Access to this full-text is provided by Frontiers.
Content available from Frontiers in Environmental Science
This content is subject to copyright.
Promoting sustainable
entrepreneurship in training and
education: The role of
entrepreneurial culture
Aida Ahmed Zahrani*
Department of Business Management, College of Science and Humanities in Remah, Majmaah
University, Al Majmaah, Saudi Arabia
The main purpose of this research was to investigate how universities may help
Saudi Arabian students who are planning to become entrepreneurs promote
sustainability development goals. The intersection of ecological development
and entrepreneurship is referred to as “sustainable entrepreneurship.”
Entrepreneurs want to provide practical educational solutions. Thus, this
study seeks to fill this gap by developing a new model for measuring the
relationships between entrepreneurial culture, sustainability training, and
sustainability education in Saudi Arabia. A quantitative research “survey
questionnaire”found in the human relations theory of sustainable
entrepreneurship was used to collect data. This study looked at the impact
of three dimensions connected to the role of entrepreneurship in higher
education using AMOS and Structural Equation Modelling (SEM). The data
(n= 252) was examined using AMOS and SEM. Therefore, this study
specifies 37 items, three of which are the most important. 1) a sustainable
entrepreneurial culture, 2) sustainability training, and 3) sustainability education.
The findings imply that a sustained entrepreneurial culture has a good influence
on training and education. Furthermore, sustainability training has a good
influence on sustainability education. As a result, this research supports the
extended human relations theory of the function of a sustainable
entrepreneurial culture by indicating that the model anticipates university
students increasing their entrepreneurial culture via training and education in
higher education.
KEYWORDS
entrepreneurial culture, training sustainabile, and education sustainabile, structural
equation modeling (SEM), sustainable entrepreneurship (SE)
Introduction
Sustainable entrepreneurship instructors teach people how to successfully use current
resources to achieve sustainability growth while not risking future generations’ability to
access resources (Hermes and Rimanoczy, 2018). “Preservation of nature, intensive care,
and society in the order to pursue of perception opportunity to bring into presence
products in the future, processes, and services for benefit, where gain is broadly construed
OPEN ACCESS
EDITED BY
Usama Awan,
Lappeenranta University of Technology,
Finland
REVIEWED BY
Joanna Rosak-Szyrocka,
Częstochowa University of Technology,
Poland
Gulnaz Muneer,
Bahauddin Zakariya University, Pakistan
*CORRESPONDENCE
Aida Ahmed Zahrani,
Aida.z@mu.edu.sa
SPECIALTY SECTION
This article was submitted to
Environmental Economics and
Management,
a section of the journal
Frontiers in Environmental Science
RECEIVED 07 June 2022
ACCEPTED 09 August 2022
PUBLISHED 06 September 2022
CITATION
Zahrani AA (2022), Promoting
sustainable entrepreneurship in training
and education: The role of
entrepreneurial culture.
Front. Environ. Sci. 10:963549.
doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.963549
COPYRIGHT
© 2022 Zahrani. This is an open-access
article distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License
(CC BY). The use, distribution or
reproduction in other forums is
permitted, provided the original
author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are
credited and that the original
publication in this journal is cited, in
accordance with accepted academic
practice. No use, distribution or
reproduction is permitted which does
not comply with these terms.
Frontiers in Environmental Science frontiersin.org01
TYPE Original Research
PUBLISHED 06 September 2022
DOI 10.3389/fenvs.2022.963549
to include financial and non-gains to individuals, the economy,
and society,”(Shepherd and Patzelt, 2011)define sustainable
entrepreneurship. This definition highlights that sustainable
entrepreneurship encompasses not only the creation of new
sustainable businesses, but also the transformation and
management of existing businesses to make them more
sustainable. As a result, sustainable entrepreneurship can
occur to varying degrees in start-ups, small and medium
businesses (SMEs), and major corporations (Gast et al., 2017).
Given its significance, (Hall et al., 2010) state that the goal of
sustainable entrepreneurship is to build a more sustainable and
equitable society. Several institutions throughout the globe have
launched research and training programs on sustainable
entrepreneurship in order to play a vital role in the
development of sustainable societies (Décamps et al., 2017;
Olalla and Merino, 2019). To give sustainable
entrepreneurship education modules, educators frequently
combine sustainability-related themes with entrepreneurship
education (Gast et al., 2017). Sustainable entrepreneurial
education and training, in general, helps graduates develop
new relationships that will eventually aid them in their future
responsibilities, in addition to increasing their skills (Chandra,
2016). Students, for example, can connect with a variety of
networks and perhaps profit from them by affiliating with
academic institutions. This is why the number of young
people interested in attending sustainable entrepreneurship
training programs is increasing (Hesselbarth and Schaltegger,
2014). According to (Chandra, 2016), sustainable
entrepreneurship courses, extracurricular activities, and
contests are becoming increasingly popular in Hong Kong.
The intersection of sustainable development and
entrepreneurship is referred to as sustainable
entrepreneurship. Since the 1990s, sustainable development
has been a major notion in policy, society, and industry. It is
most generally characterized as “filling current demands without
jeopardizing future generations’capacity to fulfill their own
needs”(WCED: World Commission on Environment and
Development, 1987). Thus, while acknowledging the
connection of the natural environment, societal welfare,
economic performance, and sustainable entrepreneurship,
sustainable development must preserve intra-generational
equity while simultaneously developing inter-generational
equity. Although all of these labels describe the dynamic link
between enterprise, society, and the environment, their market
and profit orientations differ (Binder, 2017). According to
(Binder et al., 2015) have highlighted five components that
are typically included in sustainability entrepreneurship
definitions. First and first, academics are interested in the
process of identifying, developing, and exploiting possibilities.
Second, the triadic link inherent in the notion of sustainable
development to balance economic, social, and ecological effects is
reinforced. Third, the transformational potential of future
products and services is included in the definitions. Fourth,
definitions incorporate the source of opportunities: resourceful
entrepreneurs generate them, or an actor’s vigilance reveals a
market weakness that may be taken advantage of. Finally, some
researchers expressly admit who takes advantage of chances
(i.e., the entrepreneurs). Because researchers highlight the idea
that sustainable entrepreneurship is a process beyond definitions,
the chapter will show sustainable entrepreneurship in action,
which is also useful for understanding how sustainable
enterprises evolve in practice. Most entrepreneurship studies,
including recent sustainable entrepreneurship research (Belz and
Binder, 2017), focus on the entrepreneurial process. Also,
according to Wang, (Wang, 2022) asserts that social
entrepreneurship and innovation have an impact on value
creation and sustained economic development. Noneconomic
advantages and emotions often initiate the sustainable
entrepreneurial process: it is the compassion to promote the
well-being of others that develops a shared vision between the
founders, the firm, and its members (Farny, 2016). The
identifying of a specific ecological or social problem is the
start of a sustainable entrepreneurship process (Belz and
Binder, 2017). Entrepreneurs must have the skill and incentive
to improve their community or social well-being in order to be
sustainable (Muñoz and Cohen, 2018). Community-based
entrepreneurship, ecopreneurship, environmental
entrepreneurship, hybrid organizing, pro-social venturing,
social entrepreneurship, societal entrepreneurship, and
sustainable-ethical entrepreneurship are all similar but distinct
concepts that emphasize entrepreneurial activity as a potential
solution to environmental degradation and social inequality in
academic discourse (Shepherd and Patzelt, 2011;Muñoz and
Cohen, 2018). Additionally, according to Awan et al. (Awan et al.,
2022), embracing Industry 4.0 and the circular economy is
essential for internalizing knowledge flows among various
value chain actors and achieving more sustainable growth.
Therefore, in this research, the interest of students in starting
their own businesses has increased as educators create their own
internal ecosystems to support student driven
entrepreneurship. Also, we discovered that educators lack a
method for enticing their students to accept internships in
sustainable businesses. Instead, they are required to carry out
their own pilot projects to get real-world experience that will be
helpful whenever they start their own businesses. In addition, the
responders emphasize how the curriculum they developed is
motivated by a blend of theory and experience, aiding graduates
in undertaking business creation after the course. However,
educators desired that graduates launch businesses after
receiving their degrees. Furthermore, the outside world has
been crucial in supporting student-led projects. As a result,
the educators can support student-led sustainable
entrepreneurship by leveraging both student and industry
interest. Teachers encourage students to start sustainable
businesses as soon as it starts their education. Students can
narrowly focus on venture formation thanks to this
Frontiers in Environmental Science frontiersin.org02
Zahrani 10.3389/fenvs.2022.963549
orientation so early in the program. An educator emphasizes that
we encourage our students to start sustainable businesses along
the learning curve by exposing them to social realities and the
issues that occur in the community. In fact, several kids come to
us with a list of ideas that they want us to address, this makes our
job simple. According to the findings, educators who are
motivated by the education issue can start training in
sustainable entrepreneurship with the goal of inspiring
students to start sustainable businesses focused on training
and education. To do this, we first asked them about the skill
shortages in the training and education they contribute to solve
the problem at any level to promoting sustainable
entrepreneurship in training and education by the role of
entrepreneurial culture. Thus, the aim of this study was to
develop a new model for measuring sustainable
entrepreneurship in Saudi Arabia through education and
training.
Problem background
It is controversial whether entrepreneurship should be
included in academic courses or programs. As a result,
(Abdullah, 2020) claims that entrepreneurship is strongly
associated with Business and Economic studies in several
European nations, such as Spain and the United Kingdom.
Unlike traditional entrepreneurship, which focuses primarily
on increasing profits, sustainable entrepreneurship is based on
the premise that entrepreneurs have the ability to create
economic, social, and environmental value through their
business activities (Belz and Binder, 2017). The word
encapsulates the dynamic interaction that exists between
entrepreneurs as economic agents, society, and the natural
world. “Sound investment is focused on the conservation of
nature, life support, and community in the order to pursue of
perceived opportunities to bring into existence products in the
future, processes, and services for gain, where gain is broadly
interpreted to include financial and non gains to individuals, the
economy, and society,”(Shepherd and Patzelt, 2011), offer a
prominent definition. Rather than attempting to limit social and
environmental harm, entrepreneurship should strive to
regenerate the environment and promote constructive social
change (Markman et al., 2016). As a result, sustainable
entrepreneurship views entrepreneurship as a possible solution
to environmental deterioration and social inequity (Cohen and
Winn, 2007;Shepherd and Patzelt, 2011). At the moment, there
are at least three perspectives on sustainable entrepreneurship in
the literature, each with a different understanding of the
confluence of economic, social, and environmental
sustainability (Farny, 2016). The adaptation of Elkington’s
Triple Bottom Line (TBL) model (Elkington, 1994) into
sustainable development entrepreneurship as a concept of
intersection between both the economy, society, and the
environment, which has been widely applied in
entrepreneurship (Cohen and Winn, 2007;Hockerts and
Wüstenhagen, 2010;Schaltegger and Wagner, 2011).
Furthermore, Elkington asserts that balancing the
requirements of the environment, society, and economy has
largely become an accounting exercise for most businesses,
rather than resulting in a sustainability economic reform
(Elkington, 2018). The second way of looking at sustainability
is to use Passet’s Bioeconomy model (Passet, 1996), which
culminates in a notion of embeddedness called sustainability
entrepreneurship. The key argument is that, in light of previous
negative consequences, entrepreneurship should be understood
as rooted in, and so constrained by, the natural environment and
society (Markman et al., 2016). As a result, it is necessary to
emphasize that the environment comes first, since it is the
ultimate basis for all human activity, and society comes
second, as it is nested inside the economy (Markman et al.,
2016). Simultaneously, sustainable entrepreneurship has
structural tensions as a result of pursuing numerous goals,
which are likely to lead to internal disputes (Binder, 2017).
Conflicts arise primarily as a result of the degree to which
numerous objectives are integrated or separated in
organizational architecture, organizational activities, and
organizational actors (Battilana and Lee, 2014). Highly
integrated sustainability businesses must deal with a variety of
organizational actors and competing interests.
The numerous aims of community-oriented sustainability
firms preclude the rigorous application of market logic,
necessitating the inclusion of a heterogeneous skillset with
varied origins in its personnel makeup (Awan et al., 2022).
Another, if less well-known, viewpoint sees sustainability
entrepreneurship as a notion of integration, in which
economic, social, and ecological entrepreneurship all come
together to produce sustainability entrepreneurship (Schlange,
2009;Heikkurinen et al., 2019). The Anthropocene economic
players have a collective obligation to organize in response to
ecological boundaries, which has substantial repercussions for
the connection between humans and other creatures, according
to the integrated approach to sustainability (Heikkurinen et al.,
2019). As a result, this methodology excludes weak examples of
sustainable entrepreneurship, such as compliance-oriented
business models, and only includes strong cases of
sustainability, such as regenerative and co-evolutionary
sustainability (Heikkurinen et al., 2019). Sustainable
entrepreneurship research has progressed quickly and is
diverse (Anand et al., 2021). The internally and externally
forces drive sustainable entrepreneurship uptake in people and
organizations (Ahmad et al., 2020); the abstract comprehension
of entrepreneurial success as a construct and its difference from
other forms of business organization (Schaltegger and Burritt,
2018); and the processes implied in entrepreneurial success, such
as opportunity recognition and business model building
(Schaltegger and Burritt, 2018). (Criado-Gomis et al., 2018).
Frontiers in Environmental Science frontiersin.org03
Zahrani 10.3389/fenvs.2022.963549
In the case of the internal and external aspects of sustainable
entrepreneurship, research has focused on the antecedents of
activities related to the formation of a sustainable business, which
includes people’s aspirations to do so (Agu et al., 2021). Despite
the fact that there is a large body of literature dedicated to the
study of conventional entrepreneurship’s behavioral intents,
research on entrepreneurial intentions when the sustainability
component is at risk is still in its infancy (Arru, 2020). Even
though there is a growing desire for social responsibility and
environmental integrity in the corporate sector (Reyes-Rodríguez
et al., 2016), research on sustainable entrepreneurship intentions
and behavior is limited when compared to traditional
entrepreneurship research (Vuorio et al., 2018;Arru, 2020;
Agu et al., 2021). Closed concepts to entrepreneurial success
have been developed, such as recycling and reuse (Kirchherr
et al., 2017), social enterprise (Mair and Noboa, 2006),
environmental entrepreneurialism or eco-entrepreneurship
(Schaper, 2002), and self-sustaining entrepreneurship as a
whole (Kirchherr et al., 2017). (Anand et al., 2021). However,
there is still gap for study on sustainability entrepreneurial
education and training. Therefore, the goal of this study was
to develop a new model for measuring sustainable
entrepreneurship in Saudi Arabia through education and
training.
Research model and hypotheses
development
Academic training is critical in all three domains because
they all have the ability to help to achieving sustainability growth.
Academic institutions, in particular, play a key role in teaching
sustainable entrepreneurship (Dentchev et al., 2018). (Brock and
Steiner, 2009), for example, found that 75% of the sustainable
entrepreneurship courses they looked at were part of the
academic curriculum. Prior sustainable entrepreneurship
training-based research have found that sustainable
entrepreneurship training improves fledgling entrepreneurs’
self-efficacy and helps them start social companies (Smith and
Woodworth, 2012;Hockerts, 2015). (Kummitha and Majumdar,
2015).
There has been an increase in scholarly interest in
understanding students’intentions to engage in sustainable
entrepreneurship (Kirby and Ibrahim, 2011;Vuorio et al.,
2018), prosocial motives that influence their interest in
sustainable entrepreneurship (Miller et al., 2012;Bacq et al.,
2017), and the role of academic training in promoting sustainable
entrepreneurship practice (Kirby and Ibrahim, 2011)(Vuorio
et al., 2018), (Brock and Steiner, 2009;Miller et al., 2012).
However, there has been little research on the motivations of
academic institutions to teach sustainable entrepreneurship
(Fichter and Tiemann, 2018). For the practice of sustainable
entrepreneurship, education and training are critical. According
to (Becker, 1994), these two are the “most essential investments
in human capital”(p. 17). Individuals’inclinations to start
businesses (Estrin et al., 2016) and firms’capabilities to
engage in integrated value creation are heavily influenced by
human capital (Battilana and Dorado, 2010). Although the
distinction between training and education is sometimes
overlooked and confused, the two are beneficial in different
ways. While the former refers to general education obtained
via schooling or university, the latter refers to any training that
aids in the acquisition of skills (Becker, 1994) (see Figure 1).
Entrepreneurial culture on sustainability
Students from all higher education courses and all levels of
education who need to acquire these abilities began to get
entrepreneurship education in a way that made it feasible to
include students from all higher education courses and all levels
of education. As a result, entrepreneurial programs have been
developed and implemented on every continent as a means of
preparing and enabling people to face professional challenges,
create jobs, and develop unique and valuable solutions to a
variety of emerging social and economic issues, such as the
environment, poverty, social exclusion, and sustainability.
