Entrepreneurship is increasingly popular among policy makers worldwide to promote and achieve economic development and growth. However, entrepreneurship rates differ from one country to another, and particularly the number of women entrepreneurs is still significantly lower than the number of male entrepreneurs in many contexts. In the present paper, we critically assess how country measures of gender inequality shape men and women’s entrepreneurial intentions, which were shown in literature to be excellent predictors of the establishment of new ventures. We analyze the direct and moderating effects of gender inequality on important individual-level antecedents of entrepreneurial intention. The United Nations Development Program (UNDP) identified gender inequality as a key contributor to the loss of human development and declared “gender equality” as a sustainable development goal (SDG) in the UN 2030 agenda. Our research draws on the gender inequality index and GEM data from nine Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) countries. Our results show that a culture of inequality leads to limited entrepreneurial behavior by both men and women in a population.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to develop an empirically informed framework to analyze women empowerment and entrepreneurship, contextualized within a collective society.Design/methodology/approach: The authors conducted 15 in-depth semi-structured interviews with women entrepreneurs located in the United Arab Emirates to understand their entrepreneurial experiences and how they were empowered.Findings: Findings suggest that the three aspects of power characterized as “positive” from within Rowlands’ distinctions (“power to”, “power with” and “power within”) dominate, as opposed to those emphasized in the literature (“power to” and “power over”). Findings include empowerment of the “me” (individual) also synergistically contributes to empowerment of the “we” (society), when considering empowerment within a collective society.Originality/value: A psychology model was used as a basis to develop a Collective Empowerment Process Framework. This framework provides a fresh look at empowerment, allowing for explanations of how women in specific contexts experience empowerment and social change.

Entrepreneurship has been increasingly promoted as a means to achieve women’s empowerment in the pursuit of gender equal societies by international development organizations, NGO’s as well as national and local governments across the world. Against this, the paper explores the role and influence of multi-actor engagement on successful empowerment of women based on a case study of Kudumbashree program in a regional context of Kerala, in South India. Our objective is to examine the women empowerment outcomes of the Kudumbashree initiatives, implemented within a multi-actor engagement framework supportive of women’s empowerment through capacity building and social inclusion programs. The case study demonstrates ‘how multiple-level engagements help enhance women’s development and support broad sustainable social change, in view of their sensitivity to the embeddedness of women’s agency under specific socio-political and cultural contexts’. We find that Kudumbashree programs, through its multi-actor engagement, strives for an equilibrium between social change through policy and regulatory change (top down) and social change via mobilizing the people (bottom-up). From a policy angle, the key learnings from the successful outcomes of Kudumbashree may be considered for designing rural and urban community development programs with a focus on the multidimensional empowerment as well as social and economic inclusion of women and other marginalized communities.

We ran two focus groups with well-educated Saudi women; there were ten participants with established businesses and ten nascent entrepreneurs. Despite the Saudi Vision 2030’s centring of environmental sustainability as a key tenet of the country’s development, the women entrepreneurs we studied (both established and nascent) were not well informed on the topic. Further, the well-educated women in our sample were under pressure from neither their customers nor their own religious, financial, or moral imperatives to engage in sustainable practices or seek out and implement sustainable business in any form. Our respondents believed that government should incentivise businesses to undertake sustainable practices and saw no financial benefits to initiating these practices themselves. Contrary to previous literature, we found that the women entrepreneurs in our sample did not perceive sustainability as an entrepreneurial opportunity and, in many cases, did not believe that sustainability should be an intrinsic element of any for-profit business. Our research findings imply that the prevalent top-down policy approach used by the government to promote sustainable entrepreneurial practices needs to be complimented by a more inclusive multi-actor approach that would involve local and national stakeholders. Moreover, educational policies need to promote the integration of sustainability topics within the larger educational system to promote awareness and social change.

The relationship between empowerment and entrepreneurship in collective societies is, in our view, insufficiently examined. Accepted definitions of empowerment and the assumptions underlying programs and research designs based on them result in outcomes that self-fulfil and, as a result, disappoint. Several issues are prevalent: the empowerment potential of programs is overestimated and the dominant view of what constitutes an ‘empowered self’ does not go deep enough to explore, and reframe, the self and its relationship to agency—two issues at the core of empowerment definitions and formulations. In this conceptual article, we examine the entrepreneurship and empowerment literature to suggest ways forward for the future health and relevance of the subject area. We highlight a serious methodological and perceptual issue within the literature, which offers many opportunities for theory development in the field.