Asynchronous Learning: Sustainable Entrepreneurship

Asynchronous Learning: Sustainable Entrepreneurship

Asynchronous Learning: Sustainable Entrepreneurship
Citation: Tunçalp, D.; Y ld r m, N. Sustainable Entrepreneurship: Mapping the Business Landscape for the Last 20 Years. Sustainability2022, 14 , 3864.https://doi.org/10.3390/ su14073864 Academic Editor: Dilek Cetindamar Received: 7 January 2022 Accepted: 14 March 2022 Published: 24 March 2022 Publisher ‘s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional af l- iations. Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). Article Sustainable Entrepreneurship: Mapping the Business Landscape for the Last 20 Years Deniz Tunçalp and Nihan Y ld r m * Department of Management Engineering, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul 34469, Turkey; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract:Sustainable entrepreneurship is venturing to shift business practices towards environmental and social sustainability. It gained popularity worldwide, particularly in the US, due to promoting regulations for some sustainability areas, the high availability of impact investment, and the large- scale entrepreneurial ecosystem of the country. However, the literature does not explain what sustainable entrepreneurs undertake in business. This paper investigates (1) what the coverage of sustainable entrepreneurship is, (2) how this coverage has changed in the last 20 years, and (3) which sustainable development goals (SDGs) sustainable entrepreneurs serve. For these questions, the study analyses keyword co-occurrences of companies ( n= 2004) from 72 countries and regions listed on the CrunchBase database with sustainability identi cation. The study shows differences in coverage and changes between the US and the other countries in the last 20 years. The study maps sustainable entrepreneurs to the SDGs they primarily serve, analysing their descriptions and websites. It identi es the distribution of sustainable entrepreneurs over SDGs, locating more popular and less popular SDGs. The paper invites several research streams on sustainable entrepreneurship and suggests policies to promote SDGs among sustainable entrepreneurs. Keywords: sustainable entrepreneurship; sustainability; keyword co-occurrence; keyword maps; sustainable transformation 1. Introduction The population and the socioeconomic activity of humans have already surpassed the Earth’s capacity to supply essential resources [ 1]. Change and innovation have be- come vital for establishing a sustainable economic order worldwide. Humanity needs better living conditions for everybody while maintaining the delicate ecological balance of the planet [ 2,3]. Services owing from nature to the people create high levels of cost as they cause pollution, harm, and biodiversity loss. As custodians of natural ecosystems, sustainable entrepreneurs [ 4,5] venture to create signi cant economic value for the large- scale betterment of the Anthropocene [ 6]. They may also have pivotal roles in translating scienti c and technological knowledge into innovative products and services in various industries and markets [ 7,8]. These roles seem necessary for a large-scale transition towards a sustainable future [ 9 12]. There are various research papers on the roles of sustain- able entrepreneurs [ 13] and techniques to locate [ 12] or support them in entrepreneurial ecosystems [14] with extensive reviews and theoretical models [15 17]. However, sustainability-driven, sustainable, or sustainability entrepreneurship is rela- tively recent [ 18]. As an umbrella term, it covers a variety of approaches, including green entrepreneurship, ecopreneurship [ 19,20], business social entrepreneurship [ 21], or sustainability-motivated [ 22] entrepreneurship. However, the study could not locate any comprehensive review identifying the business landscape of sustainable entrepreneurship. This gap may be due to unavailable data and methodological limitations. Fielser et al. [ 13] argue that researchers have a preoccupation with studying the features of sustainable Sustainability 2022,14 , 3864.https://doi.org/10.3390/su14073864https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability sustainability Sustainability 2022,14 , 3864 2 of 21entrepreneurs and their potential to act as catalysts for sustainable development. However, the literature is also silent on which SDGs sustainable entrepreneurs serve. Several research areas covered opportunities, motivations, competencies, strategies and business models . However, the knowledge about their focus on different SDGs is still limited [ 13]. As the world needs urgent global actions towards a comprehensive sustainability transition [ 23], questions remain on how entrepreneurs respond to sustainability issues and how these responses change. In exploring sustainable entrepreneurship on the business landscape, one has to ac- knowledge the particular position of the US. Sustainable entrepreneurship has a signi cant footprint in this country with the regulations that promote sustainability in some domains, available impact investment, and its large-scale entrepreneurial ecosystem [ 12,24,25]. There- fore, making a wholesale analysis of world countries without separate treatment of the US may hinder differences and shifts in the coverage of sustainable entrepreneurship in other countries. This paper investigates what sustainable entrepreneurs undertake in business in the US