State-owned enterprises (SOEs) manage significant portion of world economy, including in the developing countries. SOEs are expected to be active and play significant role in improving the country’s economic performance and welfare through enhancing innovation performance. However, closed innovation process and lack of collaboration hinders SOEs to reach satisfying innovation performance level. This paper explores the construction and role of innovation ecosystem in the strategic entrepreneurship process of SOEs, of which is represented by dynamic capability framework, business model innovation, and collaborative advantage. Based on the analysis, this paper concluded that the collaboration between actors in the Innovation Ecosystem (IE) has positive effect to strengthening SOE’s Sensing Capabilities (SC) related to the process of exploring and identifying innovation opportunities. The increase of Sensing Capabilities (SC) will play significant role as input or antecedent on formulating proactive Innovation Strategy (IS) in orchestrating SOE’s innovation process. SOEs which has implementing proactive Innovation Strategy (IS) will be able to build collaboration and finding right Business Model Innovation (BMI). Finally, by building collaboration with other actors through the innovative business model has significant role to increase SOE’s Collaborative Advantage (CA), which considered as a proxy for competitiveness of SOEs.

This research seeks to identify the value of a few common factors determining the speed of economic growth in Baltic states and analyzes their impact in detail on Latvia’s lagging. Latvia’s economic starting point after regaining independence because of the collapse of the Soviet Union was at least comparable to its neighbors. Still, after the implementation of liberal reforms towards a free market’ economy and 20 years of operation as an EU full member, Latvia is lagging in growth, prosperity, and innovation. Within the analysis, this scientific paper pays special attention to the three less discussed factors, namely, the impact of post-Soviet mind-set effects as a part of local innovation culture, lasting since regaining independence in 1991; the importance of the availability of talent pull, its density, diversity, and accessibility; and readiness and capability to capture external knowledge and technology adoption. The overall approach is the systemic assessment of the national innovation system and/or innovation ecosystem, trying to understand the differences between these two models. Research is performed by analysis of the performance of the local innovation ecosystem in connection with export- and Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) policies. The authors present a novel method for visually representing economic growth and its application in analyzing process development within transitional economic nations. The study uses an analytical and synthetical literature review. It offers a new GDP data visualization method useful for monitoring economic development and forecasting potential economic crises—the outcomes from aggregative literature analysis in a consolidated concept are provided for required talent policy proposals. The post-Soviet mindset is seen as a heritage and devious underdog that has left incredibly diverse consequences on today’s society, power structures, economic growth potential, and the emergence of healthy, well-managed, and sustainable innovation ecosystems. The post-Soviet mindset is a seemingly hidden and, at the same time, an intriguing factor that has a significant impact on the desire to make and implement the right decisions related to innovation, education, and other policies promoting business development. The key outcome of the article is that sociocultural aspects and differences in innovation culture led to a slow-down of Latvia’s economic growth compared to Estonia’s and Lithuania’s slightly more successful economic reforms.

The coronavirus pandemic has reinforced the need for sustainable, smart tourism and local travel, with rural destinations gaining in their popularity and leading to increased potential of smart rural tourism. However, these processes need adjustments to the current trends, incorporating new transformative business concepts and marketing approaches. In this paper we provide real life examples of new marketing approaches, together with new business models within the context of the use of new digital technologies. Via hermeneutic research approach, consisting of the secondary analysis of the addressed subject of smart rural tourism in adversity of the COVID-19 and 6 semi-structured interviews, the importance of technology is underscored in transforming rural tourism to smart rural tourist destinations. The respondents in the interview section were chosen based on their direct involvement in the presented examples and geographical location, i.e. France, Slovenia and Spain, where presented research examples were developed, concretely within European programmes, i.e. Interreg, Horizon and Rural Development Programme (RDP). Interviews were taking place between 2022 and 2023 in person, email or via Zoom. This two-phased study demonstrates that technology is important in transforming rural tourism to smart tourist destinations and that it ushers new approaches that seem particularly useful in applying to rural areas, creating a rural digital innovation ecosystem, which acts as s heuristic rural tourist model that fosters new types of tourism, i.e. smart rural tourism.

Universities play a key role in university-industry-government interactions and are important in innovation ecosystem studies. Universities are also expected to engage with industries and governments and contribute to economic development. In the age of artificial intelligence (AI), governments have introduced relevant policies regarding the AI-enabled innovation ecosystem in universities. Previous studies have not focused on the provision of a dynamic capabilities perspective on such an ecosystem based on policy analysis. This research work takes China as a case and provides a framework of AI-enabled dynamic capabilities to guide how universities should manage this based on China’s AI policy analysis. Drawing on two main concepts, which are the innovation ecosystem and dynamic capabilities, we analyzed the importance of the AI-enabled innovation ecosystem in universities with governance regulations, shedding light on the theoretical framework that is simultaneously analytical and normative, practical, and policy-relevant. We conducted a text analysis of policy instruments to illustrate the specificities of the AI innovation ecosystem in China’s universities. This allowed us to address the complexity of emerging environments of innovation and draw meaningful conclusions. The results show the broad adoption of AI in a favorable context, where talents and governance are boosting the advance of such an ecosystem in China’s universities.