Yeşilin Tonları: Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Ekogirişimcilik Niyetlerine İlişkin Tipolojik Bir İnceleme

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı, işletme bölümü öğrencilerinin ekogirişimcilik niyetlerini belirleyen içsel ve dışsal etmenler arasındaki dinamik ilişkiyi incelemek ve özgün bir nitel tipoloji oluşturmaktır. Araştırmada, 30 işletme bölümü öğrencisiyle gerçekleştirilen derinlemesine görüşmeler İdeal Tip Analizi yöntemiyle çözümlenmiştir. Bu kapsamda katılımcılar; Pasif Bekleyenler, Engellenmiş Öncüler, Pragmatikler ve Aktif Öncüler olmak üzere dört tip altında sınıflandırılmıştır. Araştırmanın en çarpıcı bulgusu, katılımcıların büyük çoğunluğunun (n=27) ekosistem desteğini yetersiz bulmasına rağmen, önemli bir kısmının (n=14) yüksek niyete sahip olmasıdır. Bu durum, üniversite girişimcilik ekosisteminin niyet oluşturmaktan ziyade, mevcut niyeti eyleme dönüştürmekte yetersiz kaldığını göstermektedir. Analizler sonucunda; niyetin eyleme dönüşme sürecini kısıtlayan girişimci-öğrenci rol çatışması, garantici tutum ve kurumsal yetersizlik algısı gibi üretken mekanizmalar ortaya konulmuştur.

Keywords

• Ekogirişimcilik
• Yeşil girişimcilik
• Ekogirişimcilik niyeti
• Üniversite girişimcilik ekosistemi

Shades of Green: A Typological Investigation of Unıversity Students' Ecopreneurial Intentions

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to examine the dynamic relationship between internal and external factors determining the ecopreneurial intentions of business students and to develop a unique qualitative typology. In the study, in-depth interviews conducted with 30 business students were analyzed using the Ideal-Type Analysis method. Within this framework, participants were classified into four types: Passive Waiters, Inhibited Pioneers, Pragmatics, and Active Pioneers. The most striking finding of the research is that although the vast majority of participants (n=27) perceive the ecosystem support as inadequate, a significant portion (n=14) maintains high levels of intention. This situation indicates that the university entrepreneurial ecosystem is insufficient in transforming existing intentions into action rather than in generating the intention itself. As a result of the analyses, generative mechanisms that constrain the process of transforming intention into action, such as the entrepreneur-student role conflict, risk-averse attitude, and perception of institutional inadequacy, were identified.

Keywords

• Ecopreneurism
• Green entrepreneurship
• Ecopreneurial intention
• University entrepreneurial ecosystem

References

1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.
2. Aka, K. G. ve Enagogo, C. A. (2025). University support and entrepreneurial intention: does a dedicated entrepreneurship course matter?. The International Journal of Management Education, 23(3), 101273.
3. Alfarizi, M. ve Herdiansyah, H. (2024). Innate green propensity: precursors of ecopreneurial intentions among Indonesian education human resources university. The International Journal of Management Education, 22(2), 100977.
4. Anderson, A. R. (1998). Cultivating the garden of eden: Environmental entrepreneuring. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 11(2), 135-144.
5. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
6. Bennett, S. J. (1991). Eco-preneuring: The complete guide to small business opportunities from the environmental revolution. New York: Wiley.
7. Bergmann, H., Geissler, M., Hundt, C. ve Grave, B. (2018). The climate for entrepreneurship at higher education institutions. Research Policy, 47(4), 700-716.
8. Berle, G. (1991). The green entrepreneur: Business opportunities that can save the earth and make you money. Liberty Hall Press, Blue Ridge.

