From dependency to innovation: a community-based entrepreneurial ecosystem model for coastal youth in Indonesia

Purpose This study aims to examine how livelihood dependency, local resources and stakeholder relations shape youth entrepreneurship in four coastal villages in Takalar Regency, Indonesia, and how these conditions informed a locally grounded business-incubator framework. Design/methodology/approach The study used a qualitative, participatory rural appraisal-informed participatory co-design approach. Fieldwork was conducted from March to July 2025 in Boddia, Palalakkang, Tamalate and Tamasaju. Thirty-four adult coastal youth aged 18–30 participated in four village focus groups, while 16 key informants contributed through semi-structured interviews. Observation, document review, resource mapping, village-level problem ranking, livelihood-flow analysis, stakeholder mapping, matrix scoring, force-field analysis and validation discussions connected diagnosis to model refinement. Village problem-ranking scores are treated as facilitated group judgements rather than individual responses or formal consensus measures, while incubator-component totals represent comparative planning priorities across four equally weighted criteria. Findings Difficult access to formal finance and the absence of sustained mentoring received the highest cross-village totals (19 of 20), followed by weak digital marketing (17). Participatory livelihood analysis showed that patron-client relations provide boats, equipment, work and emergency finance, while simultaneously limiting asset accumulation, pricing autonomy and enterprise diversification. Co-design shifted the proposed intervention from generic, one-off training towards sustained product mentoring, practical digital support, phased local finance, explicit stakeholder roles and safeguards against elite capture. Originality/value The study advances entrepreneurial-ecosystem and stakeholder-governance arguments into a peripheral maritime setting by demonstrating how bonding ties can be protective and restrictive at the same time. Its immediate contribution is a participatively refined intervention framework and prospective six-month implementation targets; it does not claim evidence of incubator effectiveness or causal livelihood impact.