The DOI matches its Crossref record; 60 of the 60 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The institutional environment and social entrepreneurship intentions
Abstract
Purpose: To fully understand the concept of social entrepreneurship (SE), contextual factors need to be accounted as the influence of the institutional environment on individual behaviour has received little attention in the literature. By heeding the research call for quantitative work in this emerging field, hypotheses are formulated which predict the influence of different institutional profiles on SE intentions. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach: A cross-sectional survey design was administered in an under-researched emerging market context – South Africa. Hypotheses were then statistically tested using correlational analysis and structural equation modelling. Findings: The results indicate that the regulatory environment has a positive and significant impact on feasibility and desirability, and furthermore both feasibility and desirability positively affect intentions. Originality/value: The study contributes towards a new understanding of the influence of the institutional environment on social entrepreneurial intentions and its antecedents in an African emerging market context, and may serve as a catalyst for this emerging and important global activity.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378101800104 · Cited by 109,190
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705519909540118 · Cited by 108,788
The theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587
Herne, H., Cooley, W. W., & Lohnes, P. R. (1973) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General) · doi:10.2307/2344428 · Cited by 35,697
Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance
Munger, M. C., & North, D. C. (1991) · Southern Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/1060065 · Cited by 24,871
Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452 · Cited by 15,744
Review of Psychometric theory (2nd ed.).
SITGREAVES, R. (1979) · Contemporary Psychology: A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.1037/018882 · Cited by 11,425
Efficacy of the Theory of Planned Behaviour: A meta‐analytic review
Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001) · British Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1348/014466601164939 · Cited by 9,970
The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis.
Andrews, A. O., Powell, W. W., & DiMaggio, P. J. (1993) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393344 · Cited by 8,261
Institutions and organizations
(1995) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.33-1848 · Cited by 8,003
Metadata
- Authors
- Urban, B., & Kujinga, L.
- Venue
- International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2017-12-06
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 638-655
- ISSN
- 1355-2554 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2596096967
- Cited by
- 300
- References
- 60
- FWCI
- 28.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The institutional environment and social entrepreneurship intentions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/ijebr-07-2016-0218
- The paper
- Urban, B., & Kujinga, L. (2017). The institutional environment and social entrepreneurship intentions. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijebr-07-2016-0218
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
