Search results

The purpose of this paper is to develop an understanding of entrepreneurship that can help researchers, policymakers and practitioners develop entrepreneurial responses to the current economic, environmental and socio-spatial crisis.

The paper adopts a conceptual approach. Hudson’s diagnosis of the current patterns of production is applied to the two dominant streams of theorising on entrepreneurship: the opportunistic discovery view and the resourcefulness view of, for example, effectuation.

The analysis indicates that the opportunistic discovery view and, to some extent, the resourcefulness view are both inadequate as conceptual platforms for entrepreneurial responses to the economic, environmental and socio-spatial crisis. Instead, an alternative perspective on entrepreneurship is developed: Entrepreneurship as re-sourcing. The perspective emphasises the importance of building regional-level resilience through entrepreneurial activity that sources resources from new places and uses these resources to create multiple forms of value.

The paper draws attention to dysfunctions in the current theorising on entrepreneurship in light of the economic, environmental and socio-spatial crisis. Instead, the authors offer an alternative. In doing so, the paper also points to the difficult trade-offs that exist between, for example, long-term resilience and short-term competitiveness and growth on a regional, as well as firm level.

This paper adds to research by offering an alternative view of entrepreneurship grounded – not in economics – but in economic geography, thus highlighting the importance of productions’ grounding in material reality and the importance of addressing non-economic concerns in our way of thinking about entrepreneurship.

Qualitative research has gained in importance in the social sciences. General knowledge about qualitative data analysis, how to code qualitative data and decisions concerning related research design in the analytical process are all important for novice researchers. The purpose of this paper is to offer researchers who are new to qualitative research a thorough yet practical introduction to the vocabulary and craft of coding.

Having pooled, their experience in coding qualitative material and teaching students how to code, in this paper, the authors synthesize the extensive literature on coding in the form of a hands-on review.

The aim of this paper is to provide a thorough yet practical presentation of the vocabulary and craft of coding. The authors, thus, discuss the central choices that have to be made before, during and after coding, providing support for novices in practicing careful and enlightening coding work, and joining in the debate on practices and quality in qualitative research.

While much material on coding exists, it tends to be either too comprehensive or too superficial to be practically useful for the novice researcher. This paper, thus, focusses on the central decisions that need to be made when engaging in qualitative data coding in order to help researchers new to qualitative research engage in thorough coding in order to enhance the quality of their analyses and findings, as well as improve quantitative researchers’ understanding of qualitative coding.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate how rural entrepreneurship engages with place and space. It explores the concept of “rural” as a socio-spatial concept in rural entrepreneurship and illustrates the importance of distinguishing between ideal types of rural entrepreneurship.

The paper uses concepts from human geography to develop two ideal types of entrepreneurship in rural areas. Ideal types constitute powerful heuristics for research and are used here to review and link existing literature on rural entrepreneurship and rural development as well as to develop new research avenues.

Two ideal types are developed: first, entrepreneurship in the rural and second, rural entrepreneurship. The former represents entrepreneurial activities with limited embeddedness enacting a profit-oriented and mobile logic of space. The latter represents entrepreneurial activities that leverage local resources to re-connect place to space. While both types contribute to local development, the latter holds the potential for an optimized use of the resources in the rural area, and these ventures are unlikely to relocate even if economic rationality would suggest it.

The conceptual distinction allows for engaging more deeply with the diversity of entrepreneurial activities in rural areas. It increases our understanding of localized entrepreneurial processes and their impact on local economic development.

This study contributes to the understanding of the localized processes of entrepreneurship and how these processes are enabled and constrained by the immediate context or “place”. The paper weaves space and place in order to show the importance of context for entrepreneurship, which responds to the recent calls for contextualizing entrepreneurship research and theories. In addition ideal types can be a useful device for further research and serve as a platform for developing rural policies.

The purpose of this paper is to review the recent critique of the discovery view of opportunities and by implication the current state of the so‐called creation view of opportunities.

A systematic review of articles published from 2000‐2010 which feature a critique of the discovery view of opportunities. The review uses an open coding approach to identify central themes in the critique. Four central themes are identified, and from within‐theme patterns three distinct groups within the literature are identified.

The four themes suggest that the discovery view is incomplete, that social and relational interactions are more pervading and important than the discovery view suggests, that opportunities are created and that the role of individuality and subjectivity needs to be emphasized more. Three distinct groups within the literature are identified, each presenting different critiques of the discovery view, theoretical foci and implications for method and practice. Furthermore, the discussion suggests that the opportunity concept is a focal point for important debates in the entrepreneurship field, that the creation view is diverse and should not be referred to in the singular and that seeking reconciliation between the discovery and creation views is a problematic strategy. Finally, it is suggested that a continued dialog exploring differences both between the discovery and creation views as well as between the creation views is a fruitful strategy for the development of the field.

The article presents a review of both the critique of the discovery view and the so‐called creation view, thereby supplementing and advancing from existing reviews of the opportunity concept in entrepreneurship. This furthers our understanding of the role of opportunities in entrepreneurial processes.

Research in entrepreneurship education faces substantial tensions and methodological challenges. Building on a review of extant empirical studies in the field, the purpose of this paper is to develop an integrative methodological framework for studying entrepreneurship education. Central questions are: What forms of entrepreneurship education research exist? Which data sources, research methods and approaches are used in this research? What are the methodological strengths and weaknesses of entrepreneurship education research? How can entrepreneurship education research be improved methodologically?

The paper combines a literature review with a conceptual discussion. The review identifies 88 journal articles reporting empirical studies of entrepreneurship education published between 2002 and 2012. The literature is coded according to method used, type of study, data collection and analysis techniques. From the analysis of the reviewed literature, a conceptual discussion of the advantages and drawbacks of various methods is undertaken, and an integrated approach to entrepreneurship education research is proposed.

Research in entrepreneurship education is fragmented both conceptually and methodologically. Findings suggest that the methods applied in entrepreneurship education research cluster in two groups: first, quantitative studies of the extent and effect of entrepreneurship education; and second, qualitative single case studies of different courses and programmes. Benefits and drawbacks haunt both clusters. Quantitative studies bring objectivity, comparability and generalizability, but show limited appreciation of the heterogeneity of the education they seek to measure. Qualitative single case studies are ripe with contextually sensitive descriptions and best pedagogical practices, but suffer from limited comparability and generalizability as well as severe biases of teacher-researcher conflation.

The suggested methodological framework builds on a systematic review of the research methods applied in extant entrepreneurship education research. It integrates qualitative and quantitative techniques, the use of research teams consisting of insiders (teachers studying their own teaching) and outsiders (research collaborators studying the education) as well as multiple types of data. To gain both in-depth and analytically generalizable studies of entrepreneurship courses and programmes, the suggested framework integrates the empirical sensitivity of qualitative techniques and diverse research positions, with the rigour of quantitative measures. The authors argue that studies of entrepreneurship education benefit from this integration. Furthermore, the authors describe a variety of helpful methods, explore the potential relation between insiders and outsiders in the research process and discuss how different types of data can be combined. The integrated framework urges researchers to extend investments in methodological efforts and to enhance the in-depth understanding of the dynamics and challenges of teaching entrepreneurship.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the concept of opportunity and its role in social entrepreneurship processes.

The paper presents a single‐case study of a sustainable community in Denmark. The data include interviews, documents and television programmes.

The case study finds that the opportunity takes a number of different forms in the process. These different forms are the result of a continuous mobilisation of actors. On the basis of these findings a model of social entrepreneurship processes is proposed, where the process is driven by mobilisation and transformation.

The findings of the case provide support for a creation view of opportunities and the view that opportunity discovery does not necessarily precede resource mobilisation. The proposed model contributes to the development of the creation view of opportunities as an alternative to the discovery view and to understanding of the role of opportunities in the social entrepreneurship process.

The findings suggest that the social entrepreneur is one who actively creates external circumstances rather than responds to opportunities already present therein. This implies a focus on different skills and ways of thinking.

The paper presents a model of social entrepreneurship processes grounded in a deep understanding of an empirical setting. The findings and model question the value of the discovery view of opportunities in the field of social entrepreneurship, while contributing to the development of the creation view of opportunities.

This paper aims to review the latest management developments across the globe and pinpoint practical implications from cutting-edge research and case studies.

This briefing is prepared by an independent writer who adds their own impartial comments and places the articles in context.

Two ideal types are developed: first, entrepreneurship in the rural and, second, rural entrepreneurship. The former represents entrepreneurial activities with limited embeddedness, enacting a profit-oriented and mobile logic of space. The latter represents entrepreneurial activities that leverage local resources to re-connect place to space. While both types contribute to local development, the latter holds the potential for an optimized use of the resources in the rural area, and these ventures are unlikely to relocate even if economic rationality would suggest it.

The paper provides strategic insights and practical thinking that have influenced some of the world’s leading organizations.

The briefing saves busy executives and researchers hours of reading time by selecting only the very best, most pertinent information and presenting it in a condensed and easy-to-digest format.

The purpose of this study is to empirically evaluate the potential of the blockchain technology in tourism. The blockchain technology (BCT) holds potential to contribute significantly to tourism policy and practice. Academic interest in the BCT is rapidly growing with studies looking at the opportunities and challenges of its application. The shortcoming of research on the BCT in tourism has however been in its conceptual nature. The lack of empirical investigations hinders an understanding of how the BCT can be more broadly adopted in tourism, especially from the viewpoint of minimizing its risks.

The initial screening of the opportunities, challenges and risks is undertaken via a systematic literature review. The Delphi study is subsequently applied to empirically confirm what opportunities, challenges and risks can be attributed to the BCT use in tourism. Twelve industry and academic experts have contributed to the Delphi study.

The risks identified have been categorized as societal, technical, financial and legal. Propositions have been made on how these risks can, at least partially, be overcome.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, it is the first known attempt to study the BCT from the perspective of academic and industry experts. This research is also one of the first to evaluate the risks of the BCT use in tourism. Most risks are identified as not critical and can be addressed as the BCT develops.

区块链技术（BCT）具有为旅游政策和实践做出重大贡献的潜力。随着研究着眼于其应用的机遇和挑战, 对 BCT 的学术兴趣正在迅速增长。然而, 旅游业中 BCT 研究的不足之处在于其概念性。缺乏实证研究阻碍了对如何在旅游业中更广泛地采用 BCT 的理解, 特别是从最小化其风险的角度来看。这项研究代表了第一次从学术和行业专家的角度实证评估 BCT 在旅游业中的潜力的已知尝试。

机会、挑战和风险的初步筛选是通过系统的文献回顾进行的。德尔菲研究法随后被应用于实证确认哪些机会、挑战和风险可归因于 BCT 在旅游业中的使用。 12 位行业和学术专家是德尔菲研究法的主要贡献人员。

已识别的风险分为社会、技术、财务和法律。研究就如何至少部分地克服这些风险提出了建议。

从学术和行业专家的角度研究BCT是已知的第一次尝试。该研究也是最早评估 BCT 在旅游中使用风险的研究之一。大多数风险被确定为不重要的, 可以随着 BCT 的发展而得到解决。

This review investigates the extent and content of research into rural firm growth, and identifies and describes various approaches to studying firm growth.

The paper is guided by the systematic literature review framework which, combined with a qualitative assessment, ensures a rigorous review. An initial set of 200 peer reviewed articles was included in the review. During the quality assessment stage this set was reduced to 50 articles which were analysed in depth.

Three approaches to firm growth are identified and explored, focusing on the output, process and context of firm growth. The results further indicate increasing interest in rural firm growth and identify six themes constituting the research field.

Firm growth is advocated as a solution to development challenges, especially in rural settings. However, the firm growth literature is dominated by outcome-based research, often focused on technology-based businesses in dynamic urban regions, whose results are not easily transferable to rural contexts. This review contributes by mapping the current state of knowledge in the field, by articulating and discussing taken-for-granted assumptions with regard to firm growth and by identifying three approaches to firm growth, of which the context approach is the least common but which may prove valuable to further increase in the understanding of rural firm growth.

This paper aims to contribute to the emerging entrepreneurship research that deals with resilience by examining how embeddedness in place and in trans-local grassroots networks influences proactive entrepreneurship for local resilience.

Three theoretical propositions are developed on the basis of the existing literature. These propositions are assisted with brief empirical illustrations of grassroots innovations from the context of agri-food systems.

Embeddedness in place and in trans-local grassroots networks enables proactive entrepreneurship for local resilience. Social-cultural embeddedness in place facilitates access to local resources and legitimacy, and creation of social value in the community. Ecological embeddedness in place facilitates spotting and leveraging of environmental feedbacks and creation of ecological value. Embeddedness in trans-local grassroots networks provides entrepreneurs with unique resources, including globally transferable knowledge about sustainability challenges and practical solutions to these challenges. As result, entrepreneurship for resilience is explained as an embedding process. Embedding means attuning of practices to local places, as well as making global resources, including knowledge obtained in grassroots networks, work in local settings.

Researchers should continue developing the emerging domain of entrepreneurship for resilience.

The objective of resilience and due respect to local environment may entail a need to consider appropriate resourcing practices and organisational models.

The critical roles of place-based practices for resilience deserve more recognition in today’s globalised world.

The specific importance of the ecological dimension of embeddedness in place is emphasised. Moreover, by combining entrepreneurship and grassroots innovation literatures, which have talked past each other to date, this paper shows how local and global resources are leveraged throughout the embedding process. Thereby, it opens unexplored research avenues within the emerging domain of entrepreneurship for resilience.