Why Can Entrepreneurial Involvement Encourage the Entrepreneurship of People Experiencing Poverty?—A Study Using China’s Empirical Data

Abstract

Entrepreneurship, as one of the key means of alleviating extreme poverty, is difficult to achieve among people experiencing poverty partly because their initiative is bound by long-term dependence and their entrepreneurial awareness is not strong. According to the existing literature, entrepreneurial involvement can promote the entrepreneurial willingness of people experiencing poverty and produce entrepreneurial behaviour. However, the reasons and paths of entrepreneurial involvement affecting the poor’s entrepreneurial behaviour are unclear. This paper developed a model based on the theory of involvement to examine the impact of entrepreneurial involvement on the entrepreneurial behaviour of individuals experiencing poverty. A questionnaire survey was conducted with 289 entrepreneurs in poverty from the Wuling Mountain area, and data analysis was performed using a hierarchical regression model. The results indicate that entrepreneurial involvement has a significant direct positive effect on the entrepreneurial behaviour of people with low incomes through the partial mediation of local capabilities. Meanwhile, it has an indirect positive effect, and entrepreneurial role models positively moderate the relationship between entrepreneurial involvement and entrepreneurial behaviour of people with low incomes. The findings provide strong evidence supporting the significant role of entrepreneurial involvement in shaping the entrepreneurial behaviour of entrepreneurs facing poverty in less developed regions. Furthermore, the results highlight the importance of effectively leveraging local capabilities and resources through entrepreneurial involvement. Consequently, this study is of great importance in understanding how government and industries can facilitate entrepreneurial opportunities to their fullest extent by promoting entrepreneurial involvement, thus optimizing local capabilities and serving as influential entrepreneurial role models at the individual level. Furthermore, from a practical standpoint, this research offers tangible solutions and valuable insights regarding the role of entrepreneurial involvement in poverty reduction.

1. Introduction

Entrepreneurship is one of the essential means of self-poverty alleviation [1]. It has a good poverty reduction effect and strong sustainability and has attracted much attention in various research fields. The question of how to reduce and eliminate poverty through entrepreneurship is a hot issue in current society and academia. Existing studies show that entrepreneurial activities are highly resource-dependent [2,3] and that having excellent and extensive entrepreneurial resources can greatly promote entrepreneurial activities [1]. Social resources are abundant in underdeveloped areas, but utilisation efficiency is not high [4]. The majority of individuals exhibit either a lack of intention to go into business or possess the desire to start a business but lack the necessary knowledge regarding entrepreneurial activities, which leads to low entrepreneurship rates in poor areas, and entrepreneurship as a means of self-poverty alleviation is not well utilised in underdeveloped areas. The social resources in underdeveloped areas are rich, but the rate of entrepreneurship is not high. Therefore, inadequate entrepreneurial initiative and ability have a significant impact on the growth of entrepreneurial activities. Rich entrepreneurial resources are not necessarily wholly practical, and entrepreneurs must have the subjective will to succeed. Existing research fails to explain the variations in entrepreneurial outcomes among economically disadvantaged groups [5]. What factors determine the entrepreneurial performance of people with low incomes? Given that entrepreneurial involvement is critical to entrepreneurship research [6], this research looks for answers by examining entrepreneurial involvement.

The concept of involvement was first used in psychological research [7], later introduced into the marketing field from the perspective of consumer purchase intention [8,9,10], and eventually applied in the field of an organisation to study the work involvement of employees [11,12]. Some scholars have recently extended it to entrepreneurship research [13]. According to existing research, participation is an unseen motivation or interest psychological state caused by unique situations or stimuli and will induce diverse search, information processing, decision-making, and behaviour [14]. Involvement is classified into three types: situational, persistent, and reactive involvement. Situational involvement refers to the temporary attention of an individual to something at a specific time; continuous involvement refers to the individual’s continuous attention to something; reaction involvement is the combined effect of the first two types of involvement and is relatively stable [15]. Job involvement, which extends to the organisational domain, is defined as employees’ level of engagement and interest in their work [16]. However, entrepreneurship is an activity that occurs in highly uncertain situations.

In this situation, the subjective will of entrepreneurs plays an important role. However, most entrepreneurs in underdeveloped areas are survival entrepreneurs forced to carry out entrepreneurial behaviour under the pressure of life, mainly to improve quality of life. This type of entrepreneur has low initiative and will not invest in entrepreneurship. More attention is also one of the reasons for the poor entrepreneurial effect in underdeveloped areas. Therefore, to encourage entrepreneurial behaviour in underdeveloped areas, more attention should be paid to the entrepreneurial initiative of entrepreneurs themselves, cultivating entrepreneurial will, and making entrepreneurs psychologically identify with and love entrepreneurship.

Based on the above analysis, this paper introduces the concept of involvement in entrepreneurship. Drawing on the views of Rothschild scholars, this paper argues that entrepreneurial involvement is the psychological identity and love of entrepreneurs for entrepreneurship, which can bring more entrepreneurial identity to poor entrepreneurs [17] so that entrepreneurs are more fully engaged in entrepreneurial activities, enhance the resilience of poor entrepreneurs to overcome difficulties, and continuously improve entrepreneurial ideas and behaviours until entrepreneurial success [18]. We also designed this study based on the relevant literature on involvement, and it finds that involvement is rarely used in entrepreneurship. The role of entrepreneurial involvement in entrepreneurial activities in underdeveloped areas is still unclear. Furthermore, we also attempt to consider the path of entrepreneurial involvement to encourage the poor to start their businesses by promoting entrepreneurial behaviour and broadening the perspective of literature research on entrepreneurship poverty reduction.

This paper divides entrepreneurial involvement into two dimensions—industry entrepreneurial involvement and government entrepreneurial involvement—to study the impact of entrepreneurial involvement on entrepreneurial behaviour in underdeveloped areas. However, in the research process, it is found that considering only the influence of entrepreneurial involvement on entrepreneurial behaviour in underdeveloped areas cannot fully reveal the reasons for the success of poor entrepreneurs. For poor entrepreneurs, the local ability of where they start their businesses will also hinder their entrepreneurial activities. That is to say, poor people’s entrepreneurship relies on subjective creation and is affected by social environment interaction and resource availability. Therefore, this paper introduces the concept of local capability to solve the one-sidedness in the research process. Local capability is an existing and potential resource or capability that can guarantee regional development and local enterprise value-creating activities. It is an essential foundation of entrepreneurial behaviour and plays a crucial intermediary role in entrepreneurship [19].

Relevant research divides local capabilities into four dimensions: natural resources, knowledge and skills, institutional endowments, and hardware facilities [20]. The search believes that enhancing local capabilities helps entrepreneurs obtain critical resources and establish competitive advantages that are difficult to imitate. This article believes that under the influence of entrepreneurship, entrepreneurs in underdeveloped areas will invest more time and energy in entrepreneurial behaviour. Compared to venture capitalists who invest in underdeveloped areas, who cannot rely on their social networks and local advantages, local entrepreneurs in underdeveloped areas have inherent advantages. They can understand potential resources, take the initiative to learn and use superior local resources, and implement entrepreneurial behaviours at a lower cost to establish their unique competitive advantages [21]. Therefore, this paper introduces local capabilities as a mediating variable and examines its influence on the relationship between entrepreneurial involvement and entrepreneurial behaviour. This analysis aims to shed light on the internal mechanism through which entrepreneurial involvement operates on the entrepreneurial behaviour of entrepreneurs in underdeveloped regions.

In summary, this paper develops and examines a model with entrepreneurial involvement as an independent variable, local ability as an intermediary variable, entrepreneurial role model as the moderator variable, and entrepreneurial behaviour as an outcome variable, combining the particularity of poor entrepreneurs and underdeveloped areas. The model shows how low-income people engage in entrepreneurial activities through industry and government involvement, actively mobilise local resources to develop entrepreneurial behaviour better, and then promote entrepreneurship among poor people. In this study, we take Wuling Mountain Area, one of China’s 14 contiguous poverty-stricken areas, as the research object for empirical analysis (N = 289) to answer the following two questions: First, how does entrepreneurial involvement affect entrepreneurial behaviour? Understanding how entrepreneurial involvement affects entrepreneurial behaviour; second, how does the entrepreneurial behaviour of people experiencing poverty result from their cooperation with external partners [22]? This study investigates the mediating role of local capabilities and the moderating role of entrepreneurial role models in the relationship between entrepreneurial involvement and entrepreneurial behaviour among individuals experiencing poverty. This research not only strengthens the practicability of entrepreneurial involvement theory in the context of consolidating poverty alleviation results, but it also enriches the research angle of entrepreneurial behaviour by perfecting the research theory of local ability and entrepreneurial involvement and plays a critical role in studying the influencing factors of entrepreneurial involvement. At the same time, it provides some theoretical basis for local enterprises and governments to promote the relevant measures of entrepreneurial activities. Improving the rate of entrepreneurial success and invigorating the entrepreneurial passion of people experiencing destitution has substantial practical significance.

2. Theoretical Analysis and Research Hypothesis

2.1. Entrepreneurial Involvement and Entrepreneurial Behaviour

Drawing upon the Theory of Planned Behavior, this study posits that entrepreneurial involvement can increase entrepreneurs’ attention towards entrepreneurship, deepen their understanding of entrepreneurial concepts, and foster their enthusiasm for business activities, which in turn influences entrepreneurial behaviour. Previous employment experience, whether for poor entrepreneurs or heirs of family firms, can help them learn vital information and industry development and increase the industry’s involvement in entrepreneurs. As the intensity of industry involvement increases, the following capabilities will be enhanced: The first is that poor entrepreneurs will be more enthusiastic about entrepreneurial activities and will be able to invest more time and energy in their entrepreneurial employment to improve the comprehensive utilisation of existing entrepreneurial resources, which is more conducive to the development of entrepreneurial behaviour [18]; the second is that poor entrepreneurs will have a strong sense of identity with entrepreneurial activities [23]. As a result, industry involvement will have a long-term impact on low-income people, allowing them not only to understand market information and trends more quickly but also to detect flaws in existing technologies and changes in target markets; reduce the risk impact of information asymmetry; quickly adapt to the market environment; and take the lead in identifying, constructing, or creating entrepreneurial opportunities, thereby further expanding the market. Based on the above analysis, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H1a. 

Entrepreneurial involvement in industry positively impacts the poor’s entrepreneurial behaviour.

In underdeveloped areas, the policy environment and entrepreneurial climate can increase government involvement in entrepreneurship. In contrast, applicable government policies and entrepreneurship support measures influence the entrepreneurial behaviour of impoverished entrepreneurs in underdeveloped regions. Some effective government entrepreneurship support programmes are extensively publicised and distributed, making it easier for disadvantaged entrepreneurs to comprehend and alter their businesses in response to policy changes. At the same time, the government promotes successful entrepreneurship examples and successes. It uses examples to increase the passion of impoverished entrepreneurs in undeveloped areas, indirectly increasing the intensity of government involvement in entrepreneurship. Finally, government involvement in entrepreneurship can protect poor entrepreneurs’ interests by developing related policies; supplementing certain public goods and services to improve their material, human, and financial resources; and establishing a consumer market for the bottom [24]. Poor entrepreneurs are more motivated to engage in entrepreneurial activities when government engagement increases, and their sense of identity with entrepreneurial activities is also boosted [11].

To summarise, the government’s participation in entrepreneurship has two effects on entrepreneurial activities: on one hand, the development of entrepreneurial activities necessitates policy tilt. Regional disadvantages exist, particularly in undeveloped areas. To some extent, local governments can boost entrepreneurial zeal, encourage entrepreneurial passion [18], and assist the impoverished in actively carrying out entrepreneurial activities. The high intensity of government involvement in entrepreneurship, on the other hand, will encourage entrepreneurs to actively understand local support policies and successful cases of entrepreneurship, generate a sense of identity with the local entrepreneurial environment and entrepreneurial resources [18], increase entrepreneurs’ entrepreneurial intention in underdeveloped areas, and promote entrepreneurial behaviour. Poor entrepreneurs in less developed areas of the entrepreneurial environment and entrepreneurial policies have a deep understanding, can improve local identity, and are more conducive to entrepreneurial conduct. Based on this, the following hypothesis is proposed in this paper:

H1b. 

Government involvement in entrepreneurship positively impacts entrepreneurial behaviour among low-income people.

According to the findings, high-intensity industry and government entrepreneurship involvement can boost disadvantaged entrepreneurs’ entrepreneurial zeal and identity while promoting entrepreneurial behaviour growth. Based on the involvement theory, this paper concludes that increasing entrepreneurial involvement can increase the entrepreneur’s identity and enthusiasm for entrepreneurial behaviour, causing them to become more fully involved in entrepreneurship; entrepreneurial involvement plays a positive role in promoting entrepreneurial behaviour. Thus, the following assumption is proposed:

H1. 

Entrepreneurial involvement can positively influence entrepreneurial behaviour among low-income people.

2.2. The Mediating Role of Local Capabilities

Local capabilities are resources or capabilities in a specific region or market relevant to entrepreneurial activities, including individual resource capabilities and the external enabling environment [19]. Based on the theory of local capabilities, this study posits that both personal resource capabilities and the external environment can provide support for the formation of entrepreneurial enterprises. The study categorises local capacities as natural resources, knowledge and skills, institutional assets, and hardware [20]. Making full use of the rich, heterogeneous resources provided by local capabilities for entrepreneurial activities, forming difficult-to-imitate competitive advantages, assisting poor entrepreneurs in coping with potential risks and connecting them with existing mature enterprises, and effectively grasping the different characteristics of local resources in the entrepreneurial process can allow entrepreneurial activities to proceed smoothly in an unceasingly changing environment [25].

