Next Article in Journal
Spatiotemporal Coupling Relationship between Higher Education and Economic Development in China: Based on Interprovincial Panel Data from 2012 to 2023
Next Article in Special Issue
Unlocking Sustainable Economic Development in Saudi Arabia through the Coffee Industry
Previous Article in Journal
Quantifying the Impact of Coal Transition on GDP Growth through System Dynamics: The Case of the Region of Western Macedonia, Greece
Previous Article in Special Issue
Digital Platforms as a Fertile Ground for the Economic Sustainability of Startups: Assaying Scenarios, Actions, Plans, and Players
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 16
Issue 16
10.3390/su16167197
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Green Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy as an Innovation Factor That Enables the Creation of New Sustainable Business

by
Victoria Eugenia Sanchez-Garcia
1,
Cristina Gallego
2,
Juan Antonio Marquez
3 and
Elena Peribáñez
1,*
1
Business and Talent Department, EAE Business School-Madrid, Joaquín Costa 41, 28002 Madrid, Spain
2
Economics Business Department, Organization Business, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Paseo de Artilleros s/n, Vicalvaro, 28032 Madrid, Spain
3
Market Research and Quantitative Methods Department, ESIC University, Avda. Valdenigriales, s/n, 28223 Pozuelo de Alarcón, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2024, 16(16), 7197; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16167197
Submission received: 11 July 2024 / Revised: 5 August 2024 / Accepted: 15 August 2024 / Published: 22 August 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management under Sustainable Development)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study examined the role of green entrepreneurial self-efficacy (GESE) through the lens of dynamic capabilities in innovation and adaptation. The research model postulated a relationship between the reconfiguration of entrepreneurial capabilities necessary to achieve a sustainable business model in the market. A structured questionnaire was adopted, validated, and disseminated among 917 entrepreneurs in Spain and Portugal (Iberian Peninsula). The findings confirmed a significant positive effect of dynamic capabilities on green and sustainable entrepreneurial intentions, mediated by self-efficacy. The study’s results indicate significant relationships between the capabilities studied, and that innovation and adaptation capabilities influence green entrepreneurial self-efficacy. These results are fundamental in guiding the market towards business models that need to be reconfigured to generate value through social impact. We offer management implications for organizations, academics, and other stakeholders, such as policymakers, so that the needs of the green market in the Iberian Peninsula can be met more efficiently.

1. Introduction

Currently, as a transition towards a green economy and digital transformation is underway, the governments of European Union member states are striving to promote new business ventures to ensure their competitiveness and sustain current employment dynamics. This situation presents ample opportunities, though these are not without risks for the future, particularly in countries like Spain and Portugal [1], where the business landscape predominantly comprises small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).
In Spain, according to data from the Directorate-General for Industry and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs) [2], the total number of SMEs amounts to 2,936,243 (0–249 employees), reflecting 10% growth compared to the previous year. This indicates a significant effort to foster policies aimed at entrepreneurs. The relationships between the two countries of the Iberian Peninsula are robust and could yield numerous synergies. In the context of the ecological transition taking place within the European Union, a particularly promising area for creating synergies between the two countries of the Iberian Peninsula is “green entrepreneurship”. The approach of cooperative actions to address the current demands of the energy and waste management sectors in both countries would allow for the optimization of outcomes derived from European financial support [3]. According to data from the Spanish Confederation of Business Organizations (CEOE), by 2024, over 2400 Spanish companies will be maintaining investments in Portugal [4]. The Portuguese entrepreneurial ecosystem, as of 2024, includes three active unicorn companies (Farfetch (London, UK), OutSystems (London, UK), and Talkdesk (San Francisco, CA, USA)). In both Spain and Portugal, new business ventures are predominantly led by men, though there is a growing trend in the European Union towards female leadership in sustainable start-ups, despite the low percentage [5].
Generally, entrepreneurs in Spain and Portugal face numerous challenges, with business survival being paramount. In Spain, the difficulties for business survival are greater than in Portugal. According to the Spanish Confederation of SMEs (Cepyme), Spain is characterised by a highly fragmented market where only about 40% of businesses survive for more than five years [6]. In contrast, survival rates in Portugal are higher, which represents a learning opportunity for Spanish entrepreneurs that has not yet been adequately explored by Spanish policymakers in their green employment planning or agenda, nor is it included in the Iberian cooperation program [2].
The high failure rate of new businesses has led to numerous studies aimed at determining the factors of entrepreneurial success [7,8,9]. According to Pérez Espés et al. (2022) [10], the most analyzed variables in the literature include size, age, innovation, and financial structure. However, the market’s dynamism complicates adherence to parameters that guarantee success. To remain attractive, businesses must adapt to VUCA (volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous) and BANI (brittle, anxious, non-linear, and incomprehensible) environments [11]; both terms denote the need for continuous business reconfiguration. Indeed, businesses are evolving in response to new business models emerging from the necessity to meet increasingly sustainable consumption and production demands. Consequently, this study is based on the following research question: RQ1: Are entrepreneurs willing to adopt new business models aligned with sustainability criteria?
According to data from the Ministry for the Ecological Transition and the Demographic Challenge of Spain [12], it is estimated that in Spain, 1 in 10 entrepreneurs engaged in green activities are women (9.6% of the total), and 1 in 20 businesswomen (5% of the total) are involved in green activities, with Catalonia and the Valencian Community having the highest number of green female entrepreneurs. Meanwhile, Portugal is intensively investing in clean energy technologies and infrastructure, creating a favorable environment for the development of sustainable projects open to foreign investors. Both countries have the support of the European Union to become European hubs for innovation in clean technologies and “cleantech” entrepreneurship [13].
Given this context, the main objective of this study is to determine whether innovation and adaptation capabilities influence self-efficacy in green entrepreneurship. The study aims to understand whether these relationships foster sustainable entrepreneurial capabilities. To this end, a theoretical framework based on the resource-based view and dynamic capabilities theory is presented. These theories seek to explain the reactive or proactive strategic changes that organizations make to achieve alignment with the dynamic environment, thereby attaining high performance levels and a competitive advantage. Specifically, the study analyses innovation and adaptation capabilities, focusing on new ventures or existing businesses, reconfiguring their value propositions by incorporating sustainability criteria (ESG: Environmental, Social, and Governance).
This work aims to contribute to the existing literature on the capabilities required for successful entrepreneurship through a confirmatory study. Unlike studies that sample students and their entrepreneurial intentions [14,15,16], this research focuses on active individuals, with a sample of 917 people from Spain and Portugal, to determine the intention to undertake sustainable ventures as opposed to other types of businesses. Additionally, the literature studies referring to this topic are found to be mostly related to Asian countries, so the geographical sample offers the authors an opportunity for study.