and other countries. It questions how the coverage of sustainable entrepreneurship has changed worldwide in the last 20 years. It also identi es which SDGs sustainable en- trepreneurs serve. For these questions, the study analysed keyword co-occurrences of com- panies identi ed with sustainability from 72 different countries and regions ( n = 2004) on CrunchBase, an extensive database of entrepreneurial companies. The study also mapped these companies over the SDGs they serve, considering their CrunchBase descriptions and websites. The results outlined related keywords and topical areas of sustainable entrepreneur- ship. It reported signi cant differences between the US and the other countries and located several shifts in the subjects’ coverage in the last 20 years. It described what topics and issues received more and increasing/decreasing attention. In addition, it identi ed the distribution of sustainable entrepreneurs over the SDGs. These results have important theoretical and policy implications for technology man- agement and entrepreneurship. Research on sustainable entrepreneurship needs to move towards an empirical approach from its current prescriptive and conceptual orientation [ 12]. Researchers need to analyse the content, impacts, trade-offs, and synergies of entrepreneur- ship and sustainable development. Furthermore, understanding the complex interdepen- dencies between different sustainability goals is essential to avoid compromises between the critical dimensions of sustainable development. The study also invites several research streams on sustainability and entrepreneurship. Researchers may perform formative assess- ments against key sustainability challenges to identify gaps in sustainable entrepreneurs’ collective sustainability performance. Policy efforts may focus on these areas to develop entrepreneurial agglomeration. In addition, further research may assess sustainable en- trepreneurs’ outcomes in addressing sustainability issues under market competition and with open innovation. Studying how sustainable entrepreneurship interacts with SDGs may help researchers understand the conditions under which sustainable entrepreneurship contributes to SDGs [13]. The following section describes the theoretical background of this paper, describing sustainable entrepreneurship. Then, the third and the fourth sections describe the study’s methodology and results, respectively. The fth section discusses the contributions before the paper concludes. 2. Sustainable Entrepreneurship 2.1. The Coverage of Sustainable Entrepreneurship Sustainable entrepreneurship is the discovery and exploitation of economic oppor- tunities through the generation of market disequilibria that initiate the transformation of a sector towards an environmentally and socially more sustainable state [ 26] (p. 482). It involves the process of discovering, evaluating, and exploiting economic opportuni- ties that are present in market failures which detract from sustainability, including those Sustainability 2022,14 , 3864 3 of 21that are environmentally relevant [ 27] (p. 58). It primarily combines opportunities and intentions to simultaneously create value from an economic, social and ecological perspective [28] (p. 18) . These entrepreneurs aim to balance their efforts in these three areas [ 4] and design their organisations [ 29]. It focuses on the preservation of nature, life support, and community in the pursuit of perceived opportunities to bring into existence future products, processes, and services for gain , where the gains includes economic and non-economic gains to individuals, the economy, and society [30] (p. 142). The literature de nes sustainable entrepreneurship as the teleological process aiming at achieving sustainable development, by discovering, evaluating and exploiting opportuni- ties and creating value that produces economic prosperity, social cohesion, and environmen- tal protection [ 31] (p. 2). It differs from regular entrepreneurship by its social, economic, and environmental dimensions [ 32] or the economic, psychological, social, and ecological consequences [ 7]. Sustainable entrepreneurs introduce innovative business models and develop revolutionary technologies through the concept of creative destruction [ 33,34]. It draws attention to four market imperfections: awed pricing mechanisms, information asymmetries, inef cient rms, and externalities leading to unsustainable business and environmental degradation [ 7]. It is a controversial area following the legacy of sustainable development [35] (p. 441). Researchers have suggested that sustainable entrepreneurs focus more on social issues than environmental problems [ 36]. They suggest green products are less likely to facilitate a scalable business [ 37]. Similarly, some have suggested that sustainable entrepreneurs prefer focusing on consumer-focused technologies to scale. For them, the recent sustainability trend in startups mainly involves consumer-focused technologies, with less interest in traditional or basic technologies [38]. 2.2. Sustainable Entrepreneurship across Countries A country’s favourable environment and supportive conditions signi cantly deter- mine the success or failure of its startups, where sustainable entrepreneurs are not an exception. The distribution of the capital available for impact investment is uneven across countries [ 39,40]. Therefore, the availability of sustainability-sensitive capital makes the country context more critical for sustainability startups [12,41 43]. Previous literature emphasised the importance of countries’ innovation ecosystems in facilitating and regulating economic activity and their effects on productivity and inno- vation [ 44]. They focused on understanding the economic, social, and institutional back- ground to explain the regional agglomeration patterns across regions and countries [ 44 47]. Research also dealt with the same issue within the systems of innovation concept for exploring regions and countries [44,48,49]. Political and social conditions in a country also make the location more critical for sustainable entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurial ecosystems in a country or a region affect business models’ selection and orientation towards speci c sustainability topics [ 12]. The proximity between entrepreneurs with similar interests reduces R&D and transaction costs, increasing the availability of quali ed human capital [ 50]. It enables knowledge spillovers and intellectual asset transitions, accelerating digital entrepreneurship [ 51]. Institutional settings shape entrepreneurs’ topical and technological choices in a particular region [12,52 55] . Therefore, it is crucial to grasp how countries and regions have speci c differences in sustainable entrepreneurship. The US has a sizeable sustainable entrepreneurship activity among world countries, as the largest country in venture capital [ 56]. The sample distribution among other countries also illustrates this phenomenon. Besides the size of the US economy [ 57], there are several reasons for the extent of sustainable entrepreneurship. For example, the US has various bodies that support sustainability, such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) [58 60] . Sustainability-related regulations include the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, Clean Energy and Security Act, Endangered Species Act, Insecticide, Fungicide, Rodenticide Act, and Lacey Act. The government also actively funds projects and economic activity in Sustainability 2022,14 , 3864 4 of 21biofuels or renewable energy [ 61]. Public policy plays a substantial role in channelling US institutional asset owners’ capital to impact investing for many years [ 25]. The country contributes more than 50% of the total value created into the global startup ecosystem. It hosts several of the world’s top startup ecosystems, including Silicon Valley, New York City, Boston, Los Angeles, and Seattle. These cities account for more than 70% of North America’s entrepreneurial ecosystem value [ 62]. Previous research has identi ed Boston, Houston, and Seattle as the top three locations for sustainable entrepreneurship in the US [ 12]. With more than two hundred specialised companies, San Francisco, including Silicon Valley as the innovation core of the US, holds the leadership position for the CleanTech vertical [ 24,63]. Silicon Valley has created a signi cant gap between the US and the other countries [ 63]. Therefore, this study takes a comparative view, analysing the US and the other countries separately. 2.3. Entrepreneurship for Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) The UN announced SDGs and declared the general responsibility of businesses in sustainability issues relatively recently in 2015 [ 64]. This move has acted as a driver for the general recognition of sustainable development challenges worldwide [ 12,13]. Later, the UN [ 65] extended this call by de ning the sustainable development pillars as (1) driving economic growth, (2) promoting sustainable agriculture and innovation, (3) increasing social cohesion, (4) reducing inequalities, (5) introducing climate change mitigation technologies, and (6) establishing environmentally sustainable practices and consumption patterns. Before the release of the UN’s sustainable development goals in 2017, Eurostat’s Environmental Goods and Services Sector classi cation for environmental protection activities (CEPA) or resource management activities (CReMA) mainly described the focus of sustainable entrepreneurship [ 9]. However, after the announcement of the UN SDGs, the scope has shifted to address them through innovation [12,33]. Previous studies provided some early insights into the focus areas of sustainable en- trepreneurship. Tiba et al. [ 12] suggest sustainable entrepreneurs mainly target the health and well-being SDG. They argued that these entrepreneurs were primarily attracted to the comparatively higher earnings potential of businesses in the medical and pharmaceutical sectors and the number of health issues in urgent need of solutions. They also suggested that the SDG regarding quality education was the second most popular SDG. The following section describes the methodology of this study, providing insights about the data, analysis, and rationale before the presentation of the results and their discussion. 3. Materials and Methods This study primarily employed two methods over different empirical materials. It car- ried out a bibliometric analysis of sustainable entrepreneurs’ keywords. It also performed a content analysis of their business descriptions and website materials to map them over SDGs. This section describes how the paper employed these methods. 3.1. Bibliometric Analysis of Sustainable Entrepreneurs’ Keywords Bibliometrics is a eld that works on quantitative analysis of textual bodies of literature within and across disciplines [ 66,67]. Bibliometric mapping generates visual maps of textual data from documents, including keywords and their internal relationships, such as keyword co-occurrences [ 68,69]. The analysis in this study focuses on keyword co-occurrences of companies that identi ed themselves with sustainability as one of the keywords in the CrunchBase. CrunchBase database collects worldwide data on entrepreneurial companies, investors, funding rounds, and critical people of the entrepreneurial ecosystem. As of May 2019, CrunchBase had collected records on 760,590 organisations (of which 708,558 companies), 121,509 investors of different types, 263,426 funding rounds, 890,429 people, 17,068 initial public offerings (IPO), and 89,959 acquisitions [ 70]. The previous research also used the Sustainability 2022,14 , 3864 5 of 21CrunchBase data to provide the entrepreneurship and innovation activity in different contexts. For example, Den Besten [ 71] analysed the content and evolution of academic research using CrunchBase. Breschi et al. [ 72] presented new cross-country evidence on innovative startups and their relations with venture capital investments, drawing upon CrunchBase. Similar to the study’s context, Marra et al. [ 24] investigated the innovation in CleanTech using CrunchBase. The authors downloaded the data of companies founded in the 20 years between 2000 and 2019 identi ed with the sustainability keyword. These keywords are noun phrases, consisting of word sequences that end with a noun, and all other words in the sequence are nouns or adjectives. The companies mainly provide these keywords and are corrected and updated by CrunchBase and its users. Secondly, the authors identi ed the noun phrases and their thesaurus equivalents that co-occur at least ten times in in- dustry keywords of CrunchBase for all sustainability-identifying companies, at the same time counting co-occurrences using binary coding. In other words, the analysis counted multiple co-occurrences of a keyword in one company. It did not consider the multiple co-occurrences caused by textual repetition. This technique resulted in the quantitative identi cation of noun phrases as candidates for emergent keyword structure for each map. The authors then screened these noun phrases and discarded erroneous or generic entries. The analysis then selected 60% of the most connected nodes for mapping to visualise the strongest co-occurrences. For the calculations and mapping, the study used VOSviewer [ 73]. VOSviewer po- sitioned related terms more closely on a keyword map. The map also employs colours to indicate the clustering of different terms, putting terms with higher co-occurrence into the same cluster. VOSviewer utilises multidimensional scaling for mapping [ 74]. For clustering, it operates the modularity function of Newman and Girvan [ 75] (see also Walt- man et al. [76]). The paper analysed the rst ten years and the second ten years separately in preparing the keyword maps. The study used the companies’ foundation dates as the assignment cri- teria for a speci c period for this analysis. The paper also analysed countries in two distinct groups: (i) the US and (ii) all other countries. In the analysis, the other countries included the following (with frequencies): Argentina (3), Australia (37), Austria (11), Belgium (14), Brazil (51), Bulgaria (1), Canada (109), Chile (7), China (6), Colombia (9), Costa Rica (3), Croatia (2), Cyprus (2), Czech Republic (2), Denmark (30), Estonia (9), Fiji (1), Finland (11), France (38), Germany (106), Ghana (1), Gibraltar (1), Greece (6), Hong Kong (10), Hungary (5), Iceland (3), India (40), Indonesia (8), Ireland (9), Israel (51), Italy (31), Japan (21), Jordan (1), Kenya (8), Lithuania (3), Luxembourg (8), Malaysia (4), Malta (1), Mexico (8), Moldova (2), New Zealand (8), Norway (14), Pakistan (1), Palestine (1), Paraguay (1), Philippines (3), Poland (7), Portugal (9), Puerto Rico (3), Qatar (1), Russia (2), Rwanda (1), Saudi Arabia (1), Serbia (1), Sierra Leone (1), Singapore (23), Slovak Republic (4), South Africa (6), South Korea (5), Spain (47), Sweden (41), Switzerland (40), Taiwan (2), The Netherlands (129), Trinidad and Tobago (1), Turkey (7), UAE (9), Uganda (1), Ukraine (7), UK (184), and Vietnam (1), making a total of 1234 sustainable entrepreneurship rms or other entities. The UK had the highest frequency in the other countries list, with 184 instances. However, it was far less than the US’s frequency of 770. These frequencies further justi ed a separate analysis of the US-based sustainable entrepreneurship. In total, 38.42% of the sample was from the US, indicating a slight overrepresentation, as companies from the US make up 34.75% of all companies in the CrunchBase database [ 70]. The relative popularity of sustainability among consumers [ 77] and the higher availability of impact investment in the US than in the other parts of the world [78] may explain the 3.7% difference. We assumed CrunchBase includes current and representative information about the included entrepreneurs, and the keywords represent their business activities well. While there might be limits to this assumption, it provided a large sample across the world countries as one of the most comprehensive entrepreneurship databases globally. Sustainability 2022,14 , 3864 6 of 21 3.2. Mapping Sustainable Entrepreneurs and SDGsBesides the keyword co-occurrence maps, the paper also coded the sustainable en- trepreneurs according to the UN’s sustainable development goals to identify the topical gaps. However, if entrepreneurs are primarily concerned with economic purposes, how can they serve different SDGs? Firstly, sustainability entrepreneurs are different from regular entrepreneurs. They identify themselves, as well as their business interests, with sustain- ability. The entrepreneurial companies in the dataset, for example, identi ed themselves, or some data source identi ed these companies with the sustainability keyword on Crunch- Base. This identi cation was also evident in companies’ descriptions or their websites. Secondly, having economic concerns does not con ict with sustainability entrepreneurs’ SDG focus. These entrepreneurial companies mainly showed hybrid character with dual economic and social missions. They, for example, provide products or services dealing with SDG-originated problems, such as renewable energy (SDG 7), pollution prevention, waste management (SDG 15), accessible food (SDG 2), water availability (SDG 8), and re- sponsible consumption (SDG 12) while surviving as rms. They develop/sell technologies to address SDGs for responsible production (SDG 12) or the development of industry and infrastructures (SDG 9). Some work on solutions for awareness on carbon emissions to ght against climate change (SDG 13). Some others promote the sustainability of cities and communities with IoT or mobility solutions (SDG 11). As SDGs address real problems, these companies primarily target those problems. They carry this out with their products and services, making them socially relevant and commercially feasible. The authors coded ( n= 2004) sustainable entrepreneurs’ businesses using their de- scriptions in CrunchBase and visiting their websites. If they are inactive or their website is not working, the authors recalled the last archived copy of that particular website at the Internet Archive, archive.org. These visits helped researchers understand which sustain- ability issues they addressed primarily. Two authors coded these entities separately using a standard coding scheme (see Figure1). If the business description downloaded from CrunchBase openly mentioned SDGs, the authors coded that SDG (Step 1). On the company websites, the authors checked for the companies’ mission or vision statements (Step 2), About Us sections that describe who they are (Step 3), Products/Services sections that describe what they carry out (Step 4), and other relevant pages (Step 5). While checking these pages, the authors looked for an open mentioning of any SDGs and coded them where available. Otherwise, the authors searched for SDG-identi er keywords on these pages. The authors generated these keywords prior to the coding from the UN’s Global SDG indicator framework [ 64], de ning key performance indicators and metadata for each SDG. The authors extracted nouns and verbal phrases for each SDG and ltered out generic words to use the rest as identi ers in locating and coding SDGs from the company web- pages. The authors performed the coding separately and discussed their coding differences for resolution afterwards. The authors planned to contact the sustainable entrepreneurs on the Internet (via CrunchBase or social media sites such as LinkedIn) if they could not identify any SDGs for a company. However, the coding resulted in no such incidence. Additionally, the coding resulted in no companies for SDG 17 Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalise the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development . The authors considered this as expected. This category mostly maps with governmental bodies and inter-governmental and global governance institutions, not necessarily registering on CrunchBase. This area also does not match with startups and other entrepreneurial entities. In the content analysis, the researchers did not consider the indirect and consequen- tial outcomes of the business activities. It would arti cially expand SDG identi cation without taking the entrepreneurs’ actual focus. Because of this reason, the researchers speci cally searched for the keywords generated for SDG identi cation in the relevant pages. The researchers also assumed the four focus areas for the coding of the websites would suf ciently cover the business activities of the sustainable entrepreneurs. While the researchers tried to consider the entirety of their websites, this could not be entirely Sustainability 2022,14 , 3864 7 of 21possible for those entrepreneurs with extensive websites. The following section describes the results of the study. Figure 1. Coding scheme for mapping sustainable entrepreneurs over SDGs. 4. Results The research has addressed three fundamental questions about sustainable entrepreneur- ship practices, their coverage worldwide, in the US and other countries, their change over time, their mapping over the SDGs and several results. 4.1. What Is Sustainable Entrepreneurship’s Coverage? The paper examined sustainable entrepreneurs’ keyword co-occurrences over 20 years globally and for the US and other countries for comparisons. It also analysed keyword co-occurrences worldwide for the rst ten years and the second ten years. The analysis of the keywords for all 20 years globally gave a signi cant overall picture showing sustainable entrepreneurship centres around ve interrelated topics: (1) food, agriculture and agritech, (2) retail and consumer goods, (3) e-commerce and fashion, (4) nancial services and marketing, (5) construction, and (6) energy (Figure2). The results indicated that sustainable entrepreneurs clustered consumer goods and retail with agriculture/food-related topics, with nutrition, packaging services, textiles, and food processing. On the other hand, paper manufacturing was related marginally with this cluster as an outlier with relatively weak co-occurrence. While consumer goods and retail also fell into this cluster with shopping and personal health, they linked strongly with the second cluster with the e-commerce and fashion focus. The second cluster was centred on e-commerce and fashion and connected with shopping and retail. Interestingly, these topics also clustered together with the sharing economy, travel, and electric vehicles. The third cluster was more closely knit than the rst two clusters next to information services, human resources, nance, and computers. Organic and aquaculture keywords also clustered together. The last two clusters included construction, smart buildings, building materials and energy, energy management, natural resources, wind energy, and gas.Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 23 Figure 1. Coding scheme for mapping sustainable entrepreneurs over SDGs. Additionally, the coding resulted in no companies for SDG 17 Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalise the Global Partnership for Sustainable Develop- ment . The authors considered this as expected. This category mostly maps with govern- mental bodies and inter-governmental and global governance institutions, not necessarily registering on CrunchBase. This area also does not match with startups and other entre- preneurial entities. In the content analysis, the researchers did not consider the indirect and consequen- tial outcomes of the business activities. It would artificially expand SDG identification without taking the entrepreneurs actual focus. Because of this reason, the researchers spe- cifically searched for the keywords generated for SDG identification in the relevant pages. The researchers also assumed the four focus areas for the coding of the websites would sufficiently cover the business activities of the sustainable entrepreneurs. While the re- searchers tried to consider the entirety of their websites, this could not be entirely possible for those entrepreneurs with extensive websites. The following section describes the re- sults of the study. 4. Results The research has addressed three fundamental questions about sustainable entrepre- neurship practices, their coverage worldwide, in the US and other countries, their change over time, their mapping over the SDGs and several results. 4.1. What Is Sustainable Entrepreneurship s Coverage? The paper examined sustainable entrepreneurs keyword co-occurrences over 20 years globally and for the US and other countries for comparisons. It also analysed key- word co-occurrences worldwide for the first ten years and the second ten years. The analysis of the keywords for all 20 years globally gave a significant overall pic- ture showing sustainable entrepreneurship centres around five interrelated topics: (1) food, agriculture and agritech, (2) retail and consumer goods, (3) e-commerce and fashion, (4) financial services and marketing, (5) construction, and (6) energy (Figure 2). Sustainability 2022,14 , 3864 8 of 21 Figure 2. Sustainable entrepreneurship across the world: 2000 2019 ( n= 2004).When the paper analysed the sustainable entrepreneurship in the US (see Figure3) separate from other countries (see Figure4), the topical map showed general similarities and characteristic differences. In terms of scope, both maps had common clusters and keywords. E-commerce, energy (including clean energy, solar, transportation, and electric vehicles), nancial services, and food (including food processing and nutrition) constituted sustainable entrepreneurship. Figure 3. Sustainable entrepreneurship in the US: 2000 2019 ( n= 770). The study also identi ed differences between the coverage of sustainable entrepreneur- ship in the US and other countries. Additionally, some stand-alone keywords emerged as separate clusters in different regions. For example, e-commerce had differential fashion, shopping, and community emphasis in the US. In contrast, it was more marketplaces, consumer goods, and lifestyle in the other countries. Similarly, the energy cluster had energy storage, automotive, and electronics more frequently noted as topical areas in the US. However, energy ef ciency, environmental engineering, energy management, gas, and natural resources were less frequent in the US than in other countries. The US was focused more on risk management, social media, travel, apps, and mobile at the nancial servicesSustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 23 Figure 2. Sustainable entrepreneurship across the world: 2000 2019 (n = 2004). The results indicated that sustainable entrepreneurs clustered consumer goods and retail with agriculture/food-related topics, with nutrition, packaging services, textiles, and food processing. On the other hand, p

Needs help with similar assignment?

We are available 24x7 to deliver the best services and assignment ready within 3-4 hours? Order a custom-written, plagiarism-free paper

Order Over WhatsApp Place an Order Online

Do you have an upcoming essay or assignment due?

All of our assignments are originally produced, unique, and free of plagiarism.

If yes Order Similar Paper