PurposeResearch on entrepreneurial ecosystems has advanced over recent years and has become a popular topic. Despite the interest, previous work has focused on entrepreneurial ecosystems in large cities in the United States. Ecosystems in small cities, underpopulated rural areas, university towns and outside the USA have not been considered much. This paper begins to address this deficit by reviewing three groups of literature.Design/methodology/approachFrom the review, the paper builds a conceptual framework to consider entrepreneurial ecosystems led by universities. After summarizing the literature on entrepreneurial ecosystems, entrepreneurial universities and entrepreneurship education, the paper suggests a conceptual framework outlying the structure, components and mechanisms that enable universities to operate as catalysts in the creation of entrepreneurial ecosystems.FindingsIt is evident that on many of the “ingredients” of a successful entrepreneurial ecosystem, a resource-constrained environment would have many gaps. Building an entrepreneurship ecosystem in such contexts would be inherently challenging. The model presented suggests that the presence of a university in such locations should enhance the prospects of progress but that the nature of the university itself would impact any outcomes. Universities that make concerted efforts to be entrepreneurial and that have entrepreneurship programmes have strategies available to them that can enhance entrepreneurship ecosystems over time.Originality/valueThe contribution of this paper is to show “how” a university and its entrepreneurship programme can operationally address deficits in a local ecosystem and how it might bring about positive change. The paper also opens new avenues for entrepreneurship education researchers.

Knowledge flows from universities to the regional economy can take different forms ranging from formal research collaborations to consultancy and informal personal connections. One of the knowledge communication channels drawing substantial interest of both researchers and regional policy makers is academic spin-off firm formation. According to the concept of the "academic entrepreneur" (Etzkowitz) university spin-off firm formation has grown naturally from the academic culture of the US where professors traditionally behave very much like entrepreneurs while setting up and maintaining research labs, hiring research assistants, "marketing" research results in conferences and publications or networking with colleagues and funding agencies. Spinning off a company is just a step forward from such entrepreneurial tasks of academics. Thus according to this concept academic motivations are main drivers in university spin-off firm formation in the US. Despite this challenging view the empirical literature pays relatively little attention to the particular "academic" features of university spin-offs and rarely considers the specificities of university entrepreneurship most notably the role of scientists as entrepreneurs. Empirical evidence suggests that Europe performs less successfully than the US in transferring knowledge from university labs to the regional economy via spin-off companies. One potential reason behind this difference is that institutions that determine the continental European research system hold back the emergence of academic entrepreneurs. Thus it is the main research question in our paper whether those specific "academic" drivers behind university spin-off firm formation are present at all in the continental European context. The related question is whether professional characteristics of the academics, their social capital, the norms of academia and the academic and business environment support or hinder these academic motivations? This paper is based on interviews carried out with university researchers who actively participate in firm formation in Hungary. Hungary is an excellent European case since the features of its university system are rooted in the continental (mainly German) tradition, but it also inherits some characteristics from the even more centralized socialist (soviet) tradition.

No abstract

Landscape aesthetic research that emerged from the second half of the 20th century has become increasingly appreciated and popular in the last few decades. There are two main reasons for this. On the one hand, it was recognized the role of landscape aesthetics in land use and environmental planning, management and conservation. On the other hand, its definition among Cultural Ecosystem Services has made it clear that landscape aesthetics has significant impact on human well-being and there is a need to examine it in the concept of Ecosystem Services and, in particular, Cultural Ecosystem Services (CES). The mapping of landscape aesthetics is mostly based on the exclusive evaluation of objective, biophysical landscape factors. The aim of the research was to create the landscape aesthetic map of Hungary with a novel method based on human perception. For this, a questionnaire survey and a GIS approach were used. In order to better understand the role of factors influencing the aesthetic value of the landscape, value maps separately for land cover and elevation that are decisive for the landscape experience were prepared. To validate the results of the maps, and contribute a better understanding of the interrelationship between CES, a certain tourism product was chosen, and the connection between landscape aesthetics and the offer of rural tourism was examined in Hungary and in the Danube Bend priority tourism development area. Our findings show that there is a difference in the results of the objective (GIS-based) and subjective (questionnaire-based) assessment of landscape aesthetic value with the more important role of elevation in the latter. According to our tourism product-based analysis, which represents a niche approach in its kind, landscape values are higher in the areas with rural accommodation. At the same time, based on the results of the Danube Bend region, it can also be concluded that elevation and land cover together are crucial factors in landscapes considered to be the most valuable in aesthetic terms. The most direct practical application of our research is to orientate further tourism development of the new Danube Bend area designated in 2017.

The increased interest of researchers and policy makers towards higher educational institutions as innovation actors is partly due to internationally well-known examples of the Silicon Valley, Route 128, the Research Triangle or Oxbridge area, just to mention a few. However, the replication of these success stories in other regions that have historically different development paths, institutional, economic and social contexts is not an easy task. The study aims to introduce the most important findings on the role of universities in regional development in peripheral Central and Eastern European countries. A special emphasis is given to those factors that can impede universities' successful regional developmental role. METHODOLOGYThe paper is based on literature survey. MOST IMPORTANT RESULTSThe existing empirical evidences suggest that the Central and Eastern European countries face many challenges if they wish to see their universities contributing to the development of their surroundings. The socialist heritage, the low absorptive capacity of companies, the mismatch between the research interest of universities and industry, and the individual motivations all has to be analysed and understood before developing policies and measures. RECOMMENDATIONSThe unique historical development path of science, economy and society in Central and Eastern Europe has to be considered at the design and implementation of innovation policies. Failing to do so and simply trying to transfer elements and solutions of high-tech regions is unlikely to lead to success.