SavedAdd your journal

Journals / İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Girişimcilik Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 9 Sayı: 21

THE INTELLECTUAL STRUCTURE AND THEMATIC DEVELOPMENT OF SUSTAINABLE ENTREPRENEURSHIP RESEARCH: A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS

SÜRDÜRÜLEBİLİR GİRİŞİMCİLİK ARAŞTIRMALARININ ENTELEKTÜEL YAPISI VE TEMATİK GELİŞİMİ: BIBLİYOMETRİK BİR ANALİZ

Mehmet Alper Akdemir(ANKARA BİLİM ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-3782-034X
Pages
1–28
Publication Date
2026-09-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The study demonstrates that the sustainable entrepreneurship literature has expanded from early conceptual foundations toward contemporary research streams focused on ecosystems, circular economy, digitalization, and artificial intelligence.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to examine the sustainable entrepreneurship literature through a conceptual framework and bibliometric analysis.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Then, 819 articles obtained from the Scopus database and covering the period 2003–2026 were analyzed using bibliometric methods.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The study demonstrates that the sustainable entrepreneurship literature has expanded from early conceptual foundations toward contemporary research streams focused on ecosystems, circular economy, digitalization, and artificial intelligence.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2003–2026 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Sürdürülebilir Girişimcilik · Bibliyometrik Analiz · Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma

Abstract

This study aims to examine the sustainable entrepreneurship literature through a conceptual framework and bibliometric analysis. First, sustainability, sustainable development, sustainable entrepreneurship, core approaches, major challenges, and current trends are discussed based on the relevant literature. Then, 819 articles obtained from the Scopus database and covering the period 2003–2026 were analyzed using bibliometric methods. The analyses were conducted in R 4.5.2 using the bibliometrix 5.3.0 package, while VOSviewer 1.6.20 was used for bibliographic coupling analysis. The findings show that the sustainable entrepreneurship literature has grown rapidly, especially after 2017, with an annual growth rate of 22.06%. Keyword and thematic map analyses reveal that the field has developed around themes such as social entrepreneurship, innovation, entrepreneurial ecosystem, circular economy, sustainable development goals, and entrepreneurship education. Bibliographic coupling analysis indicates that the literature is structured around three main axes: theoretical/conceptual foundations, sustainable business models and entrepreneurial processes, and digitalization- and technology-oriented current research. The study demonstrates that the sustainable entrepreneurship literature has expanded from early conceptual foundations toward contemporary research streams focused on ecosystems, circular economy, digitalization, and artificial intelligence.

Özet

Bu çalışma, sürdürülebilir girişimcilik literatürünü kavramsal çerçeve ve bibliyometrik analiz temelinde incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. İlk olarak sürdürülebilirlik, sürdürülebilir kalkınma, sürdürülebilir girişimcilik, temel yaklaşımlar, karşılaşılan zorluklar ve güncel eğilimler literatür doğrultusunda ele alınmıştır. Ardından Scopus veri tabanından elde edilen ve 2003-2026 dönemini kapsayan 819 makale bibliyometrik analiz yöntemiyle incelenmiştir. Analizler R 4.5.2 ortamında bibliometrix 5.3.0 paketiyle gerçekleştirilmiş; bibliyografik eşleşme analizi için VOSviewer 1.6.20 kullanılmıştır. Bulgular, sürdürülebilir girişimcilik literatürünün özellikle 2017 sonrasında hızla büyüdüğünü ve yıllık büyüme oranının %22,06 olduğunu göstermektedir. Anahtar kelime ve tematik harita analizleri, alanın sosyal girişimcilik, inovasyon, girişimcilik ekosistemi, döngüsel ekonomi, sürdürülebilir kalkınma amaçları ve girişimcilik eğitimi gibi temalar etrafında geliştiğini ortaya koymaktadır. Bibliyografik eşleşme analizi ise literatürün teorik/kavramsal temel, sürdürülebilir iş modelleri ve girişimcilik süreçleri ile dijitalleşme ve teknoloji odaklı güncel araştırmalar olmak üzere üç ana eksende yapılandığını göstermektedir. Çalışma, sürdürülebilir girişimcilik literatürünün erken dönem kavramsal temellerden ekosistem, döngüsel ekonomi, dijitalleşme ve yapay zekâ odaklı güncel araştırma hatlarına doğru genişlediğini ortaya koymaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Akdemir, M. A. (2026). THE INTELLECTUAL STRUCTURE AND THEMATIC DEVELOPMENT OF SUSTAINABLE ENTREPRENEURSHIP RESEARCH: A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Girişimcilik Dergisi, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 21, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.55830/tje.1938080

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (66)

  1. Abbas, M. H., & Bulut, M. (2024). Navigating the landscape of sustainable entrepreneurship research: a systematic literature review. Discover Sustainability, 5(1), 171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-024-00293-4
  2. Al-Mamary, Y. H. (2025). The transformative power of artificial intelligence in entrepreneurship: exploring AI’s capabilities for the success of entrepreneurial ventures. Future Business Journal, 11(1), 104. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43093-025-00533-7
  3. Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
  4. Belz, F. M., & Binder, J. K. (2015). Sustainable entrepreneurship: What it is. In P. Kyrö (Ed.), Handbook of entrepreneurship and sustainable development research (pp. 30-72). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781849808248.00010
  5. Belz, F. M., & Binder, J. K. (2017). Sustainable entrepreneurship: A convergent process model, Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1887
  6. Bickley, S. J., Macintyre, A., & Torgler, B. (2025). Artificial intelligence and big data in sustainable entrepreneurship. Journal of Economic Surveys, 39(1), 103–145. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12611
  7. Bocken, N. M. P., Rana, P., & Short, S. W. (2015). Value mapping for sustainable business thinking. Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, 32(1), 67–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681015.2014.1000399
  8. Callon, M., Courtial, J. P., & Laville, F. (1991). Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemsitry. Scientometrics, 22(1), 155–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02019280
  9. Chigbu, B. I. (2026). Algorithmic management in the global gig economy: an interdisciplinary systematic literature review and critical discourse analysis. Frontiers in Sociology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2026.1743445
  10. Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(7), 1382–1402. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21525
  11. Cohen, B., Smith, B., & Mitchell, R. (2008). Toward a sustainable conceptualization of dependent variables in entrepreneurship research. Business Strategy and the Environment, 17(2), 107–119. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.505
  12. Cohen, B., & Winn, M. I. (2007). Market imperfections, opportunity and sustainable entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(1), 29–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2004.12.001
  13. Dean, T. J., & McMullen, J. S. (2007). Toward a theory of sustainable entrepreneurship: Reducing environmental degradation through entrepreneurial action. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(1), 50–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2005.09.003
  14. Doh, J. P., Lawton, T. C., & Rajwani, T. (2012). Advancing Nonmarket Strategy Research: Institutional Perspectives in a Changing World. Academy of Management Perspectives, 26(3), 22–39. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2012.0041
  15. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
  16. Dunphy, D., Benveniste, J., Griffiths, A., & Sutton, P. (2000). Sustainability: The corporate challenge of the 21st century. Allen & Unwin.
  17. Edinsel, S., & Akdemir, M. A. (2023). Cumhuriyetin Yüzüncü Yılında Birleşmiş Milletler Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Hedefleri Kapsamında Türkiye İşletmelerinde Cinsiyet Eşitliği ve Cam Tavan Sendromu. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 22(Cumhuriyet’in 100. Yılı), 434–452. https://doi.org/10.21547/jss.1356946
  18. Elia, G., Margherita, A., & Passiante, G. (2020). Digital entrepreneurship ecosystem: How digital technologies and collective intelligence are reshaping the entrepreneurial process. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 150, 119791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119791
  19. Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone Publishing. Falagas, M. E., Pitsouni, E. I., Malietzis, G. A., & Pappas, G. (2008). Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. The FASEB Journal, 22(2), 338–342. https://doi.org/10.1096/fj.07-9492LSF
  20. Farny, S., & Binder, J. (2021). Sustainable entrepreneurship. In World Encyclopedia of Entrepreneurship. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839104145.00076
  21. Gabathuler, E., Giger, M., Herweg, K., Kläy, A., Kohler, T., Ott, C., Stuber, A., Wiesmann, U., & Zweifel, H. (1995). Sustainable use of natural resources: A conceptual approach to sustainable management of natural resources in the context of development (Development and Environment Reports No. 14). University of Berne, Institute of Geography. https://lib.icimod.org/records/naryx-0xb94
  22. Goodland, R. (1995). The concept of environmental sustainability. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 26(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.26.110195.000245
  23. Grafton, R. Q., Pendleton, L. H., & Nelson, H. W. (2001). A dictionary of environmental economics, science, and policy. Edward Elgar Publishing.
  24. Gregori, P., & Holzmann, P. (2020). Digital sustainable entrepreneurship: A business model perspective on embedding digital technologies for social and environmental value creation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 272, 122817. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122817
  25. Gregori, P., Schwarz, E., & Holzmann, P. (2025). Agencing entrepreneurial ecosystems for sustainability: A systematic review to rethink values, transformation, and boundaries. Small Business Economics, 65(3), 1755–1790. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-025-01071-w
  26. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2010.01.002
  27. Harris, J. M. (2003). Sustainability and sustainable development. In A. C. Aitken (Ed.), Internet encyclopaedia of ecological economics (pp. 1–12). International Society for Ecological Economics. https://www.isecoeco.org/pdf/susdev.pdf
  28. Hockerts, K., & Wüstenhagen, 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.07.005
  29. Holzmann, P., & Gregori, P. (2023). The promise of digital technologies for sustainable entrepreneurship: A systematic literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Information Management, 68, 102593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2022.102593
  30. Johnson, M. P., & Schaltegger, S. (2020). Entrepreneurship for sustainable development: A review and multilevel causal mechanism framework. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 44(6), 1141–1173. https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258719885368
  31. Karbassi, L. (2024). Advancing sustainable development. Erişim tarihi: 25 Nisan 2026, https://unglobalcompact.org/what-is-gc/our-work/sustainable-development
  32. Kuckertz, A., & Wagner, M. (2010). The influence of sustainability orientation on entrepreneurial intentions — Investigating the role of business experience. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(5), 524–539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.09.001
  33. Kuhlman, T., & Farrington, J. (2010). What is sustainability? Sustainability, 2(11), 3436–3448. https://doi.org/10.3390/su2113436
  34. Leydesdorff, L., & Wagner, C. S. (2008). International collaboration in science and the formation of a core group. Journal of Informetrics, 2(4), 317–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2008.07.003
  35. Madanaguli, A., Sjödin, D., Parida, V., & Mikalef, P. (2024). Artificial intelligence capabilities for circular business models: Research synthesis and future agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 200, 123189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.123189
  36. Markandya, A., Perelet, R., Mason, P., & Taylor, T. (2002). Dictionary of environmental economics. Earthscan Publications.
  37. Markman, G. D., Waldron, T. L., Gianiodis, P. T., & Espina, M. I. (2019). E pluribus unum: Impact entrepreneurship as a solution to grand challenges. Academy of Management Perspectives, 33(4), 371–382. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2019.0130
  38. McKenzie, S. (2004). Social sustainability: Towards some definitions (Hawke Research Institute Working Paper Series No. 27). University of South Australia, Hawke Research Institute. https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/catalog/3537792
  39. Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1), 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5
  40. Muñoz, P., & Cohen, B. (2018). Sustainable entrepreneurship research: Taking stock and looking ahead. Business Strategy and the Environment, 27(3), 300–322. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2000
  41. Nasir, O., Javed, R. T., Gupta, S., Vinuesa, R., & Qadir, J. (2023). Artificial intelligence and sustainable development goals nexus via four vantage points. Technology in Society, 72, 102171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102171
  42. Neumayer, E. (2013). Weak versus strong sustainability: Exploring the limits of two opposing paradigms (4th ed.). Edward Elgar Publishing.
  43. Nguyen, N. T. H., Kowalski, A. M., & Dzienis, A. M. (2024). Sustainable entrepreneurial process in the deep-tech industry. Sustainability, 16(19), 8714. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16198714
  44. Nunes, A. K. da S., Morioka, S. N., & Bolis, I. (2022). Challenges of business models for sustainability in startups. RAUSP Management Journal, 57(4), 382–400. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAUSP-10-2021-0216
  45. Özgen, E. (2022). Sürdürülebilirlik İletişimi ve Halkla İlişkiler. Türkiye İletişim Araştırmaları Dergisi/26306220. https://doi.org/10.17829/turcom.1106292
  46. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.07.006
  47. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
  48. Passet, R. (1996). L’Economique et le vivant. Payot.
  49. Patel, K., Shah, M., Qureshi, K. M., & Qureshi, M. R. N. (2025). A systematic review of generative AI: importance of industry and startup-centered perspectives, agentic AI, ethical considerations, challenges, and future directions. Artificial Intelligence Review, 59(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-025-11435-z
  50. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, N. P., & Bachrach, D. G. (2008). Scholarly influence in the field of management: A bibliometric analysis of the determinants of university and author impact in the management literature in the past quarter century. Journal of Management, 34(4), 641–720. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308319533
  51. Rosário, A., Raimundo, R., & Cruz, S. (2022). Sustainable entrepreneurship: A literature review. Sustainability, 14(9), 5556. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095556
  52. Saheb, T., Dehghani, M., & Saheb, T. (2022). Artificial intelligence for sustainable energy: A contextual topic modeling and content analysis. Sustainable Computing: Informatics and Systems, 35, 100699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.suscom.2022.100699
  53. Schaltegger, S., & Wagner, M. (2011). Sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainability innovation: categories and interactions. Business Strategy and the Environment, 20(4), 222–237. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.682
  54. Schaltegger, S., Beckmann, M., & Hockerts, K. (2018). Collaborative entrepreneurship for sustainability. Creating solutions in light of the UN sustainable development goals. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Venturing, 10(2), 131. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEV.2018.092709
  55. 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00426.x
  56. Terán-Yépez, E., Marín-Carrillo, G. M., Casado-Belmonte, M. del P., & Capobianco-Uriarte, M. de las M. (2020). Sustainable entrepreneurship: Review of its evolution and new trends. Journal of Cleaner Production, 252, 119742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119742
  57. UN Global Compact. (2024). Social sustainability. Erişim tarihi: 25 Nisan 2026, https://unglobalcompact.org/what-is-gc/our-work/social
  58. van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
  59. Venkataraman, S. (1997). The distinctive domain of entrepreneurship research. In J. A. Katz & R. H. Brockhaus (Eds.), Advances in entrepreneurship, firm emergence, and growth (Vol. 3, pp. 119–138). JAI Press.
  60. Venkataraman, S. (2001). Stakeholder value equilibration and the entrepreneurial process. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.275177
  61. Vinuesa, R., Azizpour, H., Leite, I., Balaam, M., Dignum, V., Domisch, S., Felländer, A., Langhans, S. D., Tegmark, M., & Fuso Nerini, F. (2020). The role of artificial intelligence in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. Nature Communications, 11(1), 233. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-14108-y
  62. Wang, Q., & Huang, H. (2025). Sustainable labor practices in the gig economy: Examining the role of algorithmic control on overwork through SEM and fsQCA. Journal of Cleaner Production, 531, 146815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2025.146815
  63. World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). (1987). Our common future. Erişim tarihi: 25 Nisan 2026, http://www.un-documents.net/our-common-future.pdf
  64. Xu, G., Hou, G., & Zhang, J. (2022). Digital sustainable entrepreneurship: A digital capability perspective through digital innovation orientation for social and environmental value creation. Sustainability, 14(18), 11222. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141811222
  65. Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629
  66. Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007