Purpose This paper aims to develop and validate an ecological, multidimensional framework for assessing the maturity of innovation ecosystems, grounded in the metaphor of natural ecosystem maturity. As ecosystems go through various stages of their life cycle, they experience distinct patterns of growth, maturity and regeneration. Therefore, assessing their maturity level is crucial for managing evolution, designing innovative policies and enhancing sustainability. Design/methodology/approach This research, using the metaphor of maturity in natural ecosystems, presents an ecological framework for assessing the maturity of innovation ecosystems. In this framework, six main dimensions of maturity (value flows, ecosystem structure, actor status, innovation cycle, competitive pressure and ecosystem health) are defined, and 23 measurable indicators are developed for their quantitative evaluation. For external validation of the framework, the Goal–Question–Metric method and a survey of experts from the Iranian oil and gas industry were used. Data were collected from 98 experts across four ecosystems (oil, gas, refining and petrochemicals) and analyzed using a hierarchical approach based on the median and the 95% lower confidence bound. Findings The results revealed that the petrochemical ecosystem is at the “Defined” level, the oil and gas ecosystem is at the “Quantitatively Managed” level, and the refining ecosystem is at the “initial” level. From a theoretical perspective, this study provides a dynamic, multidimensional framework for assessing ecosystem maturity by integrating ecology and innovation management concepts. Originality/value This study adds to the literature by reframing innovation ecosystem maturity as an emergent, system-level and measurable condition rather than a linear life-cycle stage or an aggregate of organizational capabilities. It advances existing work by operationalizing ecological principles into a multidimensional, generalizable framework with six integrated dimensions and measurable indicators. Unlike prior fragmented and context-specific models, it enables systematic, comparative assessment across ecosystems. Empirically, it extends research into underexplored energy-sector and developing-country contexts, demonstrating how maturity varies within a single national system and supporting more targeted, evidence-based policy design.
Abbasi et al. (Fri,) studied this question.