

digitalization(WorldBank2016).Adaptability,absorptivecapacity,andthediffusionofdigitaltechnologysolutionsandtoolsplayakeyroleinthestrengthofthedigital

entrepreneurialecosystem.

Thesmoothfunctioningoforganizationsinthedigitalerarequiresallactorstohaveanuancedunderstandingofthecurrentstateofsocietaldigitalization.Moreover,toadvanceprogresstowardadigitalentrepreneurialeconomy,policymakersneedreliablemetricstomonitorandharnesstheproductivitypotentialofdigitaladvancesforeconomicandsocietalwelfare(Autioetal.2019,BrownandMason2014).Wenextlayoutthe

GIDESmethodologydevelopedtoadvancesuchanunderstanding.

3.TheGlobalIndexofDigitalEntrepreneurshipSystems

3.1IndexStructure

GIDESisacompositeindicatordesignedtomonitorthedigitalizationofsocietyandtheeconomy,withafocusonentrepreneurialprocesses.Thelogicbehindtheindexistousemeasuresofdigitalconditionsasweightstoadjusttheeffectofinstitutionalandcontextualcountry-levelframeworkconditionsthatshapethequalityofentrepreneurialresource

allocationdynamic.

Thecountry-levelframeworkconditionsforentrepreneurship,encapsulatedinthe

eightpillarsoftheindex(Figure1),regulatethequalityofthecountry’sentrepreneurial

9

dynamicintwoways:(i)byshapingresourceallocationtrade-offstowardentrepreneurshipversusalternativeoccupationalpursuits(GeneralFrameworkConditions[GFCs]);(ii)byregulatingtheavailabilityofexternalresourcestothispursuit(SystemicFrameworkConditions[SFCs]).GFCscapturethegeneralcontextforentrepreneurialactivityinacountryandincludepillarsas(i)cultureandinformalinstitutions;(ii)formalinstitutions,regulation,andtaxation;(iii)marketconditions;and(iv)physicalinfrastructure.Alltheseconditionshavebeenshowntoshapeentrepreneurialactivity(Autioetal.2013;deSoto2000;Djankovetal.2002,2003,2006;Seung-Hyunetal.2007;Wennbergetal.2013).SFCsareresource-relatedconditionsthatdirectlyaffectacountry'sentrepreneurialdynamicsandinclude:(i)humancapital(Marveletal.2016,Shane2003,Ungeretal.2011);(ii)knowledgecreationanddissemination(AudretschandLehmann2005,Iftikharetal.2022,QianandAcs2013);(iii)finance(Charfeddine

andZaouali2022);and(iv)networkingandsupport(KooandCho2011,Zhaoetal.2022).

Inpractice,businessesneedmanydifferentresourcestogrowsuccessfully.SFCshaveadifferentimpactonthethreestagesofentrepreneurialdevelopment:stand-up,start-up,andscale-up.Theseresourcesarenotsubstitutableagainstoneanother.Therefore,the

SFCshavetocometogethertohelp“co-produce”thesystemoutcomes.

High-qualitydataonacountry’sframeworkconditionsforentrepreneurshipiscrucialtobetterunderstandhowagivencountrycouldenhancethequalityofitsentrepreneurialresourceallocationdynamic,andconsequently,theabilityofthisdynamic

tocontributetowardthecountry’sTFP.

Asathirdlayerinourmodel,thedigitalframeworkconditionsdescribethegeneral

levelofdigitalizationoftheeconomy,asitaffectsentrepreneurialactivitythroughits

10

impactongeneralandsystemicframeworkconditions.Foreachpillar,wehavecalculatedanappropriatedigitalweightreflectingthedigitalconditionsinthecountryrelevanttothatpillar.Foreachpillar,wecalculateanon-digitalizedversionandadigitallyweightedversion.ThedigitalizedversionsofpillarswecallDigitalFrameworkConditionsfor

entrepreneurship.

Figure1:StructureoftheGlobalIndex

ofDigitalEntrepreneurshipSystemsIndex

Source:AdaptedfromAutioetal.2020.

AnearlierversionoftheGIDESmethodology,theEuropeanIndexofDigitalEntrepreneurshipSystems(EIDES),wasdevelopedasapartofa3-yearresearchproject(2018–2020)fortheEuropeanCommission’sJointResearchCentre.

7

GIDEShasthe

sameindexstructure,butitsindicatorsethasbeenadjustedaccordingtodataavailability.

7EIDES(Autioetal.,2018b,2019,and2020)wasthefirstattempttomeasureboththeframework(physical)anddigitalconditionsforentrepreneurialstand-up,start-up,andscale-upinthe27EuropeanUnioncountriesandtheUnitedKingdom.

11

3.2IndexOperationalization

InGIDES,bothGFCsandSFCsareoperationalizedasindexpillarsconsistingofsetsofindividualvariables.Eachpillarvalueisobtainedbycalculatingthearithmeticmeanofthenormalizedindividualvariables.Eachframeworkconditionisrepresentedbyasinglepillarvalue.GIDEScalculatesdistinctpillarvaluesforSFCsacrossthethreeentrepreneuriallifecyclestages(stand-up,start-up,andscale-up).Thus,theindex

consistsofatotalof16pillars:4forGFCsand4foreachofthethreestagesofSFCs.

Eachindexpillarismatchedwithacorrespondingdigitalweight.Themeasuresofthedifferentdigitalconditions(oneforeachpillar)arecalculatedasthearithmeticmeanoftheirconstituentvariablesafternormalization.Thus,theindexofferstwopillarvaluesforeachgeneralandsystemicframeworkcondition:adigitalizedvalueanda

non-digitalizedvalue.

Tocapturesystemdynamics,twomethodologicalstepsfollowedwhen

aggregatingindividualpillarvaluesintothreesub-indices:EqualizationofPillarAverages

andthePFBalgorithm(Ácsetal.2014).Theequalizationstepadjuststhescalesofeachpillartohavethesameaveragevalue,whilethebottleneckalgorithmintroducesnon-substitutabilityacrosspillarsandpenalizesforgapsandvariancesamongindividualpillarvalues.Thesub-indices,representinggeneralandsystemicframeworkconditionsinbothdigitalandnon-digitalversions,arecalculatedasarithmeticmeansofequalizedandbottleneck-penalizedpillarvalues.TheoverallGIDESvalueisthearithmeticmeanofthemeasuresforgeneralandsystemicframeworkconditions.Thefulldetailsofthesesteps

areexplainedinAppendix1.

8

Thisapproachprovidesanaccuraterepresentationof

8Theappendixesareavailableat

/10.22617/WPS240095-2.

12

nationaldigitalentrepreneurialecosystems.Itallowsfordifferentiationbetweendigitalandnon-digitaldynamicsandprovidesinsightsintogeneralframeworkconditions,

digitalization,andthethreesub-dynamicsoftheoverallentrepreneurialdynamic.

GIDESconsistsof103individualindicators.ThedescriptionofalltheindicatorsusedintheGIDEScalculationcanbefoundinAppendix2.ThedatausedforGIDEScalculationweremostlythelatestavailablebetweenJuneandAugust2021,coveringyears2019,2020,or2021formostindicators.GIDESscoresrangetheoreticallyfrom0

(low)to100(high).

3.3RobustnessAnalysis

Inacompositeindicatoranalysis,thecompilationofthefinalindexinvolvesaseriesofchoices.Theaimoftherobustness(oruncertainty)analysisistoexaminetheextenttowhichthefinalindexvalueissensitivetochoicesmadeduringtheindexcompilationwhenitcomestochoicessuchastheselectionofindividualindicatorsandtheweightingofdifferentcomponentsoftheindex(Saisanaetal.2005,VanRoyandNepelski2016).Assuch,the