Gender in sustainable entrepreneurship: evidence from the UK

Abstract

Purpose -Existing research highlights gender as an important dimension for entrepreneurship theory and practice. This study aims to explore the differences between female and male sustainable entrepreneurs in the areas of previous professional experiences, their performance and growth, their use of financial resources and their overall attitude to risk. Design/methodology/approach -Through a feminist perspective and on the basis of empirical evidence gathered through a series of 20 in-depth, semi-structured interviews with male and female sustainable entrepreneurs in the UK, thr authors analyse differences between male and female sustainable entrepreneurs. Findings -The findings suggest that female role models play a significant role in the emergence of women sustainable entrepreneurs who start from the same experience levels as men, show strong feminist attitudes and are conscious of their contribution to global sustainability. Sustainable entrepreneurship offers women professional development and a limited flexibility to balance work and family commitments. Lack of funding appears to be a major constraint applying to both female and male participants, while the authors argue that business pragmatism in a difficult investment environment triggered women"s reluctance to take on debt. Nonetheless, female sustainable entrepreneurs were found to have developed and used their professional and social networks to a greater extent than their male counterparts. Originality/value -This study offers a new gender perspective to the research of sustainable entrepreneurship and, at the same time, contributes with findings from research on sustainable entrepreneurs to the study of gender in management.

Women as Key Agents in Sustainable Entrepreneurship: A Gender Multigroup Analysis of the SEO-Performance Relationship

“…In fact, authors such as Mendis [55] proposed this holistic perspective in which economic business decisions are equally environmental and social decisions, since the opposite would be an ethically indefensible position [56] obsessed with continued growth [48]. In this regard, the manager is seen as a driver of sustainable development and, to a greater extent, is a woman, as women demonstrate a greater social and environmental commitment [11,12]. Kearins and Schaefer [48] argued that, although the relationship between women and sustainability is a common research topic, it is not so much so when it comes to entrepreneurship.…”

“…In this sense, the literature considers women as drivers of change through leadership based on the principles of sustainable sufficiency: well-being and social values, environmental concern, empathy and justice [11,12,58]. Johnsson-Latham [60] argued that women have a lower environmental impact and live more sustainably than men, making gender equality a precedent for sustainable development.…”

“…Therefore, although there are hardly any studies on the role of women in sustainable entrepreneurship, recent studies such as Outsios and Farooqi [12] show that women have an entrepreneurial tendency to contribute to global sustainability, and their inclusion in management teams ensures that they are moving in this direction [11]. Men's more aggressive and resource-wasting entrepreneurial vision may result in greater ventures and increased income, but it is also more likely to result in unsustainable entrepreneurial behavior [38].…”

“…Some research suggests that behind this promotion of sustainability there are women entrepreneurs who, from positions of leadership, influence business strategy [11][12][13][14]. However, there are still too few contributions to validate the impact that gender can have on the development of a sustainable venture.…”

Legitimacy for Sustainability: A Case of A Strategy Change for An Oil and Gas Company

“…In addition, we are interested to know if gender differences matter in sustainable transition. Based on Outsios [56], Polk [57] claims that women are more willing to adopt sustainable actions than men. We thus hypothesize that: Hypothesis 4.…”