9. Bhaskar, R. (1989). Reclaiming reality: A critical introduction to contemporary philosophy. London: Verso.
10. Bhasuri Bhagyani, A. A., Gallage, N. ve Janadari, M. P. N. (2025). Universities as change agents for green entrepreneurship: role of support systems and self-efficacy in fostering sustainable ventures in Sri Lanka. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 18(2), 574-588.
11. Blue, J. (1990). Ecopreneuring: Managing for results. London: Scott Foresman.
12. Bonnett, C. ve Furnham, A. (1991). Who wants to be an entrepreneur? A study of adolescents interested in a young enterprise scheme. Journal of economic psychology, 12(3), 465-478.
13. Bryman, A. ve Bell, E. (2011). Business research methods (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
14. Brockhaus Sr, R. H. (1980). Risk taking propensity of entrepreneurs. Academy of management Journal, 23(3), 509-520.
15. Cohen, B. ve Winn, M. I. (2007). Market Imperfections, opportunity and sustainable entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(1), 29-49.
16. Ceresia, F. ve Mendola, C. (2019). The effects of corruption in entrepreneurial ecosystems on entrepreneurial intentions. Administrative Sciences, 9(4), 88.
17. Creswell, J.W. ve J.D. Creswell (2018). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. 5th Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
18. del Brío González, J. Á., Aranda, M. M. ve Barba-Sánchez, V. (2022). Environmental awareness and the entrepreneurial intention in university students: Direct and mediating effects. The International Journal of Management Education, 20(3), 100719.
19. Doğan, S., Yıldırım Söylemez, E. ve Kayabaşı, A. (2020). Are we as green as we suppose to be? Importance-performance analysis of turkish young consumers’ green consumption behaviour, Tüketici ve Tüketim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 12(2), 455-486.
20. Donaldson, L. (1996). For cartenianism: Against organizational types and quantum jumps. L. Donaldson (Ed.), For positivist organization theory: Providing the hard core içinde (ss. 108-129). Londra: Sage.
21. Dude, S. A. ve Mulyani, H. (2024). The ınfluence of personality traits and university green entrepreneurial support on students green entrepreneurial ıntentions. Dinamika Pendidikan, 19(1), 17–30. doi: 10.15294/dp.v19i1.8455
22. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. (2025). Market assessment findings – Türkiye (Youth in Business Programme). CCX.
23. Faget, M.ve Schaaper, J. (2026). International ecopreneurship through a paradox lens: eco-SME decision-makers’ sensemaking and responses to internationalization tensions. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 1-24. doi: 10.1108/cpoib-11-2024-0143
24. Ghodbane, A. ve Alwehabie, A. (2023). Academic entrepreneurial support, social capital, and green entrepreneurial intention: Does psychological capital matter for young saudi graduates? Sustainability. 15(15), 11827. doi: 10.3390/su151511827
25. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.
26. Henderson, R. ve Robertson, M. (2000). Who wants to be an entrepreneur? Young adult attitudes to entrepreneurship as a career. Career Development International, 5(6), 279-287.
27. Hirsch, P., Michaels, S. ve Friedman, R. (1987). "Dirty hands" versus" clean models": Is sociology in danger of being seduced by economics?. Theory and Society, 16(3), 317-336.
28. Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. McGraw-Hill.
29. Isaak, R. (1998). Green logic – ecopreneurship, theory and ethics. ABD: Greenleaf Publishing.
30. Isenberg, D. (2011, Mayıs). The entrepreneurship ecosystem strategy as a new paradigm for economic policy: Principles for cultivating entrepreneurship. Institute of International and European Affairs’ta sunulan davetli sunum, Dublin, İrlanda. Erişim adresi: https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/the-entrepreneurship-ecosystem-strategy-for-economic-growth-policy-iiea-dublin-2011-1/24840682
31. aved, C., Ilyas, A., Shafi Z., Awan, E. ve Fatima, E. (2025). Nurturing the architects of a sustainable future: The influence of university ecosystems on entrepreneurial ıntentions. Physical Education, Health and Social Sciences, 3(3), 361–376.
32. Katz, J. ve Gartner, W. B. (1988). Properties of emerging organizations. Academy of Management Review, 13(3), 429-441.
33. Kuckertz, A. (2019). Let's take the entrepreneurial ecosystem metaphor seriously!. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 11, e00124.
34. Krueger Jr, N. F. (2007). What lies beneath? The experiential essence of entrepreneurial thinking. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(1), 123-138.
35. Lee, S. M., Chang, D. ve Lim, S. B. (2005). Impact of entrepreneurship education: A comparative study of the US and Korea. The International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 1(1), 27-43.
36. Lin, C.-L., Chen, M.-Y., Lai, C.-H. ve Zhang, Z. (2024). The impact of perceived entrepreneurial environment on college students’ entrepreneurial intention: The chain mediating roles of achievement motivation and self-efficacy. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1364598.
37. Liñán, F. ve Chen, Y. (2009). Development and cross–cultural application of a specific ınstrument to measure entrepreneurial ıntentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 593–617.
38. Lincoln, Y.S. and E.G. Guba (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
39. Lüthje, C. ve Franke, N. (2003). The ‘making’of an entrepreneur: testing a model of entrepreneurial intent among engineering students at MIT. RveD Management, 33(2), 135-147.
40. Maritz, A., Nguyen, Q. ve Ivanov, S. (2022). Student entrepreneurship ecosystems at Australian higher education institutions, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 29(6), 940-957.
41. McQuillan, D. ve Gavigan, S. (2025). The impact of climate entrepreneurship education in higher education institutions: a university-wide climate entrepreneurship programme. Irish Journal of Management, 43(1), 39-58. doi: 10.2478/ijm-2024-0013.
42. Oftedal, E. M., Iakovleva, T. A. ve Foss, L. (2018). University context matter. Education +Training, 60(7/8), 873–890. doi: 10.1108/ET-06-2016-0098.
43. Özen, Ş. (2002). Bağlam, aktör, söylem ve kurumsal değişim: Türkiye’de toplam kalite yönetiminin yayılım süreci. Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(1), 47-90.
44. Peterman, N. E. ve Kennedy, J. (2003). Enterprise education: Influencing students’ perceptions of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory And Practice, 28(2), 129-144.
45. Rajpal, M. ve Singh, B. (2023). How to drive sustainable entrepreneurial intentions: Unraveling the nexus of entrepreneurship education ecosystem, attitude and orientation. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 31(3), 1705-1721.
46. Rasmussen, E. A. ve Sørheim, R. (2006). Action-based entrepreneurship education. Technovation, 26(2), 185-194.
47. Safitri, C., Mulyadi, H., Sutarni, N. ve Ramdhany, M. A. (2024). Fostering green entrepreneurial intentions: The role of educational environments in shaping student entrepreneurial aspirations. Jurnal Ekonomi Pendidikan Dan Kewirausahaan, 12(2), 347-366.
48. Samuel, A., Bull, M. ve White, G. R. T. (2026). Exploring ecopreneurship and value creation: a case study of Forest Green Rovers Football Club. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 32(2), 505-528.
49. Schaltegger, S. (2002). A framework for ecopreneurship. Greener Management International, 38, 45-58.
50. Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
51. Sianipar, M. Y., Welly, Y. ve Ferary, D. (2025). Young talent ecopreneurship awareness model: Personal character, digital skills, and universities shaping ecopreneurial intention. Ilomata International Journal of Management, 6(3), 1094–1108.
52. Stam, E. (2018). Measuring entrepreneurial ecosystems. Entrepreneurial ecosystems içinde (ss. 173-197). Springer.
53. tam, E. ve Van de Ven, A. (2021). Entrepreneurial ecosystem elements. Small Business Economics, 56(2), 809-832.
54. Stapley, E., O'Keeffe, S. ve Midgley, N. (2022). developing typologies in qualitative research: The use of ıdeal-type analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21, 16094069221100633. doi: 10.1177/16094069221100633
55. Thompson, E. R. (2009). Individual entrepreneurial intent: Construct clarification and development of an internationally reliable metric. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 669-694.
56. Türker, D. ve Sönmez Selçuk, S. (2009). Which factors affect entrepreneurial intention of university students?. Journal of European Industrial Training, 33(2), 142-159.
57. Walley, E. E. ve Taylor, D. W. (2002). Opportunists, champions, mavericks?A typology of green entrepreneurs. Greener Management International, 38, 31-43.
58. Wang, C. K. ve Wong, P. K. (2004). Entrepreneurial interest of university students in Singapore. Technovation, 24(2), 163-172.
59. Yi, G. (2021). From green entrepreneurial intentions to green entrepreneurial behaviors: The role of university entrepreneurial support and external institutional support. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 17(2), 963-979.