Furthermore, entrepreneurship education has taken on the
goal of developing an entrepreneurial culture, with the
abilities listed above serving as a framework (Plourde and
Pelletier, 2007;Mwasalwiba, 2010;Römer-Paakkanen and
Suonpää, 2017). Thus, an entrepreneurial culture can be
disseminated to all, ensuring that the economy and market
include not only those who are born into a family and
socioeconomic context conducive to entrepreneurship, but
also those who acquire the skills, competences, values,
emotions, and tools of this culture through learning and
training (Jardim, 2020). The development of entrepreneurial
culture elements necessitates the construction of an
educational environment conducive to the development of
value propositions, distinctive semiprofessional initiatives,
helpful goods, and creative services (European Commission,
2014). This teaching–learning process necessitates the
application of a number of educational methods. They can be
instructional games, entrepreneur biographies, group dynamics,
or business models, and they can be digital or printed, virtual or
in-person, individual or group. Similarly, the diffusion of
entrepreneurial skills programs through worldwide educational
networks underscores the importance of the entrepreneurial
sciences, such as management, economics, and pedagogy, in
promoting a global entrepreneurial culture (Jardim et al.,
2021). More specifically, the findings of this study suggested
that entrepreneurship-focused approaches had a significant
impact on the promotion of a particular culture, as evidenced
by the UKids initial teacher training program, which aims to
make entrepreneurship, particularly social entrepreneurship, a
Frontiers in Environmental Science frontiersin.org04
Zahrani 10.3389/fenvs.2022.963549
part of primary school curriculum (Rigg and van der Wal-Maris,
2020). In other countries, such as Brazil, Portugal, and Sweden
(Dolabela et al., 2019;Lackéus and Sävetun, 2019), this option has
been used. As a result, they are more valuable to participants who
would have a harder time accessing the programs’resources and
talents. As a result, in the logic of an inclusive education that
fosters social ascension, the diffusion of this culture among all
pupils becomes extremely important (Fiolhais et al., 2020;
Franco, 2020). Entrepreneurial culture ideals will be enabled
by the educator’s active, inspirational, and distinctive presence in
the most various promotional contexts of entrepreneurship. They
should know how to utilize these and other tools to encourage an
entrepreneurial mentality (Jardim et al., 2021).
Training on sustainability
Sustainable entrepreneurship training assists enthusiasts in
gaining the essential knowledge and abilities to launch
sustainable businesses (Klapper and Farber, 2016;Ortiz and
Huber-Heim, 2017;Warwick et al., 2017). Individuals who
have been taught in sustainability, for example, are more
likely to exhibit intents to start businesses, according to
(Kuckertz and Wagner, 2010). Earlier, (Hansemark, 1998)
stated that entrepreneurship training programs teach people
how to acquire confidence in order to increase their
motivation to start businesses. Individuals’attitudes toward
sustainability and their perceived entrepreneurial attractiveness
result in sustainability-oriented entrepreneurial goals, according
to a recent research by (Vuorio et al., 2018). In fact, (Germak and
Robinson, 2014) argue that enrolling in a sustainable
entrepreneurship training program should be considered a
beginning step toward practicing sustainable business.
However, there are differing perspectives on the goals of
sustainable entrepreneurship training, with some claiming that
it strives to increase awareness and build a more educated
community and others claiming that it aims to produce
business ideas (Martin et al., 2013;QAA, 2018;Alamri et al.,
2020a;Al-Rahmi et al., 2020). Scholars such as (Fayolle et al.,
2006) demonstrate that entrepreneurship training should not be
judged just on how well it increases a student’s likelihood of
starting a business. To put it another way, it should not be linked
solely with venture development outcomes. According to a study
produced by the (European Union, 2016), entrepreneurship
should be viewed as a transversal skill that is beneficial in
many aspects of human existence.
Education on sustainability
Integrating sustainability in academic curricula is a
desideratum in order to achieve sustainability literacy. The
positive correlation between the intensity of environmental
education in higher education and students’environmental
knowledge has been tested (Zsóka et al., 2013). Furthermore,
a positive relationship has been found between sustainability
knowledge and behavior for sustainability (Vicente-Molina et al.,
2013). However, progress has been unequal across universities or
countries. On one hand, students in North America and
Lithuania have reported that the sustainability perspective is
not much present in their introductory economic courses,
irrespective of the course of study they are attending
(Dagiliūtėet al., 2018). Romanian Business Administration
students have expectations from their universities to equip
them with sustainability entrepreneurial skills and knowledge
that are needed for their future entrepreneurship career by
including those topics in curricula, programs, and lectures
(Badulescu et al., 2015). Knowledge on (Al-Rahmi and
Alkhalaf, 2021) sustainable development is crucial for
students’eco-entrepreneurial intentions, as shown by the
results of studies in Asia (Nuringsih and Puspitowati, 2017;
Al-Rahmi et al., 2020;Al-Rahmi et al., 2021;Hameed et al.,
2021;Sayaf et al., 2022). Education on sustainability, with an
environmental focus leads to green entrepreneurial support and
behavior and to green venturing (Nuringsih and Puspitowati,
2017;Al-Rahmi et al., 2019;Alamri et al., 2020b;Al-Rahmi et al.,
2021;Hameed et al., 2021;Sayaf et al., 2021). Entrepreneurship
education aims to provide students the motivation, knowledge,
and abilities they need to succeed as entrepreneurs in a range of
situations (Cope, 2005). Traditional entrepreneurship education
focuses on themes such as innovation, economics, management,
and finance for new businesses. In comparison to issues like as
innovation and strategy implementation, sustainability has not
been heavily highlighted in entrepreneurship education
programs. Entrepreneurship education teaches people a variety
of abilities (Moses and Izedonmi, 2010), such as spotting business
opportunities and launching new enterprises (Bell and
Stellingwerf, 2012). The United Nations Educational,
Scientific, and Cultural Organization has underlined the need
of education for sustainable development (ESD) (UNESCO). In
November 2014, during the World Conference on Education for
Sustainable Development in Aichi-Nagoya, Japan, the Global
Action Program (GAP) for ESD was announced. The GAP takes
a two-pronged approach to ESD: 1) integrating sustainable
development into education, and 2) integrating sustainable
development into education (United Nations Educational,
2014). Furthermore, O’Brien believes that all three dimensions
of societal transitions in terms of practical, political, and human
components must be understood in order to achieve climate
change mitigation goals.
Research methodology
A questionnaire was employed as a data collection method in
this study using a quantitative approach. 272 students from
Frontiers in Environmental Science frontiersin.org05
Zahrani 10.3389/fenvs.2022.963549
students took part in the study survey. This research was
conducted at the start of the academic year 2021–2022. The
participants were given an introduction to the research before
completing the questionnaire, and their contribution was
completely optional. The survey took about 10–15 min to
complete. The participants were chosen from different
departments and faculties using a convenience-sampling
technique. After taking into consideration the missing data
and questionnaires that were incomplete, 20 questionnaires
were omitted. As a result, 252 questionnaires were considered
for further analysis and coded into SPSS. Data collected was
evaluated through AMOS for evaluating structural equation
modeling (SEM). The data was processed in two steps, with
each stage evaluating the measurement and structural model in
the arrangement as suggested by (Hair et al., 2019). In addition,
the authors decided to use AMOS for multiple reasons. First,
SEM is generally used when a study’s goal is to improve on an
existing theory (Urbach Frederik and Ahlemann, 2010).
Secondly, it allows for simultaneous analysis of both the
measurement and the structural model, resulting in more
TABLE 1 Measurement model assessment.
No Items Factors Estimate CA CR AVE
1 ECS1 <--- Entrepreneurial Culture on Sustainability 0.783 0.921 0.783
2 ECS2 <--- 0.830
3 ECS3 <--- 0.846
4 ECS4 <--- 0.818
5 ECS5 <--- 0.839
6 ECS6 <--- 0.857
7 ECS7 <--- 0.866
8 ECS8 <--- 0.840
9 ECS9 <--- 0.864
10 ECS10 <--- 0.858
11 ECS11 <--- 0.810
12 ECS12 <--- 0.853
13 TS1 <--- Training on Sustainability 0.771 0.923 0.907 0.683
14 TS2 <--- 0.888
15 TS3 <--- 0.761
16 TS4 <--- 0.841
17 TS5 <--- 0.739
18 TS6 <--- 0.789
19 TS7 <--- 0.789
20 TS8 <--- 0.801
21 TS9 <--- 0.795
22 TS10 <--- 0.768
23 TS11 <--- 0.840
24 ES1 <--- Education on Sustainability 0.718 0.919 0.928 0.697
25 ES2 <--- 0.804
26 ES3 <--- 0.713
27 ES4 <--- 0.749
28 ES5 <--- 0.790
29 ES6 <--- 0.856
30 ES7 <--- 0.814
31 ES8 <--- 0.743
32 ES9 <--- 0.762
33 ES10 <--- 0.842
34 ES11 <--- 0.864
35 ES12 <--- 0.851
36 ES13 <--- 0.765
37 ES14 <--- 0.772
Frontiers in Environmental Science frontiersin.org06
Zahrani 10.3389/fenvs.2022.963549
reliable estimations where samples are to be broken into sub-
samples (males/females, juniors/seniors, etc.). A minimum
sample size of 30 for each factor is necessary as recommended
by (Sekaran and Bougie, 2016). Hence, AMOS-SEM was the
appropriate tool for this study.
