The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/1756-6266.htm

Going green
Going green: women
entrepreneurs
and the environment
245
Patrice Braun
Centre for Regional Innovation and Competitiveness,
University of Ballarat, Ballarat, Australia

Abstract
Purpose – The paper seeks to explore whether women entrepreneurs may be more engaged with
green issues than their male counterparts. The study was undertaken to add to our understanding of
gendered attitudes and behaviours around green entrepreneurship.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper opted for a mixed method exploratory study
consisting of quantitative datasets from two regional studies on environmental attitudes and
behaviour and qualitative data generated as part of an Australian green entrepreneurship training
program.
Findings – The study found that participating women had stronger environmental attitudes and
commitment to the green entrepreneurship program than males, suggesting that women entrepreneurs
may be more engaged in green issues than male entrepreneurs.
Research limitations/implications – Given the exploratory study approach, research results lack
generalisability. Therefore, researchers are encouraged to test the proposed framework.
Practical implications – Understanding gendered behaviours has implications for policy and
education in terms of greening the small business sector. It also has implications for business
innovation, the green marketplace and a sustainable post-carbon future.
Originality/value – The paper helps lay the foundation for comprehensive research on women
entrepreneurs’ engagement with environmental issues and green entrepreneurship.
Keywords Gender, Women, Entrepreneurs, Corporate social responsibility,
Environmental management, Australia
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
Placing today’s social, economic and cultural challenges, as well as environmental ones,
at the core of a company’s strategy is no longer mere lip service; it is considered the key to
sustained success (Werbach, 2009). Indeed, regulation, the corporate social
responsibility (CSR) agenda, economic instruments and enhanced efficiency have
emerged as key drivers in today’s economy (Bansal and Roth, 2000) and the movement
toward environmentally responsible enterprises is growing worldwide. Driven by a
desire to integrate company responsibility and sustainability principles into their
businesses, entrepreneurs are finding that running a green enterprise is a sound
business proposition because they can tap into new as well as existing markets. With
governments increasingly interested in green jobs to create new economic opportunities International Journal of Gender and
in response to the twin challenges of climate change and economic downturn in Entrepreneurship
Vol. 2 No. 3, 2010
economically difficult times (Environment Victoria, 2009), supporting structures are pp. 245-259
being put in place to assist entrepreneurs in benefiting from the green enterprise markets q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1756-6266
and heightened consumer environmental consciousness. As part of this support, DOI 10.1108/17566261011079233
IJGE a greening small business program was rolled out in 2008 to a group of 30 entrepreneurs,
2,3 approximately half of which were women. The program provided an opportunity to
observe the position of participating women entrepreneurs towards green business
practices and to examine whether their engagement in green issues differed from their
male counterparts.
The paper starts with a brief description of CSR, pointing to ample literature in the
246 corporate sphere, but a paucity of data on CSR in the small and medium enterprise (SME)
arena, within which the majority of women entrepreneurs operate. The paper goes on to
review the green entrepreneurship literature and the gender component thereof for
observed gender differences in attitudes and social orientation as possible determinants
for the uptake of green entrepreneurship. The paper proceeds to introduce the green
entrepreneurship program which was the basis of the exploratory study underpinned by
datasets from two surveys conducted in 2008 and 2009, respectively, measuring
environmental attitudes and behaviours. The paper concludes with a discussion on
findings and introduces a framework for future research directions.

Corporate social responsibility

Much has been written about corporations going green (Payne and Raiborn, 2001;
Bansal and Roth, 2000), ranging from building on economic benefits that reducing
energy, water and waste saves money (Hart and Ahuja, 1996) to the greening of
organisational culture (Harris and Crane, 2002). Under the banner of CSR – whereby
companies voluntarily decide to contribute to a better society and cleaner environment
by integrating social and environmental concerns in their business operations and
interaction with stakeholders (Murrillo and Lozano, 2006) – studies have identified
regulatory compliance, competitive advantage, stakeholder pressures, ethical concerns,
critical events and top management initiatives as motives for corporate environmental
initiatives (Paulray, 2008; Bansal and Roth, 2000). Researchers have also documented
how the corporate world engages and integrates CSR in terms of value creation for both
internal and external stakeholders (Perrini, 2006). The corporate literature on gender and
CSR (Marshall, 2007; Pearson, 2007; Thompson, 2008) tends to focus on gender inequity,
providing little insight into the position of women and green business practices.
The literature is much less prolific on CSR and small business and mainly deals with
the social aspect of CSR. According to Perrini (2006), the relationship between CSR and
SMEs differs significantly from the corporate approach since SMEs have different
characteristics, such as their size, sector they operate in and orientation towards profit.
The latter author suggests that research on large firms should be based on stakeholder
theory, whereas research on CSR among SMEs should be based on the concept of social
capital. Other CSR literature (Fallin, 2008; Jenkins, 2004; Spence, 2007) indicates that
SMEs are closer to the community and often informally adopt CSR and responsible
business practices as part of maintaining their reputation. Of interest is the work of
Murrillo and Lozano (2006) who establish the values of the SME founder as a key link to
the implementation of CSR practices, although such values are not specifically linked to
environmental issues and founder data is not sex-disaggregated. Spence (2007, p. 542)
calls for more qualitative research to establish CSR motivations and activities of small
businesses and to understand “the minutiae of small business life”. The green
entrepreneurship literature was reviewed next for possible insights into entrepreneurs’
values and motivations in regards to green business practices.
Green entrepreneurship Going green
Green enterprise holds many possibilities for both the environment and for
entrepreneurs. It can protect natural resources, lower operating costs through reduced
waste and pollution, and contribute to more sustainable community economic
development, while giving entrepreneurs a new and different edge to succeed in the
market. So-called proactive environmental strategies can minimise a firm’s negative
impact and maximise its positive effects on the environment (Lepoutre, 2009). Lepoutre 247
(2008, p. 46) defines proactive environmental strategies as:
[. . .] the continuous process of resource building, selection and deployment for value creation
and distribution, by navigating through and interacting with the structural and social
conditions that influence their value, with the purpose to prevent negative effects, or create
positive impacts on the natural environment, beyond what is legally required or accepted as
standard practice.
Isaak (1999) uses the expression “ecopreneur” or individuals who pursue social and
ecological goals by means of profit-orientated green businesses. Green entrepreneurs
are those that identify market opportunities and successfully implement innovative
approaches to their product or service (Dixon and Clifford, 2007). While motivations
may differ, both focus on innovative behaviour of single actors in business as a core
objective of competitive advantage.
In the process of defining what makes a green entrepreneur, researchers have
attempted to understand why firms embrace environmentally friendly practices
(Bansal and Roth, 2000; Hillary, 2000). Following the work of social theorist Giddens
(1984) and Taylor and Wally (2004) propose that structure prompts entrepreneurial
action and entrepreneurial action in turn changes the structure. Based on a combination
of internal motivations and external (hard and soft) structural influences, the latter
authors identify four types of green entrepreneurs (the popular use of the term “green”
can refer to either a product or a process), e.g. innovative opportunists (driven by
structure, e.g. regulation), visionary champions (early adopters), ethical mavericks
(value driven) and ad hoc enviropreneurs (accidental, finance driven). The Taylor and
Wally (2004) typology does not delineate gender and the authors caution that
green entrepreneurs may be driven by a mix of green, ethical, social and financial
motivations, which may be difficult to separate. Regardless of type, green entrepreneurs
are increasingly being seen as change agents, driving societal learning and change
(Taylor and Wally, 2004).
In the last decade, surprisingly little new examination of gender and
environmentalism has taken place. Meta reviews and analyses of research prior to
this decade (Zelezny et al., 2000; Davidson and Freudenberg, 1996) consistently show
that women express higher levels of concern toward the environment than men.
Zelezny et al. (2000) reviewed six studies ranging between 1988 and 1998 that used the
new ecological paradigm (NEP) to measure environmental attitudes. The NEP
(Dunlap, 2000) incorporates three distinct dimensions: the balance of nature, limits to
growth and human domination of nature. Zelezny et al. (2000) found that in four of the
six studies, females expressed significantly greater (NEP) environmental concern that
males. In terms of gender and environmental behaviour, Zelezny et al. (2000) reviewed
13 studies, nine of which found that women reported significantly more participation in
pro-environmental behaviours than men. Hunter et al. (2004) point out that while
women typically display higher levels of environmental concern, such concern is
IJGE usually nuanced, showing that women are more likely to translate that concern into
2,3 “private” pro-environmental behaviour within the household such as recycling,
whereas men are more likely to demonstrate concern through public activism such as
attending meetings.
Although the differing patterns have been reported with enough consistency to
be considered relatively robust, less progress has been made to date in explaining the
248 underlying dynamics of women’s attitudes and behaviour. According to
Stoll-Kleemann et al. (2001), behavioural norms shape environmental action or
inaction, with dimensions such as accepting that there is indeed a crisis, the belief that
personal contribution can help mitigate the crisis, the need for personal comfort, the
belief in technological solutions, trust in government and the demand for a justifiable
relationship between personal costs and social gains. The latter is of interest in terms
of the inquiry of this paper whether women entrepreneurs may be more engaged with
greening issues than their male counterparts. Gender socialization theory posits that
females have a stronger “ethic of care” (Chodorow, 1974). Gender socialization starts in
childhood but continues in adulthood, influencing “choice of occupation, family roles,
and responses to science and technology, particularly in context of environmental
concerns” (Davidson and Freudenberg, 1996, p. 305). This could be one explanation
why women entrepreneurs may be engaged with greening issues, although it is
important to note that the socialization process is not a universal phenomenon. It
cannot be assumed that all women entrepreneurs had rewarding experiences with the
natural world as children and are therefore predisposed as adults to support green
business activities.
As Zelezny et al. (2000) indicate, the socialization of those with an environmental
consciousness comes from many factors, such as the political environment, the role of
education and the presence of an environmental danger or disaster. Risk averseness to
environmental danger could be another explanation. Although the less risk-oriented
profile attached to female entrepreneurs generally pertains to women’s use of less
financial resources and a strong emphasis on tried and true products and services
(Meier and Masters, 1988), it could also be construed as women being less prepared to
take risk in terms of climate change and therefore more inclined towards green
initiatives than men. Reviewing data from the same environmental studies examined
earlier by Davidson and Freudenberg (1996) and Bord and O’Connor (1997, p. 830)
support this notion, concluding that the driving force behind gender differences in
environmental surveys is “differences in perceived vulnerability to risks from the
environment, not necessarily differences in ecological sensibilities”. But differential
socialization processes need to again be recognised. The assumptions underlying both
formulations are culturally and contextually relative and less likely to be applicable to
women in developing economies with limited economic resources and high exposure to
climate change effects than women raised in “privileged” Western settings. It is the
latter group that concerns this paper.
Using data from a green entrepreneurship training program, an exploratory study
was conducted to gain some insights into the position of participating women
entrepreneurs towards green business practices and examine whether their engagement
differed from their male counterparts. A brief overview of the program precedes the
methodology adopted for the study.
SmartGreen Going green
Funded as a two-year (2007-2009) training program by the Australian Government and
designed as a partnership between the regional City of Ballarat, the Committee for
Ballarat and the University of Ballarat’s Centre for Regional Innovation and
Competitiveness and National Centre for Sustainability, the underpinning premise for
the SmartGreen: An Entrepreneurial Approach to Greening Small Business program
was that the greening of a small business not only depends on an awareness and demand 249
for environmental innovation by potential users, but also on the supply of expertise and
technology from those businesses who supply green products and services.
There are two significant issues this program addressed. One is the economic and
moral pressure for businesses of all sizes to go green and reduce their environmental
footprint, but whose managers do not necessarily know where to start, how to go about
greening their business, or who to engage to help them green their business. The other
is the need to boost capacity, expertise and innovation on the supply side to ensure
there is sufficient and high-quality assistance available to help businesses become
more environmentally sustainable. Building on the above premise, the program had
two major aims:
(1) to develop a comprehensive program of entrepreneurial training and mentoring
to increase supply-side capability; and
(2) to inform demand-side firms of the efficiency gains that can be made from going
green and leverage-increased demand for green products and services.

Using this dual approach, the program was designed to generate benefits for both the
demand and supply side. Through a combined process of resource auditing and
entrepreneurship training, expected outcomes included a growth of capability on the
supply side and ultimately a growth in these businesses, provided these business “push”
green services and awareness after the completion of the program. On the demand side,
anticipated outcomes included improved resource use, greater efficiency, and business
growth driven by lower costs and improved resource efficiency. A third component of
the program was to make the training available online and cluster expertise, information
and learning in the MySmartGreene portal. By providing access to information,
training, green products and services, this program component was designed to
encourage small businesses across the region to work towards a green code of practice,
whereby firms commit to excellence in sustainability through sustainable development
practices, partnerships and continual improvement.
In year 1 (2008), a pilot program was rolled out to 30 micro and SMEs, targeting a mix
of demand- and supply-side micro and small business suppliers of green products or
services. Based on established entrepreneurship objectives, the program provided nine
learning modules in business planning, marketing, risk management, service
development and expansion of client base, environmental compliance training,
technology and knowledge acquisition, collaboration with other suppliers of green
products/services and identification of best practice. The in-depth training and
mentoring program was delivered over a nine-month period, during which participating
businesses developed an environmental action plan (EAP). Participants were equally
divided in terms of gender and included both manufacturing and service sector
industries. During year 1, the project team also designed the MySmartGreen portal
(www.mysmartgreen.com). Portal functionality was designed to house re-purposed
IJGE workshop content for year 2 participants, facilitate clustering/social networking
2,3 objectives, encourage collaborative information generation and support the networking
component of the project by using a clustering and social networking approach.

Methodology
To explore the position of participating women entrepreneurs towards green business
250 practices and examine whether their engagement in green issues differed from their
male counterparts, the study adopted the gender socialization “ethic of care” theory
(Chodorow, 1974) and fused it with a social constructionist epistemology (Chell, 2000),
reflecting the view that women entrepreneurs value both economic and wider social
goals. In developing the exploratory study, it was deemed useful to explore
whether gender differences were present in other datasets beyond the qualitative data
generated from the green entrepreneurship program. This required the adoption of a
mixed-method approach (Creswell et al., 2003) to allow for a combination of both
quantitative and qualitative datasets to inform the exploratory study. To that end,
datasets from two surveys conducted in 2008 (Braun and McEachern, 2010) and 2009,
respectively, measuring environmental attitudes and behaviours in regional Victorian
households were revisited and analysed for gender differences.
The quantitative studies were administered using a well-established survey design
to measure environmental attitudes and behaviours (Wilson and Dowlatabadi, 2007).
The method combined the earlier described NEP (Dunlap, 2000), which measures
environmental attitudes towards the balance of nature, limits to growth and
human domination of nature and the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) (Ajzen, 1992),
which focuses on the prediction of behavioural intentions, particularly behavioural
norms (the belief that engaging in the behaviour will fulfil normative expectations
of the individual) and attitudes towards the behaviour. The extended TPB model
(Ajzen, 1992) incorporates perceived control over the completion of the behaviour
as an additional predictor, to account for those situations where the individual’s
capacity to engage in the behaviour may not be entirely within their control.
Demographic aspects such as gender and socialization experiences have also been
shown to affect attitude and behavioural intentions (Ajzen and Gilbert Cote, 2008).
Since this type of survey instrument has been successfully applied to numerous studies
and was based on established measures (Wilson and Dowlatabadi, 2007), it could be
relied upon to inform the exploratory study on current environmental attitudes and
behaviours of women in the region. Of course, surveys are subject to sample reliability
and validity of survey responses. People often overestimate the benefits of their
behavioural choices and methods of self-monitoring can be ineffective. Especially in
response to a sensitive question such as having reduced their energy consumption,
survey respondents may provide a socially acceptable and hence biased response
(Fuj et al., 1985).
To generate sex-disaggregated data for the purposes of this study, a t-test was
conducted on a random sample of 200 males and 200 females, who took part in a 2009
survey on environmental attitudes based on the NEP across 2000 households in regional
Victoria. A Mann-Whitney test was conducted on data pertaining to energy-related
behaviours stemming from a 2008 community survey conducted on behalf of a local
climate action group in the regional Victorian community of Ballarat. For both surveys,
computer-assisted telephone interview software and random digit-dialling sampling
techniques were used to draw a random sample of households. For the latter study, Going green
a total of 538 people were contacted, with 89 females and 65 males consenting to
participate in the survey. The collected data were entered into SPSS statistical analysis
software to facilitate the data analysis process.
The qualitative component of the study focused on data collected in 2008 during the
first year of the green entrepreneurship program. At the time, 30 micro and SMEs were
enrolled in the program, approximately half of which were women. Attendance and 251
in-class observations were recorded for each of the nine workshops. Following each
session, participants were directed to a brief online survey on the SmartGreen web site
and requested to provide feedback on the workshop. Upon completion of the training
course, participants were again requested to complete an exit survey and share their
program and learning experiences. The exit survey consisted of an open-ended
questionnaire predominantly designed to collect qualitative responses as to
the usefulness of the content provided (with a view of repurposing content for the
year 2 online environment), measure overall value of time spent at the SmartGreen
workshops and measure the value of networking and mentoring in terms of the
development of an EAP. The exit survey was completed by 17 participants. Data
pertaining to the optimisation of program content for year 2 delivery fall outside of the
scope of this paper and is hence not included. All data relevant to the exploratory study
were clustered into attitude and behaviour themes and are reported below. Both the
feedback and exit surveys were designed using free online survey software.

Study findings
As reflected in Table I, results from a t-test conducted to compare gender differences in
environmental attitudes based on NEP questions found that in seven of the 15 items
women expressed greater (NEP) environmental concern than males.
On the other hand, results from the Mann-Whitney test conducted to generate
sex-disaggregated data on energy-related behaviours identified no differences in
behaviour between gender groups on an ordinal scale (Table II).
The quantitative data on attitudes suggest that females are more engaged in
environmental issues than males, although the behavioural data indicate that women’s
positive environmental attitudes do not necessarily translate into more engaged
behaviour. The study then went on to examine the qualitative results to see whether these
findings might apply to entrepreneurs and in particular whether women entrepreneurs
were more engaged in green business practices than their male counterparts.
Of the initial number of participants (30), all of which were managers of micro
enterprises or SMEs, a number of men (six) either dropped out of the program citing
issues such as “too busy” and “Am already doing most of this stuff” or replaced
themselves with a woman colleague citing her to be “better placed to undertake and
implement the SmartGreen program”. As a result of these dropouts, more female
participants completed the learning program and an EAP for their enterprise than male
participants. In-class attendance and observation also found women entrepreneurs to
be more eager than their male counterparts to gather and contribute information to the
classroom and sharing information on course content in their workplace, providing
feedback such as “I look forward to learning more and implementing changes in our
business”. Females were also more eager to network with other participants, seeing
networking as both a learning experience and business opportunity. Exit survey
IJGE Male (n ¼ 200) Female (n ¼ 200)
2,3 NEP questions Mean Mean t-value

The balance of nature is strong enough to cope with the

impacts of modern industrial nations 2.46 1.99 4.01 *
The balance of nature is very delicate and easily upset 3.95 4.33 2 3.67 *
Humans have the right to modify the natural
252 environment to suit their needs 2.82 2.44 3.06 *
Plants and animals have as much right as humans to
exist 4.12 4.42 2 2.90 *
When humans interfere with nature, it often produces
disastrous results 3.79 4.08 2 2.58 *
If things continue on their present course, we will soon
experience a major environmental disaster 3.69 3.96 2 2.33 *
The so-called “environmental crisis” facing people has
been greatly exaggerated 2.84 2.53 2.29 *
The earth is like a spaceship with very limited room and
resources 3.66 3.44 1.74
Despite our abilities, humans are still subject to the laws
of nature 4.35 4.20 1.58
Humans were meant to rule over the rest of nature 2.30 2.09 1.55
We are approaching the limit of the number of people the
earth can support 3.67 3.49 1.37
Humans are severely abusing the environment 3.94 4.04 2 0.87
The earth has plenty of natural resources if we just learn
how to use them better 3.77 3.86 2 0.81
Humans will eventually learn enough about how nature
works to be able to control it 2.62 2.68 2 0.43
Human intelligence will ensure that we do NOT make
Table I. the earth unliveable 2.77 2.79 2 0.12
Environmental attitudes
(NEP) by gender Notes: *Statistically significant at the 95 per cent level; scale 1 – strongly disagree, 5 – strongly agree

comments by male participants on the value of networking during the course included:
“The group was too small for useful networking” and “The networking opportunities
can be improved”, whereas female participants expressed the opposite view: “Meeting
other business people was great”, “Learning what is available in our area is always
useful” and “SmartGreen has provided an opportunity to discuss environmental issues
affecting organisations and to network with like-minded folks in the local area”.
Both genders looked to government to lead climate change actions, although a female
participant commented that “business can and need to lead the way to solve our
environmental issues towards a more sustainable society”. Comments by men
participants on the value of the course included “the program made me think, but it
would have been useful if we had more in the same industry.” Female participants’
comments included: “What I learnt is that it doesn’t cost a lot”; “being informed is being
armed”; “knowing what questions to ask is half the battle”; “a standard to work towards
makes life easier”; and “I feel good about where my business is headed”. Comments on
whether the SmartGreen program changed their business practices by men included
“I feel we didn’t get down to the real reason most people are attending – how they can
make $$ out of sustainability”. Female participants: “SmartGreen was a catalyst for us
 Female (n ¼ 89) Male (n ¼ 65)
Energy-related behaviours N (%) R (%) S (%) U (%) A (%) N (%) R (%) S (%) U (%) A (%) Mann-Whitney U Z-test

Buy energy-efficient appliances 7 4 30 35 24 9 6 25 29 31 2,791.5 2 0.38

Buy organic and or fair-trade products 19 12 43 21 4 15 26 42 15 2 2,578.5 2 1.21
Recycle household waste 2 0 8 9 81 0 0 6 20 74 2,735.0 2 0.80
Compost domestic waste 20 8 15 12 45 17 14 20 9 40 2,757.0 2 0.52
Use household or garden chemicals 20 28 31 12 8 11 23 38 23 5 2,435.5 2 1.73
Use recycled products 3 11 39 34 12 3 8 52 31 6 2,674.0 2 0.86
Buy food produced locally 3 7 53 27 10 8 9 46 25 12 2,782.5 2 0.44
Grow your own food 53 7 20 16 4 32 18 32 11 6 2,495.5 2 1.54
Conserve water in your household 0 1 3 28 67 2 3 8 38 49 2,314.0 2 2.44
Conserve water in your garden 0 2 6 24 69 2 0 2 34 63 2,788.0 2 0.46
Reduce appliance use to save energy 2 4 25 33 36 5 5 23 38 29 2,719.5 2 0.66
Reduce energy use for heating and cooling 2 6 28 37 27 3 5 18 45 29 2,666.0 2 0.87
Reduce hot water use in your home 6 9 25 35 26 3 9 14 49 25 2,654.0 2 0.92
Use public transport or ride/walk to work 52 15 20 10 3 37 22 26 11 5 2,509.0 2 1.49
Avoid long-distance air travel 39 10 10 21 19 22 17 12 28 22 2,465.5 2 1.61
Notes: Scale: N, never; R, rarely; S, sometimes; U, usually; A, always

Energy-related
behaviours by gender
Going green

253

Table II.
IJGE to implement our waste management system. The program encouraged us to make
more environmentally friendly decisions in relation all aspects of our business”. One
2,3 female participant expressed frustration that she was unable to source sustainable
supplies domestically and was forced to enlarge her footprint by having to import
components of her product range. Whereas, participating women saw themselves as
agents of change in leading the greening of their own business into profound social
254 change, men saw it as an opportunity for leaner business practices and operational
savings, providing comments such as: “The owners and management are committed to a
process that will minimise the impact of these activities on the environment”; “Not sure
where this is all headed”. Female responses included (referring to some of the male
participants):
Are the participants all committed to being “green entrepreneurs” or is it mainly for business
building of conventional businesses who wish to tap into the green market, but may not be
committed to “green” direction in their product/manufacturing?
While participating, women saw themselves as agents of change in leading the
greening of their own business into profound social change, providing comments such
as: “The owners and management are committed to a process that will minimise the
impact of these activities on the environment”; “Not sure where this is all headed [. . .]”
Female responses included (referring to some of the male participants):
Are the participants all committed to being “green entrepreneurs” or is it mainly for business
building of conventional businesses who wish to tap into the green market, but may not be
committed to “green” direction in their product/manufacturing?
Male entrepreneurs tended to look for bottom-line outcomes and competitive
advantage, whereas women tended to lean towards broader ethical concerns in terms
of benefiting the greater good. Women were also more proactive in participating
in green networking opportunities, where they could interact with like-minded
businesses, access more clients, source alternative resources and expand their business
networks.
The qualitative data generated during year 1 of the SmartGreen program suggest
that women entrepreneurs were more engaged in green issues than their male
counterparts with participating women displaying different attitudes and
demonstrating more commitment to finishing the program than participating males.

Conclusion
This paper has explored whether women entrepreneurs may be more engaged with
greening issues than their male counterparts. To that end, the paper has presented the
results of an exploratory study underpinned by datasets from two regional studies on
environmental attitudes and behaviour and an Australian green entrepreneurship
training program consisting of attendance records, in-class observation,
post-workshop feedback and a program exit survey.
The quantitative data on environmental attitudes are line with earlier gender and
environmental attitude/risk studies (Hunter et al., 2004; Zelezny et al., 2000; Bord and
O’Connor, 1997; Davidson and Freudenberg, 1996), corroborating findings in the literature
that females are more engaged in environmental issues than males. The behavioural
dataset shows that women’s positive environmental attitudes do not necessarily
translate into higher levels of engagement in environmental behaviour, supporting
the Barr et al. (2001) observation that attitude alone does not lead to behaviour change. Going green
The qualitative data generated as part of the green entrepreneurship program suggest
that women entrepreneurs are more engaged in green issues than their male
counterparts and that findings from household data apply to women entrepreneurs.
Male entrepreneurs tended to look for bottom-line outcomes and competitive
advantage, seeing the program as an opportunity for leaner business practices and
operational savings, whereas women tended to lean towards broader ethical concerns 255
in terms of benefiting the greater good. Being a group of relatively homogeneous
women entrepreneurs brought up in a “privileged” Western context, they displayed a
strong “ethic of care” (Chodorow, 1974) and risk averseness to climate change (Bord
and O’Connor, 1997), transferring gendered attitudes on environmental issues into
green entrepreneurship. Putting these findings in the context of the Taylor and Wally
(2004) typology, it could be argued that participating male entrepreneurs fit the finance
driven ad hoc enviropreneur type and participating female entrepreneurs fit the
value-driven ethical maverick type, with women entrepreneurs more engaged in
driving societal learning and change (Taylor and Wally, 2004). Women were also more
proactive in participating in green networking opportunities and expanding their
business and social capital. The latter may be a reflection on entrepreneurs’ interest
in engaging on the local level and could form part of their (conscious or unconscious)
CSR agenda/green entrepreneurship reputation, as suggested by Spence (2007).
The study also contributes to Perrini’s (2006) view that research on CSR among SMEs
should be based on the concept of social capital. As this was an exploratory study,
the findings are indicative only and there are limitations to consider. At the time
of writing, the green entrepreneurship program was not monitoring participating
entrepreneurs on implementation of their EAPs and longer term green
entrepreneurship behaviour. As such, outcomes can only be considered in terms of
what Stern (1992) describes as self-reported intentions that may have a stronger link to
attitudes than reality. Another limitation of the study is the lack of demographic and
contextual detail in both the quantitative and qualitative datasets, which prevents the
generalisation of findings and requires comprehensive research, directions for which
are discussed below.
Both the CSR and green entrepreneurship literatures link the values
and motivations of entrepreneurs to CSR and green practices. Ajzen’s (1992) TPB
ties individual knowledge, awareness, different information and communication
channels/networks to decision-making processes. Thus, gender differences in
awareness, knowledge gathering and social orientation may well be important
determinants for the uptake of green entrepreneurship by the women. The study also
supports the use of the extended TPB model (Ajzen, 1992), which incorporates
perceived control over the completion of the behaviour as an additional predictor, to
account for those situations where the individual’s capacity to engage in the behaviour
may not be entirely within their control. For small business, this may include a
combination of internal motivations and external (hard and soft) structural influences
proposed by Taylor and Wally (2004) and a level of social capital as discussed by
Perrini (2006). In developing a framework for environmental action, the Barr and Gilg
(2007) conceptual framework adopts the premise that values and behaviour are linked,
but are mediated by a range of situational variables (such as socio-demographics,
knowledge and behavioural context) and psychological variables (such as intrinsic
IJGE motivation, perceived environmental threat and social influence), which are
2,3 subject to antecedents. Adapted to reflect gender socialization, CSR, TPB and green
entrepreneurship themes, the holistic Barr and Gilg (2007) conceptual framework
(Figure 1) provides a useful construct for further research on gender and green
entrepreneurship.
Many components of this exploratory study would benefit from in-depth
256 investigation and analysis based on larger samples and more qualitative research to
establish CSR motivations and activities of small businesses (Spence, 2007). The
proposed conceptual framework could be applied to research on gender values,
motivations, attitudes and behaviour pertaining to SMEs and CSR, socialization,
climate change risk, local structures, the ecological footprint, exogenous pressures and
other issues pertaining to green entrepreneurship. There is significant scope for further
research that will add to our understanding of what influences small business to move
from pro-environmental attitudes to pro-environmental behaviours. Gender-specific
entrepreneurial processes as a vital aspect of these practices (Ahl, 2002) would also
assist in answering some of the many remaining questions. Understanding gendered
behaviours will have implications for policy and education in terms of greening the
small firm sector. It will also have implications for innovation and the green
marketplace. If green business practices, entrepreneurial innovation and the generation
of green jobs are indeed the foundation of a sustainable post-carbon future, it is
imperative that we gain a better understanding of behavioural norms shaping
environmental action or inaction.

Situational variables
• Local context
• Awareness Enablers/
• Knowledge disablers
• Socio-demographics
• Structural influences

Behaviour
Social/environmental values Intentions (green
entrepreneurship)

Psychological
variables
• Intrinsic motivation
• Perceived risk/
Motivators/ Actual
environmental
barriers behavioural
concerns
• Socialization control
• Ecopreneurial
orientation
Figure 1.
Conceptual framework
Source: Adapted from Barr and Gilg (2007)
References Going green
Ahl, H. (2002), “The construction of the female entrepreneur as the other”, in Czarniawska, B. and
Hopfl, H. (Eds), Casting the Other: The Production and Maintenance of Inequalities in
Work Organizations, Routledge, London, pp. 52-67.
Ajzen, I. (1992), “The theory of planned behavior”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 179-211.
Ajzen, I. and Gilbert Cote, N. (2008), “Attitudes and the prediction of behaviour”, in 257
Crano, W.D. and Prislin, R. (Eds), Attitudes and Attitude Change, Psychology Press,
New York, NY.
Bansal, P. and Roth, K. (2000), “Why companies go green: a model of ecological responsiveness”,
Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 717-36.
Barr, S. and Gilg, A. (2007), “A conceptual framework for understanding and analyzing attitudes
towards environmental behaviour”, Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography,
Vol. 89 No. 4, pp. 361-79.
Barr, S., Gilg, A. and Ford, N. (2001), “A conceptual framework for understanding and analysing
attitudes towards household waste-management”, Environment and Planning, Vol. 33
No. 11, pp. 2025-48.
Bord, R. and O’Connor, R. (1997), “The gender gap in environmental attitudes: the case of
perceived vulnerability to risk”, Social Science Quarterly, Vol. 78 No. 4, pp. 830-40.
Braun, P. and McEachern, S. (2010), “A climate of change: towards sustainable community
behaviour”, Australasian Journal of Regional Studies, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 3-22 (special issue).
Chell, E. (2000), “Towards researching the ‘opportunistic entrepreneur’: a social constructionist
approach & research agenda”, European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology,
Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 63-80.
Chodorow, N. (1974), “Family structure and feminine perspective”, in Rosaldo, M. and
Lamphere, L. (Eds), Women in Culture and Society, Stanford University Press, Stanford,
CA, pp. 41-8.
Creswell, J., Clark, V., Gutmann, M. and Hanson, W. (2003), “Advanced mixed methods research
designs”, in Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C. (Eds), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social
and Behavioral Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 209-39.
Davidson, D. and Freudenburg, W. (1996), “Gender and environmental risk concerns: a review
and analysis of available research”, Environment & Behavior, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 302-39.
Dixon, S. and Clifford, A. (2007), “Ecopreneurship – a new approach to managing the triple
bottom line”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 326-45.
Dunlap, R. (2000), “Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: a revised NEP
scale”, Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 425-42.
Environment Victoria (2009), Victoria – The Green Jobs State: Seizing the Opportunities,
Environment Victoria, Melbourne.
Fallin, Y. (2008), “SMEs and the fallacy of formalising CSR”, Business Ethics: A European
Review, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 364-79.
Fuj, T., Hennessy, M. and Mak, J. (1985), “An evaluation of the validity and reliability of survey
response data on household electricity conservation”, Evaluation Review, Vol. 9 No. 1,
pp. 93-104.
Giddens, A. (1984), The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration, Polity
Press, Cambridge, MA.
IJGE Harris, L. and Crane, A. (2002), “The greening of organizational culture – management views on
the depth, degree and diffusion of change”, Journal of Organizational Change
2,3 Management, Vol. 15, pp. 214-34.
Hart, S. and Ahuja, G. (1996), “Does it pay to be green? An empirical examination of the
relationship between emission reduction and firm performance”, Business Strategy and the
Environment, Vol. 5, pp. 30-7.
258 Hillary, R. (Ed.) (2000), Small and Medium-sized Enterprises and the Environment, Greenleaf,
Sheffield.
Hunter, L., Hatch, A. and Johnson, A. (2004), “Cross-national gender variation in environmental
behaviours”, Social Science Quarterley, Vol. 85 No. 3, pp. 677-94.
Isaak, R. (1999), Green Logic: Ecopreneurship, Theory and Ethics, Kumarian Press, West
Hartford, CT.
Jenkins, H. (2004), “A critique of conventional CSR theory: an SME perspective”, Journal of
General Management, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 37-57.
Lepoutre, J. (2008), “Proactive environmental strategies in small business: resources, institutions
and dynamic capabilities”, unpublished thesis, Department of Management,
Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration,
University Gent, Ghent, available at: www.feb.ugent.be/nl/Ondz/Proefschriften/lepoutre_j_
proefschrift.pdf
Lepoutre, J. (2009), “Proactive environmental strategies in small businesses: resources,
institutions and dynamic capabilities”, Accountancy en Bedrijfskunde, Vol. 29 No. 8, pp. 14-19.
Marshall, J. (2007), “The gendering of leadership in corporate social responsibility”, Journal of
Organizational Change Management, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 165-81.
Meier, R. and Masters, R. (1988), “Sex differences and risk-taking propensity of entrepreneurs”,
Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 31-5.
Murillo, D. and Lozano, J. (2006), “SMEs and CSR: an approach to CSR in their own words”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 67 No. 3, pp. 227-40.
Paulray, A. (2008), “Environmental motivations: a classification scheme and its impact on
environmental strategies and practices”, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 18
No. 7, pp. 453-68.
Payne, D.M. and Raiborn, C.A. (2001), “Sustainable development: the ethics support the
economics”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 157-68.
Pearson, R. (2007), “Beyond women workers: gendering CSR”, Third World Quarterly, Vol. 28
No. 4, pp. 731-49.
Perrini, F. (2006), “SMEs and CSR theory: evidence and implications from an Italian perspective”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 67 No. 3, pp. 305-16.
Spence, L. (2007), “CSR and small business in a European policy context: the five ‘C’s of CSR and
small business research agenda 2007”, Business and Society Review, Vol. 112 No. 4,
pp. 533-52.
Stern, P. (1992), “Psychological dimensions of global environmental change”, Annual Review of
Psychology, Vol. 43, pp. 269-302.
Stoll-Kleemann, S., O’Riordan, T. and Jaeger, C. (2001), “The psychology of denial
concerning climate mitigation measures: evidence from Swiss focus groups”, Global
Environmental Change, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 107-17.
Taylor, D. and Walley, L. (2004), “The green entrepreneur: opportunist, Maverick or
visionary?”, International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Vol. 1 Nos 1/2,
pp. 56-69.
Thompson, L.J. (2008), “Gender equity and corporate social responsibility in a post-feminist era”, Going green
Business Ethics: A European Review, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 87-106.
Werbach, A. (2009), Strategies for Sustainability, Perseus, New York, NY.
Wilson, C. and Dowlatabadi, H. (2007), “Models of decision making and residential energy use”,
Annual Review of Environment and Resources, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 1-35.
Zelezny, E., Chua, P. and Aldrich, C. (2000), “Elaborating on gender differences in
environmentalism”, Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 443-57. 259
Further reading
Denton, F. (2002), “Climate change vulnerability, impacts, and adaptation: why does gender
matter?”, Gender & Development, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 10-20.

Corresponding author
Patrice Braun can be contacted at: p.braun@ballarat.edu.au

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints