Comparative comparison of the view on the environment and rural entrepreneurship in Iran and the world with emphasis on scientific research

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Department of Geography, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran

2 Department of Geography and Rural Planning, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran

10.22059/jed.2026.408412.654630

Abstract

ABSTRACT




Objective: In recent years, rural entrepreneurship have emerged as a critical mechanism for addressing economic and social challenges in rural areas. These enterprises serve as primary drivers of employment generation, income growth, and improved living conditions for rural populations while functioning as engines of sustainable development. However, their expansion is invariably accompanied by environmental challenges. The direct dependence of these activities on natural resources heightens the vulnerability of rural ecosystems, amplifying both economic and social consequences. Failure to integrate environmental considerations can lead to resource degradation, loss of biodiversity, and threats to rural ecosystems. Accordingly, adherence to sustainability principles, environmental ethics, and corporate social responsibility not only mitigates negative impacts but also fosters long-term economic growth and enhanced competitiveness. Nevertheless, compliance with environmental requirements often raises production costs and diminishes entrepreneurial motivation. Success in this domain therefore demands an integrated approach combining supportive policies, education and awareness-raising, local community participation, and effective regulatory frameworks. Using a scientometric approach, this study investigates the ethical dimensions and legal requirements of rural entrepreneurship, elucidating similarities and differences between domestic (Iranian) and international approaches.
Method: This study adopts a Scientific research approach combined with a systematic qualitative–descriptive–analytical method. Data were collected from Persian- and English-language scholarly articles published between 2010 and 2025. Reputable national and international databases were searched using keywords related to rural entrepreneurship, rural business, environmental considerations, and sustainable development. A three-stage screening process was applied: (1) title and abstract review, (2) full-text reading, and (3) methodological quality assessment. Inclusion criteria comprised direct relevance to the topic, explicit focus on environmental aspects, and use of rigorous scientific methods; low-quality or off-topic papers were excluded. Ultimately, 29 articles (7 Persian and 22 English) were selected from an initial pool of 61. Data analysis was performed using VOSviewer software, encompassing co-occurrence analysis of keywords, author collaboration networks, and thematic clustering in the domains of environmental impacts, sustainability solutions, policy-making, and social responsibility. This approach enabled systematic comparison of domestic and international strategies and facilitated the development of a hybrid model to balance rural entrepreneurship development with environmental protection.
Results: The analysis firmly indicates that neither strict hard regulatory mandates nor soft voluntary ethical pledges alone can provide fully comprehensive, sustainable, and effective environmental management solutions for rural entrepreneurship.Hard approaches, characterized by formal regulations and enforcement mechanisms, demonstrate considerable effectiveness in reducing pollution, with success rates ranging from 65% to 75%, and offer rapid, measurable outcomes (Zhu & Sarkis, 2004; Dechezleprêtre & Sato, 2017). However, these approaches often impose substantial financial burdens on small-scale rural enterprises, frequently exceeding 10% of their annual budgets. Moreover, their effectiveness is significantly constrained in regions with weak institutional capacity and limited monitoring infrastructure, leading to inconsistent implementation. Conversely, soft approaches emphasize education, awareness-raising, and the cultivation of intrinsic motivation among stakeholders. These strategies achieve relatively high voluntary participation rates (approximately 72–75%) and contribute to notable energy savings of around 30%. In addition, they play a critical role in fostering long-term cultural transformation, strengthening social capital, and enhancing community trust (Wang et al., 2018; Hepburn, 2010). Nevertheless, their success largely depends on pre-existing levels of environmental literacy, as well as the availability of institutional support and facilitation mechanisms. A longitudinal examination of research trends reveals divergent trajectories between Iranian and international scholarship. Between 2010 and 2015, Persian-language studies in Iran predominantly focused on ethical awareness and managerial responsibility, whereas global research emphasized regulatory frameworks, corporate social responsibility (CSR), and technological innovation influenced by international agreements. During the 2015–2020 period, Iranian research shifted toward reinforcing national and local regulations, although implementation gaps remained evident. In contrast, international studies increasingly prioritized sustainable development, public participation, and green technologies. From 2020 to 2025, Iranian publications began integrating individual ethics, emerging technologies, and supportive legislation, while global scholarship advanced toward cross-border collaboration and stricter compliance regimes. These differences underscore structural variations in institutional capacity, enforcement effectiveness, and levels of integration into the global environmental governance system.
Conclusion: The most effective strategy is a context-sensitive hybrid model that strategically combines both approaches: initial investment in soft measures to build awareness and cultural readiness, followed by gradual, regionally tailored regulatory enforcement supported by financial and technical assistance. Local communities must be positioned as genuine partners in decision-making and implementation.   To advance environmental performance in Iran’s rural sector, policymakers must strengthen legislation, enhance transparency and reporting, promote CSR, incentivize technological innovation, deepen international cooperation, and sustain public education and civil-society engagement.
Keywords: rural entrepreneurship, Environmental Considerations, Scientific research, Sustainable Development, VOSviewer
 

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

Amalia, I. N., & Irwanto, I. (2025). Trends and Development of Research on Flipped Classroom in Education: A Bibliometric Analysis from 2012 to 2024. Journal of Computers for Science and Mathematics Learning, 2(2), 74-98. DOI: 10.70232/jcsml.v2i2.38
Ansari, B., Mirdamadi, S. M., Zand, A., & Arfaee, M. (2013). Sustainable entrepreneurship in rural areas.  Research Journal of Environmental and Earth Sciences, 5(1), 26–31. https:// doi:10.19026/rjees.5.5635
Azmi, A., Rahmani, H., & Salehi, S. (2019). Investigating the causes and factors affecting the improvement of rural housing quality (Case study: Oraman District, Sarvabad County).  Journal of Research and Rural Planning, 8(4), 49–68 (in persian).Investigating the Causes and Factors affecting the Improvement ofRural Housing Quality(Case Study: Oraman District, Sarvabad County)
Bayne, K., Wreford, A., Edwards, P., & Renwick, A. (2021). Towards a bioeconomic vision for New Zealand–Unlocking barriers to enable new pathways and trajectories. New biotechnology, 60, 138-145. DOI: 10.1016/j.nbt.2020.09.004
Candelario-Moreno, C., & Sánchez-Hernández, M. I. (2024). Redefining rural entrepreneurship: The impact of business ecosystems on the success of rural businesses in Extremadura, Spain.  Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, 20(2), 36–52. https://doi.org/10.7341/20242022
Carmine, S., & De Marchi, V. (2023). Reviewing paradox theory in corporate sustainability toward a systems perspective.  Journal of Business Ethics, 184(1), 139–158. https:// doi: 10.1007/s10551-022-05112-2
Contreras, R., Puertas, R., & Martinez-Gomez, V. (2025). Bibliometric analysis of emerging trends and future prospects in sustainable agriculture. Discover Sustainability, 6(1), 951. DOI: 10.1007/s43621-025-01901-7
Darvari, Seyedeh Zahra, Jamshidi, Omid, & Ghorbani Piralidehi. (2024). Designing a sustainable development model for rural entrepreneurship (Case study: coastal villages of Sari and Miandroud counties). Entrepreneurship Strategies in Agriculture, 11(2), 54-73.‎ (in persian) https://doi: 10.22059/jrd.2025.397752.668932 (in Persian)
De Andrade Neto, C. A., de Oliveira Costa, R., Sarmento, M. R., Santos, L. X., de Andrade, A. B. A., & Rodrigues, M. H. B. S. (2025). Environmental sustainability in rural businesses in Brazil.  Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental, 19(5), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v19n5-022
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. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2005.09.003
Dechezleprêtre, A., & Sato, M. (2017). The impacts of environmental regulations on competitiveness.  Review of Environmental Economics and Policy. https:// doi: 10.1093/reep/rex013
Dhewanto, W., Ratnaningtyas, S., Permatasari, A., Anggadwita, G., & Prasetio, E. A. (2020). Rural entrepreneurship: Towards collaborative participative models for economic sustainability.  Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 8(1), 705. https:// https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2020.8.1(48)
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101
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
Guidelines for advancing theory and practice through bibliometric research. Journal of Business Research, 148, 101–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
Hanif, S., Nawaz, M. A., Fazal, S., & Ibraheem, R. (2022). Role of natural resources and eco-innovations in determination of the environmental quality of Pakistan: evidence through vector autoregressive (VAR) estimation.  iRASD Journal of Economics, 4(1), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.52131/joe.2022.0401.0067
Harris, J. M., & Roach, B. (2016).  Environmental and natural resource economics: A contemporary approach. Routledge. (in persian) https://www.sid.ir/paper/94891/fa
Hashemi Niloufar. (2010). The role of ecotourism in sustainable rural development.
