UNDERSTANDING THE NEXUS BETWEEN GREEN ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND
GREEN ECONOMY: A REVIEW
Agung
Purnomo1, Nur Asitah2 Elsa Rosyidah3
1Entrepreneurship
Department, Bina Nusantara University, Jakarta
2Basic Education
Department, Universitas Negeri Malang, Malang
3Environmental
Engineering Department, Universitas Nahdlatul Ulama Sidoarjo, Sidoarjo
Email: agung.purnomo@binus.ac.id
Abstract
The role of green entrepreneurship is sufficient to realize a green
economy. This study aims to understand the existing literature and research on
green entrepreneurship in the green economy. The literature was reviewed
systematically following the PRISMA guidelines for performing and reporting
systematic literature reviews. Some reviewed articles were included based on a
systematic search of the Scopus database. The research agenda was provided
using quantitative, multilevel, and management perspective analysis. Continental
Europe has made the most contributions to this field. The developments in green
entrepreneurship research in the green economy can be attributed to several
factors, such as environmental concern, SDGs, resource efficiency, climate
change mitigation, innovation, social inclusion and measurement. Further
research can be carried out using the team level by connecting the management
perspective of finance, operation and human resource.
Keywords: entrepreneurship; green entrepreneurship; green economy; systematic
review
Introduction
Entrepreneurship has been acknowledged as an
appropriate method to produce financial gains (Terán-Yépez, Marín-Carrillo, Casado-Belmonte, & Capobianco-Uriarte,
2020).
With the current developments, green entrepreneurship has become a trend among
business people (Anghel & Anghel, 2022; Purnomo, Firdaus, Rosyidah, Afia,
& Firdausi, 2023).
In addition, consumer awareness of the environment to buy environmentally friendly
products has natural implications for the emergence of green entrepreneurs in
the green economy (Lotfi, Yousefi, & Jafari, 2018). There are two types
of green entrepreneurs; then the first is environmental goods and services
(EGS), such as innovation, ecological mental control, resource conservation,
and clean energy. The second is green business (GB), involving private industries
actively changing their goods and procedures to advance ecological responsibility
(Khanna, 2020). Green entrepreneurs
in a green economy aim to succeed in current and future sustainable
development. Success if it can meet needs without compromising future
generations (Purnomo, Firdaus, Saputra, Teja, & Harjanti, 2021;
Terán-Yépez et al., 2020).
The green economy is a
progress and growth paradigm shift that can improve people's quality of life,
preserve the planet, and achieve greater economic and environmental
sustainability (Söderholm, 2020; Zhang, Xu, Chen, Li, & Chen, 2022). A beneficial relationship exists between the green
economy's environmental component with green entrepreneurship. Sustainable
growth can only be achieved by radically altering people's perceptions of green
business practices (Ahmad, Abdul-Halim, Ramayah, & Rahman, 2015; Purnomo, Sari, Aziz,
Prasetyo, & Rosyidah, 2021). Green
entrepreneurs contribute to the success of the green economy.
Entrepreneurship's contribution
to productivity, economic growth, innovation, and job creation has been studied
for centuries (van Praag & Versloot, 2007), so business owners must advance their companies. Research
related to green entrepreneurs in the green economy is more about community
involvement in business (Radović-Marković & Živanović, 2019), building the relationship of entrepreneurs with social and economic
systems (Affolderbach & Krueger, 2017), and management systems (J. Willemsen & van der Veen, 2014). However, only some studies use systematic literature reviews to
develop green entrepreneurs on green economy science. Researchers must consider
this when studying green entrepreneurs in a green economy.
A systematic literature review (SLR) is a
reliable evaluation of the body of knowledge on a specific subject or area (Petticrew &
Roberts, 2006). Using straightforward and dependable techniques, all relevant
studies must be located, assessed, and summarised (Jahan, Naveed,
Zeshan, & Tahir, 2016; Snyder, 2019). The protocol is described and provides a paper trail of searching,
excluding, including documents, and then analyzing them (Jones,
Coviello, & Tang, 2011). SLRs strive to collect
as much current evidence-based research on the subject under study as possible,
regardless of source (Thorpe, Holt,
Macpherson, & Pittaway, 2005). SLRs are notable for their
propensity to produce robust reviews of evidence rigorous, as they require
various methods that reduce inaccuracies and biases (Tranfield,
Denyer, & Smart, 2003). This study aims to conduct a systematic literature review of
existing literature and research on green entrepreneurship in a green economy.
Research Methods
This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items
for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to conduct a systematic
literature review (PRISMA, 2022). This study subjected a comprehensive literature database to a
systematic literature review (SLR) (Purnomo et al., 2022).
This study
has linked relevant keywords to green entrepreneurship and green economy
research to identify and associate relevant articles from the Scopus database. Academics consider Scopus a reliable source of
scholarly papers, so it was used as the main source of information (Purnomo et al., 2022). As shown in Figure 1, this study used the
keywords "green entrepreneurship" and "green economy" from
the author's title, abstract, and keywords to retrieve pertinent data from the
Scopus database. The data mining was limited to annual data to compile all
released data for a year. As of October 2022, the search query option used for
data mining was (TITLE-ABS-KEY ("green entrepreneurship") AND
TITLE-ABS-KEY ("green econom*") AND PUBYEAR
2022. We found 24 articles during this phase. Inclusion criteria (IC) used in
research include topic, full text accessed and year.
Figure
1 PRISMA Protocols
This SLR quantitatively analyzes
annual publications, affiliation, and geographic contexts. In addition, multilevel
analysis and perspective analysis were also utilized in this study. This research investigates several management perspectives,
including human resources, entrepreneurship, marketing, operations, finance, and strategy. The multilevel analysis included taking into
various factors at the individual, team, firm, network, and institutional
levels (Andreini & Bettinelli, 2017).
Result and Discussion
This part discusses the status of existing
quantitative, multilevel, and perspective-based research and literature in
green entrepreneurship within the green economy.
Annual Publications
Figure 2 displays twenty-four documents
that were published annually. According
to these stats, there have been an increasing number of publications about
green entrepreneurship in the green economy. Since 2021 was the year of economic
recovery following the COVID-19 pandemic, much research has been devoted to the
concept (Sharma, Bouchaud, Gualdi, Tarzia, & Zamponi, 2021; Wang & Zhang,
2021; Xiang, Tang, Yin, Zheng, & Lu, 2021). The peak of the publication of green entrepreneurship on
green economy occurred in 2020.
Figure 2 The green
entrepreneurship in the green economy sector's annual publications
The developments in green entrepreneurship and green
economy research can be attributed to several factors, such as environmental
concern, SDGs, resource efficiency, climate change mitigation, innovation, social
inclusion and measurement. First, the increasingly serious problems related to
the ecological environment have raised awareness about the need for sustainable
practices and solutions. Green entrepreneurship and green economy align with
addressing environmental challenges and promoting sustainable development (Huang, Zhang, Liu, & Tu, 2022). Second, green entrepreneurship and the economy are closely
linked to the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Green entrepreneurship
and green economy aim to improve human well-being and social equity while
significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcity. Third, green
entrepreneurship and economy emphasize resource efficiency, including energy
and resource use efficiency, circular economy practices, and preventing
biodiversity loss and ecological services (Michael, 2022).
Fourth, the transition to green entrepreneurship and a green
economy is driven by the need to address climate change. It involves developing
low-carbon solutions, reducing carbon emissions, and promoting renewable energy
sources (Michael, 2022). Fifth, green entrepreneurship and the green economy rely on
innovation and technology to develop sustainable solutions. This includes green
technology innovation, energy efficiency, and developing policy systems to
support the green economy (Huang et al., 2022). Sixth, green entrepreneurship and economy aim to be
socially inclusive, promoting equitable access to resources and opportunities.
It seeks to improve rural livelihoods and contribute to sustainable development
in entrepreneurship sectors such as agriculture, forestry, and fisheries (Michael, 2022). Seventh, research is crucial in understanding and measuring
green entrepreneurship and economic development. Studies focus on evaluating
the impact of green economy initiatives, developing measurement frameworks, and
assessing the costs and benefits of environmental management (Chunyu, 2021).
Author's institutional affiliation
There were 24 articles affiliated with 54
research organizations. The most productive institution researching green entrepreneurship
in green economy publications was the University of Hull, United Kingdom (n =
3), as shown in Table 1, then followed by The University of South Africa, South
Africa, and Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Romania (n = 2).
Table 1 The most frequently researched affiliation
|
Affiliation |
Articles |
|
“University of Hull” |
3 |
|
“The University of
South Africa” and “Bucharest University of Economic Studies” |
2 |
Although the
United Kingdom had the most prolific publications, the United States had the most.
The University of Hull has received Ł86 million in funding to invest in
sustainable facilities and infrastructure to achieve carbon neutrality by 2027 (Farrell, 2022). This campus
strongly supports sustainable development, so research on green entrepreneurs
in the green economy immensely helped.
Geographical
Contexts
Twenty different countries were represented in the paper's total
of 24 articles. Research on green entrepreneurship in the green economy was
conducted primarily in Europe (Table 2). The research, which was conducted in
Europe, consisted of 17 articles, of which six documents came from the United
Kingdom, while one came from Romania, Italy, Croatia, Latvia, Netherlands,
Serbia, Spain, and Ukraine. Asia was the
second continent to contribute to this topic. The country that published the
most on this theme was China, Malaysia, and Saudi Arabia.
The European region has conducted the most research on green
entrepreneurship in the green economy for several reasons, such as awareness
and attitude, supportive environment, education and knowledge. First, there is
a growing awareness and positive attitude towards the principles and priorities
of a circular economy, green economy and sustainable practices among young people
in Europe (Krajnc, Kovačič, Žunec, Brglez, & Kovačič Lukman,
2022). This awareness
motivates them to engage in entrepreneurial activities that align with the
goals of the European Green Deal (Foncubierta-Rodríguez, 2022). Second, European countries have implemented policies and
initiatives that support green entrepreneurship and the transition to a green
economy. These include funding programs, incubators, and accelerators targeting
green startups. Third, while formal education may not provide enough knowledge
to work in the green economy field actively, there is a recognition of the need
to encourage young people's competence and ability to deal with the green
economy. This emphasis on education and knowledge development creates a favourable environment for green entrepreneurship research (Krajnc et al., 2022).
Table 2 Geographical
contexts of green entrepreneurship in green economy studies
|
Countries |
Papers |
Percentage (%) |
|
America |
3 |
9 |
|
Colombia |
2 |
6 |
|
United
States |
1 |
3 |
|
Asia |
9 |
26 |
|
China |
2 |
6 |
|
Malaysia |
2 |
6 |
|
Saudi
Arabia |
2 |
6 |
|
Iran |
1 |
3 |
|
Pakistan |
1 |
3 |
|
Russian
Federation |
1 |
3 |
|
Europe |
17 |
50 |
|
United
Kingdom |
6 |
18 |
|
Romania |
3 |
9 |
|
Italy |
2 |
6 |
|
Croatia |
1 |
3 |
|
Latvia |
1 |
3 |
|
Netherlands |
1 |
3 |
|
Serbia |
1 |
3 |
|
Spain |
1 |
3 |
|
Ukraine |
1 |
3 |
|
African |
4 |
12 |
|
South
Africa |
3 |
9 |
|
Nigeria |
1 |
3 |
|
Australia |
1 |
3 |
|
Australia |
1 |
3 |
|
Total |
24 |
100 |
Management Perspective Analysis and Multilevel
Analysis
Based
on our analysis of 24 documents, we can categorize them into five distinct
levels of analysis, as shown in Table 3. These five levels of analysis were
individual, team, firm, networking, and institutional. Because individuals do not operate in
isolation, various study layers were required to comprehend the dynamics within
companies in green entrepreneurship in the green economy. In this case, the individuals are business
owners, entrepreneurs, and employees. Individuals influence and influence their
respective environments, such as networks, teams, contexts, and businesses that
exist in their environment (Andreini & Bettinelli, 2017).
Table 3 Various levels and perspectives of analysis
|
Individual |
Team |
Firm |
Network |
Institutional |
|
|
Entrepreneurship |
(Diale, Kanakana-Katumba,
& Maladzhi, 2019; Vasile & Nicolň, 2017) |
- |
(Lotfi et al., 2018) |
(Gorondutse, Salimon, Nafi, & Salehudden, 2020) |
(Ahmad et al., 2015; Alwakid, Aparicio, &
Urbano, 2021) |
|
Finance |
- |
- |
(Radović-Marković & Živanović,
2019) |
- |
- |
|
Marketing |
(Ye, Zhou, Anwar, Siddiquei, & Asmi, 2020) |
- |
- |
(Mukonza, 2020) |
(J. Willemsen & van der Veen, 2014) |
|
Operation |
- |
(Gibbs & O’Neill, 2014) |
(Drăgoi et al., 2017; Webb, 2021) |
- |
- |
|
Human
resource |
(O’Neill & Gibbs, 2016; Petrović, Peternel,
& Ančić, 2020; Soomro, Ghumro, & Shah, 2020) |
- |
- |
(Maziriri, Mapuranga, Maramura, & Nzewi, 2019) |
- |
|
(Affolderbach & Krueger,
2017; Pertuz, Miranda, & Sánchez Buitrago, 2021) |
- |
(Bobkova, Andryeyeva, Verbivska, Kozlovtseva, &
Velychko, 2021; Demirel, Li, Rentocchini, & Tamvada, 2019; Ge, Sheng,
Gao, Tsai, & Du, 2018; Vasilevska, 2018) |
- |
(Alwakid et al., 2021; Todirica, 2018) |
Research on perception, learning, cognition, creativity,
motivation, personality, behaviour, and ethics is
typically conducted at the individual level of analysis. The individual-level
analysis is frequently used in research on ethics, deviant behaviour,
cooperative behaviour, learning, personality,
perception, motivation, cognition, and creativity. This analysis emphasizes
psychology and entrepreneurship theories (Ostroff & Judge, 2012).
Research on group dynamics, norms, power, roles, leadership,
intragroup and intergroup conflict and cohesion, and interpersonal
communication was done at the team-level analysis (Molloy, Ployhart, & Wright, 2011). Scholars typically employ socio-psychological and
sociological methodologies at this level of study.
Firm-level
research was conducted on technology, change, inter-organizational cooperation,
firm culture, conflict, structure, cultural diversity, and external
environmental variables (Foss & Saebi, 2015). Social
interaction, collaboration, cooperation, collective action, relationships, connectedness, and trust were all
included at the network level of analysis.
The
cultural-cognitive, normative, and regulative institutions identified as the
three pillars of institutions were typically partially addressed by research at
the institutional level analysis (Scott, 1995). The regulative
pillar focuses on the enforcing body and explicit regulatory mechanisms,
including rule-setting, monitoring, and penalizing actions that compel businesses
to abide by the rules. The normative
pillar focuses on the rules and standards that people adhere to because of a
sense of duty to others and because they are expected to do so. The
cultural-cognitive pillar emphasizes common understanding and how people react
to cultural cues in their environment.
Based
on the 24 papers analyzed, the
analysis of entrepreneurship focus was found at almost all levels except in the
field of teams. The green entrepreneurship ecosystem must be seen from the
macro and micro levels with crucial elements (Diale et al., 2019).
Studies
also analyze using a management perspective, such as finance, strategy, human
resource, entrepreneurship, operation, and marketing (Andreini & Bettinelli, 2017). Regarding the
focus on finance management, researchers only found it at the firm level. The
study discovered a financing gap between what the banking industry was ready to
offer green entrepreneurs in the green economy sector and what they required (Radović-Marković & Živanović,
2019).
On
the focus of marketing management, researchers found it at the individual,
team, and institutional levels. The most significant influence on a person's
intentions to engage in environmentally responsible entrepreneurship, according
to the findings of a recent study. In contrast, the interaction between mooring
factors and market orientation on switching to green entrepreneurship was
relatively weak (Ye et al., 2020). The focus of operations
management was only found at the team and firm levels. The number of
agrotourism business units is positively impacted by economic variables (Drăgoi et al., 2017).
Individual and network levels were found in the focus area of
human resources. Researchers found four studies involving
survey results in green entrepreneurship on green economy studies (Maziriri et al., 2019; O’Neill
& Gibbs, 2016; Petrović et al., 2020; Soomro et al., 2020). Moreover, the last strategic focus was on the
individual, firm, and institutional levels. The field's strategic direction
becomes the focus, with the highest number of people in business having the
right strategy for green entrepreneurship to realize a green economy. Green
entrepreneurship is a tool for delivering potentially broader system change and
exploring green development's conceptual and practical aspects (Affolderbach & Krueger, 2017). The industry life cycle, the abundance of knowledge,
organizations, and financing access are critical to the success of green
entrepreneurship in a green economy (Demirel et al., 2019).
There are several
research gaps in green entrepreneurship in a green economy. First, the
entrepreneurship perspective research has not been linked to team analysis.
Second, the finance management perspective study has not been linked to
individual, team, network and institutional analysis. Third, marketing management
perspective research is unrelated to team and firm analysis. Fourth, the
operation management perspective study has not been linked to individual,
network and institutional analysis. Fifth, research on the human resource
management perspective has not been linked to team, firm and institutional
analysis. Sixth, strategic management perspective studies are unrelated to team
and network analysis. The team level is the least researched multilevel
analysis for green entrepreneurship in a green economy. Management perspectives
that have been little studied for green entrepreneurship in a green economy are
operations, human resources and finance.
Conclusion
The
role of green entrepreneurship is sufficient to realize a green economy. This study investigates the distribution of related
research by presenting several quantitative analyses relating to green
entrepreneurship and green economy, such as annual publication, country, and
affiliation. The
developments in green entrepreneurship research in the green economy can be
attributed to several factors, such as environmental concern, SDGs, resource
efficiency, climate change mitigation, innovation, social inclusion and
measurement. The study's
findings indicate that green entrepreneurship in the green economy has been
studied in numerous research institutes and several countries. The University
of Hull and continental Europe have contributed most to this field as a research
institution and country. The annual analysis demonstrates that research in the area
has stabilized since 2014, with the management perspective of entrepreneurship,
marketing, and strategy being the most researched and linked topic. This
topic's most frequently reviewed multilevel analysis was the individual and
firm level. This study has limitations using data only from Scopus.
Further
research that can be carried out, especially for green entrepreneur research in
the green economy, is to use the team level by connecting the management perspective
of the finance, operation and human resource. Some future research can be
carried out in comparative studies on the differences in the characteristics of
green entrepreneurship between different countries around the world and
business strategies that can help green entrepreneurship to survive in the long
term based on a green economy.
REFERENCES
Affolderbach, J., &
Krueger, R. (2017). “Just” ecopreneurs: re-conceptualizing green transitions
and entrepreneurship. Local Environment, 22(4), 410–423.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2016.1210591
Ahmad, N. H.,
Abdul-Halim, H., Ramayah, T., & Rahman, S. A. (2015). Green
entrepreneurship inclination among Generation Y: The road towards a green
economy. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 13(2), 211–218.
Alwakid, W., Aparicio,
S., & Urbano, D. (2021). The Influence of Green Entrepreneurship on
Sustainable Development in Saudi Arabia: The Role of Formal Institutions. International
Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(10), 5433.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18105433
Andreini, D., &
Bettinelli, C. (2017). Business Model Innovation: From Systematic Literature
Review to Future Research Directions. Cham: Springer International
Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53351-3
Anghel, G. A., &
Anghel, M. A. (2022). Green Entrepreneurship among Students—Social and
Behavioral Motivation. Sustainability, 14(14), 8730.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148730
Bobkova, A., Andryeyeva,
N., Verbivska, L., Kozlovtseva, V., & Velychko, V. (2021). Environmental
Responsibility in The Development of Green Entrepreneurship. Studies of
Applied Economics, 38(4). https://doi.org/10.25115/eea.v38i4.4003
Chunyu, X. (2021). Research
on Confirmation and Measurement of Corporate Environmental Costs-Based on Green
Economy. International Journal of Innovative Technologies in Economy, 3(35).
https://doi.org/10.31435/rsglobal_ijite/30092021/7666
Demirel, P., Li, Q. C., Rentocchini, F., & Tamvada, J. P. (2019). Born to be green: new
insights into the economics and management of green entrepreneurship. Small
Business Economics, 52(4), 759–771.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9933-z
Diale, C. D.,
Kanakana-Katumba, G., & Maladzhi, R. W. (2019). Green Entrepreneurship
Model Utilising the System Dynamics Approach: A Review. 2019 IEEE
International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management
(IEEM), 384–389. IEEE.
https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEM44572.2019.8978804
Drăgoi, M., Iamandi, I.-E., Munteanu, S., Ciobanu, R., Țarțavulea
(Dieaconescu), R., & Lădaru, R. (2017). Incentives for Developing Resilient Agritourism
Entrepreneurship in Rural Communities in Romania in a European Context. Sustainability,
9(12), 2205. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9122205
Farrell, S. (2022).
University of Hull Secures Ł86M for Green Investments.
Foncubierta-Rodríguez,
M.-J. (2022). Influence of the entrepreneur’s personal values in business
governance style and their relationship with happiness at work. Corporate
Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 22(3),
592–617. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-05-2021-0197
Foss, N. J., & Saebi,
T. (2015). Business Model Innovation: The Organizational Dimension.
Oxford University Press.
Ge, B., Sheng, F., Gao,
Y., Tsai, S.-B., & Du, X. (2018). “Green Ocean Treasure Hunting” Guided by
Policy Support in a Transitional Economy. Sustainability, 10(2),
445. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10020445
Gibbs, D., & O’Neill,
K. (2014). Rethinking Sociotechnical Transitions and Green Entrepreneurship:
The Potential for Transformative Change in the Green Building Sector. Environment
and Planning A: Economy and Space, 46(5), 1088–1107.
https://doi.org/10.1068/a46259
Gorondutse, A. H.,
Salimon, M. G., Nafi, S. N. B. M., & Salehudden, M. R. Bin. (2020). Green entreprenual
practices among SMEs in Malaysia and Nigeria. International Journal of
Supply Chain Management, 9(1), 464–474.
Huang, X., Zhang, Q.,
Liu, Z., & Tu, X. (2022). Comprehensive Evaluation Research of Urban Green
Economy Evaluation Index System. 2022 7th International Conference on
Financial Innovation and Economic Development (ICFIED 2022). Harbin:
Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/aebmr.k.220307.493
J. Willemsen, S., &
van der Veen, G. (2014). Organizing local “green” entrepreneurship: a brand
perspective. Journal of Place Management and Development, 7(3),
235–246. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPMD-05-2014-0007
Jahan, N., Naveed, S.,
Zeshan, M., & Tahir, M. A. (2016). How to Conduct a Systematic Review: A
Narrative Literature Review. Cureus, 8(11).
https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.864
Jones, M. V., Coviello,
N., & Tang, Y. K. (2011). International Entrepreneurship Research (1989–2009):
A Domain Ontology and Thematic Analysis. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(6),
632–659. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2011.04.001
Khanna, M. (2020). Growing
Green Business Investments in Asia and the Pacific: Trends and Opportunities.
Manila, Philippines. https://doi.org/10.22617/WPS200357-2
Krajnc, D., Kovačič,
D., Žunec, E., Brglez, K., & Kovačič Lukman, R. (2022). Youth
Awareness and Attitudes towards a Circular Economy to Achieve the Green Deal
Goals. Sustainability, 14(19), 12050.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912050
Lotfi, M., Yousefi, A.,
& Jafari, S. (2018). The Effect of Emerging Green Market on Green Entrepreneurship
and Sustainable Development in Knowledge-Based Companies. Sustainability,
10(7), 2308. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072308
Maziriri, E. T.,
Mapuranga, M., Maramura, T. C., & Nzewi, O. I. (2019). Navigating on the
key drivers for a transition to a green economy: evidence from women
entrepreneurs in South Africa. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues,
7(2), 1686–1703. https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2019.7.2(62)
Michael, P. S. (2022). Research
Needs in Agriculture and Other Land Uses in Response to The Green Economy: A
Review. Journal of Global Agriculture and Ecology, 14(4), 97–104.
https://doi.org/10.56557/jogae/2022/v14i47910
Molloy, J. C., Ployhart,
R. E., & Wright, P. M. (2011). The Myth of “the” Micro-Macro Divide:
Bridging System-Level and Disciplinary Divides. Journal of Management, 37(2),
581–609. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310365000
Mukonza, C. (2020). An
Analysis of Factors Influencing Green Entrepreneurship Activities in South
Africa. In Advances in African Economic, Social and Political Development
(pp. 47–67). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44180-7_3
O’Neill, K., & Gibbs,
D. (2016). Rethinking green entrepreneurship – Fluid narratives of the green economy.
Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 48(9), 1727–1749.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X16650453
Ostroff, C., & Judge,
T. A. (2012). Perspectives on organizational fit. London, England:
Psychology Press.
Pertuz, V., Miranda, L. F., & Sánchez Buitrago, J. O. (2021). Towards a conceptual
understanding of green entrepreneurship. Revista
Venezolana de Gerencia, 26(94), 745–761.
Petrović, N., Peternel, L., & Ančić, B. (2020). The Rejectionist Ethic
And The Spirit Of The Green Economy. Traditiones, 49(1), 13–36.
https://doi.org/10.3986/Traditio2020490101
Petticrew, M., &
Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical
Guide. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
PRISMA. (2022). PRISMA:
Transparent Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. www.prisma-statement.org/
Purnomo, A., Afia, N., Prasetyo, Y. T., Rosyidah, E., Persada, S. F.,
Maulana, F. I., & Meiryani. (2022). Business Model on M-Business: A
Systematic Review. Procedia Computer Science, 215, 955–962. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2022.12.098
Purnomo, A., Firdaus, M., Rosyidah, E., Afia, N., & Firdausi, N.
(2023). A retrospective
overview of green entrepreneur research using a bibliometric analysis. AIP
Conference Proceedings, 090007. Jakarta: AIP Publishing LLC.
https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0109152
Purnomo, A., Firdaus, M., Saputra, D. H., Teja, A., & Harjanti, W.
(2021). A
Scientometric Mapping of Green Economy Academic Publication. International
Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, 1855–1863. Singapore: IEOM Society International.
Purnomo, A., Sari, A. K., Aziz, A., Prasetyo, Y. E., & Rosyidah, E.
(2021). A
Study of Green Management Literature through Bibliometric Positioning during
Four Decades. Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial
Engineering and Operations Management, 1738–1748. Singapore: IEOM Society
International.
Radović-Marković,
M., & Živanović, B. (2019). Fostering Green Entrepreneurship and Women’s
Empowerment through Education and Banks’ Investments in Tourism: Evidence from
Serbia. Sustainability, 11(23), 6826.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su11236826
Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions
and organizations (Foundations for organizational science) (1st edition).
SAGE Publications, Inc.
Sharma, D., Bouchaud,
J.-P., Gualdi, S., Tarzia, M., & Zamponi, F. (2021). V–, U–, L– or W–shaped
economic recovery after Covid-19: Insights from an Agent Based Model. PLOS
ONE, 16(3), e0247823. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0247823
Snyder, H. (2019).
Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal
of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Söderholm, P. (2020). The
green economy transition: the challenges of technological change for
sustainability. Sustainable Earth, 3(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42055-020-00029-y
Soomro, B. A., Ghumro, I.
A., & Shah, N. (2020). Green entrepreneurship inclination among the younger
generation: An avenue towards a green economy. Sustainable
Development, 28(4), 585–594.
https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2010
Terán-Yépez, E., Marín-Carrillo, G. M., Casado-Belmonte, M. del P., &
Capobianco-Uriarte, M. de las M. (2020). Sustainable entrepreneurship: Review of its
evolution and new trends. Journal of Cleaner Production, 252,
119742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119742
Thorpe, R., Holt, R.,
Macpherson, A., & Pittaway, L. (2005). Using Knowledge within Small and Medium-sized
Firms: A Systematic Review of The Evidence. International Journal of
Management Reviews, 7(4), 257–281.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2005.00116.x
Todirica, I. (2018).
Green Entrepreneurship in Rural Areas. International Multidisciplinary
Scientific GeoConference Surveying Geology and Mining Ecology Management, SGEM,
431–438. International Multidisciplinary Scientific Geoconference. https://doi.org/10.5593/sgem2018/5.3/S28.055
Tranfield, D., Denyer,
D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a Methodology for Developing
Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review. British
Journal of Management, 14(3), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375
van Praag, C. M., &
Versloot, P. H. (2007). What is the value of entrepreneurship? A review of
recent research. Small Business Economics, 29(4), 351–382.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-007-9074-x
Vasile, A. J., & Nicolň, D. (2017). Sustainable Entrepreneurship and
Investments in the Green Economy (A. Jean Vasile & D. Nicolň, Eds.). IGI
Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-2075-7
Vasilevska, D. (2018).
Green Entrepreneurship as A Factor of Sustainable Economic Development in
Baltic States. International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference
Surveying Geology and Mining Ecology Management, SGEM, 18(5.3), 423–430.
International Multidisciplinary Scientific Geoconference.
https://doi.org/10.5593/sgem2018/5.3/S28.054
Wang, Q., & Zhang, F.
(2021). What does the China’s economic recovery after COVID-19 pandemic mean
for the economic growth and energy consumption of other countries? Journal
of Cleaner Production, 295, 126265.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126265
Webb, H. C. (2021). India’s
Entrepreneurial Path to Green Market Solutions in Waste Management. In Innovation
Management and Growth in Emerging Economies (pp. 1–15).
https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-4195-1.ch001
Xiang, L., Tang, M., Yin,
Z., Zheng, M., & Lu, S. (2021). The COVID-19 Pandemic and Economic Growth:
Theory and Simulation. Sec. Health Economics, 9(741525).
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2021.74152
Ye, Q., Zhou, R., Anwar,
M. A., Siddiquei, A. N., & Asmi, F. (2020). Entrepreneurs and Environmental
Sustainability in the Digital Era: Regional and Institutional Perspectives. International
Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(4), 1355.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17041355
Zhang, L., Xu, M., Chen,
H., Li, Y., & Chen, S. (2022). Globalization, Green Economy and
Environmental Challenges: State of the Art Review for Practical Implications. Frontiers
in Environmental Science, 10.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.870271