Page 1
243
EXPLORING PILLARS OF SUSTAINABLE ENTREPRENEURSHIP AMONG SMALL AND MEDIUM ENTERPRISEs FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN KENYA
Lucy Maina Kiganane The Co-operative University of Kenya
Email: [email protected]
ABSTRACT The contribution of Sustainable Entrepreneurship (SE) to the economic progression of African has been somehow undermined. However, it is important to note that there has been a remarkable change through Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) engaging in SE in the African region. The pursuit of Sustainable Development (SD) in Kenya is evident in several policy documents and lately Presidents Kenyatta’s big four agenda. This paper aimed at exploring pillars of SE among SMEs for SD. The study was anchored on, Schumpeter’s Theory of economic development and Bocken et,al.,’s business model of sustainability. It engaged Systematic Literature Review (SLR) where 12 relevant and reliable documents with convergent views were summarized, synthesized, analysed and interpreted. Content analysis method was employed to qualitatively analyse data and determine correlations that enabled understanding and interpretation of meaning and pillars of SE among SMEs. Results revealed that there is no universal definition of SE to date and that different scholars perceive pillars of SE as well as the relationship between SE and SD differently. Most studies indicated that there is a correlation between SE founded upon three key pillars (social, environmental and economic) and SD. Results indicated that the environmental pillar is the most important (83%) followed by social (58%) and economic pillar (47%) in contributing to SD. The study proposes a more comprehensive definition of SE and postulates a new SE model consisting of six pillars: environmental, economic, social, cultural, innovation and skilled entrepreneur. The findings of this study are paramount for devising ways of enhancing SE among SMEs aimed at promoting SD. Keywords: Pillars, Sustainable Entrepreneurship, SMEs Paper type: Research paper Type of Review: Peer Review
1. INTRODUCTION
The concept of Sustainable Development (SD) concept has steadily gained popularity worldwide and is
increasingly getting identified as central for economic development not only among economists but also in many
development documents in many Nations. Sustainable entrepreneurship is now attracting the attention of many
scholars and is increasingly being recognised globally as the mantra and driver of SD (Schaltegger and Wagner,
2011). Many nations have started recognising it as the engine for innovations towards sustainable products,
services, methods, procedures and processes and ultimately SD. Sustainable entrepreneurs are unique in that they
are alert, innovative and aim at achieving environmental, social and economic goals with their entrepreneurial
activities.
SD in Kenya is traced back to 1963 when it attained independence and heightened its focus to eradication of
hunger, illiteracy and diseases (Kenya Ministry of Planning and National Development, 2007). The Kenyan
government has created an enabling environment for businesses to align their sustainability activities with the
nation’s priorities. Session paper No. 1 of 1965 set the stage for prioritization of sustainable development in Kenya
among other policy document including The Economic Recovery Strategy for Wealth and Employment Creation
(ERS); and Kenya’s development blueprint Vision 2030. More weight on the need for sustainable development in
Kenya is locked in Presidents Kenyatta’s declaration of the big four areas of concern as he assumed his 2nd term in
East African Journal of Social and Applied Sciences (EAJ-SAS) Vol.2, No.2 Publication Date: October 20, 2020
ISSN: (Online) 2714-2051, (Print) 0856-9681
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at: http//www.mocu.ac.tz
Cite this article as: Kiganane, L. M. (2020). Exploring pillars of sustainable entrepreneurship among SMEs for
sustainable development in Kenya, East African Journal of Social and Applied Sciences, 2(2), 243-251.
Page 2
Kiganane, L. M. (2020). Exploring pillars of sustainable entrepreneurship among SMEs for sustainable development in Kenya , East African Journal of
Social and Applied Sciences, 2(2),105-114.
The East African Journal of Social and Applied Sciences [EAJ-SAS] Vol. 2, Issue 2, 2020 244
office. Sustainable entrepreneurs and sustainability managers are substantially shaping markets and society with
their actions and behaviour (Racelis, 2014). Some researchers like Dyllick & Hockerts, (2002); and Young & Tilley,
(2006) have argued that sustainable enterprises have to go beyond the entrepreneurial venture and incorporate
economic, eco-and socio-efficiency for holistic performance. The study aimed at consolidating: meaning of
sustainable entrepreneurship, the pillars of sustainable entrepreneurship among SMES and perceived influence of
sustainable entrepreneurship among SMEs on SD.
Different scholars as can be seen in Annex (1) define SE differently. There is need to understand and harmonise its
meaning, the pillars on which the concept is anchored, processes and consequences of sustainable entrepreneurial
actions that impact on sustainable economic development. In spite of the realisation of its importance, it is also not
clear why the concept of SE has not fully taken root among SMEs. The emphasis of sustainable Entrepreneurship is
that all business activities should lead to sustainable development (Schaltegger & Wagner, 2008). For Small and
Medium sized Enterprises (SMEs), SE is about carrying out business practices that are sustainable through
innovation and creating value entrepreneurship that lead to environmental preservation, social and economic
stability. Graham postulates that the concept of SE has changed the way people perceive entrepreneurial activities
(Graham, 2010). In spite of researchers suggesting the integration of SE in business practices so as to contribute to
SD (Tilley & Young, 2009; Parrish, 2010), different scholar’s understanding of the concept of SE, its pillars and its
perceived influence on SD are different. Scholars posit that SE is still an emerging area of study (Binder and Belz,
2015). The study aims to identify, appraise and synthesize the meaning and pillars of SE. Different scholar’s
postulates influence of economic, environmental and social dimensions on the sustainability orientation of SMEs
and consequently on SD differently. Although a number of researches in this area have increased dramatically in
recent times, the pillars of SE are still not very clear. This study helped to establish correlations across different
studies to draw meaning and conclusions about the concept and hence closed the gap across this complex concept.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
The method of systematic review of literature is widely accepted as an authentic study method since the 1990s and
indeed has become popular in conducting research in many fields of studies. This section gives a systematic review
of literature by first theoretically anchoring the study. In this study, 12 articles published between 2004 and 2018
were reviewed.
2.1 Theoretical Review
The concept of economic development can be traced back to 1972 when Schumpeter published the Theory of
Economic development. He reckoned that the entrepreneur propelled economic change through introduction of
innovations that bring about creative destruction (Schumpeter, 1942). He propounded that the entrepreneur is the
engine of economic growth and development. Under this theory the occurrence of discontinuous and
“revolutionary” change is viewed as the core of “economic development” since it destructs the equilibrium state of
the venture and sets the economy on a dynamic mode. The “creative destruction” concept advocates for the
destruction of the long-standing business models, organisations and structures among SMES.
The SD concept dates back to 1972 when it was introduced in the first global environmental conference organised
by the United Nations. Its first foundational definition featured in Brundtland Report of 1987 as a “development
that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own
needs”. The definition of 17 SDGs by the United Nations served as a spring board for the Agenda 2030 for SD.
SMEs are being challenged to redefine their core business toward sustainable business models (Ritala, et al., 2018).
Page 3
Kiganane, L. M. (2020). Exploring pillars of sustainable entrepreneurship among SMEs for sustainable development in Kenya , East African Journal of
Social and Applied Sciences, 2(2),105-114.
The East African Journal of Social and Applied Sciences [EAJ-SAS] Vol. 2, Issue 2, 2020 245
Figure 1: Adopted from Ritala, et al., (2018) based on Bocken, et al., (2014), (2016) and Lüdeke-Freund, et al., (2016)
2.2 Sustainable Entrepreneurship
In this section the study systematically reviewed relevant studies aimed at identifying, appraising and synthesizing
the meaning of SE, the pillars of SE and consequent influence on SD. Systematic literature review method was
engaged where a total of 12 secondary documents published between years 2004 and 2018 (Annex-1) were
systematically reviewed to seek understanding and inference on meaning of SE and its pillars as perceived by
SMEs as well as influence of SE on SD.
SD is globally and gradually being seen as the catalyst of economic development. Graham, (2010) postulates that
the development of SE has changed perceptions of undertaking business operations due to their effect on the
environment. Studies have emphasized the importance of ensuring that sustainability aspect is incorporated in
management and business practices among entrepreneurs to contribute to SD (Parrish, 2010; Tilley & Young, 2009).
In his study, Hall et al., (2010) cites entrepreneurship as a significant conduit for sustainable products, processes
and procedures.
There has not been a universally accepted definition of SE over the years (Koe et al., 2017). Scholars have
propounded varying definitions of SE; majority revolve around the fundamental principles of sustainability. This
section undertook to review the most outstanding and relevant definition of this concept. Concurrence and
parallels to the definition of this concept with regard to the fundamental principles of sustainability were explored
given that SE is a key building block to SD. The study reviewed definitions of SE form 12 secondary studies
(Annex1) aimed at drawing parallels, concurrence and the fundamental elements in all definitions. A study on
factors Influencing SD in SMEs by Hosseininia and Ramezani (2016), indicated that the key pillars for SE were
social and environmental. Results of a study undertaken by Choongo et al., (2016) indicated that social or natural
environment awareness and perception of the likely threat to the environment do not necessarily trigger
identification of sustainable opportunities.
Bell and Stellingwerf (2012), indicated that SD is influenced by three key pillars of SE namely; environmental,
economic and socio-political sustainability. They advocate for a holistic business model where entrepreneurs
integrate environmental, economic and social sustainability building blocks. Filser (2011) undertook a study on
entrepreneurship as catalyst for SD outlining how SD influences entrepreneurial activities. Results revealed that
“there seems to be a preoccupation with the features of sustainable entrepreneurs and their potential to act as
catalysts for SD.
Crals and Vereek (2004) in their study on SE defined it as” the continuing commitment by business to behave
ethically and contribute to economic development, while improving the quality of life of the workforce and their
families as well as of the local community and society at large, or simply as business that takes into account the 3
Ps: people, planet, and profits”. He postulates that other elements that are key to sustainability include captivating
a positive image; motivated personnel; cost efficiency; risk containment; and, market opportunities.
Majid, Kamaludin, Saad & Aziz, (2012) defined SE as “sustainability-driven entrepreneurship”, they pointed out
that many SE scholars have focused on “environmental entrepreneurship” including Cohen and Winn, (2007);
Dean and McMullen, (2007); Dixon and Clifford, (2007); Schlange, (2006). However, the study noted that SE is
Page 4
Kiganane, L. M. (2020). Exploring pillars of sustainable entrepreneurship among SMEs for sustainable development in Kenya , East African Journal of
Social and Applied Sciences, 2(2),105-114.
The East African Journal of Social and Applied Sciences [EAJ-SAS] Vol. 2, Issue 2, 2020 246
mainly about the main issue of “what entrepreneurs can do in preserving economics, environment, social and
culture, in entrepreneurial ways”. This study defines SE as “a process in which entrepreneurs exploit the
opportunities in an innovative manner for economic gains, society equity, environmental quality and cultural
preservation on an equal footing”. It indicates that economic, social, environmental and cultural are the main
components but commitment from the innovative entrepreneurs is also paramount in ensuring change in their
businesses, processes or products for sustainability.
According to Schaltegger & Wagner (2008), SE is a new concept that connects entrepreneurial activities to SD. In
their study on SE and Sustainability Innovation, Schaltegger and Wagner (2011), described SE as “the realization of
sustainability innovations aimed at the mass market and the provision of benefit to the larger part of society”.
Benefit products and services is not limited to start-ups. The study defines SE more widely as “an innovative,
market-oriented and personality driven form of creating economic and societal value by means of break-through
environmentally or socially beneficial market or institutional innovations”.
Shepherd and Patzelt (2011) defined SE as “the focus on the preservation of nature, life support, and community in
the pursuit of perceived opportunities to bring into existence future products, processes, and services for economic
and non-economic gains to individuals, the economy, and society”. This study focused on “what is to be sustained”
and “what is to be developed”. Other scholars construe this definition include economic gains to individuals, the
economy, and society (Hockerts and Wüstenhagen, 2010; Pacheco et al., 2010; Shepherd and Patzelt, 2011).
Hockerts &Wüstenhagen, (2010) contend that entrepreneurship based SMEs contribute immensely to the SD of an
economy.
According to Choi & Gray, (2008), sustainable entrepreneurs engage in continual improvement of their products
and services while taking cognizance of the environmental and social impact. They assert that “Sustainable
Entrepreneurs create profitable enterprises, but also achieve environmental and social objectives”. Dean and
McMullen (2007) alleged that “market failures represent opportunities for simultaneously achieving profitability
while reducing environmentally degrading economic behaviours”.
2.3 Conceptual Framework
Figure 1: Conceptual SE framework
Scholars (Elkington, 2004; Crals and Vereeck, 2004; Tilley and Young, 2009; Richomme-Huet and De Freyman,
2011) over the years, postulated that SE should lay emphasis on economic viability, environmental preservation
and social development. This study undertakes to determine the relationship between the three pillars of SE and
the competitiveness of SMEs and consequently their contribution to SD.
3. METHODOLOGY
The study sought to investigate Pillars of SE among SMEs for sustainable economic development. This section
depicts the application of SLR to collect, summarize, synthesize, analyse and interpret data. The study employed a
Page 5
Kiganane, L. M. (2020). Exploring pillars of sustainable entrepreneurship among SMEs for sustainable development in Kenya , East African Journal of
Social and Applied Sciences, 2(2),105-114.
The East African Journal of Social and Applied Sciences [EAJ-SAS] Vol. 2, Issue 2, 2020 247
descriptive method where in-depth systematic review of literature on SE and SD from 2004 to 2018 aimed at
determining the meaning and pillars of SE among SMEs was undertaken. In the last two decades SLR has proved
itself as an efficient and reliable method for identifying, appraising and synthesizing data through a clear replicable
process (Petticrew and Roberts, 2006). A total of 12 purposively selected relevant and convergent articles were
identified, summarized and all relevant data synthesized, analysed and interpreted. The unit of analysis is the
understanding the meaning of SE by different researchers and the correlation of its pillars.
4. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
This paper reviewed literature to identify critical gaps in the field of SE with the aim of arriving not only a holistic
definition of SE but also a new framework of pillars that are the building blocks of SE. This section presents the
synthesis of the data that was drawn from the twelve articles reviewed based on meaning of and Pillars of SE that
make SMEs competitive and so contribute to SD. Thematic data analysis method was employed where two themes
summarized meaning and pillars of SE (see Annex1) were adopted in this case
4.1 Definition of sustainable Development
The literature reviewed (Annex1) explored the definitions of SE as presented in Annex (1) to provide a valuable
overview of the building blocks of the concept that has developed over the years 2004 to 2018. The convergence in
the definitions reviewed is the emphasis on need for innovation, continual improvement of processes, products/
services and methods which is in tandem with Schumpeter’s theory of “constructive destruction”. This is aimed at
creating value that benefits the society through opportunity and impact creation. Another outstanding
commonality in the definition is the emphasis on discovery and exploitation of economic and social benefits for
sustainable societal values and ultimate impact of quality life. Common ground in these definitions stress the
aspect of sustainability in terms of longevity, assurance of long-lasting goods, values or services and with future
generation in mind.
As it can be seen, some studies do not have their own original definition of the term SD but have referred to
previous studies. However, there are some two definitions that seemed to be quite comprehensive. Majid,
Kamaludin, Saad & Aziz, (2012) defined SE as “a process in which entrepreneurs exploit the opportunities in an
innovative manner for economic gains, society equity, environmental quality and cultural preservation on an
equal footing” and Hockerts &Wüstenhagen (2010) somehow solidifies the definition of SE as “The discovery and
exploitation of economic opportunities through the generation of market disequilibria that initiate the
transformation of a sector towards an environmentally and socially more sustainable state” These two definitions
are in tandem with Pacheco et al. (2010) , who defined sustainable entrepreneurship as the “discovery, creation,
evaluation, and exploitation of opportunities to create future goods and services consistent with the SD goals”.
Dean and McMullen (2007) emphasizes on discovery and exploitation as the core of SE. These definitions are
consistent with those of Cohen and Winn, (2007), who assert that specific market failures are the springboards for
sustainable entrepreneurial activities that lead to the realization of social objectives and environmental
improvements.
It is evident that SE strives to create long lasting value that is of great benefit to the society as it creates
opportunities. This study combines valuable elements from previous studies to provide a fundamental definition
of SE as “the process of discovering, evaluating, and exploiting economic opportunities innovatively through the
generation of market disequilibria that initiate the transformation of an enterprise towards economic gains, society
equity, environmental quality and cultural preservation for sustainability”
4.2 Pillars of Sustainable Development
The field of SE is still emerging and as such its conceptualisation, and definitions are unclear (Shepherd &Patzelt,
2011 Hockerts and Wüstenhagen 2010). As it can be seen in Annex (1) different scholars have provided different
pillars of SD. Crals and Vereeck (2005) clearly allege that skilled personnel, suppliers, customers among others are
key drivers of SE. Shepherd and Patzelt (2011), contend that gains, social and environmental aspects are important
building blocks of SE. This is enough proof that enterprise profit is not only very important to sustain the business
but can be reinvested for its growth and sustainability. Hockerts and Wüstenhagen (2010), argue that most start-
ups focus on one single environmental or social issue for which they try to excel while balancing economic health
Page 6
Kiganane, L. M. (2020). Exploring pillars of sustainable entrepreneurship among SMEs for sustainable development in Kenya , East African Journal of
Social and Applied Sciences, 2(2),105-114.
The East African Journal of Social and Applied Sciences [EAJ-SAS] Vol. 2, Issue 2, 2020 248
(profit), social equity (people) and environmental resilience through entrepreneurial behaviour (Hockerts &
Wüstenhagen, 2010).
The findings of Schaltegger & Wagner (2011) indicate that small and young firms are better at integrating
environmental and social elements as well as skilled entrepreneurs into business objectives that promote
sustainability. Crals &Vereek, (2005) posits that no enterprise operates in isolation, its business operations must be
embedded in an economic, social, cultural and ecological environment. Majid and Koe‘s new model of SE
incorporates economic, social, environmental, and cultural domains. Dean and McMullen (2007) compares broader
concept of SE to environmental and social entrepreneurship. They explain that mission-driven entrepreneurs
address the social dimension whereas sustainable entrepreneurs address environmental problems together with
the profit.
Filser (2011) posits that SE encompasses both environmental and social objectives. Bell and Stellingwerf (2012),
define SE as “Start-ups that introduce an innovation, with the aim to solve a sustainability-related market failure,
which initiates the transformation of an industry towards sustainability”. This study brings in the element of
innovation. According to them pillars of sustainable entrepreneurship include Environmental, Economic, Socio-
political and Innovation. Gholamhosse Hosseininia and Ali Ramezani (2016), have no definite definition of SE.
They argue that pillars of SE go beyond environmental, economic, and social. It also encompasses the entrepreneur,
customer orientation and human resource. Entrepreneur’s propensity for SE is very key since he/she is the driver.
This is in consistent with a study carried out by Koe, Omar and Sa’ari (2015), which revealed that the attitude and
perception of the entrepreneur is key in influencing a person’s level of propensity to SE.
Considering the forgoing results and discussion it is evident that there are three pillars of SE that are
conventionally recognised: Economic, social and environmental with a clear bearing on sustainable economic
development. The most fundamental being environmental (appeared 10 out of 12 reviewed articles) followed by
social (appeared 7 out of 12 reviewed articles), Economic factor and skilled and innovative entrepreneur ranks
third appearing 5 out of 12 times. However, it is important to note that two other factors culture and customer
appeared twice.
Most of the researchers agree that environmental, Social and economic pillars are the backbones of sustainable
entrepreneurship which has an undisputable potential to contribute to SD. A number of studies, however, pointed
out that most SMEs consciously or unconsciously focus on one or two pillars of sustainable development. Most
researchers concluded that sustainable entrepreneurship is a fundamental prerequisite for sustainable
development which is in concurrence with Hall et al. (2010) who describe SE as “a panacea for transitioning
towards a more sustainable society”. Results also indicate that environment is a key pillar of sustainable
entrepreneurship since it provides a great opportunity for enterprises and inventions. This is in tandem with the
allegation by Binder and Belz, (2015) that sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainable economic development has
clearly gained a foothold in mainstream entrepreneurship in recent years. 5. CONCLUSIONS
This study adopted systematic literature review to study 12 articles aimed at determining the meaning of
sustainable entrepreneurship, its pillars as well as its contribution to sustainable development. While there still
appears to be no consensus of SE definition, the definition by Majid, Kamaludin, Saad & Aziz, (2012), who defines
it as “a process in which entrepreneurs exploit the opportunities in an innovative manner for economic gains,
society equity, environmental quality and cultural preservation on an equal footing” and Hockerts &Wüstenhagen
(2010,), somehow solidifies the definition of SE as “The discovery and exploitation of economic opportunities
through the generation of market disequilibria that initiate the transformation of a sector towards an
environmentally and socially more sustainable state” seems to be somewhat comprehensive. However, other
definitions pointed culture, skilled entrepreneur/ human resource, achievement motivation and innovation as
important elements. This study proposes that the following definition be adopted” SE is “the process of
discovering, evaluating, and exploiting economic opportunities innovatively through the generation of market
disequilibrium that initiate the transformation of an enterprise towards economic gains, society equity,
environmental quality and cultural preservation for sustainability”.
Page 7
Kiganane, L. M. (2020). Exploring pillars of sustainable entrepreneurship among SMEs for sustainable development in Kenya , East African Journal of
Social and Applied Sciences, 2(2),105-114.
The East African Journal of Social and Applied Sciences [EAJ-SAS] Vol. 2, Issue 2, 2020 249
The review revealed that the most SE pillar is environmental (appeared 10 out of twelve studies) followed by social
(appeared 7 out of 12 studies). Economic pillar appeared 5 out of 12 studies) and skilled and innovative
entrepreneur ranks third appearing 4 out of 12 studies. However, it is important to note that two other factors,
namely; culture and customer appeared twice whereas achievement motivation appeared once. These are strong
indications that SE is anchored on social, environmental and economic pillars- the most critical one being
environmental. Results further indicate that economic, environmental and social pillars are the driving force for
SMEs competitiveness that translates into SE which is a spring board of achieving SD. It is evident from the results
that there is no definite meaning and a framework of SE. Majority of the studies point to economic, social and
ecological while a few others indicate that the pillars of SE are economic, social, environmental and cultural. This
study proposes six pillars framework: environmental, social, economic, cultural innovation and skilled
entrepreneur, on which SE is competitively anchored. 5.1 New SE Framework
Figure 2: Resultant SE Model
Looking at the proposed model, SE in SMEs is not only driven by environmental, social and economic pillars but
also the cultural context, continual innovation of products/services, processes and methods. The other key pillar is
a skilled entrepreneur who has the capacity to coordinate all the factors of production and operations. Results of
this study will be useful to the policy makers in their bid to promote SE among SMEs which in turn will promote
SD in Kenya.
5. RECOMMENDATIONS
An entrepreneur who is keen on sustainability should accurately combine all factors of production and the pillars
proposed by this study (New model). He or she should continually engage all the six pillars so as to remain
competitive and as such adopt SE. This model will help to understand the important dimensions in SE.
Furthermore, it will help innovative entrepreneurs to measure their sustainable entrepreneurial practices. Now the
entrepreneurs will also be able to identify the strengths and weaknesses in areas pertaining to sustainable practices
in their enterprises as well as identify areas that may require further attention. This will help them to ultimately
determine their sustainable entrepreneurial practice. Theoretically, this model provides sound insights for
evaluating sustainable entrepreneurial practices and so measure SE practices. Entrepreneur should explore
practical ways of implementing the model and verifying its applicability, reliability and validity. REFERENCES
Bell, J. & Stellingwerf, J. (2012). Sustainable Entrepreneurship: The Motivations and Challenges of Sustainable
Entrepreneurs in the Renewable Energy Industry. Independent Thesis Advanced Level, Jönköping University,
Jönköping, Sweden.
Page 8
Kiganane, L. M. (2020). Exploring pillars of sustainable entrepreneurship among SMEs for sustainable development in Kenya , East African Journal of
Social and Applied Sciences, 2(2),105-114.
The East African Journal of Social and Applied Sciences [EAJ-SAS] Vol. 2, Issue 2, 2020 250
Binder, J. K., & Belz, F., (2015). Sustainable Entrepreneurship: What It Is. Handbook of Entrepreneurship and
Sustainable Development. Ed. Kyrö, P., Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Bocken, N. M. P., Short, S. W., Rana, P. & Evans, S. (2014). A literature and practice review to develop sustainable
business model archetypes. Journal of cleaner production, 65(1): 42-56
Brundtland, G. H. (1997). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future;
UN: Oslo, Norway, 1987.
Choi, D.Y. & Gray, E. R. (2008). The venture development processes of sustainable entrepreneurs, Management
Research News, 31(8): 558-569.
Choongo P., Van Burg E. Paas L.J. & Masurel E. (2016). Factors Influencing the Identification of Sustainable
Opportunities by SMEs: Empirical Evidence from Zambia. Sustainability ((Switzerland), 8(1): 1-24.
Cohen, B., Winn, & M. I. (2007). Market imperfections, opportunity and sustainable entrepreneurship. Journal of
Business Venturing, 22(1): 29–49
Crals, E., & Vereeck, L. (2005). The affordability of sustainable entrepreneurship certification for SMEs. International
Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 12(2): 173-183
Crals, E., & L. Vereeck. (2004). Sustainable Entrepreneurship in SMEs: Theory and Practice’, paper presented at the 3rd
Global Conference in Environmental Justice and, Copenhagen, Denmark, February, 2004.
Dean, T. J. & McMullen, J. F. (2007). Towards a theory of sustainable entrepreneurship: Reducing environmental
degradation through entrepreneurial action. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(1): 50–76.
Dixon, S.E.A. and Clifford, A. (2007), "Ecopreneurship – a new approach to managing the triple bottom line",
Journal of Organizational Change Management, 20(3): 326-345.
Dyllick, T. & Hockerts, K. (2002). Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability, Business Strategy and the
Environment, Wiley Blackwell, 11(2): 130-141.
Elkington, J. (2004). Enter the triple bottom line in Henriques, A.& Richardson, J. (Eds.) The triple bottom line: Does it
all add up? London, England: Earthscan. pp.1-16.
Filser, M.; Kraus, S.; Roig-Tierno, N.; Kailer, N.; Fischer, U. (2016). Entrepreneurship as Catalyst for Sustainable
Development: Opening the Black Box. Sustainability 2019, 11(16): 4503.
Graham, S. (2010). What is Sustainable Entrepreneurship? Accessed on 5.11.15 from http://biznik.com/articles/what-
is-sustainable entrepreneurship.
Hall, J. K., Daneke, G. A. & Lenox, M. J. (2010). Sustainable development and entrepreneurship: Past contributions and
future directions. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(5): 439–448.
Hockertz, K. & Wustenhagen, R. (2010). Greening Goliaths versus emerging Davids – Theorizing about the role of
incumbents and new entrants in sustainable entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 25( 5): 481-492.
Hosseininia G. & Ramezani A. (2016). Factors Influencing Sustainable Entrepreneurship in Small and Medium-Sized
Enterprises in Iran: A Case Study of Food Industry. Academic Editor: Marc A. Rosen.
Kenya Ministry of Planning and National development, (2007), Vision2030.Nairobi: Government of the Republic of
Kenya, Ministry of Planning and National Development and the National Economic and Social Council
(NESC), Office of the President, 2007.
Koe, W. L.; Krishnan, R.; Alias, N.E.; Othman, R. R., Abdul, R. (2017). Measuring Sustainable Entrepreneurial Practice:
A Suggested Model, Journal of Computational and Theoretical Nanoscience . 23(8):7553-7556 ·
Koe, W. L. & Majid I. A. (2014). Socio-Cultural Factors and Intention Towards Sustainable Entrepreneurship Eurasian J.
Bus. Econ. 7(13):145-156.
Koe, W., Omar, R., & Sa’ari, J. R. (2015). Factors Influencing Propensity to Sustainable Entrepreneurship of SMEs in
Malaysia. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 172. Accessed at www.sciencedirect.com
Kraus, S.; Burtscher, J.; Niemand, T.; Roig-Tierno, N.; Syrjä, P. (2017). Configurational Paths to Social Performance in
SMEs: The Interplay of Innovation, Sustainability, Resources and Achievement Motivation. Sustainability
2017, 9(10): 18-28.
Krueger, N. F. (2005). Sustainable Entrepreneurship: Broadening the Definition of Opportunity. 19th National
Conference of United States Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship (USASBE), California,
USA.
Majid, I. A., & Koe, W. 2012. Sustainable entrepreneurship (se): A revised model based on triple bottom line (tbl).
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 2(6): 293–310.
Page 9
Kiganane, L. M. (2020). Exploring pillars of sustainable entrepreneurship among SMEs for sustainable development in Kenya , East African Journal of
Social and Applied Sciences, 2(2),105-114.
The East African Journal of Social and Applied Sciences [EAJ-SAS] Vol. 2, Issue 2, 2020 251
Meek, W. R., Pacheco, D. F., & York, J. G. (2010). The Impact of Social Norms on Entrepreneurial Action: Evidence from
the Environmental Entrepreneurship Context. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(5), 493-507.
Nurse, K. (2006). Culture as the fourth pillar of sustainable development. London: Commonwealth Secretariat
O'Neill, G., Hershauer, J., Golden, J., (2009). The Cultural Context of Sustainability Entrepreneurship. Greener
Management International, 55(1): 33–55.
Pacheco, D. F., Dean, T. J. & Payne, D. S. (2010). Escaping the green prison: Entrepreneurship and the creation of
opportunities for sustainable development. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(5). 464–480.
Parrish, B. D. (2010). Sustainability-driven entrepreneurship: Principles of organization design. Journal of Business
Venturing, 25(5), 510–523.
Patzelt, H., Shepherd, & D. A., (2011). Recognizing Opportunities for Sustainable Development. Entrepreneurship Theory
and Practice, 35 (4): 631–652.
Petticrew, M. & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide. Blackwell Publishing
Ltd., Malden, MA.
Racelis A. (2014). Sustainable Entrepreneurship. In Asia 1 Journal of Management for Global Sustainability 2 (2014) ©
2014 International Association of Jesuit Business.
Ramírez, L. J. C.; Sánchez-Cañizares, S. M. & Fuentes-García, F. J. (2019). Past Themes and Tracking Research Trends
in Entrepreneurship: A Co-Word, Cites and Usage Count Analysis. Sustainability, 11(1), 31-21.
Richomme-Huet, K. & De Freyman, J. (2011). What sustainable entrepreneurship looks like: An exploratory study from
a student perspective. In Social Entrepreneurship Leveraging Economic, Political, and Cultural
Dimensions; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 155–178.
Ritala, P., Huotari, P., Bocken, N., Albareda, L., & Puumalainen, K. (2018). Sustainable business model
adoption among S&P 500 firms: A longitudinal content analysis study. Journal of Cleaner Production,
vol. 170, pp. 216-226. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.159
Sabrine D. & Anis, O. (2018). Entrepreneurship Contribution to the Three Pillars of Sustainable Development: What Does
the Evidence Really Say? Online at https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/84504/ MPRA Paper No. 84504,
Schaltegger, S., & Wagner, T. (2008). Types of Sustainable Entrepreneurship and Conditions for Sustainability Innovation:
From the Administration of a Technical Challenge to the Management of an Entrepreneurial Opportunity.
In R. Wüstenhagen, J. Hamschmidt, S. Sharma, & M. Starik (Eds.). Sustainable Innovation and
Entrepreneurship (pp. 27-48). Glos: Edward-Elgar.
Schaltegger, S. & Wagner, M. (2011). Sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainability innovation: Categories and
interactions. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2011, 20, 222–237. [CrossRef] 30.
Schlange, L. E. (2006). What Drives Sustainable Entrepreneurs? 3rd Applied Business and Entrepreneurship
Association International (ABEAI) Conference, Kona, Hawaii Secretariat.
Schumpeter, J.A. (1942). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, 3rd edition, London: George Allen and Unwin,
1976.
Shepherd, D. & Patzelt, H. (2010). The New Field of Sustainable Entrepreneurship: Studying Entrepreneurial Action
Linking “What is to be Sustained” with “What is to be Developed”. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,
35(1): 137-163.
Shepherd, D.A. & Patzelt, H. (2011). The new field of sustainable entrepreneurship: Studying entrepreneurial action
linking “What is to be sustained” with “What is to be developed”. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice.
35(1): 137-163.
Tilley, F.; Young, W. (2009). Sustainability entrepreneurs: Could they be the true wealth generators of the future?
Greener Management International Issue 55, 79–92.
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence Informed Management
Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review. British Journal of Management, 14. UN Conference on sustainable Development. (2012). Sustainable Development in Kenya: Stocktaking in the run up
to Rio+20. Nairobi, Kenya.