2. Theoretical Framework and Development

2.1. Theoretical Foundations

In contrast to “traditional” theories, such as those of Jay Barney (Resource-Based View) [17] and Porter [18], the dynamic capabilities theory developed by David Teece, along with Pisano and Shuen, focuses on the importance of specific “dynamic” capabilities that are crucial for an organization to successfully navigate rapidly changing environments [19]. These capabilities go beyond ordinary capabilities (Table 1) [20] and are particularly important in entrepreneurship. They include the capability for innovation [21], adaptation, and reconfiguration [22], and the ability to make informed strategic decisions [23] during times of uncertainty, brought about by rapid technological and regulatory changes associated with the digital transition [24].
A significant portion of research on dynamic capabilities has focused on established or mature firms [25]. However, the scenario is different for new ventures [26]. This study, therefore, applies the theory of dynamic capabilities to the context of entrepreneurship. In this context, adaptability and rapid responsiveness are crucial for the survival of early-stage ventures and their subsequent growth in volatile environments. Entrepreneurs with high dynamic capabilities are quick to identify such opportunities, adapting their strategies to capitalize on them [22,27], thus enabling them to stay in the market and grow.
Sustainability is increasingly regarded as a dynamic capability [19,27]. This new perspective allows firms to build and sustain practices over time. The competitive advantages created by the dynamic integration of sustainability and business strategy are referred to as green competitive advantages. Based on this, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H1. 
The combination of innovation capability and adaptability constitutes the necessary resource mix for entrepreneurs to enhance their green business capabilities.

2.2. Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy

Self-efficacy refers to the personal belief in one’s ability to achieve set goals and successfully accomplish tasks [28]. Within the realm of entrepreneurship, entrepreneurial self-efficacy refers to an individual’s confidence in their capacity to undertake the task required to initiate and successfully manage a venture [29]. Researchers have found that entrepreneurial self-efficacy is positively related to the intention to act entrepreneurially [28], and to entrepreneurial action. On the contrary, individuals with low self-efficacy are quickly discouraged by obstacles [30] and are also likely to perceive that they have little control over entrepreneurial situations and outcomes [31]. Perceived social support is directly related to a stronger orientation towards an entrepreneurial attitude, which in turn reinforces the entrepreneur’s confidence and support. In this task, characterised by high intrinsic motivation, it is common for recurring regrets to arise about whether the right professional and educational decisions have been made [31].
On the other hand, change self-efficacy has been identified as essential for organizations to adopt new processes. The change self-efficacy depends on the self-confidence of those managing the organization. Dynamic environments compel individuals to face the uncertainties accompanying change processes. To respond effectively and resiliently, constant learning and the development of specific skills are necessary. Among the soft skills related to this self-efficacy, creativity stands out as crucial for appropriately managing the changing circumstances of today’s markets [32].
Individuals with a high level of green entrepreneurial self-efficacy (GESE) have greater confidence in developing innovative ideas, designing creative eco-friendly products, and engaging in social responsibility that results in environmental protection. This, in turn, allows companies to develop a competitive advantage, leading to better economic performance and increased profits [33]. Moreover, individuals with GESE are more willing to embrace new challenges or customer demands, thereby adding value to the company.
It has been proposed that innovation capability is one of the key factors for organizational performance in strategic management [34]. This strategic management is enhanced by creativity competence, which allows for achieving competitive advantages [35]. Other studies have validated the hypothesis that green entrepreneurial self-efficacy can be an effective tool for managers to foster entrepreneurial intention and innovate behavior at work [36]. Based on the above, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H2. 
Innovation capability positively influences GESE, generating entrepreneurial capabilities in sustainable business.
Entrepreneurs demonstrating high self-efficacy are more likely to explore new parameters that benefit the business and identify new opportunities to adapt their organizations [37] through learning and adaptability. Both strengths foster green entrepreneurial initiatives [38] in a context where business expansion often overlooks ecological innovations [39], which are increasingly demanded by society due to the rise in natural disasters.
It has been demonstrated that companies face socio-environmental vulnerabilities due to constant legislative changes and new market requirements, necessitating rapid changes to meet these demands by reconfiguring processes and/or products [40]. To achieve this, they must change their leadership approach and focus on understanding market dynamics [41]. Only by doing so can they detect environmental challenges in their surroundings and adapt accordingly, as it is self-efficacy that enables the prediction of optimal task performance.
At this point, self-efficacy, accompanied by transformational leadership, will enable the adaptation towards green leadership within the company [42]. The entrepreneur’s capacity for reconfiguration and resilience, which are linked to their innovation capability, will facilitate a transition that fosters prosperity in dynamic and competitive environments [43]. Thus, a third hypothesis is proposed:
H3. 
Adaptation capability positively influences GESE, generating business reconfiguration capabilities to incorporate sustainability behaviors (according to ESG criteria).

