• Wilert Puriwat Marketing Department, Faculty of Commerce and Accountancy, Chulalongkorn University
  • Suchart Tripopsaku School of Entrepreneurship and Management (BUSEM), Bangkok University
  • Chakrit Pichyangkul School of Management, Mah Fah Luang University


Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions, Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM), Asia


The purposes of this paper are to study the level of Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions (EFCs) in enhancing Thai entrepreneurial society in 2016 and to compare with the secondary data of the levels of EFCs with 8 Asian GEM Member countries; namely, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, China, and Taiwan. This paper is utilized the GEM data in National Expert Survey (NES) part. The 36 experts in 9 business fields of each country were asked to evaluate the levels of EFCs of their countryside. The result of NES shows that three most readiness Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions (EFCs) in Thailand are physical infrastructure ( X = 3.83), cultural and social norms ( X = 3.35), and market openness respectively ( X = 3.15). Furthermore, compared with other 9 countries, Thailand has consistently been ranked the third lowest in terms of Entrepreneurial Financial Support, Government Policy, Government Entrepreneurship Programs, R&D Transfer, and Physical Infrastructure factors are ranked third from the bottom. The results underline the fact that in order to enhance and achieve sustainability for Thai entrepreneurial society, these EFCs need to be further developed and improved.


Download data is not yet available.


สำนักงานส่งเสริมวิสาหกิจขนาดกลางและขนาดย่อม.(2558). รายงานสถานการณ์ SMEs ปี 2558. สืบค้นเมื่อ 23 ธันวาคม 2558, จาก

สุชาติ ไตรภพสกุล. (2558). รายงานสถานภาพระดับความเป็นผู้ประกอบการของประเทศไทยจากโครงการการศึกษาสังคมความเป็นผู้ประกอบการระดับโลกของ Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM). วารสาร BU Academic Review, 14(2), 50-68.

Ács, Z. J., Autio, E., & Szerb, L. (2014). National systems of entrepreneurship: Measurement issues and policy implications. Research Policy, 43(3), 476-494.

Bosma, N., Jones, K., Autio, E., & Levie, J. (2008). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2007. Babson College, London Business School, and Global Entrepreneurship Research Association (GERA).

Bosma, N., Coduras, A., Litovsky, Y., & Seaman, J. (2012). GEM Manual: A report on the design, data and quality control of the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association.

Feld, B. (2012). Startup communities: Building an entrepreneurial ecosystem in your city. John Wiley & Sons.

Isenberg, D. (2011). The entrepreneurship ecosystem strategy as a new paradigm for economic policy: Principles for cultivating entrepreneurship. Presentation at the Institute of International and European Affairs.

Kantis, H. D., & Federico, J. S. (2012). Entrepreneurial Ecosystems in Latin America: the role of policies. International Research and Policy Roundtable (Kauffman Foundation), Liverpool, UK.

Kelly, D., Singer, S., & Herrington, M. (2016). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) Global Report 2015/2016, Global Entrepreneurship Research Association.

Malecki, E. J. (2011). Connecting local entrepreneurial ecosystems to global innovation networks: open innovation, double networks and knowledge integration. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 14(1), 36-59.

Mason, C., & Brown, R. (2014). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and growth oriented entrepreneurship. Final Report to OECD, Paris.

Moore, J. F. (1993). Predators and prey: a new ecology of competition. Harvard business review, 71(3), 75-83.

Napier, G & Hansen, C (2011). Ecosystems for Young Scaleable Firms, FORA Group.

Zacharakis, A. L., Shepherd, D. A., & Coombs, J. E. (2003). The development of venture-capital-backed internet companies: An ecosystem perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(2), 217-231.



How to Cite

Puriwat ว., Tripopsaku ส., & Pichyangkul ช. (2020). THE STUDY OF ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS IN ENHANCING ENTREPRENEURIAL SOCIETY: A CASE STUDY OF THAILAND. Suthiparithat, 30(95), 89–102. Retrieved from



Research Articles