Decision-Oriented Foresight for Transforming Entrepreneurial Ecosystems toward 2040
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24023/FutureJournal/2175-5825/2026.v18i1.986Keywords:
Strategic foresight, Entrepreneurial ecosystems, Decision-oriented foresight, Innovation governance, Strategic roadmappingAbstract
Objective: This study aims to identify and operationalize the most strategic future scenario for transforming Ecuador’s entrepreneurial ecosystem toward 2040, addressing the gap between high entrepreneurial activity and limited structural transformation through a decision-oriented foresight approach.
Originality/Value: The article advances strategic foresight by shifting the focus from scenario construction to scenario selection and commitment. It introduces a transparent and replicable framework that integrates participatory criteria definition and multi-criteria decision analysis to legitimize strategic choice in fragmented and uncertain contexts.
Methods: A multi-method design was applied. Causal Layered Analysis was used to construct four alternative future scenarios. A high-competence expert panel was selected using the K coefficient method. Strategic evaluation criteria were prioritized through the Régnier Abacus, and scenarios were ranked using the Analytic Hierarchy Process. The selected scenario was operationalized through strategic roadmapping with backcasting to 2040.
Results: The results identify a science- and technology-based entrepreneurial ecosystem as the most strategic scenario, achieving the highest global priority by balancing relevance, feasibility, desirability, and transformative capacity. Relevance and feasibility were weighted more strongly than radical disruption.
Conclusions: The study shows that ecosystem transformation requires structured mechanisms for collective strategic choice. The proposed framework enhances foresight’s decision value by linking participatory evaluation, consistency, and actionable long-term planning.
Downloads
References
Acs, Z. J., Stam, E., Audretsch, D. B., & O’Connor, A. (2017). The lineages of the entrepreneurial ecosystem approach. Small Business Economics, 49(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9864-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9864-8
AEI (Alliance for Entrepreneurship and Innovation). (2022). Informe anual del ecosistema de emprendimiento en Ecuador. AEI.
Aguirre, J. C., Peralta Zuñiga, M. L., Mora, P., & Blanco, F. (2021). Innovative entrepreneurship and quality of life: The case of Ecuador. Academia Revista Latinoamericana de Administración, 34(1), 143–164. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARLA-04-2020-0076 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/ARLA-04-2020-0076
Alajrab, S. S., Oweidat, I. A., Nassar, O., ALBashtawy, M., & Nashwan, A. J. (2025). The influence of strategic foresight on quality of healthcare services in the presence of artificial intelligence solutions in Jordan. BMC Nursing, 24, 165. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-02518-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-02518-3
Amer, M., Daim, T. U., & Jetter, A. (2013). A review of scenario planning. Futures, 46, 23–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2012.10.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2012.10.003
Amorós, J. E., & Bosma, N. (2014). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2013 global report. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association.
Autio, E., Nambisan, S., Thomas, L. D. W., & Wright, M. (2018). Digital affordances, spatial affordances, and the genesis of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 12(1), 72–95. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1266 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1266
Ayaviri-Nina, D., Cáceres-Guzmán, J., Quispe Fernández, G. M., & Maldonado-Nuñez, A. I. (2023). The determinants of success in entrepreneurship: A study in the urban area of Ecuador. Sustainability, 15, 5277. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15065277 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su15065277
Barbosa, C. E., Lyra, A., de Souza, J. M., Lima, Y., Salazar, H., & Argôlo, M. (2024). Hindsight to foresight: An AI-powered analysis of future events in EJFR in 10 years. European Journal of Futures Research, 12, 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40309-024-00233-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40309-024-00233-5
Bosma, N., Hill, S., Ionescu-Somers, A., Kelley, D., Levie, J., & Tarnawa, A. (2020). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2019/2020 global report. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association.
Brunelli, M. (2015). Introduction to the analytic hierarchy process. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12502-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12502-2
Cabero-Almenara, J., & Llorente-Cejudo, M. del C. (2013). The reliability of expert judgment in educational research through the coefficient of expert competence (K coefficient). Revista de Investigación Educativa, 31(1), 317–330. https://doi.org/10.6018/rie.31.1.148231
Dörr, U.-S., Schönhofer, G., & Schwarz, J. O. (2024). The state of foresight in small and medium enterprises: Literature review and research agenda. European Journal of Futures Research, 12, 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40309-024-00237-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40309-024-00237-1
ESPAE Escuela de Negocios. (2024). Informe GEM Ecuador 2023/2024. ESPAE. https://espae.edu.ec/gem-ecuador/
European Commission. (2021). 2021 strategic foresight report: The EU’s capacity and freedom to act. https://doi.org/10.2775/48810
Fergnani, A. (2022). Corporate foresight: A new frontier for strategy and management. Academy of Management Perspectives, 36(2), 820–844. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2018.0178 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2018.0178
GEM (Global Entrepreneurship Monitor). (2023). Global report 2023/2024. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association.