2.3. Hypothetical Model

Following the analysis of previous studies, the proposed research model is depicted in Figure 1. In the model, entrepreneurial self-efficacy is identified as the dependent variable, since it is the main variable of the object of study and its value depends on how the independent variables are measured, which in this case are the innovation and adaptation capabilities.

3. Methodology

3.1. Instrument and Analysis

A regression/factorial analysis was conducted for each construct of the dynamic capabilities model, which subsequently resulted in a structural equation model using regressions.
Structural equation modelling (SEM) was employed to examine the relationships [44] in the proposed research model, utilizing SMART PLS software (SmartPLS v. 4.0.9.5) due to its suitability for SEM [45].

3.2. Sample

To obtain the study’s quantitative data, a structured questionnaire was disseminated through a professional panel targeting active entrepreneurs or individuals with ventures in various sectors. The geographic scope of the sample covered the Iberian Peninsula, comprising Spain and Portugal. Out of 917 interviews, 913 valid questionnaires were collected between 1 October 2023 and 1 November 2023. All sociodemographic variables used to profile the sample, along their respective weights, are detailed in Table 2.
The sampling procedure used was probabilistic, specifically stratified sampling, which selected the target population as those with an active business or entrepreneurial intentions. From this population, random sampling was employed to avoid biases that could introduce limitations to the study.

3.3. Questionnaire Design

To identify potential issues in the questionnaire (such us ambiguous, confusing, or unclear questions), a pilot test was conducted with 100 cases. This allowed us to carry out the following:
  • Ensure the questionnaire had an appropriate length.
  • Verify that the questions were clearly understood, especially given the young target audience.
  • Confirm that the questions addressed the defined topics and were in the correct order.
  • Improve the reliability and validity of the questionnaire (by eliminating problematic questions).
  • To minimize potential common method bias [46], the following measures were taken:
  • A brief introduction at the beginning of the survey ensured the confidentiality of the collected data.
  • Information about the required completion time was provided to set clear expectations.
  • The survey was structured into sections with questions presented in a random order.
  • Control questions and reverse-worded items were used.
After implementing these measures, common method bias was empirically examined using the Harman’s single factor test, showing that 44.3% of the variance was attributed to a single factor, indicating the absence of bias in the study [47].

3.4. Measurement Scales

The items under analysis were measured using a five-point Likert scale (with 1 being strongly agree and 5 being strongly disagree), as it is the recommended scale for measuring attitudes. These nominal values allowed for homogeneous grouping of the data from the various questionnaire questions, which facilitated the statistical data processing.
The scale used in this research has been tested and utilized in other similar studies.
Table 3 presents the questions and the type of scale used, along with bibliographic information demonstrating that the measurements have been previously validated.

4. Results and Discussion

4.1. Model Measures

Before analyzing the results, it is important to conduct a series of checks to ensure that the model’s measurement are appropriate. The most used checks include analysis of factor loadings, internal consistency, convergent validity, and discriminant validity.
The first step in this type of analysis is to examinate the reliability of the indicator by observing the factor loadings, which represent the correlation between the observed variables and their corresponding construct. Factor reliability is confirmed when factor loading exceeds ±0.3, which is the minimum acceptable threshold [45,50].
To verify the reliability of the construct, another test performed is the analysis of composite reliability or internal consistency. A value of 0.7 is considered valid according to the literature [51]. In our study, all constructs are reliable as they exceed this value (Table 4). It is also appropriate to conduct a convergent validity analysis using the AVE (Average Variance Extracted) indicator. Values above 0.5 are recommended, although a range of 0.49 to 0.76 is also acceptable [52]. As is shown in Table 4, all values in this study are above the recommended 0.5 threshold.
To conclude the assessment of the proposed model’s measures, it is crucial to analyze discriminant validity, which ensures that constructs not meant to be related are indeed unrelated. For a model to be considered robust, the AVE value must exceed the shared variance between the construct and other constructs [52]. The study’s results are satisfactory, as the constructs meet this criterion, thus confirming the discriminant validity (Table 5).

4.2. Structural Model

Once the reliability of the indicators and constructs has been evaluated, the models are constructed. To assess the goodness of fit and the precision of the data in the structural equation modelling analysis, various indices have been employed. This approach provides a more comprehensive and accurate picture of the model’s fit.
In this study, three indices commonly used in studies employing the same methodology provided by the Amos statistical software (IBM SPSS AMOS v.29) were utilized:
(a)
CFI (Comparative Fit Index): The CFI measures incremental fit by comparing the proposed model to a baseline null model. Values range from 0 to 1, with a value close to 1 indicating a better fit. A CIF value above 0.95 is generally considered an acceptable model fit.
(b)
RMSEA (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation): The RMSEA assesses the overall fit of the proposed model to the population. It indicates how well the model’s covariances fit and provides a measure of the model’s fit to the population. RMSEA values range from 0 to 1, with values below 0.06 considered an excellent fit.
(c)
SRMR (Standardized Root Mean Square Residual): The SRMR evaluates the difference between observed and model estimated correlations. With values ranging from 0 to 1, an SRMR value below 0.08 typically indicates a good model fit.
The results obtained indicate that the goodness of fit meets the minimum required parameters for each index (Table 6).

4.3. Model Results

The results obtained from the proposed model, represented in Figure 2, are presented in Table 7. As is shown in the data analysis, all hypotheses are confirmed. All impacts have been statistically verified. Moreover, the model validates all the initial hypothesis of this study:

4.4. Discussion

Sustainability is increasingly considered a dynamic capability [18,53]. This theory seeks the capabilities needed to adapt to a constantly changing sector [54], which is why it has been applied in this study. The study focuses on how the theory of dynamic capabilities supports the capacity for innovation and adaptation, and the relationship between them. It examines the significance of H1, which is highly positive, as the interdependence between these capabilities can occur in three ways: in the creation of new eco-friendly products and services, in introducing improvements in processes such as the supply chain, and in creating new business models [55,56]. This opens new avenues for entrepreneurs, aiming to create shared value within the green market [57]. Thus, H1 is validated.
On the other hand, the discussion regarding the relationship between green innovation and firm performance requires further empirical examination, as indicated in the literature [57], creating a gap that this study aims to address through H2. Previous studies affirm that innovation on existing products is crucial for aligning the creation and capture of value across the various stages of business model innovation. Additionally, there are authors [58] who study the impact of environmental policies that lead to improvements in innovation parameters. These issues imply that current and future entrepreneurs must understand market opportunities to adapt to demands that enable their survival in a dynamic environment through adaptive capacity (H3) to drive economic and social change [59], fulfilling the parameters of green entrepreneurship. As was defined by Schaltegger and Wagner [60], it is the processes of identifying, developing, and exploiting business opportunities that are an impetus for a sustainable future.
There is greater awareness among small business entrepreneurs, as market opportunities arise through their adaptive capacity, leading to a positive result for H3. The literature review shows that organizations are willing to adopt sustainability as an organizational capability due to market demand [56], but a focus on leadership capacity is necessary [61].

5. Conclusions

Given the need to empirically study sustainable dynamic capabilities [37], this work validates the resources and capabilities model in relation to entrepreneurial self-efficacy. The results obtained in Spain and Portugal confirm that the study’s objective is met, demonstrating positive relationships that enhance the ability of surveyed entrepreneurs to manage sustainable businesses or ventures. In this context, a dynamic capability is associated with decision-making, problem-solving, opportunity and threat identification, and modifying existing resources [62].
Positive relationships are observed between the constructs of the research model: innovation capability, adaptation capability, and entrepreneurial self-efficacy, as demonstrated by the proposed hypotheses (H1, H2, H3), which have been corroborated. The application of reliability indices confirms the importance of these relationships, with the p-value being significant (p < 0.001).
Since the three hypotheses has been corroborated, it can be concluded that there is a positive relationship between dynamic capabilities and the willingness to undertake entrepreneurship.

5.1. Practical Implications

The practical implications of the current work contribute to the improvement of the different stakeholders.
On the one hand, the literature has identified a gap in both areas [43], due to the lack of recommendations for business (new business). In this regard, it can be stated that creative competences drive innovation, and soft skills enable the exploration of new ways for business to adapt to socio-environmental challenges based on knowledge. The studies published in this line help to evaluate business strategy and new business models that are necessary at a social, business, and government level. All these actors are of vital importance in green entrepreneurship.
Precisely, from a business point of view, companies that focus on producing innovative and environmentally friendly products and services will contribute to business developing, resulting in better individual and collective outcomes [33].
However, it is recommended that green entrepreneurship be supported by institutions with tax policies that are beneficial to companies.
Additionally, it is recommended that support be channeled through training for companies to reconfigure themselves towards new markets through business incubators, as well as by involving universities in this project.
Universities can contribute to training if green entrepreneurship is included in current study plans as an option that provides a path to business innovation opportunities, to which students may be attracted by the current nature of the topic.

5.2. Limitations and Future Research Lines

This study presents certain limitations that will be addressed in future work. There is a gap in the literature on this topic in the case of Spain, unlike in other countries [63]. This gap makes it difficult to address the issue at the national level. A similar situation is observed in Portugal.
Given the potential issues arising from subjective biases in the questionnaire and the overall methodology, it is advisable to conduct this study longitudinally. This approach would allow for the validation of the hypotheses proposed in this study over time.
Although it is a large sample, the distribution may contain some imbalances due to the main classification variables (sex, age, and educational level) that will be attempted to be corrected in future studies.
Future research should analyze the cultural, social, demographic, and technological factors that influence business survival in Spain and Portugal. The aim will be to identify best practices that generate synergies between the countries of the Iberian Peninsula, promoting the green economy, and facilitating the ecological and digital transitions currently taking place in the European Union.
Finally, we are currently expanding the study model by incorporating more capabilities and considering the analysis of control variables. It has also been observed when carrying out the study that there is an interesting line between job satisfaction and entrepreneurship [63], in addition to relating the main constructs of this study (innovation and self-efficacy) with corporate social responsibility, as linked in previous studies [64].

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: C.G.; methodology: C.G. and J.A.M.; validation: V.E.S.-G.; formal analysis: J.A.M.; resources: V.E.S.-G., C.G. and E.P.; writing—original draft preparation: C.G., J.A.M. and E.P.; writing—review and editing: C.G. and E.P.; visualization: E.P.; supervision: C.G. and V.E.S.-G.; project administration: V.E.S.-G.; funding acquisition: V.E.S.-G. and E.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the EAE Business School, Madrid, CCRP 2023–2024, including Open Access.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

In addition to the data available in the article, the authors can provide access to upon request. All study data are owned by EAE Business School, Madrid.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Romero-Martínez, A.M.; Milone, M. El emprendimiento en España: Intención emprendedora, motivaciones y obstáculos. J. Glob. Compet. Gov. 2016, 10, 95–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Ministerio de Industria y Turismo, La DGEIPYME Publica el Informe “Cifras PYME”, Web DGIPYME, Marzo 2024. Available online: https://plataformapyme.es/es-es/Paginas/noticias-detalles-simple.aspx?idnoticia=854 (accessed on 6 July 2024).
  3. Comisión Europea. Decisión de Ejecución de la Comisión, Por la Que se Aprueba el Programa de Cooperación «Interreg VI-A España-Portugal (POCTEP)» Para Optar a la Ayuda del Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional Conforme al Objetivo de Cooperación Territorial Europea (Interreg) en España y Portugal CCI 2021TC16RFCB005; Comisión Europea: Bruselas, Belgium, 2022.
  4. CEOE (Confederación Española de Organizaciones Empresariales). Portugal: Economía, Relaciones Bilaterales y Oportunidades de Negocio Para las Empresas Españolas, Web CEOE, Internacional, Mayo 2023. Available online: https://www.ceoe.es/es/ceoe-news/internacional/portugal-economia-relaciones-bilaterales-y-oportunidades-de-negocio-para (accessed on 6 July 2024).
  5. Torres-Mancera, R.; Martínez-Rodrigo, E.; Amaral Santos, C. Sostenibilidad femenina y startups: Análisis de la comunicación del liderazgo de mujeres emprendedoras en España y Portugal. Rev. La. Com. Soc. 2023, 81, 474–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. CEPYME (Confederación Española de Pequeña y Mediana Empresa). Indicador CEPYME Sobre la Situación de la PYME. Coyuntura de las Pequeñas y Medianas Empresas Españolas. II Trimestre de 2023. CEPYME. Madrid. Available online: https://cepyme.es/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/%E2%80%A2Informe-Indicador-CEPYME-2do-T-2023_CEPYME_V4.pdf (accessed on 6 July 2024).
  7. Usman, F.O.; Eyo-Udo, N.L.; Etukudoh, E.A.; Odonkor, B.; Ibeh, C.V.; Adegbola, A. A critical review of ai-driven strategies for entrepreneurial success. Int. J. Manag. Entrep. Res. 2024, 6, 200–215. [Google Scholar]
  8. Welsh, D.H.; Kaciak, E.; Fadairo, M.; Doshi, V.; Lanchimba, C. How to erase gender differences in entrepreneurial success? Look at the ecosystem. J. Bus. Res. 2023, 154, 113320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Hussain, M.; Rasool, S.F.; Xuetong, W.; Asghar, M.Z.; Alalshiekh, A.S.A. Investigating the nexus between critical success factors, supportive leadership, and entrepreneurial success: Evidence from the renewable energy projects. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2023, 30, 49255–49269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Pérez Espés, C.; Víctor Ponce, P.; Romero Fúnez, D.; Cervera Oliver, M. ¿Qué factores afectan a la supervivencia y éxito empresarial de las pymes en épocas de crisis? RCyT CEF 2022, 470, 109–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Huicab-García, Y. Gestión del talento humano en el entorno BANI. 593 Digit. 2023, 8, 155–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Ministerio de Transformación Ecológica y el Reto Demográfico. Emprendimiento Verde de las Mujeres y el Emprendimiento de las Mujeres en el Ámbito Rural. MITECO, Madrid. Marzo 2023. Available online: https://www.miteco.gob.es/content/dam/miteco/es/ministerio/planes-estrategias/igualdad-de-genero/2023-03-10presentacion_principalesresultados_infome_miteco_2023_emprendimiento_mujeres_verde_rural_tcm30-560304.pdf (accessed on 6 July 2024).
  13. Giudici, G.; Guerini, M.; Rossi-Lamastra, C. The creation of cleantech startups at the local level: The role of knowledge availability and environmental awareness. Small. Bus. Econ. 2019, 52, 815–830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Mendoza Champion, J.A.; Barrutia Barreto, I.; Bejar, L.H.; Huamani, O.; Borja, J.; Flores Asqui, P.R. La educación y la intención emprendedora en estudiantes universitarios: Una revisión en Latinoamérica. Rev. Conhecimento Online 2024, 1, 18–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Mehraj, D.; Ul Islam, M.I.; Qureshi, I.H.; Basheer, S.; Baba, M.M.; Nissa, V.U.; Asif Shah, M. Factors affecting entrepreneurial intention for sustainable tourism among the students of higher education institutions. Cogent Bus. Manag. 2023, 10, 19–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Jebsen, S.; Senderovitz, M.; Winkler, I. Shades of green: A latent profile analysis of sustainable entrepreneurial attitudes among business students. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 2023, 21, 100860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Barney, J. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J. Manag. 1991, 17, 99–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Porter, M.E. Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance; Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 1985. [Google Scholar]
  19. Teece, D.J.; Pisano, G.; Shuen, A. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strat. Manag. J. 1997, 18, 509–533. Available online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3088148 (accessed on 1 August 2024). [CrossRef]
  20. Teece, D. A dynamic capabilities-based entrepreneurial theory of the multinational enterprise. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2014, 45, 8–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Helfat, C.E.; Peteraf, M.A. The dynamic resource-based view: Capability lifecycles. Strat. Manag. J. 2003, 24, 997–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Eisenhardt, K.M.; Martin, J.A. Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strat. Manag. J. 2000, 21, 1105–1121. Available online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3094429 (accessed on 1 August 2024). [CrossRef]
  23. Teece, D.J. Explicating Dynamic capabilities: The nature and micro foundations of (sustainable) Enterprise performance. Strat. Manag. J. 2007, 28, 1319–1350. Available online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20141992 (accessed on 2 August 2024). [CrossRef]
  24. Teece, D.J. The Evolution of the Dynamic Capabilities Framework. In Artificially and Sustainability in Entrepreneurship, FGF Studies in Small Business and Entrepreneurship; Adams, R., Ed.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; pp. 113–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Khan, Z.; Lew, Y.K. Post-entry survival of developing economy international new ventures: A dynamic capability perspective. Int. Bus. Rev. 2018, 27, 149–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Laurell, H.; Achtenhagen, L.; Andersson, S. The changing role of network ties and critical capabilities in the international new ventures already developed. Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 2017, 13, 113–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Zahra, S.A.; Sapienza, H.J.; Davidsson, P. Entrepreneruship and Dynamic capabilities: A review, model and research agenda. J. Manag. Stud. 2006, 43, 917–955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Zhao, H.; Seibert, S.E.; Lumpkin, G.T. The relationship of personality to entrepreneurial intentions and performance: A meta-analytic review. J. Manag. 2010, 36, 381–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Chen, C.C.; Greene, P.; Crick, A. Does entrepreneurial self-efficacy distinguish entrepreneurs from managers? J. Bus. Venturing 1998, 13, 295–316. Available online: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883-9026(97)00029-3 (accessed on 2 August 2024). [CrossRef]
  30. Gist, M.E. Self-efficacy: Implications for organizational behavior and human resource management. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1987, 12, 472–485. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/258514 (accessed on 2 August 2024). [CrossRef]
  31. Markman, G.D.; Balkin, D.B.; Baron, R.A. Inventors and new venture formation: The effects of general self-efficacy and regretful thinking. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2002, 27, 149–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Chughtai, M.S.; Syed, F.; Naseer, S.; Chinchilla, N. Role of adaptive leadership in learning organizations to boost organizational innovations with change self-efficacy. Curr. Psychol. 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Alshebami, A.S. Green Innovation, Self-Efficacy, Entrepreneurial Orientation and Economic Performance: Interactions among Saudi Small Enterprises. Sustainability 2023, 15, 1961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Gallego-Gomez, C.; De-Pablos-Heredero, C. Artificial intelligence as an enabling tool for the development of dynamic capabilities in the banking industry. Int. J. Enterp. Inf. Syst. 2020, 16, 20–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Ferreira, J.; Coelho, A.; Moutinho, L. Dynamic capabilities, creativity and innovation capability and their impact on competitive advantage and firm performance: The moderating role of entrepreneurial orientation. Technovation 2020, 92–93, 102061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Qadir, F.; Chaudhry, S.A. Autoeficacia empresarial ecológica y sus resultados: El papel mediador de la actitud hacia el emprendimiento. Boletín Asiático Gestión Ecológica Econ. Circ. 2024, 4, 74–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Schmitt, A.; Rosing, K.; Zhang, S.X.; Leatherbee, M. Un modelo dinámico de incertidumbre empresarial e identificación de oportunidades de negocio: La exploración como mediador y la autoeficacia empresarial como moderador. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2018, 42, 835–859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Yang, Y. Impact of institutional support and green knowledge transfer on university students’ absorptive capacity and green entrepreneurial behavior: The moderating role of environmental responsibility. PLoS ONE 2024, 19, e0304070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Tran, T.K. Can sustainable entrepreneurship be achieved through green knowledge sharing, green dynamic capabilities, and green service innovation? Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2024, 31, 3060–3075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Liboni, L.B.; Cezarino, L.O.; Alves, M.F.R.; Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J.; Venkatesh, V.G. Translating the environmental orientation of firms into sustainable outcomes: The role of sustainable dynamic capability. Rev. Manag. Sci. 2023, 17, 1125–1146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Santika, I.W.; Wardana, I.M.; Setiawan, P.Y.; Widagda, I.G.N.J.A. Entrepreneurship education and green entrepreneurial intention: A conceptual framework. Linguist. Cult. Rev. 2022, 6, 797–810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Chen, Y.-S.; Chang, C.-H.; Lin, Y.-H. Green Transformational Leadership and Green Performance: The Mediation Effects of Green Mindfulness and Green Self-Efficacy. Sustainability 2014, 6, 6604–6621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Amui, L.B.L.; Jabbour, C.J.C.; de Sousa Jabbour, A.B.L.; Kannan, D. Sustainability as a dynamic organizational capability: A systematic review and a future agenda toward a sustainable transition. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 142, 308–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Kline, R.B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modelling, 5th ed.; The Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  45. Hair, J.F.; Hult, G.T.M.; Ringle, C.; Sarstedt, M. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM), 3rd ed.; Sage Publishing: New York, NY, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  46. Podsakoff, P.M.; MacKenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.Y.; Podsakoff, N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Eichhorn, B.R. Common method variance techniques. In Cleveland State University, Department of Operations & Supply Chain Management. Paper AA11; SAS Institute Inc.: Cleveland, OH, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  48. Pongtanalert, K.; Assarut, N. Entrepreneur Mindset, Social Capital and Adaptive Capacity for Tourism SME Resilience and Transformation during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Sustainability 2022, 14, 12675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Setiawan, J.L.; Kasim, A.; Ardyan, E. Understanding the Consumers of Entrepreneurial Education: Self-Efficacy and Entrepreneurial Attitude Orientation among Youths. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Hair, J.F.; Babin, B.J.; Black, W.C.; Anderson, R.E. Multivariate Data Analysis, 8th ed.; Cengage Learning Inc.: Boston, MA, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  51. Nunnally, J.C.; Bernstein, I.H. Psichometric Theory, 3rd ed.; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  52. Fornell, C.; Lacker, D.F. Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3151312 (accessed on 2 August 2024). [CrossRef]
  53. Zollo, M.; Winter, S.G. Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organ. Sci. 2002, 13, 339–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Buzzao, G.; Rizzi, F. On the conceptualization and measurement of dynamic capabilities for sustainability: Building theory through a systematic literature review. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2021, 30, 135–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Dangelico, R.M.; Pujari, D.; Pontrandolfo, P. Green product innovation in manufacturing firms: A sustainability-oriented dynamic capability perspective. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2017, 26, 490–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Ortiz-Avram, D.; Ovcharova, N.; Engelmann, A. Dynamic capabilities for sustainability: Toward a typology based on dimensions of sustainability-oriented innovation and stakeholder integration. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2024, 33, 2969–3004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Huang, S.Z.; Tian, H.H.; Cheablam, O. Promoting sustainable development: Multiple mediation effects of green value co-creation and green dynamic capability between green market pressure and firm performance. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2024, 31, 1063–1078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Qiu, L.; Yu, R.; Hu, F.; Zhou, H.; Hu, H. How can China’s medical manufacturing listed firms improve their technological innovation efficiency? An analysis based on a three-stage DEA model and corporate governance configurations. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2023, 194, 123456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Alkaraan, F.; Elmarzouky, M.; Hussainey, K.; Venkatesh, V.G.; Shi, Y.; Gulko, N. Reinforcing green business strategies with Industry 4.0 and governance towards sustainability: Natural-resource-based view and dynamic capability. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2024, 33, 3588–3606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Schaltegger, S.; Wagner, M. Sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainability innovation: Categories and interactions. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2011, 20, 222–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Vinh, N.Q.; Hien, L.M.; Do, Q.H. The Relationship between Transformation Leadership, Job Satisfaction and Employee Motivation in the Tourism Industry. Adm. Sci. 2022, 12, 161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Barreto, I. Dynamic capabilities: A review of past research and an agenda for the future. J. Manag. 2010, 36, 256–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Ratković Njegovan, B.; Vukadinović, M.; Šiđanin, I.; Bunčić, S.; Njegovan, M. Optimistic Belief in One’s Own Capableness as a Factor of Entrepreneurial Sustainability: The Assessments of Self-Efficacy from the Perspective of Serbian Entrepreneurs. Sustainability 2022, 14, 12749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Mourato, I.; Dias, Á.; Pereira, L. Estimating the Impact of Digital Nomads’ Sustainable Responsibility on Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy. Soc. Sci. 2023, 12, 97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 16 07197 g001
Figure 1. Research model.
Figure 1. Research model.
Sustainability 16 07197 g001
Sustainability 16 07197 g002
Figure 2. Structural model “sustainability”. Chi-square = 439.183(116 df); p = 0.00; RMSEA = 0.963; AIC = 547.183; IFI = 0.963.
Figure 2. Structural model “sustainability”. Chi-square = 439.183(116 df); p = 0.00; RMSEA = 0.963; AIC = 547.183; IFI = 0.963.
Sustainability 16 07197 g002
Table 1. Some differences between ordinary and dynamic capabilities.
Table 1. Some differences between ordinary and dynamic capabilities.
Ordinary CapabilitiesDynamic Capabilities
PurposeTechnical efficiency in business functionsAchieving congruence with customer needs and with technological and business opportunities
Mode of attainabilityBuy or build (learning)Build (learning)
Tripartite schemaOperate, administrate, and governSense, size, and transform
Key routinesBest practicesSignature processes
Managerial emphasisCost controlEntrepreneurial asset orchestration and leadership
PriorityDoing things rightDoing the right things
ImitabilityRelatively imitableInimitable
ResultTechnical fitness (efficiency)Evolutionary fitness (innovation)
Source: Teece, 2014 [20]: 332.
Table 2. Sample profile.
Table 2. Sample profile.
VariableDistributionPercentages (%)
NationalitySpain77.9
Portugal22.1
GenderMale35.5
Female64.2
Other0.3
Age intervals (years)18–248.3
25–3419.7
35–4428.8
45–5429.8
55 and above13.4
Level of educationDoctorate2.8
Master12.7
Bachelor or equivalent27.8
Graduate9.6
Vocational Education and Training 21.6
Upper secondary12.4
Secondary12.7
Primary/None0.3
Table 3. Questionnaire questions on innovation and adaptation capability, and entrepreneurial self-efficacy.
Table 3. Questionnaire questions on innovation and adaptation capability, and entrepreneurial self-efficacy.
ConstructItems *References
Innovation capability
(transforming business processes for success)		[Q25] Would you be willing to face unexpected changes, such as legislative changes, or reconfigure your business to a more sustainable one?[32]
[Q26] Would you be willing to reconfigure your business to make it more sustainable?[33]
[Q27] Would you be interested in hiring new professional profiles that contribute to making your activities more transparent (providing information through the web, social media, etc.)?
[Q28] Would you be interested in working only with suppliers who assure you that their business is green (responsible and sustainable)?[39]
[Q29] Would you be willing to join networks or associations that make your business more sustainable?
[Q30] Would you be willing to innovate in the processes you employ and/or the products you offer?
Adaptation capability
(change, learn, and reconfigure)		[Q8] To what extent do you consider entrepreneurship necessary to remain active in the labor market in the medium term?[40]
[Q9] To what extent do you consider green entrepreneurship as an opportunity to enter the labor market in the short term?[48]
[Q10] To what extent do you find green (sustainable) entrepreneurship exciting?[42]
[Q11] To what extent do you see green entrepreneurship engaging with the social and business fabric of your region/province or county of residence?
Green Entrepreneurial self-Efficacy[Q12] To what extent do you think pursuing something related to sustainability is beneficial to you because you have family or friends who have already done it?[36]
[Q13] To what extent do you think that being involved in something related to sustainability is beneficial because you have a strong network to succeed? [49]
[Q14] To what extent do you think that pursuing something related to sustainability is beneficial for you because you have information on grants to support it?[33]
[Q15] To what extent do you think that engaging in sustainability-related activities is beneficial for you because it offers an opportunity to improve your income?
[Q16] To what extent do you think that pursuing something related to sustainability is good for you because you are unemployed or currently in a job you don’t like?
[Q19] To what extent do you feel you have the knowledge and skills to develop “a new activity” that will improve the sustainability of your business/workplace or community?
[Q20] To what extent do you think you would be successful if you undertook something related to sustainability?
* Scale of measurement: Likert 5.
Table 4. Individual item and construct reliability.
Table 4. Individual item and construct reliability.
ConstructItemRegression Coefficientsß *AVEComposite Reliability
EstimateSE **CR ***p-Value
Innovation
Capability		Q250.7570.03819.867<0.0010.660.700.92
Q260.9880.03131.828<0.0010.85
Q270.9740.03329.355<0.0010.82
Q281.0020.03230.961<0.0010.84
Q291.0190.03232.067<0.0010.85
Q301---0.84
Adaptation
Capability		Q80.8150.03126.136<0.0010.780.70.9
Q90.9160.02832.23<0.0010.86
Q100.8690.0328.805<0.0010.82
Q111---0.87
Green Entrepreneurial Self-EfficacyQ120.0210.04423.447<0.0010.760.60.9
Q131---0.80
Q141.0620.04125.735<0.0010.85
Q150.9900.04024.584<0.0010.83
Q161.0080.04422.864<0.0010.78
Q190.7390.0418.482<0.0010.66
Q200.7330.03520.667<0.0010.72
* ß (beta), Standardized Regression Coefficient. ** SE, Standard Error. *** CR, Critical Ratio (t-value).
Table 5. Discriminant validity.
Table 5. Discriminant validity.
Innovation
Capability		Adaptation
Capability		Green Entrepreneurial
Self-Efficacy
Innovation
Capability		0.7--
Adaptation
Capability		0.50.7-
Green Entrepreneurial
Self-Efficacy		0.60.50.6
Table 6. Model Fit.
Table 6. Model Fit.
MeasureEstimateThreshold
CFI0.963>0.95
SRMR0.095<0.08
RMSEA0.055<0.06
Table 7. Results of the analysis.
Table 7. Results of the analysis.
ItemRegression Coefficientsß ***
EstimateSE *CR **p-Value
Green Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy⟵Innovation
Capability		0.480.0410.93<0.0010.48
Green Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy⟵Adaptation
Capability		0.360.048.41<0.0010.37
Innovation
Capability		⟷Adaptation
Capability		0.730.0238.94<0.0010.73
* SE, Standard Error. ** CR, Critical Ratio (t-value). *** ß (beta), Standardized Regression Coefficient.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Sanchez-Garcia, V.E.; Gallego, C.; Marquez, J.A.; Peribáñez, E. The Green Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy as an Innovation Factor That Enables the Creation of New Sustainable Business. Sustainability 2024, 16, 7197. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16167197

AMA Style

Sanchez-Garcia VE, Gallego C, Marquez JA, Peribáñez E. The Green Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy as an Innovation Factor That Enables the Creation of New Sustainable Business. Sustainability. 2024; 16(16):7197. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16167197

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sanchez-Garcia, Victoria Eugenia, Cristina Gallego, Juan Antonio Marquez, and Elena Peribáñez. 2024. "The Green Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy as an Innovation Factor That Enables the Creation of New Sustainable Business" Sustainability 16, no. 16: 7197. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16167197

APA Style

Sanchez-Garcia, V. E., Gallego, C., Marquez, J. A., & Peribáñez, E. (2024). The Green Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy as an Innovation Factor That Enables the Creation of New Sustainable Business. Sustainability, 16(16), 7197. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16167197

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop