doi: 10.58763/rc202379

 

Scientific and Technological Research Article

 

University social entrepreneurship as a development strategy for people, communities and territories

 

El emprendimiento social universitario como estrategia de desarrollo en personas, comunidades y territorios

 

María Ripoll Rivaldo¹  *

 

ABSTRACT

Entrepreneurship openness in a community implies its involvement and granting it equity in decision-making, incorporating it into the social productive sector in a strategic vision of empowerment. This premise leads to a sustained interest in the implementation and development of university social entrepreneurship as a vital strategy for the growth of individuals, communities, and territories. For this purpose, a mixed research approach and a sequential, staged model were used to build the relationship between local community development processes, using interviews and axioms. The results highlight that educating, promoting, and fostering a community and university entrepreneurial culture are actions related to business opportunities, creativity, innovation, and knowledge management in a given locality. Likewise, the conclusions and reflections obtained underscore the pressing need to establish coherent budgets that serve as a development path, for the execution of actions and projects that strengthen educational scenarios and, in turn, promote an entrepreneurial culture, because it is the empowerment processes that lead to university social entrepreneurship, which still have ample room for improvement.

 

Keywords: community, development, education, social entrepreneurship, territory.

 

JEL Classification: D24; O14

 

RESUMEN

La apertura al emprendimiento en una comunidad implica involucrarla y otorgarle equidad en la toma de decisiones, incorporándola al sector productivo social en una visión estratégica del empoderamiento. Esta premisa conlleva al interés que debe perdurar hacia la implementación y desarrollo del emprendimiento social universitario como una estrategia vital para el crecimiento de las personas, comunidades y territorios. Para ello, se utilizó un enfoque de investigación mixto y un modelo secuencial por etapas, para construir la relación entre los procesos locales de desarrollo comunitario, mediante entrevistas y axiomas. Los resultados obtenidos destacan que educar, promover y fomentar una cultura emprendedora comunitaria y universitaria son acciones relacionadas con oportunidades de negocios, creatividad, innovación y gestión del conocimiento en una localidad determinada. Asimismo, las conclusiones y reflexiones obtenidas subrayan la necesidad imperante de establecer presupuestos coherentes que ejerzan como vía de desarrollo, para la ejecución de acciones y proyectos que fortalezcan los escenarios educativos y, a su vez, fomenten una cultura emprendedora, debido a que son los procesos de empoderamiento los que conllevan al emprendimiento social universitario, los cuales aún poseen un amplio margen de mejora.

 

Palabras clave: comunidad, desarrollo, educación, emprendimiento social, territorio.

 

Clasificación JEL: D24; O14

 

Received: 10-02-2023          Revised: 25-04-2023          Accepted: 15-06-2023          Published: 04-07-2023

 

Editor: Carlos Alberto Gómez Cano  

 

¹Corporación Universitaria Minuto de Dios. Bogotá, Colombia.

 

Cite as: Ripoll, M. (2023). El emprendimiento social universitario como estrategia de desarrollo en personas, comunidades y territorios. Región Científica, 2(2), 202379. https://doi.org/10.58763/rc202379

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION

 

Social entrepreneurship is one of the topics that has gained more importance nowadays due to the repercussions and impact that it can have in a specific community. When referring to "social entrepreneurship," it should be considered that it can be considered to create opportunities in the business sector. Likewise, they are creations that seek to achieve favorable societal transformations and, therefore, leave a positive footprint; their implementation can generate positive returns in various social sectors and improve people's quality of life.

 

In general terms, the concept of "entrepreneurship" refers to the action of the undertaking, where the subject is known as the entrepreneur. However, its meaning may vary depending on the approach and theories surrounding it (Rivera et al., 2018; Azqueta & Naval, 2019; Buckingham, 2019). Similarly, it is essential to turn to the term's etymology to understand the approach to be addressed clearly. Felgueiras and Palou (2018), Jurado and Morán (2019), and Laguía et al. (2019) have described that the term "entrepreneur" is derived from the French entrepreneur, which referred to adventurers and conquerors.

 

Later, the term began to identify those who started a company and were associated with innovative businesspersons (Ruiz & Puga, 2019; Ríos-Manríquez et al., 2020). Schumpeter, a Harvard professor, related the term to those individuals who generated market instabilities through their activities. However, del Río (2020), Capella et al. (2020), Mendoza et al. (2021), and Barrera and Villarroel (2021) argue that the Austrian school disagreed with this theory since many entrepreneurs managed to improve and make the commercial network more efficient, reducing turbulence and generating new wealth.

 

Thus, it can be seen how the term "entrepreneur" has been linked mainly to economic activity, which has resulted in most research being focused on this field. However, the importance of entrepreneurship lies in the fact that the actions that these individuals carry out have the potential to impact social, economic, and political sectors. In addition, to be an outstanding entrepreneur, specific unique characteristics are required. According to Montiel and Soto (2020), San-Martín et al. (2021), and Tolchinsky (2021), entrepreneurship implies thinking of actions with a high level of creativity, thus achieving the creation of something with high value from practically non-existent elements. In that sense, it is the constant search for opportunities from available resources. Therefore, it requires a clear vision and the necessary passion to guide others in pursuing that vision.

 

In this context, when a territory begins entrepreneurial activity, it is possible to observe the development of an entrepreneurial culture, an element that is key to the emergence of companies. Thus, being an entrepreneur is linked to the capacity to be innovative, which is considered a cultural fact where people achieve their development as individuals. Therefore, it can be stated that the term "entrepreneur" refers to a modern businessman who can generate changes in the social structure of societies, mainly due to his active role in different sectors. It is not only limited to those who produce companies but also requires an innovative spirit and distinctive characteristics, qualities that must be developed to make the best decisions and know how to take advantage of opportunities (Vélez et al., 2020; Ortiz et al., 2021).

 

In line with the above, Rodriguez et al. (2022) and Rodriguez et al. (2023) comment that leadership qualities positively influence entrepreneurs, as this leadership is essential for them when making decisions. Observing the relationship between entrepreneurship and the education sector is also noteworthy. In this regard, education is crucial for developing individuals and communities, as it stimulates economic growth, reduces social inequality, and significantly reduces poverty. In particular, university institutions play a decisive role in forming human capital, which represents the country's labor force and is directly related to income levels.

 

The quality of education and its effect on reducing poverty are directly related to the increase in people's income. According to Acuña and García (2020), education is important for work productivity, all because it provides people with basic skills, as well as the ability to learn and adapt to change. To improve educational quality, universities have adopted Social Entrepreneurship as part of their curricula. This involves the creation of infrastructure and resources to promote theoretical and practical experience, as well as the interaction between content, competencies, learning outcomes, methodologies, agreements, support networks and services, with the aim of getting involved in communities through of leadership, cooperative work and community management.

 

Thus, the relationship between social entrepreneurship and the university environment is essential since this social approach changes the traditional way entrepreneurship is presented. As stated by Baena et al. (2020), social entrepreneurship seeks to meet the social needs of people through entrepreneurship, which is not the same as private companies, the public sector, or non-governmental organizations. This means that this new concept actively involves the entrepreneur, not indirectly, from the impact it generates, as there is a question of will and basic need.

 

This type of entrepreneurship seeks solutions to social problems such as poverty, exclusion, drug addiction, and issues related to environmental pollution (Muñoz & Martínez, 2020; García et al., 2020). According to Krauss et al. (2020) and Paz et al. (2020), "social entrepreneurship" refers to the process of construction, as well as evaluation and pursuit of opportunities for the achievement of social change, highlighting the ability to generate ideas and the recognition of entrepreneurial opportunities in the process.

 

In the 21st century, the university develops links with communities under the figure of social responsibility, which implies assuming education in social entrepreneurship as a scientific tool to achieve the integration of entrepreneurs as a benefit to the community. The activity of entrepreneurship must be based on the mastery of several conceptual, procedural, and personal skills, which must be related to know-how. Therefore, the impulse toward entrepreneurial education initiatives should prevail in an education based on a system composed of competencies (Terán & Guerrero, 2020; Rodríguez et al., 2021; Ramos et al., 2021).

 

Likewise, competencies are skills acquired by the student during the formative process, crucial for strengthening the student's potential and consolidating crucial social action tools in all sociable spheres, as far as the individual is concerned. Araya (2021), Atúncar et al. (2021), and Cantillo et al. (2021) have described that competencies are related to aptitudes, capacities, qualities, or skills that have to do with dexterity. They appear to be a kind of practical knowledge to do things, solve situations, and, in turn, suggest effectiveness. Likewise, Bravo et al. (2021), Crespí and García (2021), Dávila et al. (2021), and Jiménez et al. (2021) have agreed that competence is a complex term that can be fostered by taking into account the individual's aspects, such as cognitive and affective, as well as attitudinal and aptitudinal elements linked to the experiential (see figure 1).

 

Source: own elaboration.

Note: the figure appears in its original language.

 

This research proposes alternatives that guarantee university social entrepreneurship as a development strategy for people, communities, and territories. This initiative represents a viable alternative for a community's socioeconomic advancement and social progress, involving all people willing to contribute their work to produce goods and services within an organization, association, or community. In this way, it seeks to improve the socioeconomic situation of each community member.

 

METHODS

 

A mixed paradigm was chosen as the methodological approach in the research context. This choice was based on the idea that mixed designs can be essential for analyzing the results obtained. According to Serna (2019), the mixed approach represents the highest degree of integration between qualitative and quantitative approaches. Both approaches are intermingled or combined throughout the research process, which adds complexity to the study design but allows taking advantage of the benefits of each.

 

From the above, the mixed approach is a valuable tool in educational research, as it combines qualitative and quantitative elements and categories. It is important to note that the mixed model selected was sequential by stages; as suggested by Muyembe (2019), such a model implied that each stage could strengthen the previous one, which gave rise to a sequential strategy. Therefore, this strategy was very useful in obtaining significant results in educational research.

 

In the initial stage of the study, a quantitative data analysis was carried out through an online survey called Social Observatory. To construct the report, a methodology of observation of indicators was used through categories grouped into dimensions for their identification. This approach allowed for a rigorous and scientific measurement of quantitative data and, additionally, allowed for a qualitative exploration of the data.

 

In summary, this mixed research approach offered a combination of rigorous and flexible techniques that were valuable for studying complex social phenomena. Finally, predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to select the materials in the article. In turn, aspects such as the type of study, methodological elements, and the content's relevance were evaluated.

 

RESULTS

 

Housing Dimension

 

Considering the results obtained in the OSIC Survey, it was possible to conclude that 39.14% of the sample was in a situation of family occupation. In comparison, 26.33% lived in rented housing and 22.06% in their own home. It is important to emphasize that access to decent housing is a fundamental human right and that it is the State's responsibility to guarantee its promotion, satisfaction, and protection, as established in the legal and regulatory framework of the Social State of Law.

 

Similarly, as seen in table 1, the OSIC Survey showed a relevant aspect related to the respondents' use type, according to which 59.30% paid more than 300 thousand pesos. Also, 21.29% paid between 251 and 300 thousand pesos, and 19.41% paid between 100 and 250 thousand pesos. These data were essential to analyze the purchasing power of the respondents and how this influenced their access to different services and goods.

 

Source: own elaboration.

 

According to Cantillo et al. (2021), since the 1960s, Colombia has implemented a fixed mechanism of differential tariffs in urban Public Domiciliary Services (SPD) according to the economic capacity of the various sectors of society. The principles of equity and solidarity enshrined in the National Constitution have been fundamental for adopting this measure.

 

Of the results obtained, 48.4% of the respondents corresponded to stratum 1, 37.7% to stratum 2, and 11.4% to stratum 3. Finally, stratum 4 represented 2.4%. These data reflect the importance of guaranteeing access to SPD for all sectors of society, particularly for those with much scarcer economic resources. In this sense, the measure is fundamental to promoting social inclusion and equity in access to essential services in Colombia.

 

The survey results indicated that 63% of the people living in these dwellings cohabited in a range of 4 to 6 persons, followed by 22%, with a range of 1 to 3 persons, and 12.7%, with a range of 7 to 9 persons. This shows that housing must have adequate services, materials, and facilities to meet the needs of the residents. Thus, it is essential to ensure access to drinking water, energy, and lighting; together, these elements contribute to the welfare and quality of life of people in the home. In addition, it is necessary to implement policies and programs to improve living conditions in low-income housing, including access to essential services and the adequacy of housing infrastructure to meet the needs of its residents.

 

Labor Dimension

 

The "work dimension" is conceived as the category that defines the work environment of the human being, interpreted as the space or environment where all work activities are carried out and which implies a set of indicators that define their relationship (see table 2).

 

Source: Prepared by the authors based on the survey.

 

According to the OSIC Survey, the data revealed that 45% of the respondents were employed, 31.67% were students, 14% were unemployed, 4% were homemakers, and 4% were self-employed. It is essential to clarify the difference between trade and profession, where the former refers to a work activity generally related to processes of a manual or artisanal nature that do not require formal studies, while a profession requires specialized academic training.

 

Regarding the labor dependence of the respondents, 53% indicated that they did not work in preschool, primary, CDI, and HCF; of the latter, 19.57% depended on CDI, 12% on preschool, and 10.32% on basic. Regarding gender, 98.9% were women, and the rest were men. Based on the above, it is necessary to promote public policies that favor access to quality education and technical training to expand employment opportunities and improve working conditions. Likewise, access to childcare and care services for the elderly should be guaranteed, especially for those who work as housewives and informal caregivers, so that they can enter the labor market without neglecting their role as caregivers.

 

On the other hand, the OSIC Survey showed that 49.56% of those surveyed were between 31 and 45 years old, 41.78% were between 17 and 30 years old, and 7.49% were between 46 and 54 years old. In this sense, the report on the labor market in Colombia for June 2021 of the Bank of the Republic of Colombia indicates that, in the June-August 2021 mobile quarter, 39.5% of the total working-age population was inactive, which represented a decrease of -2.7 p.p., compared to the June-August 2020 mobile quarter (Cantillo et al., 2021). Thus, it can be observed that labor inactivity affected women to a greater degree, with a proportion of 51.1%, compared to men, with 27.5%, which represented a decrease of -2.4 p.p. for men and -3.0 p.p. for women, compared to the same mobile quarter of the previous year. It is essential to highlight that these data influenced those surveyed's employment and economic situation, especially in searching for and accessing employment.

 

Now, in the second qualitative phase of the study, a universal system constructed from interviews and axioms was used to determine the relationship between local community development processes and university social entrepreneurship as a development strategy in people, communities, and territories. The reality constructed by three professors-entrepreneurs of Colombian universities was taken as a point of reference, from which categories emerged, such as University Social Entrepreneurship and Strategies for the Development of People, Communities, and Territories.

 

These emerging categories explained the ideal medium so the arguments could be understood, interpreted, and developed into a theoretical construction. Using Grounded Theory, proposed by Correa (2014), other categories were postulated, such as information analysis, support and training, inclusion of social innovations, methodical, community participation, services and benefits, knowledge transfer, and use of technologies. The main category, or superfamily, was called Strategies for the Promotion of University Entrepreneurship, representing the integrated view of the opinions and experiences of the critical subjects interviewed. This category symbolized the concretion between the emerging categories of University Social Entrepreneurship and Strategies for the Development of People, Communities, and Territories. It represented the central theme and structure of the present inquiry. The units that emerged in the research were summarized in an integrated manner in these categories (see figures 2 and 3).

 

Source: Own elaboration.

Note: the figure appears in its original language.

 

Source: Own elaboration.

Note: the figure appears in its original language.

 

Emerging categorization

 

After analyzing the responses of the innovative and entrepreneurial professional educational actors, it was possible to identify a series of emerging subcategories important for promoting university entrepreneurship. First, the importance of analyzing the information as a diagnostic and contextualized management of reality, which allows planning and executing practical social research actions, is highlighted. It also highlights the need for tangible institutional support from universities, including resources and training processes on social economy, innovation, and entrepreneurship issues. This initiative should be focused on creating entrepreneurial and innovative ecosystems within the university that respond to the community's needs (see Table 3).

 

In this context, innovation and entrepreneurship are fundamental tools for social development, and their application will always be a viable solution despite the difficulties that may exist in society. The approaches and procedures used to understand reality should complement each other to allow the researcher to observe and determine cognitive action paths for the entrepreneurial and innovative approach and action. It should be remembered that, in communities, there is a tendency to be creative and proactive because the worldview of that context serves as a driver and motivator for finding relevant and coherent solutions.

 

Therefore, universities must generate functional spaces to take advantage of knowledge as a common good, and the fundamental premise to promote entrepreneurial and innovative spaces must be to serve and benefit the community. Practical knowledge transforms and understands human reality, translating into tangible solutions and individual and collective benefits. On the other hand, to achieve a state of satisfaction and improvement in intangible ideas towards a model of the complex reality between the university, entrepreneurship, and the curricular system, the support of information and communication technologies is required for information processing.

 

Source: Own elaboration.

 

However, entrepreneurship in Colombia has acquired significant importance as it is considered a key factor for increasing employability, productivity, and competitiveness, especially after the COVID-19 pandemic. According to the CONPES document on Social Economic Policy, entrepreneurship is crucial for a country's socioeconomic growth and development since it promotes innovation, improves productivity, fosters internationalization, and generates income.

 

Over the last three decades, Colombia has enacted laws and regulations to foster an entrepreneurial culture and create a sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystem that drives productive development in the country. In line with the demand for technological innovation, the Colombian State has generated entrepreneurship policies, such as the National Development Plan 2018-2022 and the National Entrepreneurship Policy, which are based on other development policies at the productive level, as is the case of CONPES Document 3866 Productive Development Policy (PDP); CONPES Document 3956 Business Formalization Policy; CONPES Document 4005 Financial Inclusion and Education Policy; as well as the policies in construction of Intellectual Property and Science, Technology and Innovation: Entrepreneurship Law, November 30, 2020 (National Entrepreneurship Policy, 2020).

 

CONCLUSIONS

 

The role of education and social entrepreneurship in universities is undeniably essential, requiring an emphatic commitment to research to deepen scientific knowledge in this field. Creating more robust and guiding theoretical frameworks is crucial in an ever-changing world with a constant demand for innovation. Such frameworks will enable universities to understand better how social entrepreneurship can be fostered and how it can contribute to the solution of social problems.

 

In addition, it is imperative to consider the development of a new educational model that facilitates knowledge transfer and effectively supports the incubation and growth of social enterprises. This model should encourage students to become entrepreneurs by providing the tools and skills to identify opportunities, develop innovative solutions, and launch successful enterprises. It should also focus on fostering an entrepreneurial spirit within the university community, including students, faculty, and administrative staff.

 

Within the context of an entrepreneurial university, the interaction between education and social entrepreneurship can become a powerful tool for social change, promoting more significant equity, inclusion, and well-being in local and global communities. This highlights the importance of adopting an integrated approach that links teaching, research, and outreach with social entrepreneurship.

 

REFERENCES

 

Acuña, M. y García, I. (2020). Transiciones y conjeturas en el diseño de prácticas educativas abiertas para el desarrollo de competencias transversales en una universidad a distancia. American Journal of Distance Education, 34(4), 322-336. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2020.1841418

 

Araya S. (2021). Autoconfianza y actitud hacia la enseñanza del emprendimiento. Impulsores claves de la intención emprendedora. Cuadernos de Investigación Educativa, 12(2), 63-81. https://doi.org/10.18861/cied.2021.12.2.3091

 

Atúncar, C., Franco, D., Vergaray, L., y Quijano, H. (2021). Estudio comparativo de emprendimiento social en Colombia y Dinamarca: hacia la búsqueda de respuestas para el desarrollo humano y sostenible. Maestro y Sociedad, Número especial, 215-234. https://maestroysociedad.uo.edu.cu/index.php/MyS/article/view/5458/5171

 

Ázqueta, A. y Naval, C. (2019). Educación para el emprendimiento: una propuesta para el desarrollo humano. Revista Española de Pedagogía, 77 (274), 517-533. https://doi.org/10.22550/REP77-3-2019-03

 

Baena, P., García, E., y Monge, M. (2020). Entrecomp: marco competencial para el emprendimiento. Una revisión sistemática de la literatura sobre su uso y aplicación. Información tecnológica, 31(2), 163-172. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-07642020000200163

 

Barrera, G., y Villarroel, A. (2021). Measuring the association between students’ exposure to social media and their valuation of sustainability in entrepreneurship. Heliyon, 7(6), e07272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07272

 

Bravo, I., Bravo, M., Preciado, J., y Mendoza, M. (2021). Educación para el emprendimiento y la intención de emprender. Revista Economía y Política, 33, 139-155. https://acortar.link/vDF33U

 

Buckingham, D. (2019). Teaching media in a ‘post-truth’age: fake news, media bias and the challenge for media/digital literacy education. Cultura y Educación, 31(2), 213-231. https://doi.org/10.1080/11356405.2019.1603814

 

Cantillo, N., Pedraza, C., Suárez, H. (2021). Formación del emprendimiento social: Compromiso de la Universidad de la Guajira en Colombia. Revista de Ciencias Sociales (Ve), 27(1), 216-229. https://doi.org/10.31876/rcs.v27i1.35308

 

Capella, C., Gil, J., Martí, M., y Ruíz, P. (2020). Development and validation of a scale to assess social entrepreneurship competency in higher education. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 11(1), 23-39. https://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2018.1545686

 

CONPES. (2020). Política Nacional de Emprendimiento. Consejo Nacional de Política Económica y Social, República de Colombia, Departamento Nacional de Planeación. Bogotá. https://colaboracion.dnp.gov.co/CDT/Conpes/Econ%C3%B3micos/4011.pdf

 

Correa, M. (2014). Bases de la investigación cualitativa. Entramados y Perspectivas, 4(4), 281-287. https://acortar.link/vy8AWu

 

Crespí, P. y García, J. (2021). Competencias genéricas en la universidad. Evaluación de un programa formativo. Educación XX1: revista de la Facultad de Educación, 24(1), 297-327. https://doi.org/10.5944/educxx1.26846

 

Dávila, M., Zlobina, A. y Serrano, A. (2021) Emprendimiento social en jóvenes: análisis de su relación con otras formas de participación social. REVESCO. Revista de Estudios Cooperativos, 138, e75562. https://dx.doi.org/10.5209/reve.75562

 

del Río, M. (2020). International Journal of Social Psychology: same journal, new title for a global science. International Journal of Social Psychology, 35(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/02134748.2020.1711599

 

Folgueiras, P. y Palou, B. (2018). An exploratory study of aspirations for change and their effect on purpose among Catalan university students. Journal of Moral Education, 47(2), 186-200. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2018.1433643

García, A., Ramírez, M., De León, G. y Aragón, S. (2020) El emprendimiento social como una competencia transversal: construcción y validación de un instrumento de valoración en el contexto universitario. REVESCO. Revista de Estudios Cooperativos, 136, e71862. https://dx.doi.org/10.5209/reve.71862

 

 Jiménez, R., Zeta, A., Farfán, R., More, J. y Atoche, C. (2021). Emprendimientos y emprendedores en un contexto peruano. Revista Científica, Cultura, Comunicación y Desarrollo, 6(2), 33-40. https://rccd.ucf.edu.cu/index.php/aes/article/view/290

 

Jurado, I., y Morán, M. (2019). Gestión universitaria de la innovación social promovida desde espacios académicos relacionados con el emprendimiento, la investigación y la proyección social. Revista de investigación, desarrollo e innovación, 9(2), 261-272. https://doi.org/10.19053/20278306.v9.n2.2019.9161

 

Krauss, C., Bonomo, A. y Volfovicz, R. (2020). Empoderar el emprendimiento femenino universitario. Journal of technology management & innovation, 15(2), 71-80. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242020000200071

 

Laguía, A., Jaén, I., Topa, G. y Moriano, J. (2019). University environment and entrepreneurial intention: the mediating role of the components of the theory of planned behaviour. Revista de Psicologia Social, 34(1), 137-167. https://doi.org/10.1080/02134748.2018.1542789

 

Mendoza, G., Llopis, J., Gasco, J., y González, R. (2021). Entrepreneurship as seen by entrepreneurs in a developing country. Journal of Business Research, 123, 547-556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.038

 

Montiel, O. y Soto, A. (2020). Un marco exploratorio para el emprendimiento desde una perspectiva evolutiva. RETOS. Revista de Ciencias de la Administración y Economía, 10(20), 361-373. https://doi.org/10.17163/ret.n20.2020.10

 

 Muñoz, Á. y Martínez, L. (2020). Emprendimiento social y felicidad urbana. Revista disciplinaria en ciencias económicas y sociales, 2(1), 127-169. https://aunarcali.edu.co/revistas/index.php/RDCES/article/view/114

 

Muyembe, B. (2019). Basics of research design: A guide to selecting appropriate research design. International Journal of Contemporary Applied Researches, 6(5), 76-89. https://acortar.link/M0McXs

 

Ortiz, J., Greca, I., y Meneses, J. (2021). Effects of an integrated STEAM approach on the development of competence in primary education students. Journal for the Study of Education and Development, 44(4), 838-870. https://doi.org/10.1080/02103702.2021.1925473

 

Paz, A., Salóm, J., García, J., y Suárez, H. (2020). Perfil emprendedor en la formación universitaria venezolana. Revista de Ciencias Sociales (Ve), 26(1), 161-174. https://doi.org/10.31876/rcs.v26i1.31317

 

Ramos, V., Duque, P. y Vieira, J. (2021). Responsabilidad Social Corporativa y Emprendimiento: evolución y tendencias de investigación. Desarrollo Gerencial, 13(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.17081/dege.13.1.4210

 

Ríos, M., Pérez, L., y Sánchez, M. (2020). Entrepreneurship and Innovation Based on the RIEMPEI Model: Inequality of Opportunities in Mexico. Entrepreneurship and the Community: A Multidisciplinary Perspective on Creativity, Social Challenges, and Business, 141-158. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23604-5_9

 

Rivera, R., Santos, D., Martín, M., Requero, B. y Cancela, A. (2018). Predicting attitudes and behavioural intentions towards social entrepreneurship: the role of servant leadership in young people. Revista de Psicología Social, 33(3), 650-681. https://doi.org/10.1080/02134748.2018.1482057

 

Rodríguez, E., Marichal, O. y Meneses, Z. (2022) Teorías del liderazgo y su impacto en los dirigentes y estudiantes universitarios. Revista Estrategia y Gestión Universitaria, 10(2), 66-79. https://acortar.link/6o5Xyp

 

Rodríguez, E., Pérez, A. y Camejo, Y. (2023). Formación del liderazgo distribuido en los estudiantes de la carrera Gestión Sociocultural para el Desarrollo. Atenas, 61, e10942, 1-13. http://atenas.umcc.cu/index.php/atenas/article/view/778

 

Rodríguez, P., Celis, A, y Jiménez, F. (2021). E-Learning: herramienta para la formación en emprendimiento social y saberes tradicionales de jóvenes víctimas del conflicto. Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Sociales, 12(2), 611-648. https://doi.org/10.21501/22161201.3572 

 

Ruiz, A. y Puga, J. (2019). Modelling academic entrepreneurial intention with Bayesian networks. Revista de Psicología Social, 34(2), 383-411. https://doi.org/10.1080/02134748.2019.1589783

 

San-Martín, P., Fernández, A., Pérez, A., y Palazuelos, E. (2021). The teacher of entrepreneurship as a role model: Students' and teachers’ perceptions. The International Journal of Management Education, 19(1), 100358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2019.100358

 

Serna, M. (2019). ¿Cómo mejorar el muestreo en estudios de porte medio usando diseños con métodos mixtos? Aportes desde el campo de estudio de elites. EMPIRIA. Revista de Metodología de las Ciencias Sociales, 43, 187-210. https://doi.org/10.5944/empiria.43.2019.24305

 

Terán, E. y Guerrero, A. (2020). Teorías de emprendimiento: revisión crítica de la literatura y sugerencias para futuras investigaciones. Revista espacios, 41(07), 1-16. https://www.revistaespacios.com/a20v41n07/20410707.html

 

Tolchinsky, L. (2021). The university: challenges, trade-offs and possible transformations. Culture and Education, 33(2), 217-228. https://doi.org/10.1080/11356405.2021.1905979

 

Vélez, C., Bustamante, M., Loor, B. y Afcha, S. (2020). La educación para el emprendimiento como predictor de una intención emprendedora de estudiantes universitarios. Formación universitaria, 13(2), 63-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-50062020000200063

 

FINANCING

No external financing.

 

DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

None.

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS (ORIGINAL SPANISH VERSION)

Se agradece a la Fundación Universitaria Minuto de Dios por el apoyo recibido para el desarrollo de la investigación.

 

AUTHORSHIP CONTRIBUTION

Conceptualization: María Ripoll Rivaldo .

Research: María Ripoll Rivaldo.

Methodology: María Ripoll Rivaldo.

Validation: María Ripoll Rivaldo.

Writing - original draft: María Ripoll Rivaldo.

Writing - revision and editing: María Ripoll Rivaldo.