مؤلفه‌های تبیین‌کننده کارآفرینی بومی از منظر مناطق مختلف ایران

نوع مقاله : پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری، دانشگاه مازندران، بابلسر، ایران

2 استاد، دانشگاه مازندران، بابلسر، ایران

3 دانش آموخته دکتری، دانشگاه مازندران، بابلسر، ایران

چکیده

مطالعات نظام‌های نوآوری، استفاده از سیاست‌های یکسان برای طراحی و هدایت مسیر توسعه مبتنی بر نوآوری را مردود دانسته و توجه خاص به ویژگی‌های مختلف مؤثر بر نوآوری هر منطقه را ضروری می‌دانند. ایران با داشتن مناطق و اقلیم‌های متنوع برای سیاست‌گذاری اقتصادی و اجتماعی، باید به شناسایی ظرفیت‌ها و شرایط هر منطقه اقدام کند. هدف از این پژوهش تبیین متغیرهای کارآفرینی بومی با توجه به استعداد مناطق مختلف کشور ایران با استفاده از رویکرد فراترکیب است. برای انجام این پژوهش کلیه پژوهش‌های کارآفرینی بومی بین سال‌های 1385 تا 1399 مورد بررسی قرار گرفت و پس از انجام گام‌های فرآیند فراترکیب در نهایت تعداد 91 مقاله انتخاب ‌شده و مورد بررسی قرار گرفت. پس از تحلیل داده‌ها، مؤلفه‌های کارآفرینی هنری، کارآفرینی گردشگری، کارآفرینی روستایی، کارآفرینی زنان، کارآفرینی فرهنگی، کارآفرینی منطقه‌ای، کارآفرینی پایدار، کارآفرینی سنتی، کارآفرینی دانشی، کارآفرینی دینی، کارآفرینی سبز کارآفرینی پزشکی و کارآفرینی کشاورزی به‌ عنوان مؤلفه‌های تبیین‌کننده کارآفرینی بومی در مناطق ایران شناسایی شدند و سه مؤلفه کارآفرینی روستایی (26%)؛ کارآفرینی گردشگری (18%) و کارآفرینی فرهنگی (12%) دارای بالاترین نرخ تکرار در میان موضوعات پژوهش‌های مورد نظر بودند. با توجه به دسته‌بندی مناطق مشخص شد که بیشترین تعداد مقالات با موضوع کارآفرینی بومی استان‌های تهران، اصفهان، زنجان، بوشهر و مازندران بوده است که جزو مناطق موفق در سیستم‌های نوآوری کشور محسوب می‌شوند. لذا با توجه به استعدادهای کارآفرینانه بومی هر منطقه و خلأها و کمبودهای پیش روی این ظرفیت‌ها، در درجه اول الزامات قانونی و دستگاهی در چارچوب مناطق کشور برای انتفاع ساکنین مناطق از این فرصت‌ها و سپس کل کشور مدون شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Explanatory components of indigenous entrepreneurship from the perspective of different regions of Iran

نویسندگان [English]

  • Zohre Nikrouy 1
  • Hassanali Aghajani 2
  • Soma Rahmani 3
1 PhD Student, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran
2 Professor, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran
3 PhD Graduated, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran
چکیده [English]

   IntroductionNumerous studies have shown that innovation and entrepreneurship play a key role in different aspects including economic development, quality of life, and competitiveness on a global scale. Despite of similar parts that the regions have, their potentials, territorial assets, cultures and ways of thinking are diverse that guides them in choosing their unique development path. In this regard, studies of innovation systems reject the use of the same policies to design and guide the path of innovation-based development and consider it necessary to pay special attention to the different characteristics affecting innovation in each region.
Previous studies of regional development have not dealt with the impact of social factors on regional innovation behavior due to its geographical breadth and historical depth, the existence of different ethnic groups with different cultures and at the same time centralized policy-making. Therefore, the study of entrepreneurship from a local perspective that shows the cultures, values, traditions, views and potentials of each region in Iran can provide a useful approach to formulate political and legal requirements to pave the correct way for effective use of the entrepreneurship concept based on culture and especial social structure based on every region. Entrepreneurship in the cultural sector needs more attention and support.
   Methodology: The most important reasons are due to the requirements of production and consumption of cultural goods, prevention of foreign culture spread in country, and the high potential of cultural industries to develop and create employment. Considering the cultural diversity in our country, it is very important to identify opportunities and potential talents in the field of local businesses in each specific region of the country and in such a context, the capacities and capabilities of the local subcultures of Iranian society and the role they can play in the process of local and national development should be discussed. Since Iran has different regions and climates with various cultural, social, geographical, etc. so it is necessary to identify the potentials and conditions of each region for economic and social policy-making.
 Regarding the urgent need to address the aforementioned challenges, this study conducted. The purpose of this study is to explain the variables of local entrepreneurship according to the potentials of different regions of Iran using a Meta-Synthesis Review. To conduct this research, all researches related to local entrepreneurship between 2006 and 2020 were reviewed. Finally, 91 articles were selected and reviewed.
   Results ana Discussion: We did the analyze of dates according to the steps presented by Barroso and Sandlowski in seven steps, 1. Defining the objectives of the research; 2. Systematic study of background; 3. Searching and selecting appropriate researches; 4. Information extraction; 5. Analysis and composition of findings from qualitative studies; 6. Quality control and 7. Findings, . In order to use newer sources, research related to the research topic was considered in the period 2006 to 2020. After reviewing the titles and abstracts of the researches, 263 related researches were selected. After reviewing the research abstract, 152 articles that had the most similarity and relevance to the research topic were selected.
In this study, to validate the proposed model from the point of view of the focus group (experts), including two faculty members of Mazandaran University with entrepreneurial expertise and two PhD graduates in policy-making, was used in a systematic design and using the opinion. Experts in this field and making repeated corrections the validity of the research was reviewed and approved. In other words, to ensure the validity of the results with specific criteria of qualitative research, the necessary studies including acceptability and verification were performed. To increase the acceptance, the review method was used by experts and some experts in this field. For verification, in the final stage of the obtained classes, several experts were sent to review and confirm the submission and suggested points.
Then, to evaluate the quality, with the help of selected experts, the 50-point scale of the Critical Assessment Skills Program was used and the researches were reviewed. The range of scores was considered as follows: Studies with a total score between 40 and 50 were considered excellent, 31 to 40 were very good, 21 to 30 were moderate, 11 to 20 were poor, and 0 to 10 were very poor. At this stage, 61 articles were deleted for scoring less than 30, and finally 91 articles were reviewed. In the present study, all the factors extracted through library studies were considered as a component (code). The information of each article (journal name, year of publication, authors' names, key variables, research result, proposed solutions and the province of the research) was entered in a table and a code (letter A and one number) was assigned to each research. Because some of the research was conducted in a specific city and village and the task of surveying spatial information was difficult, the province of that particular village or city was used to match the regions. Then, table (2) was prepared for presentation in this research. In the first column, the general classification of key indicators of local entrepreneurship extracted from research, in the second column, the concepts extracted from each research and in the third column, the codes related to related research are examined. Has been obtained and in front of each code, the province related to the research is listed.
   Conclusion: The results showed the 12 components of local entrepreneurship, including: artistic entrepreneurship, tourism entrepreneurship, rural entrepreneurship, women entrepreneurship, cultural entrepreneurship, regional entrepreneurship, sustainable entrepreneurship, traditional entrepreneurship, Wisely entrepreneurship, religious entrepreneurship, green entrepreneurship, medical entrepreneurship, and agricultural entrepreneurship were identified as explanatory components. Three components of rural entrepreneurship (26%); Tourism entrepreneurship (18%) and cultural entrepreneurship (12%) had the highest repetition rates among the research topics. According to the classification of regions, it was found that the highest number of articles on local entrepreneurship was related to the provinces of Tehran, Isfahan, Zanjan, Bushehr, and Mazandaran, which are among the most successful regions in the country's innovation systems.
 It is suggested that legal and systemic requirements and policies should be formulated to take advantage of these opportunities by both the local of the regions, and the whole country according to the local entrepreneurial potentials, and the gaps and shortcomings ahead of these potentials in each region. It is suggested that the status of each component of local entrepreneurship in the macro and sectoral policies of relevant institutions should be examined. One of the most important tools is the smart specialization strategy. Intelligent specialization is one of the newest regional development strategies which states that each region should set specific priorities according to the potential of the region, which is most appropriate in order to stimulate entrepreneurial culture and promote innovation in that region. It is suggested that future research using similar tools or instruments identify the local entrepreneurial priorities of each region.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Local entrepreneurship
  • Meta synthesis
  • Regional development
  1. Aageson, T. (2009). The economic impact of art and cultural enterprises on local economics and the role of the cultural entrepreneur, Silver City, New Mexico, 12(1), 18-21.
  2. Abdoli, Gh. (2009). Estimation of social discount rate for Iran. Economic Research publication, 9(3), 135-156. [In Persian]
  3. Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. (2005). The rise of Europe: Atlantic trade, institutional change, and economic growth, American Economic Review 95, 46–579.
  4. Afrough, Mohammad (2019) an Introduction to Indigenous Entrepreneurship in the Art of Felt and Felt Work in Shahrekord, Journal of Research in Arts and Humanitie (15), 33-46. [In Persian]
  5. Ahmadi, S., Kouhestani, H., Yadavar, H., & Hussein, A. (2020). Analysis of effective factors on the success of rural women entrepreneurship in Kurdistan province. Geographical Space, 20(70), 167-187. [In Persian]
  6. Ahmadpour Dariani, M., & Moghimi, S.M. (2013). Fundamentals of Entrepreneur. Tehran: Negah Danesh Publications. [In Persian]
  7. Ali Ahmadi, H. (2015). The impact of religion on entrepreneurship in Iran (Field Study of Analysis and Application of Islamic Grammatical Standards in Entrepreneurship), Fourth International Conference on Accounting and Management and the First Conference on Entrepreneurship and Open Innovation, Tehran. [In Persian]
  8. Alizad, A., & Bahrami, S. (2015). The role of rural women in creating green business (Case Study of Qaleh Ghafe Bala and Kafsh Mahalla Villages in Golestan Province). Journal of Social Work, 2 (7), 121-150. [In Persian]
  9. Amiri, P., Ehsanifar, T., & Naderi, Rostami, F. (2016). Provide a conceptual model to investigate the impact of agricultural tourism on the development of rural entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship in Agriculture, 3(1), 1-15. [In Persian]
  10. Andersson, M., & Larsson, J. P. (2016). Local entrepreneurship clusters in cities. Journal of Economic Geography, 16(1), 39-66.68
  11. Baratloo, F. (2007). Cultural entrepreneurship: messages for localization; Political-Economic Information, 238
  12. Benita, F., & Urzua, C. (2017). Efficient creativity in Mexican metropolitan areas. Journal of Economic Modeling, 12 (1), 1–9.
  13. Bosma, Niels, et al (2021). Global Report Sponsor, Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2020/2021 Global Report. Published by the Global Entrepreneurship Research Association, London Business School.
  14. Bygrave, W.D. (1989). The entrepreneurship paradigm: A philosophical look at its research methodologies, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 14 (1), 7–26.
  15. Chell, E. (2001). Entrepreneurship: Globalization, Innovation and Development, London: Thomson Learning.
  16. Chivu, L. (2019). Local entrepreneurship and social services in Romania. Territorial analysis. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 25(2), 79-86.
  17. Cole, A.H. (1942). Entrepreneurship as an area of ​​research’, Journal of Economic History Supplement, 2, 118–26.5
  18. Curry, J. A., Donker, H., & Michel, P. (2016). Social entrepreneurship and indigenous people. Journal of Co-operative organization and management, 4 (2), 108-115
  19. Danaei Fard, H., Alwani, M., & Azar, Adel (2022). Qualitative research methodology in management: a comprehensive approach Authors, Saffar Pub. [In Persian]
  20. Ehsanifar, T., Rostami Ghobadi, F., Naderi, K., & Khosh Khoy, Sh. (2019). Measuring the level of sustainability in entrepreneurial agricultural activities in Kermanshah province. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 21 (6), 243-256. [In Persian]
  21. Fatou, J. (2011). Reconsidering cultural entrepreneurship: hip hop music economy and social change in Senegal, francophone West Africa. London school of economics and political science
  22. Filion, L.J. (1997). The champ of entrepreneurship: history, evolution and trends. Notes de lecture’, Revue Internationale P.M.E., 10 (2), 129–72.
  23. Gartner, W.B. (1990). What are we talking about when we talk about entrepreneurship?’ Journal of Business Venturing, 5 (1), 15–29.
  24. Gehman, J., & Francois S. J. (2017). Cultural entrepreneurship: from making culture to cultural making. Journal of Innovation & management, 23, 760-781.
  25. Ghadiri, M., Matiei Langroudi, M., Zali, S. H., & Gholami, A. (2019). Spatial zoning the comparative advantage of rural entrepreneurship and its effective factors (case study of Parsabad city). Rural Research, 10 (1), 130-145. [In Persian]
  26. https://rc.majlis.ir
  27. https://www.mcls.gov.ir
  28. Husseiniya, Gh. H., & Fallahi, H. (2017). Factors affecting the development of rural entrepreneurship (study sample: rural areas of Manojan city). Rural Research, 8 (1), 22-37. [In Persian]
  29. Ismaili, M. R., & Habibi, M. (2016). Designing a strategic handicraft marketing model based on data theory. Modern Marketing Research, 7 (2), 93-114. [In Persian]
  30. Julien, P.A. (2007) Regional Entrepreneurship and Knowledge Economy. English Cheltenham, UK; Northampton.
  31. Karimzadeh Fayazi, M., & Mirkazehi Rigi, F. (2017). Barriers to Baloch women's participation in economic and social activities. Scientific Journal of Women and Culture, 8 (30), 59-73. [In Persian]
  32. Kharazian Brotherhood, M., & Shahbazi, M. M. (2017) Evaluating the effective cultural dimensions in strategic transformation towards entrepreneurial behavior. Quarterly Journal of Strategic Management Studies, 8 (29), 65-92. [In Persian]
  33. Khosravi Pour, B., & Pourjavid, S. (2016). Analysis of factors affecting entrepreneurial growth in small business (SME) of Rural Women in West Islamabad, Using Content Analysis Technique. Rural Development Strategies, 4 (3), 299-315. [In Persian]
  34. Khosravi, K., & Majidi, D. (2019). The effect of entrepreneurial desire on the behavior of start-ups with a moderating role in national culture. Marketing Management, 14 (45), 29-40. [In Persian]
  35. Kirzner, I.M. (1997). Entrepreneurial discovery and the competitive market Process: An Austrian approach. Journal of Economic Literature, 35: 60-85.
  36. Klamer, A. (2011). Cultural Entrepreneurship. The Review of Austrian Economics, 24 (2), 141-156.
  37. Kwil, I., Piwowar-Sulej, K., & Krzywonos, M. (2020). Local entrepreneurship in the context of food production, a review. Sustainability, 12(1), 424.
  38. Lindsay, N. (2005). Toward a cultural model of Indigenous nascent entrepreneurial attitude, Academy of Marketing Sciences Review.Vol.5
  39. Lundvall, B.A. (1992) National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. Pinter Publishers, London.
  40. Lundvall, B-Å (2009). Innovation in Africa: toward a realistic vision. African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, 1 (1), 212–219.
  41. Mazhari, M., Kheirandish, Kh. & Rostami, J. (2017). Prioritization of effective factors on agricultural entrepreneurship development in rural development (Case study: Kuhistan village of Rostamkola city). Entrepreneurship Strategies in Agriculture, 4 (7), 30-38. [In Persian]
  42. Mehrara, A. (2007). Cultural entrepreneurship, Indigenous entrepreneurship Necessary   for the Development of Entrepreneurship in Higher Education, National Conference on Higher Education and Entrepreneurship Past, Present, Future. (iIn Persian)
  43. Mir Vahadi, S. S., & Esfandiari B. (2016). Investigating the entrepreneurial potential of cultural tourism in the Qashqai nomadic community of Iran. Tourism and Development, 5 (3), 62-78. [In Persian]
  44. Mohammadi Yeganeh, E., & Bigdeli, A. (2016). The role of entrepreneurship in the development of rural areas with emphasis on tourism (Case: Hesar Valiasr village-Avaj city). Regional Planning, 6 (21), 193-204. [In Persian]
  45. Mohammadi, A., Sharafi, and., Sidiousfi, M., & Sidiousfi, N. (2018). Identifying the mental patterns of entrepreneurs towards cultural entrepreneurship using Q method. Entrepreneurship Development, 11 (3), 481-500. [In Persian]
  46. Mokhtari, D. (2017). Geotourism: The key to protecting and organizing the capabilities of local communities with examples from northwestern Iran. Geography and Environmental Planning, 28 (3), 37-58. [In Persian]
  47. Naghizadeh, R., Elahi, S., Manteghi, M., Ghazinoory, S., & Ranga, M. (2015). Through the magnifying glass: an analysis of regional innovation models based on co-word and meta-synthesis methods. Quality & Quantity, 49 (6), 2481-2505.
  48. Nojavan, M., Mir Hosseini, S., & Ramesht, M. (2010). Yazd geotopes and its attractions. Geography and Development, 7 (13 consecutive), 47-60. [In Persian]
  49. Pakzad, (2016). The role of handicrafts in women's entrepreneurship and economic development. Effects of Art, 8 (1), 29-42. [In Persian]
  50. Rafifar, J., Danesh Mehr, A., & Rashid, R., (2012). Insights and methods in indigenous knowledge research and its place in the process of sustainable rural development. Local Development (Rural-Urban), 4 (1), 19-38. [In Persian]
  51. Rahimpour, M., Yahya Zadehfar, M., Aghajani, H. A., & Azar, A. (2022). Start-up financing strategies. Quarterly Journal of Strategic Management Studies, 12 (45), 45-64. [In Persian]
  52. Rahmani, S., Alizadeh Sani, M., Majidpour, M., & Valipour Khatir, M. (2020). A look at Technological Catch-up Studies from the Perspective of Sustainability Transitions: A Meta-Synthesis Review. Journal of Science & Technology Policy, 12 (1), 73-90. [In Persian]
  53. Rezaei Moghadam, K., & Masoumi, E. (2015). Sustainable Rural Entrepreneurship: A Response to the Consequences of Boundless Development of Entrepreneurship in Rural Areas, Journal of Entrepreneurship in Agriculture, (25), 104-83. [In Persian]
  54. Riahi, Ghazi Nouri, S. S., & Haji Hosseini, H. (2013). Morphology of innovation behavior of Iranian provinces with emphasis on social factors. Science and Technology Policy, 5 (4), 47-66. [In Persian]
  55. Sadeghloo, T., & Azizi Demirchilo, A. (2014). Assessing the impact of indigenous knowledge on the sustainability of agricultural development case Study: Villages of Gugtapeh County, Bileshavar County. Rural Research, 6 (2), 389-410. [In Persian]
  56. Sanaz, P., & Sabbaghian, S. (2019). A combination of factors affecting the transfer of learning to the workplace. Social Security, 15(2), 87-112. [In Persian]
  57. Schumpeter, J. A. (1999). Vilfredo Pareto. 1848-1923. Wood / McLure, 106-128.8
  58. Sepah Panah, M., & Movahedi, R. (2015). Sustainable Entrepreneurship A New Approach in Agriculture. Entrepreneurship in Agriculture, 2 (1), 19-36. [In Persian]
  59. Sheriff, D., & Jamali, H. (2020). A brief look at the components of indigenous culture of Darhshahr city and its functional capabilities with emphasis on empowerment of local economic capacities, Ilam Culture Bi-Quarterly (66 and 67), 105-131. [In Persian]
  60. Venkataraman, S. (1997(. The distinctive domain of entrepreneurship research. Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence and Growth, 3 (1), 119-138.
  61. Yaghoubi, Noor Mohammad, Qassabzadeh Langari, Zeinab, Ahang, Farahnaz, Ghaffari, Hassan. (2020). Development of desert ecotourism development strategies in Lut plain. Quarterly Journal of Strategic Management Studies, 10 (40), 151-174. [In Persian]
  62. Zahiraldiny, M., & Hasanzade, M. (2021). Assessing the status of entrepreneurship in Iran based on the reports of the Global Entrepreneurship Watch and the Global Institute for Entrepreneurship and Development during the last four years. Journal of New Research Approaches in Management and Accounting, 4 (37), 56-69. [In Persian]
  63. Dacin, P.A., Dacin, M.T., & Matear, M. )2010(. Social entrepreneurship: Why we do not need a new theory and how we move forward from here. The Academy Of Management Perspectives, 24 (3), 37- 57.
  64. Farhadi, K., & Mirzaei, M. (2017). Photo Entrepreneurship: a phenomenological inquiry into indigenous entrepreneurship. Welfare Planning and Social Development, 8 (31), 117-167. [In Persian]