Hepburn, C. (2010). Environmental policy, government, and the market.  Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 26(2), 117–136. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grq016
Hiwale, S. D.  Environmental Issues in Rural Development: Challenges and Solutions. https:// doi: 10.61410/had.v20i1.233
Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing Cultures: The Hofstede Model in Context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014
Idrees, F., & Hassan, H. (2019). Entrepreneurships Role in Enhancing the Productivity and Sustainability of Pakistan.  Global Regional Review, 4(1), 376–383. https://h10.31703/grr.2019(IV-I).40
Imani, B., & Madani, J. (2024). Green Rural Tourism: Investigating the Factors Influencing the Development of Sustainable and Environmentally Preserver Rural Tourism. Journal of Environmental Science Studies, 8(4), 7305-7317.ISO. (2010). ISO 26000: Guidance on social responsibility. https://doi: 10.22034/jess.2023.394087.2010  (in Persian)
ISO. (2010). ISO 26000: Guidance on social responsibility. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization. https://www.iso.org/standard/42546.html htpps:// doi: 10.22004/ag.econ.253743
Kirchherr, J., Reike, D., & Hekkert, M. (2017). Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions.  Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 127, 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005
Korsgaard, S., Gartner, W. B., Dentoni, D., Tillmar, M., & Gaddefors, J. (2025). Rural entrepreneurship: foundations and future directions during a time of transformation. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 37(9-10), 1085–1101. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2025.2532618
Korsgaard, S., Müller, S., & Tanvig, H. W. (2015). Rural entrepreneurship or entrepreneurship in the rural–between place and space.  International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 21(1), 5–26. https:// doi: 10.1108/IJEBR-11-2013-0205
Li, Y., Fedosenko, A., & Murzin, A. (2023). Challenges in implementing the rural revitalization strategy (Chinese example). In  E3S Web of Conferences  (Vol. 389, p. 03006). EDP Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202338903006
Liu, L., Liu, B., Song, W., & Yu, H. (2023). The relationship between rural sustainability and land use: a bibliometric review.  Land, 12(8), 1617. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12081617
Mair, J., & Marti, I. (2009). Entrepreneurship in and around institutional voids: A case study from Bangladesh. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(5), 419–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.04.006
Milne, M. J., & Gray, R. (2013). W(h)ither ecology? The triple bottom line, the global reporting initiative, and corporate sustainability reporting.  Journal of Business Ethics, 118(1), 13–29. (pp. 15–18). https:// doi: 10.1007/s10551-012-1543-8
Mol, A. P. J., & Sonnenfeld, D. A. (2014). Ecological modernisation around the world: Perspectives and critical debates.  Environmental Politics, 9(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.2307/3594110
Mukherjee, D., Lim, W. M., Kumar, S., & Donthu, N. (2022).
NICRE (2023) Rural SMEs and the environment, National Innovation Centre for Rural Enterprise, State of Rural Enterprise Report No 5. https://nicre.co.uk/media/lfynn1m5/nicre-state-of-rural-enterprise-report-no-5-december-2023-rural-smes-and-the-environment.pdf
Ostrom, E. (2009). A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems.  Science, 325(5939), 419–422. (pp. 420–422). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1172133
Paschoaleto, R. D. L., & Martínez-Zarzoso, I. (2024). Environmental regulations and firms’ integration in global markets: Using a new environmental performance index.  Empirica, 51(3), 829–876. https://DOI: 10.1007/s10663-024-09612-4
Roche, C., Wall, P. J., & Lewis, D. (2023). Ethics and diversity in artificial intelligence policies, strategies and initiatives.  AI and Ethics, 3(4), 1095–1115. https:// doi: 10.1007/s43681-022-00218-9
Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities (4th ed.). Sage Publications. DOI:10.22439/cjas.v32i2.4764
Shao, Q., Jiang, C., Li, G., & Xie, G. (2024). Influencing Factors of Sustainable Rural Entrepreneurship: A Four-Dimensional Evaluation System Encompassing Entrepreneurs, Economy, Society, and Environment.  Systems, 12(10). https://DOI: 10.3390/systems12100387
Sheikhnejad, Y., & Yigitcanlar, T. (2020). Scientific landscape of sustainable urban and rural areas research: A systematic scientometric analysis. Sustainability, 12(4), 1293. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041293
Shirkhani, & Karimi. (2019). Development of environmental entrepreneurship with emphasis on the role of rural small and micro businesses. Entrepreneurship Studies and Sustainable Agricultural Development, 5(4), 1-26. https://doi: 10.22069/jead.2020.15931.1354 (in Persian)
SHRI, K. R. (2024). The Growth Engine of Rural Bihar: How MSMEs Shape Livelihoods and Economic Progress.  INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL, 11(6), 1023–1034. https://doi.org/10.32628/IJSRST25121244
Skjærseth, J. B., Stokke, O. S., & Wettestad, J. (2006). Soft law, hard law, and effective implementation of international environmental norms.  Global Environmental Politics, 6(3), 104–120. https:// doi: 10.1162/glep.2006.6.3.104
Soleimani, Atiyeh, Yaghoubi Farani, & Karimi. (2021). Designing a sustainable entrepreneurship development model in businesses and jobs in rural areas of Hamadan. Quarterly Journal of Spatial Economics and Rural Development, 10(36), 49-78. (in persian) https://www.magiran.com/p2313924 ‎
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. DOI: 10.2307/258788
Tampubolon, T., Yanti, J., Hutahaean, J., & Siregar, G. P. (2024, November). Spatio-Temporal Analysis of Susceptibility Hazardous and Risk Mapping in Post-2023 Simangulampe Devastating Flood. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 2908, No. 1, p. 012005). IOP Publishing. DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/2908/1/012005
Tuitjer, G., & Thompson, N. A. (2025). Rural entrepreneurship as-practice: a framework for research beyond stereotypical notions of entrepreneurial agency and contextual constraints.  Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2025.2475890
UN General Assembly. (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. New York: United Nations. https://mentorsinternational.org
UNEP. (2011). Towards a Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme. https://www.unep.org/resources/report/towards-green-economy-pathways-sustainable-development-and-poverty-eradication-10
UNFCCC. (2015). The Paris Agreement. Bonn: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement
United Nations Environment Programme. International Resource Panel; United Nations Environment Programme. Sustainable Consumption & Production Branch. (2011).  Decoupling natural resource use and environmental impacts from economic growth. UNEP/Earthprint. https://www.unep.org/resources/report/decoupling-natural-resource-use-and-environmental-impacts-economic-growth
Wesseler, J., & Zhu, M. (2024). The contribution of the bioeconomy to sustainable development. Engineering, 43, 25-27 http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4788893
Wielgórka, D. (2016). Environmental management in the aspect of sustainable development in micro-, small-, and medium-sized enterprises.  Desalination and Water Treatment, 57(3), 982–992. https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2015.1017322
Zhu, Q., & Sarkis, J. (2004). Relationships between operational practices and performance among early adopters of green supply chain management practices in Chinese manufacturing enterprises.  Journal of Operations Management, 22(3), 265–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOM.2004.01.005
Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629
Journal of Entrepreneurship Development
Volume 19, Issue 2
July 2026
Pages 155-185

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics