The role of the entrepreneurial university in building an entrepreneurial ecosystem in a post conflict economy: an exploratory study of Rwanda

The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of the entrepreneurial university in supporting the development of the entrepreneurial ecosystem in a post conflict, transitional economy. We developed a cross case analysis to identify common themes and patterns in the data. Our findings demonstrate that in a post conflict, transitional economy entrepreneurial universities entrepreneurial ecosystem development is constrained by a number of institutional factors including, structures , systems , leadership , strategies , and culture . We further identify that, when an entrepreneurial ecosystem system has been destroyed during conflict, these constraints present significant challenges to the evolution of the entrepreneurial ecosystem post conflict. Second, in a departure from other studies, our findings also outline the role of the entrepreneurial university in the unique evolution of the post conflict entrepreneurial ecosystem in Rwanda. We identify that the entrepreneurial ecosystem evolves through a number of stages including, embryonic , destruction , formation , and capacity building stages .

communities, as well as recreating learning environments that supports the integration of those involved directly and indirectly in conflict (Feuer, Hornidge, & Schetter, 2013). Existing studies of EE building have posited an evolutionary process by which EEs emerge and change over time (Cohen, 2006;Colombelli, Paolucci, & Ughetto, 2019;Mack & Mayer, 2016).
In adopting a post conflict context-Rwanda-where genocide has resulted in the collapse of civil society, government, and institutions, we set out to examine the role of the entrepreneurial university in supporting the development of a wider EE in a post conflict in a transitional economy. Rwanda is an African country that shares its borders with Uganda in the North, Burundi in the South, Democratic Republic of Congo, and Tanzania in East and West respectively. A recent estimate of its population is in excess of 12 million people with 41% being under the age of 30 (National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda, 2017). The 1994 Genocide devastated the Rwandan economy and society. It also exacerbated a number of development constraints, which existed before 1994 including, low subsistence agriculture productivity, natural barriers to trade, high public debt, poor infrastructure, severe shortage of professional personnel among other challenges. Genocide devastated a generation of trained teachers, doctors, public servants, and private entrepreneurs along with its societal, political, and economic fabric.
Our paper makes two main contributions. First, we identify from our findings that in a post conflict, transitional economy entrepreneurial universities contribution to EE development is constrained by a number of institutional factors including, structures, systems, leadership, strategies, and culture. We further identify through our findings that, when an EE system has been destroyed during conflict, these constraints present significant challenges to the evolution of the EE post conflict. Second, in a departure from other studies of EE (Collombeli et al., 2018;Mack & Mayer, 2016), we offer a contextual contribution, outlining the role of the entrepreneurial university in the unique evolution of the post conflict EE in Rwanda. In post conflict transition economy we identify that the EE evolves through a number of stages including, embryonic, destruction, formation, and capacity building and the role that the entrepreneurial university contributes through this evolution.
Our paper is organized as follows; section one begins by reviewing the literature on EEs and the role entrepreneurial universities play in it. We then present our methodology and outline the situational and contextual factors associated with Rwanda. In our findings section, we present the evolution of the national EE from the period before genocide to after. We conclude the paper with a discussion and outlining the main contributions of this exploratory study.

| Entrepreneurial ecosystems
The concept of ecosystem applied in entrepreneurship relates to the capacity of a territory to create a system of interdependent, heterogeneous elements, and supporting infrastructure to bring about conducive environment for new ventures to flourish (Cavallo et al., 2018;Hechavarría & Ingram, 2018;Stam, 2015;Neumeyer & Santos, 2018). Recently attention has been drawn to the potential for African entrepreneurship to support economic development (Etuk, Etuk, & Michael, 2014;Vermeire & Bruton, 2016). However, the challenge of sustainable economic development is exacerbated by the often limited capacities of African governments to support entrepreneurship within the formal economy (Pattinson & Wanjiru, 2020) because of entrenched socio-economic challenges including, political instability, corruption, infrastructure deficits, and, in particular, a lack of institutional support (London, Anupindi, & Sheth, 2010;Prahalad & Hammond, 2002), all of which present challenges for the development of an effective EE.
An EE can be defined as a community consisting of many independent actors (governments, universities, investors, mentors, service providers, companies) that can play a key role in the development of entrepreneurial activities for a given geographical area (Hechavarría & Ingram, 2018). Here, context is a significant element of the EE (Autio, Kenney, Mustar, Siegel, & Wright, 2014) and the "variable" space, therefore, needs to be considered (Bhawe & Zahra, 2019) in order to develop an understanding of the role of actors. However, the concept of the EE is not clearly understood and different scholars and policy makers have applied a variety of meanings to it (Cavallo et al., 2018).
Recent studies on EEs have begun to conceptualize the evolutionary and dynamic nature of ecosystems (Cantner, Cunningham, Lehmann, & Menter, 2020). Accordingly, EEs are not static but evolutionary, going through phases from inception, growth, consolidation, and decline (Colombelli et al., 2019;Mack & Mayer, 2016). The inception, or creation stage, refers to the emergence of an EE system where actors begin to network. This stage is characterized by a main actor that takes responsibility for the stewardship of the ecosystem. The governance of the EE at this stage revolves around a main actor (Colombelli et al., 2019). There are more firm births than there are deaths or exits, and the overall number of start-ups increases (Mack & Mayer, 2016). The growth stage is characterized by an emergence of a more complex and specialized network systems with multiple actors that interact without a central actor shaping the governance system.
Other peripheral actors become central actors and contribute to the governance, dynamism, and adaptation of the ecosystem (Colombelli et al., 2019). At the consolidation stage, the governance system becomes self-sustaining as actors are self-reinforcing due to the strong interconnections and feedback effects. However, market opportunities for start-ups begin to decline leading to overall decline in new ventures (Mack & Mayer, 2016). A variety of frameworks have been put forward to explain the interactivity and relationship between EE elements (Isenberg, 2010;Spigel, 2017;Stam, 2015;Suresh & Ramraj, 2012). Isenberg (2010), for example, argues that there is no formula to create a successful EE, but suggests nine principles that governments can use as guiding principles that can be adapted to create sustainable ecosystem and vibrant business sector. In the final stage, decline, networks, market connections, and entrepreneurship support disappear. Entrepreneurial failure at this stage is high and there is inadequate policy support for start-ups (Mack & Mayer, 2016).
In the extant literature, the EE and entrepreneurial university concepts have been developed through the lens of developed economies that have well-developed institutional structures (Audretsch & Belitski, 2017;Isenberg, 2011;Neck et al., 2004;Roundy, 2017). In developed and non-conflict economies, entrepreneurial universities play an enhanced role in economic development through research commercialization for economic or social good and the application of research outcomes to address social or economic challenges (Guerrero et al., 2015). In the literature, universities are considered as the central actor during the birth phase of an EE (Colombelli et al., 2019). To date, however, the EE concept has placed little emphasis on their role in transitional economies that have experienced significant economic and social disruption. Moreover, there have been limited studies examining the evolutionary aspect of EE processes in a post-conflict setting. Our study, therefore, seeks to address this gap by examining the role of the entrepreneurial university in supporting the development of a wider EE in a post conflict in a transitional economy.

| Entrepreneurial universities
The traditional mission of university has been on the transference of knowledge through education and advancement of new knowledge through research, (Lombardi, Massaro, Dumay, & Nappo, 2019;Philpott, Dooley, Amp, Reilly, & Lupton, 2011). The entrepreneurial university's role now involves a third mission-an entrepreneurial role-and they play a significant role in the evolutionary process of EEs (Cunningham, Guerrero, & Urbano, 2017;Cunningham, Menter, & Wirsching, 2017;Guerrero & Urbano, 2012;Guerrero et al., 2015;Urbano & Guerrero, 2013). Especially, at the emergent stage of the ecosystems, universities serve as anchor tenants that generate and disseminate knowledge within the ecosystems to facilitate its growth (Cantner et al., 2020). At this stage, universities play a central role not only in creating knowledge, but in the knowledge transfer process through other intermediary firms (Colombelli et al., 2019;Mack & Mayer, 2016). In the context of developed economies, entrepreneurial universities are regarded as catalysts for regional economic and social development through knowledge spill-over and spinoffs based on endogenous theory which attribute the economic growth to policy measures such as subsidies, support measures, or incentives (Culkin, 2016;Guerrero et al., 2014;Guerrero et al., 2015;Trequattrini et al., 2018;Urbano & Guerrero, 2013).
However, in transitional economic contexts little is known if they are regarded as economic and social catalysts in supporting and contributing to the evolution of EEs. In post conflict situations the role of universities is focused rebuilding campuses, university activities, recreating knowledge around teaching and research activities as well as being involved in peace building efforts (Feuer et al., 2013) rather than directly on entrepreneurial activities. Moreover, in such situations universities are involved in efforts to rebuild relationships between conflicting parties as well as contributing to local and regional development efforts (Bergan & Van't Land, 2010;Johnson, 2013).

Studies of Higher Learning Institutions (HLIs) in Kenya and Colombia
have highlighted that they were involved in peace building efforts during conflict stages as well as post conflict (Pacheco & Johnson, 2014). Heleta (2017) argues that in post conflict situation that universities are essential in rebuilding capabilities across professions as well as for civil and public services.
In an entrepreneurial society, Guerrero et al. (2014) argue that knowledge and technology transfer occurs when the experiences of actors influence the behavior and activities of others. This has also been acknowledged by Cacciotti and Hayton (2015) and Cacciotti, Hayton, Mitchell, and Giazitzoglu (2016) who argue that the presence of successful entrepreneurs (role models) alleviate the fear to engage in entrepreneurial activities, and encourage government policies (Audretsch & Belitski, 2017), ease access to finance (Schwienbacher, 2013), and business support ( Acs, Szerb, & Jackson, 2013). Entrepreneurial universities also contribute to the research and development (R&D) capability of the economy through the production of skilled workers with entrepreneurial mind-set capable of coping with uncertainty and complex current working environment, transfer of technology, and its application from academia to industry (Philpott et al., 2011). Given the paucity of research on the role of entrepreneurial universities in transitional and post conflict economies, our focus now turns to how entrepreneurial universities can contribute to the evolution of the EE.

| METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Given our research context and focus is to examine the role of the entrepreneurial university in supporting the development of a wider EE in a post conflict in a transitional economy (before and after 1994 Rwanda Genocide), we selected a case methodology as the most appropriate approach for this study (Baxter & Jack, 2008 Guerrero et al., 2014). Our study is set in Rwanda and we purposefully selected universities that possessed some of the conditioning factors posited by Urbano & Guerrero (2013) and that were based in both urban and rural contexts. Table 1 provide an overall summary of each entrepreneurial university.
We used a systematic approach to data gathering across all entrepreneurial universities case studies. Field notes by one member of the authoring team who visited Rwanda in October 2019 also complimented our data collection. This further supported triangulation of the case data and findings with respect to reliability and validity (Yin, 2009). With respect to our data, we developed a cross case analysis to identify common themes and patterns, and through an iterative process, a deep understanding of the data. In the next section we outline our findings.

| FINDINGS
Analysis of our findings we have identified a number of institutional constraints on the entrepreneurial university and ecosystem development as well as its evolution post conflict.

| Institutional constraints on the entrepreneurial university to EE development
Our findings illustrate how in a post conflict, transitional economy the role of the entrepreneurial university in EE development is constrained by a number of institutional factor constraints including, structures, systems, leadership, strategies, and culture (Table 2).

| Structures
We found some evidence of strategy in Rwandan HLIs, such as Indus- provide placement assistance to their students, 59% consult industry to update or revise their course curriculum, and no HLI has applied for any patent in 2014 (GHRDC, 2015).

| Systems
We did find evidence among our case study entrepreneurial universities where they had set up bilateral collaborative arrangement with  negative implication to entrepreneurial orientation as indicated by Fiet (2001) and the capacity to entrepreneurial universities to contribute to EE building.

| Leadership
We found some evidence of leadership focus on third mission activities and the broader contributions of their institutions can make beyond to EEs. The leadership and institutional focus tends to be more on teaching and research some of which is more applied to meet local economic and societal needs. However for example, INES Ruhengeri has made progress is establishing structures and systems to drive its entrepreneurial mission whereby each department and its academic members have the autonomy to pursue and establish external linkages with industry based on the departmental vision that feeds into the overall vision of the institution and the leadership is the driving force. This approach has facilitated INES Ruhengeri to steer and drive its third mission and it is now renowned for its academic excellence and high quality of graduates that are highly employable. However, more widely among Rwanda's institution there seems to be limited focus leadership which respect to third mission activity and this reflected with only 3% of institutions have patent, 24% have laboratories sponsored by the industry, and 28% providing consultancy work to industry (GHRDC, 2015).

| Strategies
We found that some of the HLIs' mission statements can appear ambiguous or not "entrepreneurial" in orientation, The overriding challenge in implementing such strategies is the lack of sufficient resources. In terms of strategies what we did find in our case study entrepreneurial universities is a strong focus on teaching mission.
We found that traditional teaching methods are more predominant by some institutions are adopting new experiential teaching methods that enable students develop critical thinking and communications skills that are a pre-requisite for success, not just in entrepreneurship, but also for wider institutional building. However, Rwanda still faces challenges in this regard. A recent report from Higher Education Council found that five private HLIs in the country have been closed permanently over inadequate staff and lack of enough training facilities, among other requirements after an external audit by the government to assess challenges affecting HLIs.

| Culture
Institutional culture is a key determinant of the type of entrepreneur- We found an absence of role models or entrepreneurial guest speakers and this hampers the creation of an entrepreneurial culture among students and on campuses. Also, we found little evidence of role model for entrepreneurship and how faculty were encouraged or even rewarded to engaging in their mission activities. The absence of incentives for those who engage in entrepreneurial activities is an inhibiting factor. To ensure success, the entrepreneurial university needs to engage and collaboration with industry and government in order to contribute effectively to the EE. In Table 3 we chart the evolution of the entrepreneurial university's main ecosystem actors (industry, government, and academia) in Rwanda from pre conflict to post conflict.
Next, we outline the role of the entrepreneurial university in the evolution of the EE.

| EE building as an evolutionary process
Analysis of our findings revealed the evolution of the entrepreneurial university in the context of the post conflict EE in Rwanda, enabling us to identify how the EE evolves through a number of stages; embryonic, destruction, formation, and capacity building and the role that entrepreneurial universities play in contributing to EE development.

| Embryonic stage
The first stage is the embryonic stage and is identified as occurring prior to the conflict in Rwanda. During this stage, entrepreneurial  There was only 13 higher learning institution in the country. Intake was relatively low but gradually increasing (921 in 1980, 1,572 in 1985) NUR had only 2 campuses. In the early 1990's, the expansion of the system saw public and private enrolment rising to about 5,000 students.
All higher learning institutions and vocational training centers were destroyed, or nonfunctional. Teachers and children were killed or fled; schools and colleges were destroyed, burned, looted and pillaged, and their properties stolen or destroyed. The National Archives lost all its documents. The National Library was burned down.
The government gave the highest priority to the reestablishment of the one public university. NUR consolidated the two campuses into one campus for the immediate future, due to reasons of cost and security. National funds were made available to recruit and remunerate regional and international staff in order to ensure the functioning of the university, and urgent appeals went out to bilateral and multilateral organizations to provide further funding for the university, for other government institutions of higher education and for the immediate development of higher institutions in the private sector Tertiary education was very small, and research at the university was practically non- universities played a significant role in the economic growth of the country, and in supporting the establishment of an EE. Such entrepreneurial universities served as incubators of knowledge creation entrepreneurship, a primary focus during this stage (Cohen, 2006;Colombelli et al., 2019;Mack & Mayer, 2016). However, building a strong EE in such a transitional economy was hampered by ineffective government policies, low student enrolment at entrepreneurial universities and slow infrastructure development. Supporting institutions during this embryonic stage were weak and ineffective in facilitating networking of actors and the transfer of knowledge for entrepreneurial activities to adequately sustain the birth of a national EEs. Arguably, the government was considered the main actor in the establishment and nurture of EEs through its programmes and incentives which were limited in scope. In addition, support structures through which university actors such as faculty, support staff, and students could network with actors outside the university (and vice versa) were limited.

| Destruction stage
The second, destruction stage, was the direct result of the conflict period in Rwanda (April-July 1994). Prior to the conflict, the establishment stage of the EE has been slow as described in the embryonic

| Formation stage
The third stage, the formation stage, consists of a process of rebuilding idea of the entrepreneurial university in the aftermath of the conflict and was a period when universities focused solely on addressing rudimentary economic and civil society needs. Our study highlights that entrepreneurial universities focus at this time was on rebuilding physical resources and knowledge infrastructure, and in a practical sense on developing new degree programmes that were politically sensitive to conflicting parties and that met the development needs of the country at that time. In essence, during this stage there was a focus on rebuilding the university system but limited entrepreneurial activity from universities regarding their role in developing the wider EE.  (Urbano & Guerrero, 2013). The development of third mission activities of entrepreneurial universities in post conflict transitional economies is in its infancy compared to more established economies and entrepreneurial universities. This is particularly true in the African entrepreneurship context of Rwanda. Moreover, in developed economies Guerrero et al., (2014:434) argues that "university authorities need to recognize their core role at this time as not only building but also enforcing the university entrepreneurship ecosystem" of entrepreneurial universities that enables them to fully participate in ecosystem building. Whereas are our study has found that the entrepreneurial universities in post conflict transitional economy context core role and task is building the university entrepreneurship ecosystem that in the short to medium term is to support conflict resolution, civil society, and economic needs. In essence, we argue that these are antecedent foundational elements in order for an entre- 6 | CONCLUSION

| Managerial implications
Our study raises some relevant managerial implications. First, in a post conflict context, entrepreneurial universities play an anchor role for rebuilding the EE, initially through first mission activities-teaching.
Whereas the anchor role of entrepreneurial universities in more developed economies is on using on missions to contribute to the EE with a particular focus on supporting entrepreneurship and third mission activities. In essence their anchor roles differ. Entrepreneurial universities in post conflict and reconciliation contexts need to take on wider national building roles of peace building, humanitarian, and development than just focusing on the creation of entrepreneurial capacity through their three missions. Some of these activities are rudimentary but require entrepreneurial universities to cut across conflicting parties to addresses immediate societal and economic needs within its locality. Second, policy makers and donor countries in post conflict situations need to appreciate that investing in developing incrementally different missions of entrepreneurial universities takes more time and it has to be contextual aligned to meeting the needs of local stakeholders that is sensitive to but not constrained or defined by conflict. Such an incremental approach is a necessary foundation to the re-establishment of a functioning and sustainable EE. Third, in such contexts entrepreneurial universities should seek international collaborative and bilateral support to accelerate their capacity to build research and third mission activities that are essential for any EE to grow.

| Future avenues for research
Our findings opens up some opportunities for new research avenues with respect to the study of the EE and entrepreneurial universities in post conflict and transitional economies. While we did find some limited examples of specific formal institutional structures that are designed to focus on supporting entrepreneurs and that attempts to nurture "entrepreneurial potential" (Guerrero et al., 2014