Entrepreneurial ecosystems (EEs), understood as a type of organisational environment conducive to fostering high-growth and technology oriented startups, are currently deemed important for economic and employment growth. However, while the flagship case of Silicon Valley is widely researched and invoked, our knowledge of variation in how EEs develop is limited, and insufficiently theorised. In response, this thesis adopts an institutional perspective, conceptualising EEs as organisational fields, and addressing how the interplay between agency and structure result in different developmental trajectories of location-based EEs. The thesis consists of three empirical papers that examine several cases of EEs in Japan and India focused on Information and Communication Technology. The in-depth inductive studies are anchored in interview and participant observation data generated during multiple fieldwork visits.

The findings illuminate key novel concepts: 1) a field development mechanism of intra-field cross-generational support (uncovered in an emerging field of Tokyo EE examined in relation to domestic large corporations); 2) a comparative framework of Varieties of Entrepreneurial Ecosystems (derived from an analysis of Tokyo and Bangalore – the biggest EEs in their respective countries); 3) an institutional infrastructure-related element of place cohesion (identified from a comparison of Osaka-Kyoto and Fukuoka – smaller EEs developing within one institutional context where the dominant EE is already present).

Together, the papers show that differences in EE developmental trajectories stem from the interplay of EE stakeholders’ agency to develop a desired EE institutional infrastructure (which is similarly conceptualised across locations), and the underlying elements for such infrastructure (which can be very time- and location-specific). Particular agency-related mechanisms that are crucial to EE development, depend on the EE relations to other fields. Overall, the thesis contributes to the scholarship on EEs and organisational fields, enhancing more contextualised understanding of EEs, and suggesting how to better study fields in a comparative and interconnected perspective.