The particular needs of companies may affect the future development of local capabilities and stimulate significant improvement of local capabilities as a result of entrepreneurial activity. Entrepreneurial participation, which represents the interest and passion of entrepreneurs, can have the following effects on local capabilities: First, consider the influence on natural resource development capacity. Some natural resources with commercial worth can still be developed and utilised in most undeveloped places. However, these are frequently controlled by local governments or corporations [20]. The participation of governments and businesses in entrepreneurial activities without a doubt lessens the difficulty of creating these resources. Second, consider the effect on regional knowledge and skills. Some underdeveloped regions, such as manufacturing management, have fewer resources and require higher pay. Entrepreneurs with employment experience will be motivated to improve their modern production and management knowledge required for entrepreneurship, cultivate market economy awareness, and then improve the knowledge and skills level of underdeveloped regions [26]. Third is the impact on local interpersonal skills [27]. Indigenous peoples in underdeveloped areas are typically self-sufficient in production and life, and they do not rely on external interpersonal interactions to seek assistance when faced with adversity. However, influenced by prior employment experience, industry involvement will lead poor entrepreneurs to solve conflicts and difficulties in starting a business through interpersonal relationships, thus improving local interpersonal skills [28,29]. Local transport networks, public facilities, and hardware required for commercial activities are frequently backward and weak in underdeveloped areas, lagging behind developed areas and becoming a bottleneck restricting local economic development [30]. The government has promoted local entrepreneurial activity in underdeveloped areas and increased relevant infrastructure construction in response to the tide of innovation and entrepreneurship. As a result, entrepreneurial activity can help to improve local capacities to some level.

Improving local capacity will bring many diverse resources for developing entrepreneurial behaviour, which can assist poor entrepreneurs in undeveloped places in creating, obtaining, accumulating, and using resources more quickly; establishing distinctive competitive advantages; and promoting entrepreneurial activities. Due to the complexity of the environment in underdeveloped areas, the social network, hardware facilities, and resource allocation are relatively inferior when carrying out entrepreneurial activities [31]. In contrast, natural resources, knowledge and skills, human capital, and infrastructure in local capabilities contain tremendous commercial value, which can compensate for the lack of these aspects, thus driving the development of local entrepreneurial activities. As a result, poor entrepreneurs can more quickly integrate the strengths of various aspects of local capabilities to provide core competencies for entrepreneurial activities and to create, access, accumulate, and use resources, allowing entrepreneurial activities to proceed smoothly [32]. Existing research on local capabilities is mainly based on a fundamental idea, namely the notion of local capabilities. Many studies suggest that the effective use of local resources in entrepreneurial operations is the primary weapon for adapting to a dynamic environment, resisting external threats, and maintaining healthy growth [33,34]. Thus, making good use of local resources can aid in developing entrepreneurial behaviour.

Poor entrepreneurs, on one hand, are affected by the involvement of industry entrepreneurship and will have some understanding of the relevant information and development status of the enterprise and its industry, promoting the dissemination and accumulation of market economy awareness and modern production and management knowledge in the local area; optimising the local social networks; helping them communicate and learn with the members of the entrepreneurial network through political relations, commercial relations, and personal relations; and gradually improving their opportunity development ability. This allows them to better adapt to the environment to establish their competitive advantage [35,36]. On the other hand, influenced by the involvement of government entrepreneurship, the governments in underdeveloped areas have greatly supported entrepreneurial activities, optimised the hardware conditions required for entrepreneurial activities, and reduced the difficulty of utilising local natural and human resources. Entrepreneurs can effectively harness local resources and capabilities for innovation if they possess a comprehensive understanding of entrepreneurial accomplishments and pertinent supporting policies, which is instrumental in fostering a conducive environment for long-term entrepreneurial activities [30]. The convergence of the effects of industry and government entrepreneurial involvement enhances local capabilities, and the resulting resource “synergy” acts as an intermediary transmission mechanism that ultimately affects the competitive advantage of entrepreneurs and the development of entrepreneurial activities [37]. Based on this, this paper proposes the following assumptions:

H2. 

Local capabilities mediate between entrepreneurial involvement and entrepreneurial behaviour of low-income people.

2.3. Moderating Role of Entrepreneurial Role Models

Entrepreneurial role models were first introduced into the field of entrepreneurship by Shapero [38]. This term refers to individuals followed and imitated by other entrepreneurs because of their success in entrepreneurship and to some individuals who encourage and drive entrepreneurs to engage in certain specific entrepreneurial behaviours to achieve the expected goals [39]. Entrepreneurial role models play an essential role in individual entrepreneurship not only in behaviour guidance but also in spiritual support [40,41].

Based on the theory of social learning, this paper argues that entrepreneurial role models play a significant role in shaping the entrepreneurial behaviour of impoverished entrepreneurs operating in underdeveloped areas. Entrepreneurial involvement enhances the enthusiasm of entrepreneurs for entrepreneurship to a certain extent [42] and solves the problem of entrepreneurial behaviour “from scratch”. Therefore, the research based on entrepreneurial models also explains why there are apparent differences in the effects of entrepreneurial activities carried out by different entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurial role models play four prominent roles in a highly uncertain entrepreneurial environment: First, entrepreneurs are more likely to imitate effective entrepreneurial role models when they perceive shared characteristics with these role models, thereby increasing their entrepreneurial intention [43]. Second, entrepreneurs can learn the entrepreneurial knowledge needed to start a business and consciously improve their entrepreneurial skills through exposure to the behaviour of entrepreneurial role models [44]. Moreover, entrepreneurial role models can avoid the adverse effects on entrepreneurial activities caused by weak opportunity recognition ability, weak resource integration and utilisation ability, and weak entrepreneurial will to maximise the use of information and resources obtained by poor entrepreneurs [45] and to prevent entrepreneurial behaviour “from having to being refined”. Finally, the successful experience of entrepreneurial role models will help entrepreneurs and further promote entrepreneurial behaviour [46].

Furthermore, when the entrepreneurial role model is closely related to the entrepreneur, such as family members, friends, or colleagues, the similarities in characteristics between the role model and the entrepreneur become more pronounced. As a result, entrepreneurial involvement can directly influence the entrepreneurial behaviour of the entrepreneur [47]. Especially in less developed regions, the development of local resources is complex, and the entrepreneurial environment is more severe than that in developed regions. Entrepreneurial role models can avoid negative impact on entrepreneurial activities due to weak opportunity recognition ability, weak resource integration and utilisation ability, and weak entrepreneurial willingness [41] to maximise the use of information and resources obtained by poor entrepreneurs [45] and promote better and faster development of entrepreneurial behaviour. Based on the above analysis, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H3. 

Entrepreneurial role models mediate between entrepreneurial involvement and entrepreneurial behaviour. The closer the relationship between entrepreneurial role models and people with low incomes, the more pronounced the role of entrepreneurial involvement in promoting entrepreneurial behaviour.