Hernández, C.-G., & Bas, E. (2026). Scenarios for the Ecuadorian entrepreneurial ecosystem towards 2040. European Journal of Futures Research, 14, 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40309-026-00265-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40309-026-00265-z
Hines, A., Benoit, H., Leong, L., Worrell, D., Schlehuber, L., & Cowart, A. (2024). Mapping archetype scenarios across the three horizons. Futures, 162, 103418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2024.103418 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2024.103418
Inayatullah, S. (2008). Six pillars: Futures thinking for transforming. Foresight, 10(1), 4–21. https://doi.org/10.1108/14636680810855991 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/14636680810855991
INEC. (2022). Directorio de empresas y establecimientos. INEC.
Ishizaka, A., & Labib, A. (2011). Review of the main developments in the analytic hierarchy process. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(11), 14336–14345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.04.143 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.04.143
Meissner, P. (2013). The benefits of scenario-based planning. In T. Wulf & B. Schwenker (Eds.), Scenario-based strategic planning (pp. 175–195). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-02875-6_6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-02875-6_6
OECD. (2021). OECD science, technology and innovation outlook 2021. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/75f79015-en DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/75f79015-en
Phaal, R., Farrukh, C. J. P., & Probert, D. R. (2004). Technology roadmapping—A planning framework for evolution and revolution. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 71(1–2), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-1625(03)00072-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-1625(03)00072-6
Presidency of the Republic of Ecuador. (2021). Estrategia Ecuador emprendedor, innovador y sostenible 2030.
Ringland, G. (2010). The role of scenarios in strategic foresight. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77(9), 1493–1498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.06.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.06.010
Rohrbeck, R., & Kum, M. E. (2018). Corporate foresight and its impact on firm performance: A longitudinal analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 129, 105–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.12.013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.12.013
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process: Planning, priority setting, resource allocation. McGraw-Hill. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21236/ADA214804
Savolainen, J., & Knudsen, M. S. (2025). Managing strategic flexibility in Industry 5.0 transition: An integrated real options and strategic foresight approach. In P. Aaltonen & E. Kurvinen (Eds.), Contemporary issues in Industry 5.0 (pp. 109–134). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-74779-3_5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-74779-3_5
Spigel, B., & Harrison, R. (2018). Toward a process theory of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 12(1), 151–168. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1268 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1268
Stam, E. (2015). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and regional policy: A sympathetic critique. European Planning Studies, 23(9), 1759–1769. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2015.1061484 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2015.1061484
Stam, E., & van de Ven, A. (2021). Entrepreneurial ecosystem elements. Small Business Economics, 56(2), 809–832. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00270-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00270-6
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 CC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms: the author(s) authorize(s) the publication of the text in the journal;
2. The author(s) ensure(s) that the contribution is original and unpublished and that it is not in the process of evaluation by another journal;
3. The journal is not responsible for the views, ideas and concepts presented in articles, and these are the sole responsibility of the author(s);
4. The publishers reserve the right to make textual adjustments and adapt texts to meet with publication standards.
5. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right to first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Atribuição NãoComercial SemDerivações 4.0 Internacional, which allows the work to be shared with recognized authorship and initial publication in this journal.
6. Authors are allowed to assume additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g. publish in institutional repository or as a book chapter), with recognition of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
7. Authors are allowed and are encouraged to publish and distribute their work online (e.g. in institutional repositories or on a personal web page) at any point before or during the editorial process, as this can generate positive effects, as well as increase the impact and citations of the published work (see the effect of Free Access) at http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html
• 8. Authors are able to use ORCID is a system of identification for authors. An ORCID identifier is unique to an individual and acts as a persistent digital identifier to ensure that authors (particularly those with relatively common names) can be distinguished and their work properly attributed.
• 9 The authors commit to serving as reviewers for the journal: As a form of reciprocity with the academic community, Future Studies reinforces the commitment that authors of accepted articles have to act as reviewers for manuscripts submitted to the journal.