Instrument factors
For this study, the authors developed a questionnaire. The
first part includes questions intended to collect respondents’
demographic information, such as age, gender, specialization,
and year of study. The second section includes measurement
items to assess the three variables. Entrepreneurial culture on
sustainability was adapted 12 items from (Plourde and Pelletier,
2007;Römer-Paakkanen and Suonpää, 2017), training on
sustainability was adapted 11 items from (Brock and Steiner,
2009;Chandra, 2016;Klapper and Farber, 2016), and education
on sustainability was adapted 14 items from (Zsóka et al., 2013;
Nuringsih and Puspitowati, 2017;Al-Rahmi et al., 2021), see
Table 1.
Results and analysis
Measurement model assessment
Hair and his associates recommended considering the
reliability (Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability) and
validity of the constructs while evaluating the measurement
model (including convergent and discriminant validity) (Hair
et al., 2019). As seen in Table 1, they are both substantially
over the required given threshold of 0.7, as required, the
reliability of the construction was established on this basis
(Gefen et al., 2000;Kannan and Tan, 2005). The factor
loadings and average variance extracted (AVE) were
investigated in order to determine convergent validity (Hair
et al., 2019). Results in Table 1 show that all the factor loadings
and AVEs are greater than the recommended minimum values
of 0.7 and 0.5, implying that the measurement model possesses
convergent validity. As well as, this study measurement the
model through 37 items, and all are greater than the
minimum values of 0.7 was recommended by (Hair et al.,
2019).
Model fit evaluation
To find particular links among dimensions in the structural
model, the statistical significances of total, direct, and indirect
effects were further investigated. For model evaluation, a variety
of goodness-of-fit indices for model fit were investigated.
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) and
Structural Equation Modeling were used to confirm the
measurement model’s validity and reliability (AMOS-SEM).
Factor loadings were used to establish validity, convergent
validity, Cronbach’s alpha, and convergent validity again for
model’s goodness of fit, as shown by (Hair et al., 2019).NFI
(0.932) is a valid value, RFI (0.922) is a valid value, IFI (0.935) is a
valid value, TLI (0.928) is a valid value, CFI (0.935) is a valid
value, GFI (0.933) is a valid value, and AGFI (0.952) is a valid
value. Also, the RMR value below the threshold of 0.033 (0.05), as
suggested by (Hair et al., 2019). Figure 2 show all items and
factors values. This shows that the measure-mint model was
acceptable and well-suited to the structural model. See Figure 2
and table 2.
Measurement validity convergent
The differences between sets of ideas and their measurements
are referred to as discriminant validity. The discriminant validity
of all constructs was investigated with values more than 0.50 and
significant at p= 0.001, as stated by the authors. Hair et al. (Hair
et al., 2012). As indicated in Table 3, the square root shared by
objects in a single construct should be less than the similarities
between items in the two constructions.
Structural model and path coefficient
Structured equation modeling was used to investigate the
complex relationships between the direct and indirect effects of
various research variables (entrepreneurial culture on
sustainability, training on sustainability, and education on
sustainability). The structural model specifies both the
interaction and the influence of independent factors on the
dependent variable (path coefficient). The maximum
likelihood method, in particular, may be used to thoroughly
examine complex models and uncover multiple linkages between
multi-item parts, as well as the influence of moderating and
moderating factors (Hair et al., 2019). Figure 3 depicts the direct
influence of the route coefficient on the latent predictor variable
anticipated variables.
Hypotheses testing results
Based on the results shown in Figure 3 and Table 4, the
relationship between entrepreneurial culture on sustainability
and training on sustainability (β= 0.176, C.R = 3.188, p= 0.001),
thus, hypothesis number one was accepted. Also, the relationship
between entrepreneurial culture on sustainability and education
on sustainability (β= 0.170, C.R= 2.572, p= 0.010), thus,
hypothesis number two was accepted. Finally, the relationship
between training on sustainability, and education on
Frontiers in Environmental Science frontiersin.org07
Zahrani 10.3389/fenvs.2022.963549
sustainability (β= 0. 554, C.R = 8.169, p= 0.000), thus, hypothesis
number three was accepted.
Discussion and implementations
Sustainable entrepreneurship education offers a strong
platform for students to learn about the practical value of
sustainability, as well as entrepreneurship, in higher education.
Integrating sustainability in entrepreneurship education in Saudi
Arabia is beneficial in terms of both entrepreneurial culture and
training instruction on sustainability for countries with a
relatively high percentage of higher education. As a result, the
current study examines the elements that impact the
entrepreneurial culture, training on sustainability, and
education on sustainability in order to investigate their
learning of sustainable entrepreneurship.
The outcomes of this study suggest that entrepreneurial
education for sustainable development is a pluralistic method
that may connect the two paradigms of doing well (sustainability
training) and doing well (doing well in general) (education on
sustainability). This conclusion shows that educational
entrepreneurs might benefit from being exposed to learning
content related to sustainable entrepreneurship. As shown in
our research, views of entrepreneurial culture have a role in
sustainability training and education in order to maximize
learning about sustainable entrepreneurship (see Figure 3).
Entrepreneurial culture is viewed as a sort of education that
teaches the skills needed to start a new firm (Rahim et al., 2015). A
few entrepreneurship education academics argue that existing
entrepreneurship education is impeding the spread of
entrepreneurial training and education on sustainability
sustainability. As a result, entrepreneurial education includes
more than just acquiring information. It is about instilling an
entrepreneurial attitude in lecturers and students so that they can
provide sustainability training and education. Entrepreneurial
abilities are not just instilled through traditional lectures;
alternative ways have also been employed to attain the intended
learning outcome, notably through effective pedagogical practices
that might improve the employability of its graduates.
Entrepreneurship education equips students with a wealth of
knowledge, a range of skills, and sustainability education in
order to encourage entrepreneurial success. Entrepreneurship
education and culture share the purpose of reinforcing
FIGURE 1
Research Model.
Frontiers in Environmental Science frontiersin.org08
Zahrani 10.3389/fenvs.2022.963549
entrepreneurs’value orientation for a sustainable society (Lindner,
2018). The study’sfinding that environmental sustainability at
universities has the potential to develop good attitudes toward
sustainability entrepreneurship has already been proven (Hameed
et al., 2021). As a result of this conclusion, environmental
sustainability should be a component of the university’s
strategy, which will eventually have a good influence on the
society’s business environment.
FIGURE 2
Model fit measurement.
TABLE 2 Model Fit Evaluation.
Model NFI Delta1 RFI rho1 IFI Delta2 TLI rho2 CFI GFI AGFI RMR
Default model 0.932 0.922 0.935 0.928 0.935 0.933 0.952 0.033
Saturated model 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 .000
Independence model 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
TABLE 3 Discriminant validity.
No Factors Code ECS TS ES
1 Entrepreneurial Culture on Sustainability ECS 0.819
2 Training on Sustainability TS 0.354 0.880
3 Education on Sustainability ES 0.402 0.432 0.876
Frontiers in Environmental Science frontiersin.org09
Zahrani 10.3389/fenvs.2022.963549
Higher education institutions play a critical role in societal
adaption of sustainable practices, notably on campus. As a result,
students must adjust their conduct on campus to conform to go-
green culture (Zsóka et al., 2013;Hameed et al., 2021). It is hoped
that this conduct will spread beyond campus, resulting in societal
transformation. Sustainability practices on campus will not only
result in changes on campus but will also result in a shift in the
attitude of all persons involved with the institution to adopt them
in their daily lives, such as entrepreneurial culture and
sustainability training courses. Educators collaborate with
practitioners to help students launch their own businesses.
Such collaborations provide a source of funding for student-
led, sustainability enterprises. Students are exposed to extreme
societal problems as part of the process, which helps them
develop compassion (Miller et al., 2012), altruism (Vuorio
et al., 2018), and empathy (Cincera et al., 2018), all of which
help them start sustainable businesses (Long et al., 2019).
Furthermore, the academic model tried to develop internal
infrastructure to encourage student interest in sustainable
business (Chandra, 2016). The outcomes of this study
demonstrate that establishing a complete entrepreneurial
environment for students and workers is the first step in
developing an entrepreneurial culture. To guide new
entrepreneurs, teaching lecturers must be well-equipped and
active in a variety of entrepreneurship-related projects. They
must continue to expand their expertise, enhance their
professions, and actively participate in creative and
entrepreneurial activities. Research and consulting activities
FIGURE 3
Structural Model (Path Coefficient).
TABLE 4 Hypotheses testing.
Path Estimate S.E. C.R. P.value Results
ES <--- ECS 0.122 0.176 0.038 3.188 0.001 Accepted
TS <--- ECS 0.143 0.170 0.056 2.572 0.010 Accepted
ES <--- TS 0.457 0.554 0.056 8.169 0.000 Accepted
Frontiers in Environmental Science frontiersin.org10
Zahrani 10.3389/fenvs.2022.963549
across disciplines should be undertaken to examine the success of
the present model and to identify methods to enhance the current
state of entrepreneurship education quality. Entrepreneurship
education is said to be a crucial component of sustainability
training and education development. As a result,
entrepreneurship is a dynamic process including vision,
change, and creativity. For the creation and implementation
of new ideas and creative resolves, the process need an
enthusiastic and passionate individual. Entrepreneurial
activities, according to researchers, create jobs, generate
income, and stimulate economic progress (Zamberi Ahmad
and Xavier, 2012). Entrepreneurship is regarded as critical in
the political and socioeconomic transformation of nations
(Matlay, 2005). Entrepreneurship education combines
experiential learning, skill development, and, most
importantly, a shift in mindset (Potter, 2008); in fact,
entrepreneurship culture is listed as a key competence in the
European framework on key competences for lifelong learning
(2013), and includes creativity, innovation, and risk-taking.
According to Neck, Greene, and Brush (Neck et al., 2014),
challenge-based learning is a practically focused approach to
entrepreneurship education that is built on the learning cycle
“challenge, feedback, training, education and reflection”(Kolb,
1983;Sternad and Buchner, 2016). This instructional strategy
combines a reflection- and action-oriented pedagogical
approach. Therefore, this research defined a challenging task
as one that is difficult to do, that is complex, targeted to the target
audience, and representative of their everyday situation. The task
for students is to generate and put into action solutions for the
given scenario (sometimes in partnership with others). To deal
with it, we must adopt a process of inquisitive learning that
closely links theory and practice. By connecting cognitive,
personal, training, education, and social competencies to
entrepreneurial content and situations, entrepreneurial
challenge-based learning focuses on practical competences and
entrepreneurial culture (Jambor and Lindner, 2018). The
development of fresh ideas and their imaginative and
conceptual application are the main foci of entrepreneurial
education (Faltin, 2013). Therefore, this research aimed to
investigate how universities may help Saudi Arabian students
who are planning to become entrepreneurs promote sustainable
development goals. According to proponents of experience-
based learning (Dewey, 1933), competencies are most
effectively learned through demonstration and practical
application. Entrepreneurship education encourages a hands-
on, exploratory learning method that closely links theory and
practice, combines training and education with creativity, and
fosters teamwork (Faltin and Zimmer, 1995). Consequently, in
entrepreneurship education, critical and communicative learning
is realized through interaction between professors and students
that is characterized by respect, empathy, and encouragement.
The cultivation of respectful relationships with others that
promote cooperation, as well as instruction and training that
encourage group creativity, are the main areas of attention
(Rosenberg, 2013). This is consistent with the main objective
of this research. This entrepreneurial culture strategy helps
people in their daily lives and at work by enabling them to
seize possibilities in an environment that encourages
sustainability training and education. Therefore, the following
study implications have been determined based on the theoretical
framework and hypotheses findings:
•Adopting sustainable entrepreneurship in training and
education for learning, which will strengthen students’
skills and knowledge concerns.
••Higher education institutions are urged to learn about
sustainable entrepreneurship in training and instruction.
••Two key concerns for sustainable entrepreneurship in
training and education are technology and the influence of
entrepreneurial culture.
Therefore, this research contributes to the literature by
suggesting a model that promotes sustainable
entrepreneurship in training and education through the role
of entrepreneurial culture theory, which is demonstrated to be a
beneficial model to understand the following:
•The sustainability entrepreneurial culture influences
sustainable training and education.
•Sustainable training on sustainability influences the
entrepreneurial culture and education on sustainability.
•Sustainable education influences the entrepreneurial
culture of sustainability and training.
Additionally, this research contributes to the development of
a theoretical model addressing how Saudi higher education’s
sustainability entrepreneurial culture influences sustainable
training and education. Therefore, the major practical
implications and contributions of this study were achieved.
The limitations of this research
There are two major limitations to this study that we think
future research might resolve. First of all, we haven’t looked at the
students’real actions or their plans to start sustainable businesses
after they complete their training. As a result, we support
additional study to comprehend student enthusiasm after they
complete academic programs in sustainable business. Second,
while the Saudi scenario is intriguing, academic institutions in
affluent nations might have other reasons for starting sustainable
entrepreneurship-based teaching. Due to the comparatively
mature socioeconomic backdrop in industrialized nations,
there are resources available to help student-led sustainable
firms. Therefore, conducting additional research in wealthy
nations with a comparable research goal would be great.
Frontiers in Environmental Science frontiersin.org11
Zahrani 10.3389/fenvs.2022.963549
Conclusion, and future works
In Saudi Arabia’s higher education, the current research
provided 37 items for analysis, including three primary factors:
sustainable entrepreneurial culture, sustainable training, and
sustainable education. The study models postulated all items
and hypotheses were demonstrated to be significantly
connected. As a result, this study offers evidence of the
significance of a sustainable entrepreneurial culture in
developing students’entrepreneurial cultures, which, in turn,
hasaninfluence on students’training and education in higher
education. Especially in light of the COVID-19 epidemic, countries
with diverse societal origins may face a variety of obstacles when it
comes to incorporating sustainability into entrepreneurship
education. As a result of the current study’sfindings, the
following are some proposals for future research topics: 1)
studying the considerable advantages of sustainable in
entrepreneurship education: from spreading awareness to
behavioral change and improving sustainability, and 3)
encouraging academic institutions to continue training
sustainable, which will impact education self-sustaining. Tus,
this research feel that further research could resolve two
shortcomings in our study. First, we haven’t looked at the
students’actual behavior or intents to engage in sustainable
entrepreneurship once they complete their training. As a result,
we urge more study to better identify student interest after they
complete the sustainable entrepreneurship academic program.
Second, while the Saudi story is intriguing, academic
institutions in wealthy nations may have distinct motives for
launching sustainability entrepreneurial training programs.
Because the societal framework is more advanced in
industrialized nations, the resources available to assist student-
led sustainable firms are quite limited. To build on the findings of
prior research, more work has to be done on the essential
competences required for entrepreneurial success through
entrepreneurship education (Sargani et al., 2021;Chen et al.,
2022;Huang et al., 2022;Joensuu-Salo et al., 2022;Naderi
et al., 2022). Future cross-cultural studies also should place a
greater emphasis on accurately measuring enviro knowledge and
attitudes among entrepreneurship higher education students, as
well as an examination of the didactic tools and methods used to
instruct entrepreneurship in order to achieve sustainable
development. As a result, doing more study in developed
nations with a comparable research goal would be desirable.
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are
included in the article/Supplementary Material, further
inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Ethics statement
Ethics review and approval/written informed consent was
not required as per local legislation and institutional
requirements.
Author contributions
If the author has included a statement such as “I wrote this
article”“I am the author of this manuscript”the statement should
be changed to the recommended one and a query posted to the
author on the proof.
Funding
The author would like to thank Deanship of Scientific
Research at Majmaah University for supporting this work
under Project Number No. R-2022-263.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the
absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could
be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the
authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated
organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the
reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or
claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or
endorsed by the publisher.
References
Abdullah, S. B. (2020). Entrepreneurship education in technical vocational
education and training (TVET) and models of implementation. Indonesia,
Journal of Education and Practice: Ministry of Higher Education.
Agu, A. G., Kalu, O. O., Esi-Ubani, C. O., and Agu, P. C. (2021). Drivers of
sustainable entrepreneurial intentions among university students: An integrated
model from a developing world context. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 222 (3),
659–680. doi:10.1108/ijshe-07-2020-0277
Ahmad, N. H., Rahman, S. A., Rajendran, N. L. K. A., and Halim, H. A. (2020).
Sustainable entrepreneurship practices in Malaysian manufacturing SMEs: The role
of individual, organisational and institutional factors. Wremsd 16 (2), 153–171.
doi:10.1504/wremsd.2020.105986
Al-Rahmi,A.M.,Al-Rahmi,W.M.,Alturki,U.,Aldraiweesh,A.,Almutairy,S.,and
Al-Adwan, A. S. (2021). Exploring the factors affecting mobile learning for sustainability
in higher education. Sustainability 13 (14), 7893. doi:10.3390/su13147893
Frontiers in Environmental Science frontiersin.org12
Zahrani 10.3389/fenvs.2022.963549
Al-Rahmi, W. M., and Alkhalaf, S. (2021). An empirical investigation of adoption Big
Data in higher education sustainability. Jesi 9(2),108–122. doi:10.9770/jesi.2021.9.2(7)
Al-Rahmi, W. M., Alzahrani, A. I., Yahaya, N., Alalwan, N., and Kamin, Y. B.
(2020). Digital communication: Information and communication technology (ICT)
usage for education sustainability. Sustainability 12 (12), 5052. doi:10.3390/
su12125052
Al-Rahmi, W. M., Yahaya, N., Aldraiweesh, A. A., Alturki, U., Alamri, M. M., Bin
Saud, M. S. B., Kamin, O. A., Aljeraiwi, A. A., and Alhamed, O. A. (2019). Big data
adoption and knowledge management sharing: An empirical investigation on their
adoption and sustainability as a purpose of education. Ieee Access 7, 47245–47258.
doi:10.1109/access.2019.2906668
Alamri,M.M.,Almaiah,M.A.,andAl-Rahmi,W.M.(2020a).Socialmedia
applications affecting students’academic performance: A model developed for
sustainability in higher education. Sustainability 12 (16), 6471. doi:10.3390/su12166471
Alamri, M. M., Almaiah, M. A., and Al-Rahmi, W. M. (2020b). The role of
compatibility and task-technology fit (TTF): On social networking applications
(SNAs) usage as sustainability in higher education. IEEE Access 8, 161668–161681.
doi:10.1109/access.2020.3021944
Anand, A., Argade, P., Barkemeyer, R., and Salignac, F. (2021). Trends and
patterns in sustainable entrepreneurship research: A bibliometric review and
research agenda. J. Bus. Ventur. 36 (3), 106092. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2021.106092
Arru, B. (2020). An integrative model for understanding the sustainable
entrepreneurs’behavioural intentions: An empirical study of the Italian context.
Environ. Dev. Sustain 22 (4), 3519–3576. doi:10.1007/s10668-019-00356-x
Awan, U., Sroufe, R., and Bozan, K. (2022). Designing value chains for industry
4.0 and a circular economy: A review of the literature. Sustainability 14 (12), 7084.
doi:10.3390/su14127084
Bacq, S., Janssen, F., and Noël, C. (2017). What happens next? A qualitative study
of founder succession in social enterprises. J. Small Bus. Manag. 57 (3), 820–844.
doi:10.1111/jsbm.12326
Badulescu, D., Bungau, C., and Badulescu, A. (2015). Sustainable development
through sustainable businesses. An empirical research among master students.
J. Environ. Prot. Ecol. 16 (3), 1101–1108.
Battilana, J., and Dorado, S. (2010). Building sustainable hybrid organizations:
The case of commercial microfinance organizations. Amj 53, 1419–1440. doi:10.
5465/amj.2010.57318391
Battilana, J., and Lee, M. (2014). Advancing research on hybrid organizing -
insights from the study of social enterprises. Annals 8 (1), 397–441. doi:10.5465/
19416520.2014.893615
Becker, G. (1994). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis with
special reference to education. London, National Bureau of Economic Research: The
University of Chicago Press.
Bell, J., and Stellingwerf, J. (2012). Sustainable entrepreneurship: The motivations
& challenges of sustainable entrepreneurs in the renewable energy industry. Master’s
thesis. Jonkoping, Sweden: Jonkoping International Business School.
Belz, F. M., and Binder, J. K. (2017). Sustainable entrepreneurship: A convergent
process model. Bus. Strat. Env. 26 (1), 1–17. doi:10.1002/bse.1887
Binder, J. K., and Belz, F.-M. (2015). “Sustainable entrepreneurship: What it is, ”in
Handbook of sustainable entrepreneurship research. Editor P. Kyrö (Cheltenham,
UK: Edward Elgar Publishing).
Binder, J. K. (2017). Theorizing about sustainable entrepreneurship. Munich:
Technische Universität München.
Brock, D. D., and Steiner, S. D (20092018). Susan, social entrepreneurship
education: Is it achieving the desired aims? Available at: https://ssrn.com/
abstract=1344419.
Chandra, Y. (2016). Social entrepreneurship as institutional change work: A corpus
linguistics analysis. J. Soc. Entrepreneursh. 8 (1), 14–46. doi:10.1080/19420676.2016.
1233133
Chen, L., Ifenthaler, D., Sun, W., Xu, T., and Yan, G. (2022). Effectiveness of
virtual team learning in entrepreneurship education: A survey study.
Entrepreneursh. Educ. 1, 27. doi:10.1007/s41959-022-00064-0
Cincera, J., Biberhofer, P., Binka, B., Boman, J., Mindt, L., and Rieckmann, M.
(2018). Designing a sustainability-driven entrepreneurship curriculum as a social
learning process: A case study from an international knowledge alliance project.
J. Clean. Prod. 172, 4357–4366. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.05.051
Cohen, B., and Winn, M. I. (2007). Market imperfections, opportunity and
sustainable entrepreneurship. J. Bus. Ventur. 22 (1), 29–49. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.
2004.12.001
Cope, J. (2005). Toward a dynamic learning perspective of entrepreneurship.
Entrepreneursh. theory Pract. 29 (4), 373–397. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.
00090.x
Criado-Gomis, A., Iniesta-Bonillo, M., and Cervera-Taulet, A. (2018). Sustainable
entrepreneurial orientation within an intrapreneurial context: Effects on business
performance. Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 14 (2), 295–308. doi:10.1007/s11365-018-
0503-x
Dagiliūtė, R., Liobikienė, G., and Minelgaitė, A. (2018). Sustainability at
universities: Students’perceptions from green and non-green universities.
J. Clean. Prod. 181, 473–482. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.213
Décamps,A.,Barbat,G.,Carteron,J.,Hands,V.,andParkes,C.(2017).
Sulitest: A collaborative initiative to support and assess sustainability literacy
in higher education. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 15 (2), 138–152. doi:10.1016/j.ijme.
2017.02.006
Dentchev, N., Rauter, R., Jóhannsdóttir, L., Snihur, Y., Rosano, M., Baumgartner,
R., et al. (2018). Embracing the variety of sustainable business models: A prolific
field of research and a future research agenda. J. Clean. Prod. 194, 695–703. doi:10.
1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.156
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking
to the educative process. 2nd edition. Lexington: D. C. Heath.
Dolabela, F., Jardim, J., Franco, J. E., Soares, J. H., Moutinho, A., Calheiros, C.,
et al. (2019). “Teoria empreendedora dos sonhos,”in Empreendipédia—dicionário
de Educação para o EmpreendedorismoGradiva: Lisboa, PortugalCardoso, M.S
(Theya: Lisboa, Portugal: Brincadores de Sonhos—Roteiro para Docentes e
Formadores), 713.
Elkington, J. (2018). 25 Years ago I coined the phrase ”Triple Bottom line”. Here’s
why it’s time to rethink it. AvaliableAt: https://hbr.org/2018/06/25-years-ago-i-
coined-thephrase-triple-bottom-line-heres-why-im-giving-up-on-it.
Elkington, J. (1994). Towards the sustainable corporation: Win-win-win business
strategies for sustainable development. Calif. Manag. Rev. 36 (2), 90–100. doi:10.
2307/41165746
Estrin, S., Mickiewicz, T., and Stephan, U. (2016). Human capital in social and
commercial entrepreneurship. J. Bus. Ventur. 31 (4), 449–467. doi:10.1016/j.
jbusvent.2016.05.003
European Commission (2014). Entrepreneruship education: A guide for educators.
Brussels, Belgium: EU Commission—Entrepreneurship 2020 Unit;
DirectorateGeneral for Enterprise and Industry.
Faltin, G. (2013). Brains versus Capital. Entrepreneurship for everyone lean, smart,
simple. Berlin: Entrepreneurship Foundation.
Faltin, G., and Zimmer, J. (1995). Reichtum von unten ñ die neuen Chancen der
Kleinen. Berlin: Aufbau. [Wealth from below ñ the little onesí new opportunities].
Farny, S. (2016). Revisiting the nexus of entrepreneurship and sustainability:
Towards an affective and interactive framework for the sustainability
entrepreneurship journey. Helsinki: Aalto University.
Fayolle, A., Gailly, B., and Lassas-Clerc, N. (2006). Assessing the impact of
entrepreneurship education programmes: A new methodology. J. Eur. Industrial
Train. 30 (9), 701–720. doi:10.1108/03090590610715022
Fichter, K., and Tiemann, I. (2018). Factors influencing university support for
sustainable entrepreneurship: Insights from explorative case studies. J. Clean. Prod.
175, 512–524. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.031
C. Fiolhais, J. E. Franco, and J. P. Paiva (2020). História Global de Portugal
(Lisboa, Portugal: Temas e Debates).
Franco, J. E. (2020). Europa ao Espelho de Portugal: Ideia(s) de Europa na Cultura
Portuguesa, Lisboa, Portugal: Temas e Debates.
Gast, J., Gundolf, K., and Cesinger, B. (2017). Doing business in a green way: A
systematic review of the ecological sustainability entrepreneurship literature and
future research directions. J. Clean. Prod. 147, 44–56. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.
01.065
Gefen, D., Straub, D., and Boudreau, M.-C. (2000). Structural equation modeling
and regression: Guidelines for research practice. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 4, 3.
doi:10.17705/1cais.00407
Germak, A. J., and Robinson, J. A. (2014). Exploring the motivation of nascent
social entrepreneurs. J. Soc. Entrepreneursh. 5(1),5–21. doi:10.1080/19420676.
2013.820781
Hair, J. F., Ringle, J. M., and Sarstedt, M. (2012). Editorial - partial least squares:
The better approach to structural equation modeling. Long. Range Plan. 45,
312–319. doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2012.09.011
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., Gudergan, S. P., Fischer, A., Nitzl, C., and Menictas, C.
(2019). Partial least squares structural equation modeling-based discrete choice
modeling: An illustration in modeling retailer choice. Bus. Res. 12 (1), 115–142.
doi:10.1007/s40685-018-0072-4
Hall, J. K., Daneke, G. A., and Lenox, M. J. (2010). Sustainable development and
entrepreneurship: Past contributions and future directions. J. Bus. Ventur. 25,
439–448. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2010.01.002
Frontiers in Environmental Science frontiersin.org13
Zahrani 10.3389/fenvs.2022.963549
Hameed,I.,Zaman,U.,Waris,I.,andShafique, O. (2021). A serial-med iation model to
link entrepreneurship education and green entrepreneurial behavior: Application of
resource-based view and flow theory. Ijerph 18 (2), 550. doi:10.3390/ijerph18020550
Hansemark, O. C. (1998). The effects of an entrepreneurship programme on need
for achievement and locus of control of reinforcement. Int Jrnl Ent Behav Res 4 (1),
28–50. doi:10.1108/13552559810203957
Heikkurinen, P., Clegg, S., Pinnington, A. H., Nicolopoulou, K., and Alcaraz, J. M.
(2019). Managing the anthropocene: Relational agency and power to respect
planetary boundaries. Finland, Organization and Environment SAGE:
Organization & Environment, 1086026619881145.
Hermes, J., and Rimanoczy, I. (2018). Deep learning for a sustainability mindset.
Int. J. Manag. Educ. 16 (3), 460–467. doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2018.08.001
Hesselbarth, C., and Schaltegger, S. (2014). Educating change agents for
sustainability - learnings from the first sustainability management master of
business administration. J. Clean. Prod. 62, 24–36. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.03.042
Hockerts, K. (2015). The social entrepreneurial antecedents scale (seas): A
validation study. Soc. Enterp. J. 11 (3), 260–280. doi:10.1108/sej-05-2014-0026
Hockerts, K., and Wüstenhagen, R. (2010). Greening Goliaths versus emerging
Davids - theorizing about the role of incumbents and new entrants in sustainable
entrepreneurship. J. Bus. Ventur. 25 (5), 481–492. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.07.005
Huang, Q., Rehman, A., Zeeshan, M., and Ullah, I. (2022). Exploring the effect of
in-situ urbanization on youth entrepreneurship in suburban areas with low-
medium development in China--A way forward to sustainable entrepreneurship
mechanism. Front. Environ. Sci. 798, 927918. doi:10.3389/fenvs.2022.927918
Jambor, E., and Lindner, J. (2018). Youth start entrepreneurial challenges,
materials for teachers and students. Retrieved from: www.youthstart.eu.
Jardim, J., Bártolo, A., and Pinho, A. (2021). Towards a global entrepreneurial
culture: A systematic review of the effectiveness of entrepreneurship education
programs. Educ. Sci. 11 (8), 398. doi:10.3390/educsci11080398
Jardim, J. (2020). Regiões Empreendedoras: Descrição e avaliação dos contextos,
determinantes e políticas favoráveis à sua evolução. Rev. Divulg. Científica AICA 12,
197–212. doi:10.28998/2175-6600.2020v12n26p1-14
Joensuu-Salo, S., Viljamaa, A., and Varamäki, E. (2022). Sustainable
entrepreneurs of the future: The interplay between educational context,
sustainable entrepreneurship competence, and entrepreneurial intentions. Adm.
Sci. 12 (1), 23. doi:10.3390/admsci12010023
Kannan, V. R., and Tan, K. C. (2005). Just in time, total quality management, and
supply chain management: Understanding their linkages and impact on business
performance. Omega 33 (2), 153–162. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2004.03.012
Kirby, D. A., and Ibrahim, N. (2011). The case for (social) entrepreneurship
education in Egyptian universities. Educ. + Training 53 (5), 403–415. doi:10.1108/
00400911111147712
Kirchherr, J., Reike, D., and Hekkert, M. (2017). Conceptualizing the circular
economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, conservation and recycling 127,
221–232. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005
Klapper,R.,andFarber,V.A.(2016).InAlainGibb’s footsteps: Evaluating alternative
approaches to sustainable enterprise education (SEE). The International Journal of
Management Education 14 (3), 422–439. doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2016.09.001
Kolb, D. A. (1983). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and
development. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Kuckertz, A., and Wagner, M. (2010). The influence of sustainability orientation
on entrepreneurial intentions - investigating the role of business experience. Journal
of Business Venturing 25, 524–539. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.09.001
Kummitha, R. K. R., and Majumdar, S. (2015). Dynamic curriculum development
on social entrepreneurship - a case study of TISS. The International Journal of
Management Education 13 (3), 260–267. doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2015.05.005
Lackéus, M., and Sävetun, C. (2019). Assessing the impact of enterprise education
in three leading Swedish compulsory schools. Journal of Small Business
Management 57, 33–59. doi:10.1111/jsbm.12497
Lindner, J. (2018). Entrepreneurship education for a sustainable future. Discourse and
Communication for Sustainable Education 9 (1), 115–127. doi:10.2478/dcse-2018-0009
Long,T.B.,Blok,V.,andConinx,I.(2019).Thediffusionofclimate-smartagricultural
innovations: Systems level factors that inhibit sustainable entrepreneurial action. Journal
of Cleaner Production 232, 993–1004. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.212
Mair, J., and Noboa, E. (2006). “Social entrepreneurship: How intentions to create
a social venture are formed,”in Social entrepreneurship (London: Palgrave
Macmillan), 121–135. doi:10.1057/9780230625655_8
Markman, G. D., Russo, M., Lumpkin, G. T., Jennings, P. D., and Mair, J. (2016).
Entrepreneurship as a platform for pursuing multiple goals: A special issue on
sustainability, ethics, and entrepreneurship. Jour. of Manage. Stud. 53 (5), 673–694.
doi:10.1111/joms.12214
Martin, B., McNally, J. J., and Kay, M. J. (2013). Examining the formation of human
capital in entrepreneurship: A meta-analysis of entrepreneurship education outcomes.
Journal of Business Venturing 28, 211–224. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2012.03.002
Matlay, H. (2005). Researching entrepreneurship and education. Education +
Training 47 (8/9), 665–677. doi:10.1108/00400910510633198
Miller, T. L., Wesley, C. L., and Williams, D. E. (2012). Educating the minds of
caring hearts: Comparing the views of practitioners and educators on the
importance of social entrepreneurship competencies. Amle 11, 349–370. doi:10.
5465/amle.2011.0017
Moses, C., and Izedonmi, P. F. (2010). The effect of entrepreneurship education
on students’entrepreneurial intentions. Global journal of management and business
research 10 (6), 49–60.
Muñoz, P., and Cohen, B. (2018). Sustainable entrepreneurship research: Taking
stock and looking ahead. Business Strategy and the Environment 27 (3), 300–322.
doi:10.1002/bse.2000
Mwasalwiba, E. S. (2010). Entrepreneurship education: A review of its objectives,
teaching methods, and impact indicators. Educ. Train 52, 20–47. doi:10.1108/
00400911011017663
Naderi, N., Monavvarifard, F., and Salehi, L. (2022). Fostering sustainability-
oriented knowledge-sharing in academic environment: A key strategic process to
achieving SDGs through development of students’sustainable entrepreneurship
competences. The International Journal of Management Education 20 (1), 100603.
doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2022.100603
Neck, H., Greene, P., and Brush, C. (2014). Teaching entrepreneurship, a practice-
basedapproach. Cheltenham/Northampton: Edward Elgar.
Nuringsih, K., and Puspitowati, I. (2017). Determinants of eco entrepreneurial
intention among students: Study in the entrepreneurial education practices. adv sci
lett 23 (8), 7281–7284. doi:10.1166/asl.2017.9351
Olalla, C. B., and Merino, A. (2019). Competences for sustainability in undergraduate
business studies: A content analysis of value-based course syllabi in Spanish universities.
International Journal of Management in Education 17 (2), 239–253. doi:10.1016/j.ijme.
2019.02.006
Ortiz, D., and Huber-Heim, K. (2017). From information to empowerment:
Teaching sustainable business development by enabling an experiential and
participatory problem-solving process in the classroom. The International Journal
of Management Education 15 (2), 318–331. doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2017.03.008
Passet, R. (1996). L’Economique et le vivant. Paris: Payot.
Plourde, H., and Pelletier, D. (2007). Introduction to Entrepreneurial Culture;
Gouvernement du Québec—ministère de l’Éducation, du Loisir et du Sport: Québec.
Canada: Numérique, 80.
Potter, J. (2008). in Entrepreneurship education in europe”, OECD,
entrepreneurship and higher education (Paris: OECD Publishing).
QAA (2018). Enterprise and entrepreneurship education: Guidance for UK
higher education providers. AvaliableAt: www.qaa.ac.uk〉qaas〉enterprise-and-
entrpreneurshipeducation-2018.
Rahim, H. L., Abidin, Z. Z., Junid, J., Kamaruddin, L. M., Lajin, N. F. M., et al.
(2015). Entrepreneurship education in Malaysia: A critical review. Journal of
Technology Management and Business 2, 2.
Reyes-Rodríguez, J. F., Ulhøi, J. P., and Madsen, H. (2016). Corporate
environmental sustainability in Danish SMEs: A longitudinal study of
motivators, initiatives, and strategic effects. Corporate Social Responsibility and
Environmental Management 23 (4), 193–212. doi:10.1002/csr.1359
Rigg, E., and van der Wal-Maris, S. (2020). Student teachers’learning about social
entrepreneurship education - a Dutch pilot study in primary teacher education.
Discourse and Communication for Sustainable Education 11 (1), 41–52. doi:10.
2478/dcse-2020-0005
Römer-Paakkanen, T., and Suonpää, M. (2017). Multiple objectives and means of
entrepreneurship education. Helsinki, Finland: Haaga-Helia Publications.
Rosenberg, M. B. (2013). Gewaltfreie kommunikation. [Nonviolent
communication]. Paderborn: Junfermann.
Sargani, G. R., Jiang, Y., Zhou, D., Chandio, A. A., Hussain, M., and Khan, N.
(2021). Endorsing sustainable enterprises among promising entrepreneurs: A
comparative study of factor-driven economy and efficiency-driven economy.
Front Psychol 12, 735127. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.735127
Sayaf, A. M., Alamri, M. M., Alqahtani, M. A., and Al-Rahmi, W. M. (2021).
Information and communications technology used in higher education: An
empirical study on digital learning as sustainability. Sustainability 13 (13), 7074.
doi:10.3390/su13137074
Sayaf, A. M., Alamri, M. M., Alqahtani, M. A., and Alrahmi, W. M. (2022).
Factors influencing university students’adoption of digital learning technology in
teaching and learning. Sustainability 14 (1), 493. doi:10.3390/su14010493
Frontiers in Environmental Science frontiersin.org14
Zahrani 10.3389/fenvs.2022.963549
Schaltegger, S., and Burritt, R. (2018). Business cases and corporate engagement
with sustainability: Differentiating ethical motivations. J Bus Ethics 147 (2),
241–259. doi:10.1007/s10551-015-2938-0
Schaltegger, S., and Wagner, M. (2011). Sustainable entrepreneurship and
sustainability innovation: Categories and interactions. Bus. Strat. Env. 20 (4),
222–237. doi:10.1002/bse.682
Schaper, M. (2002). The challenge of environmental responsibility and sustainable
development: Implications for SME and entrepreneurship academics. Radical changes
in the world Will SMEs soar or crash 9(1),525–534.
Schlange, L. E. (2009). Stakeholder identification in sustainability
entrepreneurship: The role of managerial and organisational cognition. Greener
Management International 55, 13–33. doi:10.9774/GLEAF.3062.2006.au.00004
Sekaran, U., and Bougie, R. (2016). Research methods for business: A skill building
approach. Germany: John Wiley & Sons.
Shepherd, D., and Patzelt, H. (2011). The new field of sustainable
entrepreneurship: Studying entrepreneurial action linking “what is to be
sustained”with “what is to be developed”.Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice
35 (1), 137–163. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00426.x
Smith, I. H., and Woodworth, W. P. (2012). Developing social entrepreneurs and
social innovators: A social identity and self-efficacy approach. Amle 11 (3), 390–407.
doi:10.5465/amle.2011.0016
Sternad, D., and Buchner, F. (2016). “Wissenschaftliche Grundlagen des Lernens
durch Herausforderung,”in Lernen durch Herausforderung. [Scientific foundations
of learning through challenge (Wiesbaden: Learning by Challenge), 41ñ46. doi:10.
1007/978-3-658-14142-4_9
European Union (2016). EntreComp: The entrepreneurship competence
framework. Enterprise and Industry: Luxemburg: publication office of the
European Union. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/DocsRoom/documents/7465.
United Nations Educational (2014). Scientific, and cultural organization.
Paris, France: UNESCO). UNESCO Roadmap for Implementing the
Global Action Programme on Education for Sustainable
DevelopmentUNESCO.
Urbach Frederik, N., and Ahlemann, F. (2010). Structural equation modeling in
information systems research using partial least squares. Journal of Information
Technology Theory and Application (JITTA) 11 (2), 5–40.
Vicente-Molina, M. A., Fernández-Sáinz, A., and Izagirre-Olaizola, J. (2013).
Environmental knowledge and other variables affecting pro-environmental
behaviour: Comparison of university students from emerging and advanced
countries. Journal of Cleaner Production 61, 130–138. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.
05.015
Vuorio, A. M., Puumalainen, K., and Fellnhofer, K. (2018). Drivers of
entrepreneurial intentions in sustainable entrepreneurship. Ijebr 24 (2),
359–381. doi:10.1108/ijebr-03-2016-0097
Wang, W. (2022). Toward economic growth and value creation through social
entrepreneurship: Modelling the mediating role of innovation. Frontiers in
Psychology 3323. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.914700
Warwick, P., Wyness, L., and Conway, H. (2017). ’Think of the future’: Managing
educational change from students’perspectives of an undergraduate sustainable
business programme. The International Journal of Management Education 15 (2),
192–204. doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2017.03.010
WCED: World Commission on Environment and Development (1987). Our
common future. New York: Oxford University Press.
Zamberi Ahmad, S., and Xavier, S. R. (2012). Entrepreneurial environments and
growth: Evidence from Malaysia GEM data. Journal of Chinese Entrepreneurship 4
(1), 50–69. doi:10.1108/17561391211200939
Zsóka, Á., Szerényi, Z. M., Széchy, A., and Kocsis, T. (2013). Greening due to
environmental education? Environmental knowledge, attitudes, consumer behavior
and everyday pro-environmental activities of Hungarian high school and university
students. Journal of cleaner production 48, 126–138. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.
11.030
Frontiers in Environmental Science frontiersin.org15
Zahrani 10.3389/fenvs.2022.963549
Available via license: CC BY
Content may be subject to copyright.
