This research reveals how cognitive and motivational factors influence green entrepreneurial intention among students, suggesting the need for enhanced institutional support.
Background and Aim: In the context of environmental crises, green entrepreneurship plays a pivotal role in sustainable development. However, a substantial disconnect exists between environmental awareness and the entrepreneurial aspirations of young people. This study examines the psychological and institutional factors that influence green entrepreneurial intention (GEI) among vocational college students in Chongqing, China, which is amplified by strong environmental awareness policies. Materials and Methods: By employing the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT), this study formulates an integrated model that incorporates Environmental Entrepreneurship Factors (EEF), which consist of Green Entrepreneurial Orientation (GEO), University Support (US), and Green Consumption (GC). The research investigates key mediators—Attitude toward Behavior (AB), Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ES), Subjective Norms (SN), Perceived Behavioral Control (PBC), Outcome Expectations (OE), and Interest (IN)—through the utilization of Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), based on data collected from 398 valid responses. Results: The findings reveal that cognitive and normative factors affect GEI through the motivational interest pathway. While AB, ES, and PBC have limited direct impact on GEI, IN mediates their effects. The mediation model explains 55.6% of the variance in GEI, with a primary emphasis on motivational activation. Conclusion: By integrating TPB and SCCT, this study provides a comprehensive framework for understanding GEI, encompassing cognitive, motivational, and intentional dimensions. The results underscore the crucial role of emotional engagement and institutional support in fostering sustainability-focused entrepreneurship in developing economies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tang et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: