Liens pour trouver l’article original : Cliquez ici
Samuel Pierre1,2, Jocelin Dupénor2, Raymond Kernizan2, Marc-Donald Vincent2, Stéphane Dauphin-Pierre1,2, and Jimmy Pierre2
Résumé
Dans le nord d’Haïti, une expérience unique a été développée et un hub d’innovation a été réalisé ; le cœur de cela est une Cité du Savoir articulée autour d’une université entrepreneuriale, l’Institut des Sciences, Technologies et Études Supérieures d’Haïti (ISTEAH). Répartie sur sept départements du pays, comme son nom l’indique, l’ISTEAH est une université technologique qui vise à mettre la science et la technologie au service du développement en formant des citoyens, des leaders et des innovateurs capables de promouvoir l’avancement du pays. Résolument tournée vers l’entrepreneuriat, cette université est en train de mettre en place tout un écosystème entrepreneurial centré autour d’un incubateur-acélérateur pour créer, avec les étudiants, les diplômés et les jeunes du pays, des entreprises technologiques et sociales afin de générer de la valeur, créer de la richesse et des emplois et soutenir le développement durable. Dans cet article, cette expérience et ses perspectives sont analysées à la lumière des objectifs de développement durable.
Abstract
In Northern Haiti, a unique experience has been developed and an innovation hub has been realised; the core of this is a City of Knowledge that is articulated around an entrepreneurial university, the Institute of Science, Technology and Graduate Studies of Haiti (ISTEAH). Spread over seven departments in the country, as its name suggests, ISTEAH is a technological university that seeks to put science and technology at the service of development by training citizens, leaders and innovators who can promote the advancement of the country. Resolutely turning towards entrepreneurship, this university is in the process of setting up an entire entrepreneurial ecosystem centred around an incubator-accelerator to create—with students, graduates and young people from around the country—technological and social enterprises to generate value, create wealth and jobs and support sustainable development. In this article, this experiment and its perspectives are analysed in light of the sustainable development goals.KeywordsEntrepreneurial ecosystem, innovation stimulation, entrepreneurial university, incubation, poverty reduction
1 Department of Computer and Software Engineering, Polytechnique Montréal, Centre-Ville, Montréal, Québec, Canada2 ISTEAH, Cité du savoir, Génipailler, Milot, HaïtiCorresponding author(s):Samuel Pierre, Department of Computer and Software Engineering, Polytechnique Montréal, P.O. Box 6079, Succ. Centre-Ville, Montréal, Québec, H3C 3A7, Canada. E-mail: samuel.pierre@polymtl.ca
Introduction
The Reflection and Action Group for a New Haiti (GRAHN-World) was created on 20 January 2010, in Montreal, with the aim of contributing to the sustainable recovery of Haiti through long-term sustainable actions (Pierre, 2010). It is a global citizen monitoring organisation whose mission is to work for the advent of a New Haiti based on law, sharing, solidarity, education, respect for the environment and the cult of the common good. In its quest for an ideal of excellence in actions and interventions, in January 2013, the GRAHN created the Institute of Science, Technology and Graduate Studies of Haiti (ISTEAH) with the aim of putting science and technology at the service of development by training citizens, innovators and leaders who are capable of acting competently at the local, national and regional levels. The motto of ISTEAH is ‘Excellence at the service of the common good’.With over 200 international adjunct professors, more than 600 students in 40 graduate and postgraduate training programmes and approximately 100 in science and engineering undergraduate programmes, ISTEAH is Haiti’s largest academic institution dedicated to higher education in scientific and technological disciplines. Prioritising scientific research, innovation, leadership and citizenship as the basis of socio-economic development, ISTEAH aims to strengthen the scientific capacities of Haitian universities, particularly those in regions that are often faced with problems of skills shortages. Throughout the country, ISTEAH trains master’s and doctoral graduates to contribute to solving various national and regional problems and to counter the brain drain considered by the World Bank1 as the largest talent exporter, as shown in Figure 1. ISTEAH also offers continuing education and expert services to organisations with specific needs.
The creation of ISTEAH is innovative as the first Haitian university institution devoted mainly to graduate training currently active in seven regional cities. Before ISTEAH was founded, students who wished to undertake higher education in most fields had to leave their region and often the country to go abroad, which is one of the main causes of brain drain. The enrolment of more than 700 students in its three-cycle programmes, including more than 100 at the doctoral level, is an innovative result. No other university in Haiti has managed to recruit so many graduate students. Most Haitian universities are limited to undergraduate training. Those providing graduate training only offer a few programmes, of which very few are in science and engineering. Such a result is useful, particularly outside the capital, in regions where it is difficult to find highly qualified professionals.For its 10th anniversary, ISTEAH found it appropriate to project itself into the future by launching ‘ISTEAH 2.0’ to promote the ideal of a New Haiti focused on social progress, economic development sustainability and the creation and sharing of wealth, with an emphasis on science and democracy, a permanent quest for social justice and gender equality. This article addresses the ISTEAH 2.0 entrepreneurial ecosystem with which experiments are currently being conducted in the Grand Nord Innovation Pole (Northern Haiti), a project known as PIGraN—City of Knowledge. As a field development laboratory, this project is a contribution to the global development of smart cities (El-Garoui et al., 2020) in terms of testing experimental economics and evaluating and disseminating solutions to fight poverty (Banerjee & Duflo, 2009).This article is organised as follows. The second section briefly presents background and related work. The third section outlines the foundations of our entrepreneurial ecosystem. The fourth section presents and analyses some empirical results and the fifth section concludes.
Background and Related Work
Higher education institutions have a responsibility to contribute to economic and social community well-being. The concept of entrepreneurial universities has emerged and evolved in response to this mission. The triple helix model suggests a contribution to economic development through the application of research results to business practices and transfer to teaching and research objectives (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 1997). This has resulted in a growing need to connect universities and industries, which facilitates the transfer of academic knowledge into tangible results for society.
The Concept of Entrepreneurial University
Several studies, including a meta-synthesis of the literature on universities from a wide variety of countries, have been conducted to promote a better understanding of entrepreneurship (Uslu et al., 2019). This article focuses on the economic and social development of entrepreneurial universities, which are needed to foster an entrepreneurial culture for staff as well as students while providing internal support for innovation. It highlights four main operational themes that universities could implement: (i) the generation of income and alternative resources, including the commercialisation of research and knowledge; (ii) collaboration with industrial partners and the private sector; (iii) production and transfer of knowledge/technology as well as the establishment of incubation services, scientific hubs, innovation and entrepreneurship centres and (iv) the acquisition of innovative and creative property, such as trademarks, patents and licences, as well as the general protection of intellectual property rights. Entrepreneurial universities should not be limited to the creation of for-profit technology companies alone. They must also relate to the realisation of social projects with external actors, favouring entrepreneurial projects that can have a positive impact on the surrounding communities. An appropriate ecosystem covers both technological and social entrepreneurships, unfolding in a City of Knowledge such as the smart city in Northern Haiti.
Smart Cities, Cities of Knowledge and Entrepreneurial Incubation
The implementation of smart cities and cities of knowledge worldwide is becoming a new paradigm of sustainable development and accessibility to services based on a knowledge economy (Ergazakis et al., 2004; Hammar & Kaci, 2016). As a result, organisations and companies adhere to the knowledge economy for the purpose of production and the dissemination and use of knowledge and information (Ergazakis et al., 2006). However, frequent poor governance generating socio-economic, political and environmental crises prevents many countries from taking full advantage of this new structural paradigm. Haiti is not exempt from such a reality. Indeed, the state seems unable to plan integrated and sustainable development by resorting to innovative approaches. In this context, the construction of smart cities and cities of knowledge requires a set of structures to facilitate the sustainable development of the living environment. Hence, there is a need for entrepreneurial incubation activities to stimulate businesses and create wealth (Bruton et al., 2013; Chabaud et al., 2004; Fayolle et al., 2010).Although entrepreneurship is important, in both low-income and high-income countries, the lack of resources, the absence of support and the preponderance of risks and threats often constitute obstacles to the incubation of companies, while opportunities often appear in the form of complex problems (Chabaud et al., 2004; Loué et al., 2008). In recent years, programmes for local development purposes were implemented but too often failed (Chabaud et al., 2004; Khelil, 2016; Michael & Combs, 2008). Considering the lessons learned, ISTEAH has become a pioneering entrepreneurial university to create incubated companies in Haiti.Many questions about the various aspects of entrepreneurial incubation, including entrepreneurial incubation platforms (Zhang et al., 2022), post-incubation business survival and the impact of entrepreneurial universities (Prokop, 2021; Soetanto & Geenhuizen, 2019), the role of internship and business incubation programmes (Zreen et al., 2019), stakeholder commitment and strategic entrepreneurial partnerships in business incubation (Liu, 2020) and the causes and consequences of entrepreneurship failure (Khelil, 2016; Michael & Combs, 2008) have arisen. The literature reviews an abundant amount of entrepreneurial incubation experiences around the world (Drissi & Nassimi, 2022; Fayolle et al., 2010; Littlewood & Holt, 2018; Sanyuan Suen et al., 2019; Van Winden, 2019; Zheng et al., 2017). According to such sources, entrepreneurial activities are a factor in creating wealth, reducing poverty and favouring pacification (Bruton et al., 2013; Grilli & Marzano, 2023; Joseph et al., 2023).
A Look at the Causes of Start-up Failures
Lack of skills and fear of failure in the business implementation process are two of the top barriers to entrepreneurship, especially for youth (Assenova, 2020; GEM, 2022; Kebede, 2023; Zheng et al., 2017). As the process of entrepreneurship generates serious problems when the firm is considered an end in itself, the different phases of its structural construction must also be considered. Thus, incubation as one of the preliminary stages of entrepreneurship (Van Winden, 2019) is not necessarily considered and is obviously not protected by certain national legal frameworks.The entrepreneurial process generally follows the same trend as university entrepreneurship: Inspiration and tools facilitate the emergence of new business ideas; prototypes help to implement business plans; opportunities are incubated and exploited and goods and services are created (Garcez et al., 2023; Shane & Venkataraman, 2000). Incubation makes it possible to immunise a nascent company against potential threats and market competition while promoting job creation, economic development and technological transfer (Peters et al., 2004). On the other hand, it makes it possible to support start-ups with resources, training, mentoring, networking and, above all, legitimacy (Lukeš et al., 2019).In terms of incubation, start-ups require a set of technical and strategic reinforcements from companies, organisations or governments so that they do not quickly sink into bankruptcy. Incubator companies serve as an intersection between incubated start-ups and providers in terms of support and services, such as regional governments, universities and investors (Zhang et al., 2022). This explains why organisations, companies and governments are entering into a dynamic to create programmes that facilitate the establishment of innovative companies (Fayolle et al., 2010).
Typology of Incubators
Despite efforts, several researchers (Ayatse et al., 2017; Klimas et al., 2021) report bitter failures of start-up companies. Indeed, according to Martinez et al. (2019), 50% to 90% of these businesses fail within their first five years. Peters et al. (2004) divide incubators according to governance and business models into three types: nonprofit incubators, university-related incubators and for-profit incubators such as private organisations. This raises the question of the values embodied by different types of incubators, as entrepreneurship has its own identity characteristics. Indeed, according to Duening et al. (2021), entrepreneurial identity refers to five fundamental virtues: creating value for others; respecting market value judgements; honouring contracts and promises; honing engineering skills and optimism; developing resilience and the ability to bounce back from failure.Basically, the analysis of the literature on entrepreneurial incubation shows the existence of a diversity of incubation landscapes. There are different types of incubators: economic and local development incubators, scientific incubators, business incubators and independent private incubators (Chabaud et al., 2004). Organisations, universities and government incubation programmes do not necessarily consider the characteristics of the rapidly changing needs in the entrepreneurial environment or the support methods that start-ups need most. Entrepreneurial incubation experiences in different contexts can be helpful for implementing an incubation model based on the real and sustainable needs of start-up companies. ISTEAH’s incubation experiences are part of interdimensional and intersectoral dynamics aimed at multiplying the number of entrepreneurs to serve sustainable development locally.
Conceptual Framework of Our Entrepreneurial Ecosystem
The ecosystem inspired by the triple helix model (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 1997) depicts how different actors can contribute to fostering. This model targets three categories of actors and their interactions: universities, governments and industries (Bach et al., 2016). Academia produces knowledge that is supported by governments and commercialised by industries. To this end, governments must implement policies that promote the production of knowledge. Universities need to transfer the knowledge that is generated to industries (Leydesdorff, 2012).Using the neo-institutional approach, Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff (2000) present a tripartite approach. The static form of government plays a central role but can also affect the ability of other actors to initiate meaningful transformations. Such a static model offers few possibilities for innovation because bottom-up inspired innovation cannot be achieved. Another approach is laissez-faire: companies act as engines of change; other forms of organisation offer support services; universities provide qualified human capital and governments establish legal frameworks.Finally, there is a balanced model in which actors work in partnership. New structures are put in place, and the roles of each actor can then be interchanged to create new technologies, companies and relationships. Figure 2 illustrates the balanced model where hybrid organisations occupy the centre. This means that the government must foster interactions between academia and industries with the adoption of innovation policies. Many researchers have used this framework to understand and explain innovation policies and systems around the world (Etzkowitz & Ranga, 2015; Leydesdorff, 2012). These researchers examine how public policies can be implemented to promote or hinder economic development. They also examine how universities build models to foster innovation (Geoghegan et al., 2015) or consider the interactions between firms and the other components of the model (Fernandez-Esquinas et al., 2016; Kayser et al., 2016).
Etzkowitz and Ranga (2015) explain that analyses using the triple helix model must consider different aspects to facilitate the dynamics of interactions between these actors. First, we must consider the actors of the model, namely, governments, firms and universities. These actors can be institutional or individual, can carry out innovation activities through R&D or not, and can be part of a single sphere or be hybrid by participating in more than one sphere. The other aspect to be considered involves the relationships that make it possible to understand the type of interactions among these actors. These relationships can take many forms, including technology transfers or acquisitions, collaborations, networking, role substitutions, collaborative support and conflict management.In sum, the triple helix literature provides a model and tools for analysing the relationships among governments, universities and businesses. This literature presents the actors, defines the types of actions they can take during their exchange and makes it possible to specify the type of objective for which these actors can aim and the means to achieve them. It is also understood that these relationships and the system that its relationships will create may have different levels of advancement and that they will evolve over time as a result of the interrelationships. As explained by Etzkowitz and Ranga (2015), some of the triple helix theories are based on the literature on innovation systems. This literature takes a somewhat broader look at the institutional structures that make up a system and how this helps to generate relationships that will facilitate knowledge exchange.Innovation systems can be viewed from a national, regional or local perspective. A national innovation system is a network of institutions in the public or private domain whose activities and interactions imitate, import, modify and diffuse new technologies. The literature on innovation systems, regional or national innovation systems and innovation ecosystems makes it possible to analyse the networks that form between institutions and the way in which these networks influence the circulation of knowledge in each system.This article focuses on the links between different economic agents to explain how these links can facilitate the circulation of knowledge. The boundaries of the sector may vary according to certain research perspectives. Thus, one can take a more industrial approach by focusing on one industry; it is possible to take a technological approach or a more geographical approach by considering the local, regional or national environment, or even more broadly by focusing on the innovation ecosystem, regardless of its geographical location. The approach of innovation networks, on the other hand, makes it possible to focus on the network of actors with whom an organisation interacts, and the angle of innovation ecosystems makes it possible to go beyond geographical limits to simply focus on the network actors, regardless of their location, provided that they are connected to each other.The triple helix literature is superimposed on that of innovation systems and ecosystems by offering a more detailed analysis of the interactions among specific actors of an innovation system. In addition, this literature offers points of interest to consider and an analytical framework for this type of tripartite system by paying particular attention to the relationships and objectives of a system. Open innovation adds a certain systematisation of processes and the idea of an open system capable of managing the flow of knowledge to the theories presented previously. Indeed, it is seen as a distributed innovation process based on purposefully managed flows of knowledge across organisational boundaries, using pecuniary and nonpecuniary mechanisms consistent with the business model of the organisation. To successfully manage this knowledge, organisations will need to establish processes which will make it possible, among other things, to find partners, find technologies or knowledge, evaluate partners and manage the transfer of intellectual property. Organisations will be able to help companies perform these tasks, and these organisations will be able to use open innovation practices to achieve this. In short, these practices will make it possible to integrate knowledge that is external to an organisation so that it improves its performance in innovation, provides opportunities for knowledge transfer to the outside and creates collaborations in which knowledge will be produced with the help of other actors. The practices that are implemented to manage this knowledge may have different degrees of openness, that is, the organisation will offer different levels of permeability within its boundaries.In sum, the triple helix literature provides a model and tools for analysing the relationships among governments, universities and businesses. This literature presents the actors, defines the types of actions they can take during their exchange and makes it possible to specify the type of objective for which these actors can aim and the means to achieve them. We also understand that these relationships and the system that their relationships will create can have different levels of advancement and that they will evolve over time as a result of the interrelationships (Dauphin-Pierre, 2018).
Analysis of a Haitian Regional Experience
The ecosystem described in the previous section was deployed locally in 2020 in the City of Knowledge in Northern Haiti as a true entrepreneurial development laboratory. The incubator-accelerator stimulates local entrepreneurship by promoting the start-up of job-creating businesses and supports new entrepreneurs. In this section, we present the first empirical results obtained from this entrepreneurial incubation experience and describe the level of maturity garnered by the first companies that emerged in the City of Knowledge.
Entrepreneurial Incubation and Project Selection
Our ecosystem is based on a driving university player, ISTEAH, as an entrepreneurial university. ISTEAH is made up of seven graduate schools, including a Graduate School of Business and Entrepreneurship (ESAE). ESAE offers graduate study programmes in the following areas: business administration, project management, local government management, management sciences and economics. In addition to these formal training courses leading to master’s and doctoral degrees, ESAE offers two other levels of non-degree training aimed at non-university clienteles as part of the PIGraN project, which aims to transform Far North Haiti into a true innovation hub built around a City of Knowledge (Pierre, 2022).Our ecosystem, which is presented in Figure 3, shows the relationships among academia, government and business. In the context of this article, the university actor is ISTEAH, whose head office occupies the university sector of the City of Knowledge. ISTEAH offers training programmes for three study cycles: bachelor’s degree in science, engineering degree, DESS, master’s and doctorate. It also manages a school complex that includes an early childhood centre, a primary school, a secondary school and a vocational and technical training school, which are in fact laboratory schools that serve as a place for experimenting with educational innovations resulting from educational science research.
Within the triple helix ecosystem, the company actor refers to a network of companies, some of which operate in the City of Knowledge and others in the immediate environment. A business service centre was also created to respond more specifically to the needs of this network: IT, networks and telecommunications, accounting and management, custom-made training, business financing assistance, legal services, marketing services, quality control, electricity and energy, transport, logistics, etc. In addition, there is an incubator-accelerator that supports new entrepreneurs in launching and growing their business by offering them offices, coaching, training, financial assistance, etc. Its objective is to support local entrepreneurship by promoting the start-up of job-creating businesses in the region. The PIGraN incubator-accelerator offers innovative and start-up companies attractively priced premises, consulting services and professional and technical support. Particular attention is given to the technological and environmental sectors. At this stage, it is important to mention that the City of Knowledge and the first series of start-up companies widely use appropriate technologies. The notion of appropriateness simply refers to the use of local/regional inputs to produce goods or services. It also refers to the implementation of business models and mobilisation of the four forms of capital (financial, human, technological and social) adapted to the local community conditions and needs.The third actor in the ecosystem is the government, a generic term to designate public authorities at different levels. This specifically includes the Board of Directors of Communal Sections (CASEC), Town Halls, Ministries or any other public or para-public bodies.The main mission of the incubator-accelerator is to support hosted start-ups. This is done through a support committee made up of experienced professionals and entrepreneurs who agree to share their know-how to increase the success rate and accelerate the growth of emerging businesses. Here is a non-exhaustive list of supportive services offered:•Rental of business space at advantageous rates;•Free or shared operating costs for certain general items (reception, secretariat, phone, internet connection, photocopier, kitchen, parking, etc.);•Accessibility to common areas: reception room, conference rooms, multipurpose rooms and cafeteria;•Support and coaching by professionals from the business service centre with a variety of expertise: management, finance, production, market development, legal, marketing, etc.;•Support for the planning and monitoring of business plans through support adapted to the needs of each company and according to its stage of development;•Support for fundraising;•Facilitation of networking with technical centres, universities and research centres, as well as with regional and national networks of business people and economic stakeholders;•Training, luncheons and conferences with economic stakeholders and other strategic partners for residents of the incubator-accelerator and entrepreneurs.Supported by a network of professionals and experts located in several countries, the incubator offers a support system to validate a business idea, develop a project step by step considering all the essential dimensions (marketing, finance, legal, etc.) and produce a relevant business plan allowing credible and convincing solicitation of stakeholders (partners, investors, etc.). Such support is provided as follows:•Mentoring with collaborative work using practical methods and approaches;•Adaptive innovation highlighting an innovative, technological, iterative course adapted to each project;•Providing access to a network of multidisciplinary experts facilitating the sharing of experiences between project leaders and a community of successful entrepreneurs around the world.A design thinking approach focused on potential customers’ current and future needs and the way in which entrepreneurial projects provide concrete and adapted responses to these needs has been developed. Figure 4 illustrates the unique four-phase journey based on the context and stage of each project.
The Initial Incubation Process: From the Idea to the Constitution of the Company
Taking on this path with an idea and the desire to embark on entrepreneurship, project leaders benefit for 12 months from step-by-step support to grow their project based on our proven methodologies and an exhaustive analysis of different aspects of their projects.
The Hatching Step: From the Creation to the Launch of the Company’s Services/Products
The Eclosion course welcomes entrepreneurs into the launch phase of a product or service. Our experts help them to properly structure the business bases of their business project. During this hatching phase, which spans six to nine months, the project leader or entrepreneur meets potential clients and partners and participates in workshops on various business-related topics, such as the search for financing, networking, planning and management of financial operations, corporate governance and ethics and marketing and communication.
The Acceleration Stage: From Launch to Business Growth
The Acceleration course is intended for entrepreneurs who plan to grow their business. Lasting between three and six months, our support during this phase helps to accelerate the growth process of incubated companies. It is a personalised and intensive coaching programme to help companies reach new levels quickly.
The Propulsion Journey: From Growth to Business Expansion
The Propulsion phase, which lasts for three to six months, is intended as an expansion stage for the supported companies. It is aimed at entrepreneurs who plan to explore and reach new markets. Thanks to a solid network of world-class experts, this support makes it possible to quickly identify good business opportunities at the national, regional and international levels.
Selection of Projects to Incubate
Projects are selected based on inclusive and transparent criteria by a selection committee composed of multidisciplinary experts. Each year, between 10 and 15 entrepreneurial projects that respond to specific local or regional needs are supported. The support choices target start-ups, manufacturing companies, companies with job creation potential and businesses with an innovative aspect and/or technological potential. Niches are found in different fields: technologies, artificial intelligence and robotics, agro-industry, health, mechanics, biotechnologies, civil engineering, etc. The team of coaches and guides includes multidisciplinary experts of international calibre and personalities in the field. Table 1 lists a few projects that were selected and are currently in incubation, and further details for two of them are provided in Table 2.
Evolution of Companies Towards Maturity
In addition to the companies mentioned in Table 1, five start-ups are already very advanced in their incubation journey and should emerge within a year as viable companies producing goods and services for their respective clienteles. These are BICS, PIGraN Blòk, PIGraN CSE, PIGraN Agro-Industries and PIGraN Dlo. This section briefly introduces them.
BICS
The company Engineering Office of the City of Knowledge (Bureau d’Ingénierie de la Cité du Savoir, BICS) specialises in the construction of buildings and works of art within the City of Knowledge. As a general contractor, BICS also offers quality engineering and project management services to organisations, companies and individuals located in the vast perimeter of the Great North of Haiti, including the departments of North, North-east, North-west and Artibonite. BICS experts combine knowledge, know-how and interpersonal skills to meet the expectations of their customers.As an engineering company, BICS offers a full range of services, from design to construction, including audits and quality control assignments, in various sectors. BICS intervenes in areas such as landscaping, medical clinics and health centre construction, both residential and school construction and renovation, maintenance and security, factory installation and general civil engineering and infrastructure works.The company has already created a significant number of direct and indirect jobs in the region, thus contributing to the fight against poverty. In addition, aware of the needs of the underprivileged classes, BICS has developed a range of low-cost private homes. This initiative allows economically vulnerable people to access quality housing at an affordable price. The growing demand for this type of housing is also stimulating economic activities in the region.As it aims to build an ecological habitat, BICS pays particular attention to energy efficiency, the use of sustainable materials, adequate water management, landscaping that respects biodiversity, proper indoor air circulation and efficient waste management. The preservation of the environment is a major concern for BICS. In addition to promoting the harmonious development of the territory, BICS presents itself as a corporate citizen by training young people in construction trades, welcoming interns and prioritising regional inhabitants when hiring.
PIGraN Blòk
PIGraN Blòk is a block production plant whose mission is to manufacture better, cheaper and more aesthetic precast concrete elements for masonry in the far north of Haiti. To guarantee the quality of its products, the company is committed to training its employees so that they can manufacture blocks and decorative surface elements that meet customer needs. It promotes innovation by creating new shapes and colours for decorative elements, tiles and decorative elements of various surfaces.The creation of PIGraN Blòk has already been noticed in the region. Indeed, the company helps reduce poverty by generating direct and indirect jobs locally. By producing quality concrete blocks at a lower cost, PIGraN Blòk will generate a growing demand that will also stimulate local economic activity.In terms of ecology, the on-site manufacture of concrete blocks, the supply of raw materials via a short circuit and the use of energy-efficient manufacturing processes significantly promote the reduction of carbon emissions. This has a positive impact on the environment as greenhouse gas emissions are reduced.Nevertheless, PIGraN Blòk remains a social and solidarity company. It contributes significantly to the creation of employment opportunities, thus providing the inhabitants of the region with a stable and sustainable source of income. The reduction in production costs has made concrete blocks more accessible on the market, stimulating the realisation of construction projects at lower cost for individuals and companies. Reducing building costs can stimulate the construction of healthy housing and commercial premises. In addition, a recruitment policy favouring the hiring of local adults and the integration of young people into a building trades apprenticeship programme helps to reduce the unemployment rate in the community. The integration of representatives of the local population in the company’s governance bodies also strengthens the links with the population.
PIGraN CSE
PIGraN CSE, an international company specialising in the provision of high-value-added services, operates in several countries. PIGraN CSE pays particular attention to the personalisation of its services and the transfer of know-how to respond optimally to its customers’ requirements. It offers a wide range of services in areas such as IT, telecommunications, management and accounting, and legal services, among others. To date, PIGraN CSE has already carried out three projects under contract.The goal of all of the activities of PIGraN CSE is to support the creation and sustainability of businesses in all sectors of activity. Indeed, business creation is the most effective way to fight poverty. Aware of the importance of environmental issues, PIGraN CSE integrates environmental issues at the heart of its interventions. Social responsibility, at the origin of the creation of PIGraN CSE, guides all its actions. This company has strategic importance because it acts both as a generator of companies and as a springboard for their growth, thus promoting economic and social development.
PIGraN Agro-Industries
The company PIGraN Agro-Industries specialises in the production, acquisition and marketing of agricultural products. Its mission is to create market opportunities, facilitate partnerships and support companies to contribute to the prosperity of the agri-food sector. The company is committed to promoting sustainable development, food self-sufficiency, social equity and environmental responsibility.The activities of PIGraN Agro-Industries activities are focused on several areas, which include, among others, seeds, medicinal plants and poultry production; vegetable and tuber cultivation (including derived products); cattle, goat and pig breeding; the processing of fruits, leaves and seeds; horticulture; the manufacture of concentrate feeds and the management of an agricultural shop. This list is not exhaustive. Regarding poverty reduction, the activities of agro-industries promote the creation of jobs in the agricultural sector throughout the territory. In addition, export activities also contribute to job creation in this sector.Regarding ecology, PIGraN Agro-Industries has implemented measures aimed at minimising its environmental footprint, such as the use of renewable energy sources, the efficient management of agricultural waste, and the promotion of reforestation and biodiversity conservation. On the social level, PIGraN Agro-Industries encourages the training and empowerment of local farmers, especially women and young people, to promote their social and economic inclusion.
PIGraN Dlo
PIGraN Dlo (drinking water production plant) is a company involved in the production and distribution of quality drinking water for the inhabitants of Genipailler and its surrounding communities. As a corporate citizen, it strives to raise awareness of water scarcity among its employees and customers and to educate them on issues such as water protection, sanitation and accessibility for all. One of the characteristics of PIGraN Dlo is its ability to produce pure water at an affordable price, after which it is sold in various types of packaging to individuals, wholesalers, distributors and institutions. In the second phase, the company plans to use its quality water to produce fruit juices based on regional products.The activities of PIGraN Dlo contribute to improving the living conditions of the inhabitants of the region, with a visible impact in several areas. The company plays a role in poverty reduction by creating direct and indirect jobs in the region. Thanks to the production of water, commercial distribution and resale activities are developing, thus stimulating the local economy. All this is performed with the utmost respect for the environment. In fact, to preserve its raw material, water, PIGraN Dlo is committed to protecting the water table, maintaining watersheds, recovering polluted water (floods, rain) and recycling plastic packaging. In the medium term, the company plans to stop using such products.Despite its status as a commercial enterprise, PIGraN Dlo does not neglect its social responsibility. It creates employment opportunities, thus offering the inhabitants of the region a stable and sustainable source of income. Access to water also has a beneficial effect on the health of the population as the spread of infectious diseases is reduced. PIGraN Dlo also pays particular attention to education by participating in a community training programme on hygiene and public health for local schoolchildren and their parents. The exemplary nature of PIGraN Dlo lies in the fact that it combines commercial success and social commitment for the well-being of the inhabitants of the region.
Conclusion
In this article, we present an entrepreneurial ecosystem based on the triple helix model and inspired research on entrepreneurial universities to create wealth through job-creating businesses. The engine of this ecosystem is the ISTEAH, a technological and international university created in 2013 by GRAHN-World and defining itself as the University of New Haiti. After briefly presenting ISTEAH by placing it at the forefront of an approach aimed at countering the brain drain of Haiti, the article briefly explored the notions of entrepreneurial universities, smart cities, cities of knowledge and entrepreneurial incubators, concepts on which the Northern Haitian City of Knowledge entrepreneurial ecosystem is based.In addition, the preliminary results of the implementation of this five-year entrepreneurial ecosystem experiment were presented and analysed in this article. Emphasis was placed on the incubator-accelerator in the City of Knowledge as a generator of new businesses of all kinds: commercial, technological and social. We also analysed the initial impact of the five companies already in operation: BICS, PIGraN Blòk, PIGraN CSE, PIGraN Agro-Industries and PIGraN Dlo.Furthermore, it is important to mention that the economic development of the region—where the City of Knowledge is located—requires the establishment of basic infrastructure and services, with the vision of providing solutions to problems that hinder community activities. It is with this perspective that the sixth company of the City of Knowledge, PIGraN Enèji, is created to produce and distribute solar energy. This is not merely a simple entrepreneurial approach aimed at generating profit but an innovative, sustainable initiative based on the principle of solidarity shareholding. It will be a development lever for a rural, underequipped and disadvantaged territory. The creation of such a company is not an end in itself: it will contribute to overcoming a major constraint, namely, the lack of access to electricity. This is a decisive step for economic and social development and an opportunity for the entire region; in this way, all the needs of the local community that need to be considered, particularly those of education, health, transport infrastructure, access to drinking water and other basic services, can be addressed.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.
Note
References
Assenova V. A. (2020). Early-stage venture incubation and mentoring promote learning, scaling, and profitability among disadvantaged entrepreneurs. Organization Science, 31(6), 1560–1578. CrossrefAyatse F. A., Kwahar N., & Iyortsuun A. (2017). Business incubation process and firm performance: An empirical review. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, 7(2), 1–17. CrossrefBach T. M., Senff C. O., da Fonseca V. S., & Quandt C. O. (2016). Innovation and the triple helix model: A case study in Brazilian incubators. European Journal of Social Sciences, 53(3), 328–353.Banerjee A. V., & Duflo E. (2009). L’approche expérimentale en économie du développement. Revue d’économie politique, 119(5), 691–726.Bruton G. D., Ketchen D. J., & Ireland R. D. (2013). Entrepreneurship as a solution to poverty. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(6), 683–689. CrossrefChabaud D., Ehlinger S., & Perret V. (2004). L’incubation d’entreprises: la nouvelle frontière européenne. Journées nationales des IAE. Consulté le 18 mai 2023 sur https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00536307/Dauphin-Pierre S. (2018). La relation entre intermédiaires de recherche et PME, analyse et impacts. Thèse présentée en vue de l’obtention du diplôme de Philosophiæ Doctor, Département de génie industriel, Polytechnique Montréal.Drissi I., & Nassimi A. (2022). Système d’appui à la création d’entreprise: approche d’efficacité des pépinières d’entreprise. Cas TECHNOPARK. International Journal of Accounting, Finance, Auditing, Management and Economics, 3(2–1), 150–168. CrossrefDuening T. N., Hisrich R. D., & Lechter M. A. (2021). Becoming an entrepreneur. In Duening T. N., Hisrich R. D., & Lechter M. A. (Eds.), Technology entrepreneurship (3rd ed.; pp. 13–24). Academic Press. CrossrefDugger C. (2005). Study finds small developing lands hit hardest by ‘Brain Drain’ (p. A9). New York Times (ProQuest Historical Newspapers). Retreived, October 25, 2005, from https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documentsreports/documentdetail/426881468127174713/international-migrationremittances-and-the-brain-drainEl-Garoui L., Pierre S., & Chamberland S. (2020). A new SDN-based routing protocol for improving delay in smart city environments. Smart Cities, 3(3), 1004–1021. CrossrefErgazakis K., Metaxiotis K., & Psarras J. (2004). Towards knowledge cities: Conceptual analysis and success stories. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(5), 5–15. CrossrefErgazakis K., Metaxiotis K., & Psarras J. (2006). Knowledge cities: The answer to the needs of knowledge-based development. VINE, 36(1), 67–84. CrossrefEtzkowitz H., & Leydesdorff L. (1997). Universities and the global knowledge economy. A triple helix of university–industry–government relations. Pinter.Etzkowitz H., & Leydesdorff L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and ‘mode 2’ to a triple helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123.Etzkowitz H., & Ranga M. (2015). Triple helix systems: An analytical framework for innovation policy and practice in the knowledge society. In Mitra J., & Edmondson J. (Eds.), Entrepreneurship and knowledge exchange (117–158). Routledge.Fayolle A., Ben Salah A., Ben Salah I., & Belkacem L. (2010). Efficacité des pépinières dans la création d’entreprise innovante: cas de la Tunisie 1. Innovations, 33, 157–179. CrossrefFernandez-Esquinas M., Merchan-Hernandez C., & Valmaseda-Andia O. (2016). How effective are interface organizations in the promotion of university–industry links? Evidence from a regional innovation system. European Journal of Innovation Management, 19(3), 424–442.Garcez A. P., Franco M., & Silva R. (2023). Development of hard skills for the process of digital entrepreneurial education in higher education institutions. INTED2023 Proceedings, 7406–7411. CrossrefGEM. 2022. Global entrepreneurship monitor 2021/2022 global report: Opportunity amid disruption. GEM. https://www.gemconsortium.org/file/open?fileId=50900Geoghegan W., O’Kane C., & Fitzgerald C. (2015). Technology transfer offices as a nexus within the triple helix: The progression of the university’s role. International Journal of Technology Management, 68(3–4), 255–277. CrossrefGrilli L., & Marzano R. (2023). Bridges over troubled water: Incubators and start-ups’ alliances. Technovation, 121(102689), 1–16. CrossrefHammar A., & Kaci S. (2016). Cité du savoir à Tamda [Travail de maitrise]. Algérie: Université Mouloud MAMMERI De Tizi-Ouzou. https://www.ummto.dz/dspace/handle/ummto/16108Joseph J., Katsos J. E., & Van Buren H. J. (2023). Entrepreneurship and peacebuilding: A review and synthesis. Business & Society, 62(2), 322–362. CrossrefKayser A. C., Schreiber D., & Dal Ri R. S. (2016). Innovation in firms from collaborative projects. Romanian Review Precision Mechanics, Optics and Mechatronics, 49, 30–38.Kebede G. F. (2023). Entrepreneurship and the promises of inclusive urban development in Ethiopia. Urban Forum, 34, 1–30. CrossrefKhelil N. (2016). The many faces of entrepreneurial failure: Insights from an empirical taxonomy. Journal of Business Venturing, 31(1), 72–94. CrossrefKlimas P., Czakon W., Kraus S., Kailer N., & Maalaoui A. (2021). Entrepreneurial failure: A synthesis and conceptual framework of its effects. European Management Review, 18, 167–182. CrossrefLeydesdorff L. (2012). The triple helix of university–industry–government relations, In Carayannis E., & Campbell D. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurship. Springer.Littlewood D., & Holt D. (2018). Social entrepreneurship in South Africa: Exploring the influence of environment. Business & Society, 57(3), 525–561. CrossrefLiu Y. (2020). The micro-foundations of global business incubation: Stakeholder engagement and strategic entrepreneurial partnerships. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 161. CrossrefLoué C., Laviolette E. M., & Bonnafous-Boucher M. (2008). L’entrepreneur à l’épreuve de ses compétences: éléments de construction d’un référentiel en situation d’incubation. Revue de l’Entrepreneuriat, 7(1), 63–83. CrossrefLukeš M., Longo M. C., & Zouhar J. (2019). Do business incubators really enhance entrepreneurial growth? Evidence from a large sample of innovative Italian start-ups. Technovation, 82(83), 25–34. CrossrefMartinez M. G., Zouaghi F., Marco T. G., & Robinson C. (2019). What drives business failure? Exploring the role of internal and external knowledge capabilities during the global financial crisis. Journal of Business Research, 98, 441–449. CrossrefMichael S. C., & Combs J. G. (2008). Entrepreneurial failure: The case of franchisees. Journal of Small Business Management, 46(1), 73–90.Peters L., Rice M., & Sundararajan M. (2004). The role of incubators in the entrepreneurial process. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(1), 83–91. CrossrefPierre S. (2010). Construction d’une Haïti nouvelle: vision et contribution du GRAHN. Montreal: Presses internationales Polytechnique.Pierre S. (2022). How technologies can be used to reduce poverty and promote sustainable development in Haiti: The case of the PIGraN project. In Régnier Philippe, Frey Daniel, Pierre Samuel, Varghese Koshy, and Pascal Wild (Eds.), Handbook of innovation and appropriate technology for international development (New Series in I&AT, pp. 187–206). Edward Elgar Publishers.Prokop D. (2021). University entrepreneurial ecosystems and spinoff companies: Configurations, developments and outcomes. Technovation, 107. CrossrefSanyuan Suen A., Medeiros D., & Vilha A. (2019). Universities in entrepreneurial ecosystems: The recent experience of IT UFABC in Brazil. Innovation, Engineering and Entrepreneurship. LNEE 505, 1012–1017. CrossrefShane S., & Venkataraman S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217–226. CrossrefSoetanto D., & Geenhuizen M. V. (2019). Life after incubation: The impact of entrepreneurial universities on the long-term performance of their spin-offs. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 141, 263–276. CrossrefUslu B., Calikoglu A., Seggie F. N., & Seggie S. (2019). The entrepreneurial university and academic discourses: The meta-synthesis of higher education articles. Higher Education Quarterly, 73, 285–311. CrossrefVan Winden W. (2019). Boosting the entrepreneurial scene in cities: Experiences and reflections from the InFocus network: A short communication. International Journal of Knowledge-based Development, 10(2), 97–106. CrossrefZhang Y., Liu X., & Fan L. (2022). Understanding incubated start-ups continuance intention towards entrepreneurial incubation platforms: Empirical evidence from China. Sustainability, 14(23), 15802. MDPI AG. CrossrefZheng W., Xu M., Chen X., & Dong Y. (2017). Who is shaping entrepreneurial experience? A multiple case study of Chinese entrepreneurial learning. Management Decision, 55(7), 1394–1409. CrossrefZreen A., Farrukh M., Nazar N., & Khalid R. (2019). The role of internship and business incubation programs in forming entrepreneurial intentions: An empirical analysis from Pakistan. Central European Management Journal, 27(2), 97–113. Crossref