Based on prior research, this paper develops a model of entrepreneurial activity, local capability in underdeveloped areas, poor entrepreneurial behaviour, and entrepreneurial role models. This study’s independent variable is entrepreneurial activity, which includes government and industry entrepreneurial involvement. Entrepreneurial involvement influences entrepreneurial behaviour positively. Entrepreneurs involved in business and government can better understand industry-specific information and entrepreneurial policies. Entrepreneurial behaviour results from entrepreneurial activity, and this paper chooses it as the study’s dependent variable. Because of the unique characteristics of underdeveloped areas, poor entrepreneurs require adequate policy and resource technology support if they are to complete their entrepreneurial behaviour, and they require policy support as well as relevant resource technology if they are to complete their entrepreneurial behaviour. Developing entrepreneurial behaviour will be challenging without applying locally derived technologies in a local capacity. As a result, in this study, local capability is a moderating variable that indirectly influences the poor’s entrepreneurial activity and behaviour. Entrepreneurial role models mediate the relationship between entrepreneurial involvement and entrepreneurial behaviour. The following (Figure 1) is the specific theoretical model:

3. Research Design

3.1. Data Collection and Sample Sources

According to Zahra et al. (1999) [48], the questionnaire is primarily for businesses that were registered during the last eight years. Because information on entrepreneurs’ involvement, entrepreneurial role models, local capabilities, and entrepreneurial behaviour is difficult to gain through public channels, the data in this paper were primarily gathered through questionnaires. During the design and collection of the questions, the following methods were followed to ensure the reliability and validity of the gathered questionnaires: The topic is concise and explicit in the questionnaire design, and no suggestive recommendations are included. Given that the collecting objects are in developing countries, the questionnaire does not include professional phrases to verify the validity of the questionnaire withdrawal. Regarding the collection of questionnaires, a pre-investigation was conducted prior to finalizing the questionnaire design. The insights gained from the pre-investigation were utilized to enhance the item expression in the questionnaire. The questionnaire was gathered anonymously to verify the reliability and validity of the questionnaire answers, and the order of variable items was changed. This study’s sample structure covers impoverished entrepreneurs in China’s Wuling Mountains. The study region includes four provinces and cities (Hubei, Hunan, Chongqing, and Guizhou), all with a large concentration of ethnic minorities and poor people. This is China’s first poverty reduction pilot area. To recruit potential interviewees, purposeful sampling was undertaken through the social network of research groups specialising in poverty in the region before snowball sampling included more extended interviews with prospects. Between April and June of 2021, the questionnaire was circulated. We initially contacted the entrepreneurs in the sample frame, described the study’s goal, and asked for their cooperation and support to collect as much important data as possible. We went to the scene to investigate after receiving permission. To accommodate respondents with time constraints, the questionnaire was mainly distributed online. In order to ensure accurate and complete responses, each questionnaire underwent meticulous scrutiny, and respondents with unclear notes or incomplete answers were contacted by phone or email for verification. Due to reliance on online channels, such as email, the distribution was limited by regional economic development. Out of the 500 questionnaires initially distributed, a total of 331 were successfully recovered, resulting in a recovery rate of 66%. Following a comprehensive quality check, 289 were deemed valid, yielding a questionnaire-valid response rate of 87.31%.

Table 1. Statistics of sample characteristics (N = 289).

Item	Category	Frequency	Frequency (%)
Sex	Male	173	59.90
	Female	116	40.10
Educational background	Primary	10	3.50
	Junior high school	63	21.80
	Technical secondary school	22	7.60
	High school	59	20.40
	Junior college	53	18.30
	University	74	25.60
	Graduate students	8	2.80
Position	Stockholder	6	2.10
	Boss	163	56.40
	General Manager	39	13.50
	Department Manager	33	11.40
	Staff	48	16.60
Industry	Agriculture, forestry, animal husbandry, and fishery	46	15.90
	Mining industry	7	2.40
	Manufacturing industry	21	7.30
	Construction industry	21	7.30
	Wholesale, retail, and logistics	74	25.60
	Accommodation and catering industry	37	12.80
	Information transmission, software, and information technology services	18	6.20
	Finance	2	0.70
	Education	9	3.10
	Culture, sports, and entertainment	22	7.60
	Tourism	6	2.10
	Other	26	9.00
Staff size	10 persons and below	189	65.40
	10–49 Man	55	19.00
	50–99 Man	23	8.00
	100–499 Man	13	4.50
	More than 500	9	3.10
asset size	Less than 1 million yuan	173	59.90
	1 million–4.99 million yuan	59	20.40
	5 million–9.99 million yuan	24	8.30
	10 million–49.99 million yuan	17	5.90
	50 million–100 million yuan	8	2.80
	100–300 million yuan	2	0.70
	More than 300 million yuan	6	2.10
Income level	Less than 1 million yuan	196	67.80
	1 million–4.99 million yuan	44	15.20
	5 million–9.99 million yuan	17	5.90
	10 million–49.99 million yuan	16	5.50
	50 million–100 million yuan	4	1.40
	100–300 million yuan	6	2.10
	More than 300 million yuan	6	2.10

shows the demographic characteristics of the subjects: Men account for 59.9% of entrepreneurs; most have a junior high school, high school, or university degree, accounting for 21.8%, 20.4%, and 25.6%, respectively. Agriculture, forestry, animal husbandry, and fishery; hotel and catering; and wholesale and retail logistics provide the most significant proportion of new operations, accounting for 15.9%, 12.8%, and 25%, respectively. The number of enterprises with fewer than 10 employees accounted for 65.6%, with asset scale and income level below 1 million yuan accounting for 59.9% and 67.8%, respectively. Overall, the effective sample characteristics in this questionnaire conform to the law of entrepreneurs’ behaviour in underdeveloped, poverty-stricken areas and further explain that it can reflect the situation of entrepreneurship in underdeveloped areas. The distribution and selection of this questionnaire are reasonable.

3.2. Variable Measurement

The expression was modified in accordance with the research context in order to make the questionnaire more consistent with the study. Except for demographic variables and entrepreneurial role models, the other items were all measured using the Likert seven-level scale.

(1)

Explained variable: entrepreneurial behaviour. This paper draws some conclusions from the research on entrepreneurial behaviour by scholars such as Dimov (2007) [49]. The scale includes two dimensions: identifying entrepreneurial opportunities and building entrepreneurial teams. Identifying entrepreneurial opportunities is divided into three items: “I have a keen intuition for entrepreneurial information”, “I can take positive actions to seize existing entrepreneurial behaviours”, and “I can actively adapt to the environment and create entrepreneurial opportunities”. The establishment of the entrepreneurial team is divided into four items: “I can recruit suitable entrepreneurial partners”, “I can divide the responsibilities of entrepreneurial team members reasonably”, “I have good team adjustment and integration ability”, and “I can establish a relatively complete entrepreneurial team system”, for a total of seven questions, using the Likert seven-level scale for evaluation.

(2)

Explanatory variable: entrepreneurial involvement. Based on the research results of Lastovicka J. L. (1979) [50], the scale of entrepreneurial involvement is divided into two dimensions: industry and government. The industry entrepreneurship involvement is divided into three items: “I pay close attention to the relevant information of the industry where the company is located”, “I am willing to participate in the dissemination of relevant information and achievements of the industry where the company is located”, and “I know the relevant information and development direction of the industry where the company is located very well”; government entrepreneurship involvement is divided into three items: “I am very concerned about the relevant information released by the government on BOP entrepreneurship”, “I am very familiar with the relevant information released by the government on BOP entrepreneurship”, and “I am very willing to participate in the dissemination of relevant information and achievements of government BOP entrepreneurship”. There are six questions, which are evaluated on a Likert seven-level scale.

(3)

Moderator variable: entrepreneurial role model. This paper uses dummy variables to measure whether entrepreneurs have entrepreneurial role models. Many entrepreneurs choose to start a business because of the influence of others, including those close to the interviewee, including family members, friends, and their previous entrepreneurial experience [39]. Therefore, based on Robert F. Scherer et al. (1989) [51] used a scale with five items: “Have your parents started a business?”, “Have your other family members started a business?”, “Have any of your good friends started a business?”, “Have you ever worked in a small business or a company that has not been established for a long time?”, “Have you ever started a business before?”. If you have relevant experience, the value is 1; otherwise, the value is 0.

(4)

Mediating variable: local capability. Based on the research results of Chaskin, R.J. (2001) [19] and Maskell, P. (1998) [20], and referring to some research results of Chen et al. (2023) [6], this paper sets up five items to measure the scale of entrepreneurial role models: “The local area lacks talents with modern production and management knowledge”, “the local market economy consciousness is not strong”, “the local natural resources are rich, a large number of resources have not been fully developed”, “the local infrastructure is backward, the transportation is inconvenient”, and “the local traditional crafts and folk secret recipes and other intangible cultural heritages are rich”.

(5)

Control variables. At the individual level, we accounted for the influence of gender and educational background on entrepreneurs, as gender differences have been observed in various aspects of entrepreneurial behaviour, including entrepreneurial intention, decision-making behaviour, and social relationship processing. In addition, related research shows that the more experience they have accumulated, the more entrepreneurship awareness entrepreneurs possess. At the organisational level, the enterprise scale where the entrepreneur is will also affect the development of his entrepreneurial activities. Therefore, this paper controls the five enterprise attribute variables: the enterprise’s industry, establishment time, employee size, asset size, and income level [52].

4. Empirical Analysis

4.1. Homologous Variance Test

In order to avoid potential error, the information is anonymous, and the items are arranged in random order to control the same variance problem. In the data processing, the Harman single-factor test method was used to test the effect of homologous variance on the results using SPSS 22.0 software. The results showed that the cumulative variance contribution rate of all factors without rotation was 72.023%, among which the variance contribution rate of the first principal component was 42.461%; this did not explain most of the variation, which also indicates that the influence of homologous variance is small and can be continued.

4.2. Reliability and Validity Test

In this paper, spss22.0 is used to test the scale’s reliability. The Cronbach’s α coefficient is shown in

Table 2. Discriminant validity test results.

	AVE	1	2	3	4
Industry entrepreneurship involved	0.584	0.764
Government entrepreneurship involvement	0.591	0.564 **	0.769
Local capacity	0.544	0.305 **	0.333 **	0.737
Entrepreneurial behaviour	0.607	0.524 **	0.667 **	0.43 **	0.779
Average		4.965	5.594	4.926	5.151
Standard deviation		1.151	1.014	1.028	1.027

**: p < 0.01. Diagonal bold font is the square root of AVE, and the lower triangle is the Pearson correlation coefficient of the dimension.

. The results show that Cronbach’s α coefficients of industry entrepreneurship involvement, government entrepreneurship involvement, local ability, and entrepreneurial behaviour are 0.790, 0.873, 0.816, and 0.932, respectively. With the recommended value of 7, each dimension factor measurement has high internal consistency, indicating the scale’s reliability.

Before testing the scale’s validity, this paper uses the KMO test and Bartlett sphere approximate chi-square test to perform exploratory factor analysis. The results show that the KMO value is 0.900, more significant than 0.8, indicating that the sample data can be analysed via factor analysis. The significance probability of the approximate chi-square statistic of Bartlett’s sphere test is 0.000, which is less than the significance level of 0.001, indicating that the internal correlation between variables is strong and that the sample data can be subjected to factor analysis. Then, the standardised factor loading, mean–variance extract (AVE), and combined reliability (CR) were used to test the convergent validity of the samples. The results showed that the factor load coefficients of all items were more significant than 0.6. The AVE values of industry entrepreneurship, government entrepreneurship involvement, local ability, and entrepreneurial behaviour were 0.584, 0.591, 0.544, and 0.607, respectively, all greater than the reference value of 0.5. The CR values were 0.806, 0.812, 0.856, and 0.915, respectively, all greater than the reference value of 0.7, indicating that the scale had good convergence validity. In addition, as shown in

Table 3. Results of hierarchical regression analysis.

Variable	Entrepreneurial Behaviour
	M1	M2	M3	M4	M5	M6	M7
Gender of entrepreneur	−0.053	−0.065	−0.083	−0.079	0.025	−0.036	−0.053
	(−0.425)	(−0.615)	(−0.889)	(−0.843)	(0.224)	(−0.395)	(−0.566)
Entrepreneur education	0.103 ***	0.069 **	0.046	0.047	0.087 **	0.045	0.044
	(2.639)	(2.052)	(1.536)	(1.564)	(2.452)	(1.570)	(1.458)
Enterprise personnel scale	0.096	0.018	−0.058	−0.046	0.082	−0.036	−0.025
	(0.952)	(0.208)	(−0.758)	(−0.600)	(0.900)	(−0.487)	(−0.528)
Enterprise assets scale	−0.109	−0.103	0.019	−0.037	−0.145	−0.064	−0.040
	(−1.120)	(−1.237)	(−0.259)	(−0.501)	(−1.644)	(−0.900)	(−0.555)
Enterprise income level	0.028	0.057	0.012	0.042	0.078	0.066	0.040
	(0.320)	(0.759)	(0.180)	(0.637)	(0.986)	(1.036)	(0.611)
Government entrepreneurship involvement		0.459 ***
		(10.108)
Industry entrepreneurship involved			0.671 ***
			(14.698)
Entrepreneurial involvement				0.710 ***		0.625 ***	0.513 ***
				(14.751)		(12.551)	(5.263)
Entrepreneurial example							−2.324 **
							(−1.985)
Entrepreneurial involvement × Entrepreneurial role models							0.486 **
							(2.239)
Local capacity					0.426 ***	0.218 ***
					(7.995)	(4.759)
R2	0.032	0.290	0.452	0.454	0.211	0.494	0.466
Adj-R2	0.015	0.274	0.440	0.442	0.194	0.482	0.450
F	1.880 *	19.157 ***	38.760 ***	39.003 ***	12.569 ***	39.260 ***	30.513 ***

Note: Values in parentheses are t values; * indicates values significant at the 0.05 level, ** indicates values significant at the 0.01 level, *** indicates values significant at 0.001 level.

, the AVE square root values of industry entrepreneurship involvement, government entrepreneurship involvement, local capacity, and entrepreneurial behaviour are 0.764, 0.769, 0.737, and 0.779, respectively, which are all greater than the maximum value of 0.667 of the correlation coefficient between factors in Table 3, which indicates that the variables have good discrimination validity.

4.3. Hypothesis Testing

Eleven regression models were constructed using the hierarchical regression model (HRM) in SPSS 22.0. Gender, educational background, enterprise personnel size, asset size, and income level of entrepreneurs were controlled for these models. To ensure the validity of the study, the variance inflation factor (VIF) of the model was tested. The statistical results revealed that the VIF values of multiple regression models, such as industry entrepreneurship involvement, government entrepreneurship involvement, local ability, entrepreneurial model, and entrepreneurial behaviour, were all below 10. This indicates that there is no severe multicollinearity issue among the sample data obtained in this study. Thus, the use of the hierarchical regression model was justified in testing the research hypotheses (

Table 4. Results of hierarchical regression analysis (continued).

Variable	Local Capacity
	M8	M9	M10	M11
Gender of entrepreneur	−0.183	−0.190	−0.198 *	−0.197 *
	(−1.463)	(−1.595)	(−1.685)	(−1.689)
Entrepreneur education	0.038	0.018	0.009	0.007
	(0.971)	(0.481)	(0.228)	(0.187)
Enterprise personnel scale	0.032	−0.013	−0.047	−0.045
	(0.321)	(−0.138)	(−0.486)	(−0.478)
Enterprise assets scale	0.084	0.088	0.150	0.124
	(0.859)	(0.936)	(1.616)	(1.352)
Enterprise income level	−0.118	−0.101	−0.126	−0.110
	(−1.335)	(−1.193)	(−1.516)	(−1.336)
Government entrepreneurship involvement		0.271 ***
		(5.333)
Industry entrepreneurship involved			0.347 ***
			(6.025)
Entrepreneurial involvement				0.392 ***
				(6.511)
Entrepreneurial example
Entrepreneurial involvement × Entrepreneurial role models
Local capacity
R2	0.018	0.108	0.130	0.146
Adj-R2	0.000	0.089	0.111	0.128
F	1.022	5.674 ***	7.007 ***	8.042 ***

Note: Values in parentheses are t values; * indicates values significant at the 0.05 level, *** indicates values significant at 0.001 level.

).

4.3.1. Main Effect Test

After controlling the control variables in model M1, two independent variables, industry entrepreneurial involvement and government entrepreneurial involvement, are introduced into models M2 and M3 to test Hypothesis 1, which is the relationship between industry entrepreneurial involvement, government entrepreneurial involvement, and entrepreneurial behaviour. Results show that industry entrepreneurship involvement (β = 0.671, p < 0.01) and government entrepreneurship involvement (β = 0.459, p < 0.01) have a significant positive impact on entrepreneurs’ entrepreneurial behaviour, indicating that the data have verified Hypothesis H1a and Hypothesis H1b. Model M4 introduces entrepreneurial involvement based on controlling control variables and finds that entrepreneurial involvement as a whole (β = 0.710, p < 0.01) has a significant positive effect on entrepreneurial behaviour, indicating that the stronger the entrepreneurial involvement, the more likely entrepreneurs are to implement entrepreneurial behaviour.

Hypothesis H1 is further verified. This confirms assumption H1.

4.3.2. Test of Local Capacity Mediating Effect

First, we examine the relationship between entrepreneurial involvement and local capabilities in less developed regions. Based on controlling variables in model M8, models M9 and M10 test the direct relationship between industry entrepreneurial involvement, government entrepreneurial involvement, and local capabilities (β = 0.347, p < 0.01) and government entrepreneurship involvement (β = 0.271, p < 0.01) significantly positively affects local capacity in less developed regions. Model M11 introduces entrepreneurial involvement based on model M8 and finds that entrepreneurial involvement (β = 0.392, p < 0.01) significantly affects local capabilities, further testing the relationship between entrepreneurial involvement and local capabilities.

Second, we examine the relationship between local capabilities and the entrepreneurial behaviour of low-income people. Model M5 tests the relationship between local ability and the entrepreneurial behaviour of people experiencing poverty. Based on controlling the control variable (model M1), the local ability is included in model M5. The results show that local ability positively affects the less fortunate’s entrepreneurial behaviour. (β = 0.426, p < 0.01).

Finally, combined with the results of model M4, after incorporating local capabilities into model M6, the regression coefficient of entrepreneurial involvement is from 0.710 to 0.625 (Δβ = 0.085), but entrepreneurial involvement (β = 0.625, p < 0.01), which indicates that entrepreneurial involvement can explain the development of entrepreneurial behaviour of people with low incomes—that is, the intermediary path of entrepreneurial involvement to entrepreneurial behaviour of people experiencing poverty exists but is not unique; local capacity plays a partial intermediary role between entrepreneurial involvement and entrepreneurial behaviour of the less fortunate, assuming that H2 holds.

In addition, we further examine the mediating effect of local competence by bootstrapping. As shown in

Table 5. Analysis results of mediating and moderating effects.

	Coefficient Value	Standard Error	95% Confidence Interval
			Lower Limit	Upper Limit
Direct effect	0.632 ***	0.049	0.536	0.728
Indirect effect	0.084 ***	0.033	0.032	0.163
Entrepreneurial involvement × Entrepreneurial role models	0.430 **	0.204	0.028	0.831

Note: Estimates of indirect effects are based on 5000 bootstraps. ** indicates values significant at the 0.01 level, *** indicates values significant at 0.001 level.

, the indirect effect was found to be 0.084 through testing with the Process macro. The standard error is 0.033, and the confidence interval of the result is 0.032 to 0.163, excluding 0, indicating that the mediating effect of local competence is established. In addition, its direct effect is significant (p < 0.001), indicating that local competence is partially mediating. Hypothesis H2 is further verified.

4.3.3. Moderating Effect of the Entrepreneurial Model

To address the issue of collinearity in the multiple regression equation, the interaction between entrepreneurial involvement and entrepreneurial role model was decentralised prior to examining the moderating effect. Model M7 tests hypothesis H3—that is, the moderating effect of entrepreneurial role models on the relationship between entrepreneurial involvement and entrepreneurial behaviour of people experiencing poverty with low incomes [53]. Based on model M4, model M7 includes the interaction of the entrepreneurial role model and entrepreneurial involvement to test the influence of the entrepreneurial role model on the entrepreneurial behaviour of people experiencing poverty (β = −2.324, p < 0.05), but the interaction between entrepreneurial involvement and role models significantly positively affected the entrepreneurial behaviour of people experiencing poverty (β = 0.486, p < 0.05). Then, H3 is established; entrepreneurial role models positively regulate the poor’s entrepreneurial involvement and behaviour [54].

In addition, this paper also tests the moderating effect through the Process macro program. As shown in Table 5, the correlation coefficient between the interaction term and entrepreneurial behaviour is 0.430 with a standard error of 0.204 and a confidence interval of 0.028 to 0.831, where 0 is not included, and also indicates a modulatory effect.

4.4. Robustness Test

This study used hierarchical regression of the model after 1% and 99% tail reduction for all continuous variables to see if the empirical results were resilient.

Table 6. Robustness test results.

Variable	Entrepreneurial Behaviour
	M1	M2	M3	M4	M5	M6	M7
Gender of entrepreneur	−0.020	−0.041	−0.024	−0.034	0.017	−0.014	−0.022
	(−0.346)	(−0.918)	(−0.478)	(−0.768)	(0.312)	(−0.328)	(−0.501)
Entrepreneur education	0.164 ***	0.075	0.112 **	0.076	0.138 **	0.074	0.072
	(2.605)	(1.583)	(2.601)	(1.609)	(2.426)	(1.613)	(1.500)
Enterprise personnel scale	0.091	−0.065	0.017	−0.049	0.078	−0.039	−0.029
	(0.910)	(−0.862)	(0.203)	(−0.645)	(0.863)	(−0.530)	(−0.386)
Enterprise assets scale	−0.135	0.036	−0.131	−0.043	−0.182	−0.077	−0.048
	(−1.068)	(0.379)	(−1.214)	(−0.451)	(−1.586)	(−0.832)	(−0.504)
Enterprise income level	0.039	0.018	0.077	0.058	0.105	0.088	0.055
	(0.334)	(0.204)	(0.764)	(0.657)	(0.989)	(1.034)	(0.630)
Government entrepreneurship involvement		0.667 ***
		(14.835)
Industry entrepreneurship involved			0.515 ***
			(10.115)
Entrepreneurial involvement				0.666 ***		0.588 ***	0.495 ***
				(14.866)		(12.623)	(5.411)
Entrepreneurial example							−0.437 **
							(−1.811)
Entrepreneurial involvement × Entrepreneurial role models							0.544 **
							(2.050)
Local capacity					0.423 ***	0.208 ***
					(7.885)	(4.511)
R2	0.031	0.457	0.290	0.458	0.207	0.494	0.468
Adj-R2	0.014	0.445	0.275	0.446	0.190	0.482	0.453
F	1.815	39.370 ***	19.107 ***	39.524 ***	12.204 ***	39.118 ***	30.676 ***

Note: Values in parentheses are t values; ** indicates values significant at the 0.01 level, *** indicates values significant at 0.001 level.

displays the results of the robustness test. Entrepreneurial involvement has a considerable favourable effect on the entrepreneurial behaviour of entrepreneurs. Local capacity is a moderator, and entrepreneurial role models serve to moderate the relationship between entrepreneurial activity and the poor’s entrepreneurial behaviour. The results of the robustness test are consistent with those presented earlier, further reinforcing the validity of the research conclusions (

Table 7. Robustness test results (continued).

Variable	Local Capacity
	M8	M9	M10	M11
Gender of entrepreneur	−0.087	−0.091	−0.098 *	−0.096 *
	(−1.463)	(−1.595)	(−1.752)	(−1.727)
Entrepreneur education	0.061	0.029	0.014	0.011
	(0.971)	(0.481)	(0.237)	(0.190)
Enterprise personnel scale	0.032	−0.013	−0.051	−0.048
	(0.321)	(−0.138)	(−0.536)	(−0.506)
Enterprise assets scale	0.109	0.113	0.200 *	0.162
	(0.859)	(0.936)	(1.669)	(1.371)
Enterprise income level	−0.157	−0.134	−0.168	−0.146
	(−1.335)	(−1.193)	(−1.525)	(−1.334)
Government entrepreneurship involvement		0.304 ***
		(5.333)
Industry entrepreneurship involved			0.355 ***
			(6.282)
Entrepreneurial involvement				0.373 ***
				(6.667)
Entrepreneurial example
Entrepreneurial involvement × Entrepreneurial role models
Local capacity
R2	0.018	0.108	0.138	0.151
Adj-R2	0.000	0.089	0.120	0.133
F	1.022	5.674 ***	7.545 ***	8.390 ***

Note: Values in parentheses are t values; * indicates values significant at the 0.05 level, *** indicates values significant at 0.001 level.

).

5. Discussion and Conclusions

5.1. Discussion

Based on the involvement theory, this paper takes entrepreneurs in underdeveloped areas as the research object, uses a hierarchical regression model to explore the relationship between entrepreneurial involvement, local competence, and entrepreneurial behaviour; introduces entrepreneurial role models as moderating variables; constructs the corresponding theoretical model; and tests the model through empirical research. This study provides empirical evidence on the positive effect of entrepreneurial involvement on entrepreneurial behaviour and the mediating influence of local competence on the relationship between entrepreneurial involvement and entrepreneurial behaviour. The results also reveal the moderating effect of entrepreneurial role models on the relationship between entrepreneurial involvement and entrepreneurial behaviour. Based on these research findings, this paper integrates existing theories to generate further discussion.

First, entrepreneurial involvement has a significant positive impact on the entrepreneurial behaviour of people with low incomes. Entrepreneurial involvement has a significant positive impact on entrepreneurial success among people experiencing poverty, as poor entrepreneurs are influenced by entrepreneurial involvement to deepen their knowledge of entrepreneurship and increase their level of entrepreneurial activity. This is a critical factor in analysing entrepreneurship and poverty reduction. The involvement of impoverished entrepreneurs with industry and government entails leveraging acquired knowledge, skills, and networks acquired with government assistance. This involvement encompasses receiving guidance, accessing resources, and obtaining network support to identify and nurture entrepreneurial opportunities. By collaborating with the government, poor entrepreneurs gain access to essential resources required for entrepreneurship. This collaboration further fosters joint development and creation of entrepreneurial opportunities, facilitating their entry into the entrepreneurial marketplace. Therefore, governments in underdeveloped areas should take measures to improve industry entrepreneurship involvement and government entrepreneurship involvement. For example, enterprises can create opportunities for entrepreneurs to participate in inter-enterprise communication activities actively, display the advanced achievements of the industry, and cultivate the entrepreneurial passion of entrepreneurs. While strengthening the implementation of policies from top to bottom, improving the infrastructure necessary for local entrepreneurship, and creating a better atmosphere for innovation and entrepreneurship, government departments should also strengthen the cultivation of entrepreneurial awareness of potential entrepreneurs, set individual examples for other entrepreneurs, publicise successful stories and individuals through social media or other new era methods, and improve entrepreneurs’ entrepreneurial intentions and degree of love for entrepreneurial activities.

Second, local capability is a partial intermediary in entrepreneurial involvement and behaviour. Poor entrepreneurs can make full use of the natural resources in underdeveloped areas through government entrepreneurial involvement, improve the hardware facilities in underdeveloped areas, enable poor entrepreneurs to obtain more heterogeneous resources, ensure their risk assessment in the ever-changing external environment, and thus have competitive advantages that other regions do not have, giving full play to the role of local capability in carrying out entrepreneurial activities. Simultaneously, with the support of government policies, financial and human resources can be thoroughly gathered and utilised in impoverished areas, which has a positive effect on the development of entrepreneurial activities. For example, the exclusive secret recipes and unique processes owned by underdeveloped regions can be used to train the industry and government to find new “selling points” for poor entrepreneurs and to let poor entrepreneurs understand the modern production and management methods of relevant processes.

Finally, entrepreneurial role models positively moderate the relationship between entrepreneurial involvement and behaviour. Potential entrepreneurs with high-quality entrepreneurial role models are likelier to have entrepreneurial behaviour. Therefore, at the individual level, entrepreneurs should first invest more time and energy to widely understand the relevant information of the industry and government, benefit people’s information and the development status of entrepreneurial activities, construct their business networks, and obtain more support from external resources for their entrepreneurial behaviour. Secondly, contact with successful entrepreneurs in daily life and work can improve their management decision-making ability, opportunity identification ability, and resource integration and utilisation ability; affirm their entrepreneurial will; and actively and correctly understand the unknown and risks in entrepreneurial activities to improve the ability to carry out entrepreneurial behaviour.

5.2. Research Contribution

5.2.1. Theoretical Contribution

First, the poor entrepreneurs in China’s underdeveloped areas being the survey object is a valuable supplement to the poverty reduction research sample. In recent decades, China has adopted a poverty reduction strategy with Chinese characteristics to eliminate absolute poverty, but relative poverty still exists. Therefore, this study examines a series of entrepreneurial behaviours of poor Chinese entrepreneurs through entrepreneurial involvement through an empirical study of 289 entrepreneurs in underdeveloped areas of China to better understand the direction and path of entrepreneurship. Secondly, clarifying the impact of entrepreneurial involvement on entrepreneurial behaviour provides scientific guidance for poverty reduction. To a certain extent, this not only makes up for the majority of the existing involvement theory that only focuses on the role of enterprises in entrepreneurship and ignores the promotion of the relevant policies implemented by the government but also expands the existing research dimensions of entrepreneurial involvement.

Second, this study introduces a new perspective on entrepreneurial involvement. It verifies the positive impact of entrepreneurial involvement on entrepreneurial behaviour, providing a new idea for studying entrepreneurial poverty reduction. This study fills some gaps in the research on entrepreneurial involvement and explores poor entrepreneurs’ processes and mechanisms of entrepreneurial involvement. Compared to ordinary and second-generation entrepreneurs, impoverished entrepreneurs are predominantly situated in remote communities, specifically rural areas, and often struggle in adapting to market changes. Moreover, low-income individuals frequently encounter limitations in terms of their knowledge base for identifying and capitalizing on entrepreneurial opportunities. Considering these constraints faced by impoverished entrepreneurs, this study explores how they overcome various obstacles through entrepreneurial involvement. By examining this particular aspect, this study provides a novel perspective on entrepreneurial opportunities and offers scientific theoretical guidance for poverty alleviation through entrepreneurship.

Finally, investigating local capabilities and the internal logic of entrepreneurial action helps open the “black box” relationship between entrepreneurial and entrepreneurial involvement. This study found that the natural resources, cultural resources, modern management knowledge, market economy awareness, and infrastructure of local capabilities in underdeveloped areas play an essential role in developing local entrepreneurial behaviour, enriching the research of local capabilities in entrepreneurship. The findings establish a significant relationship between local capabilities and entrepreneurial behaviour, shedding light on new avenues for entrepreneurial engagement.

5.2.2. Practical Implications

Based on broadening the existing theoretical research scope, the research results of this paper also have the necessary enlightenment to guide entrepreneurial practice in underdeveloped areas: Firstly, this paper finds that entrepreneurs in underdeveloped areas are affected by a higher degree of entrepreneurial involvement, which will help to improve the level of their entrepreneurial behaviour. Therefore, local enterprises and governments must actively create conditions to enhance entrepreneurs’ industry and government entrepreneurial involvement. For example, enterprises should support entrepreneurs to participate in inter-enterprise communication activities, show the advanced achievements of the industry, and cultivate entrepreneurs’ entrepreneurial passion. While strengthening the implementation of policies from top to bottom, improving the infrastructure necessary for local entrepreneurship, and creating a better atmosphere for innovation and entrepreneurship, government departments should also strengthen the cultivation of entrepreneurial awareness of potential entrepreneurs, vigorously publicise successful enterprises and individuals through mainstream social media, set an example for entrepreneurs, and improve entrepreneurs’ entrepreneurial intention and love for entrepreneurial activities.

Secondly, we find that potential entrepreneurs with high-quality entrepreneurial role models are likelier to have entrepreneurial behaviour. Therefore, at the individual level, entrepreneurs should first invest more time and energy into widely understanding the relevant information of the industry and government, benefitting people’s information and the development status of entrepreneurial activities, constructing their business networks, and obtaining more support from external resources for their entrepreneurial behaviour. Secondly, they should engage in contact with successful entrepreneurs in daily life and work to improve their management decision-making ability, opportunity identification ability, and resource integration and utilisation ability; firm their entrepreneurial will; and actively and correctly understand the unknown and risks in entrepreneurial activities to improve their ability to carry out entrepreneurial behaviour.

5.3. Limitations and Future Research Directions

The current state of research on the interplay between entrepreneurial involvement, local capacities, and entrepreneurial behaviour lacks a comprehensive understanding of the processes, antecedents, and implications. While some studies have explored the impact of local skills and entrepreneurial action on business creation, limited attention has been given to investigating the relationship between these two factors.

The following limitations should be addressed in future studies. First, this study investigates poor entrepreneurs in China’s less-developed regions. These results should be compared with results in other regions of China or similar regions. Subsequent research should validate the findings by focusing on the experiences of other countries in poverty alleviation through entrepreneurship to improve the validity of the findings. Second, the findings suggest that local capabilities and entrepreneurial role models alone are insufficient to fully explain the impact of entrepreneurial involvement creation on entrepreneurial behaviour. Third, this study did not discuss the impact of entrepreneurial involvement on entrepreneurial behaviour. Future research should better examine the impact of personality traits on the relationship between entrepreneurial involvement and entrepreneurial behaviour to understand the impact of entrepreneurial involvement on entrepreneurial behaviour.