Transforming Rural Learning Spaces: The Role of Entrepreneurship Education on Promoting Sustainable Development in Zimbabwe

Transforming Rural Learning Spaces: The Role of Entrepreneurship Education on Promoting Sustainable Development in Zimbabwe

Hazel Mubango¹, Muziti Petronella², Muchowe Regis M³

^1,2Women’s University in Africa, Zimbabwe

³Zimbabwe Open University

ORCID ID: Mubango Hazel https://orcid.org/0009-0006-4695-8056

ORCID ID: Muchowe Regis https://orcid.org/0009-0004-1574-3744

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.903SEDU0417

Received: 22 July 2025; Accepted: 30 July 2025; Published: 21 August 2025

ABSTRACT

Entrepreneurship education is crucial for developing human capital to address unemployment and promote sustainable development, particularly in low-income economies like Zimbabwe. This study examined the integration of entrepreneurial education in rural learning spaces to enhance employability and sustainable development in Zimbabwe. The study was based on Human Capital Theory (HCT), which emphasises the significance of education in cultivating skills for economic development and sustainability.  A quantitative research methodology was employed, incorporating questionnaires with 200 rural educators and students. The data was examined utilising SPSS Version 30 and analysed using descriptive statistics and regression analysis. Research findings indicated limited access to structured entrepreneurial programs.  Programmes aligned with community needs exhibited superior result rates owing to their local pertinence. However, essential gaps including infrastructure problems hindered scalability. The study promoted policy integration through the inclusion of entrepreneurial education in rural curricula with localised content. Collaborative initiatives of public authorities, non-governmental groups, and corporations to fund training institutes. Empowering teachers with practical entrepreneurship skills and resources to effectively mentor students.

Keywords: Rural learning ecologies, entrepreneurial education, human capital sustainable development, Zimbabwe.

INTRODUCTION

Entrepreneurship constitutes a vital foundation of the economy (García-Rodríguez et al., 2019). Consequently, numerous nations seek to foster entrepreneurial initiatives by incorporating them as a pedagogical principle within educational institutions, thereby identifying, motivating, and supporting potential entrepreneurs in utilising their capabilities and engaging in entrepreneurial activities. As a result, the incorporation of entrepreneurship into school curricula has risen in prevalence in recent years (Sánchez, 2013). In 2024, the worldwide unemployment rate has escalated to 6.5%, with young unemployment rates in certain regions surpassing 20% (Gern et al., 2024).

Entrepreneurship has been documented to invigorate numerous economies globally when all participants fulfil their respective tasks efficiently (Green et al., 2019). Zimbabwe confronts considerable obstacles, including elevated unemployment and impediments to sustainable growth, mostly attributed to economic instability, policy shortcomings, and restricted possibilities for youth and marginalised populations. Maphosa (2024) asserts that inflation substantially affects unemployment, but GDP growth exhibits a lesser direct relationship. The nation’s unemployment rate has escalated to among the highest in Africa, with estimates approaching 85% in recent years, notably affecting youth and marginalised groups (Chigora & Mcilo, 2021; Chigudu, 2021; Maulani & Agwanda, 2020; Zinyama, 2019). A report by Rusvingo (2015) highlighted that Zimbabwe’s 85% unemployment rate poses a significant threat to both the nation and the wider SADC region. This arises from an inadequate education system and a misalignment between skills and labour market requirements (Hupile & Siambombe, 2024; Maulani & Agwanda, 2020; Zinyama, 2019). Chinokopota et al. (2024) assert that the cultivation of entrepreneurship skills in educational institutions markedly reduces unemployment and enhances the sustainability of Zimbabwe’s educational framework.

Concerning sustainable development challenges, development programs frequently fail owing to politicisation, inadequate monitoring, insufficient financial backing, and the isolation of people from decision-making processes (Hupile & Siambombe, 2024; Muradya & Modiba, 2019; Maulani & Agwanda, 2020). A study conducted in Zimbabwe and Zambia indicated that inequitable spatial planning and the absence of sustainable frameworks impede balanced regional development (Chigudu & Chirisa, 2020). Numerous individuals, particularly the youth, resort to informal and small-scale business for subsistence, yet encounter obstacles such as restricted access to money, inadequate infrastructure, and regulatory impediments (Chigudu & Chirisa, 2020; Hupile & Siambombe, 2024). Zimbabwe presents chances for economic development; nevertheless, actualising this potential necessitates comprehensive reforms and stable, inclusive policies (Mutandwa & Genc, 2018).

An integrated curriculum and education significantly enhance sustainable development and entrepreneurship in Zimbabwean secondary schools, as a high employment rate encourages pupils to follow this trajectory (Dambudzo, 2015). This, in turn, facilitates the attainment of Zimbabwe’s NDS1 and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UNSDG) Goal 4, which aims to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education, as well as Goal 8, which promotes lifelong learning opportunities for all and fosters sustained, inclusive, and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment, and decent work for all (SDG Universal Report, 2015).

Government and NGO policy initiatives in promoting entrepreneurship education

Governments are progressively utilising entrepreneurship education to enhance economic activity, while the economic advantages are occasionally difficult to validate due to differing definitions and aims. An explicit, theoretically informed policy framework is essential for directing efficient program design and execution, as demonstrated in the Australian context (O’Connor, 2013). In nations such as Sweden, governmental programs have expressly sought to provide individuals with action-oriented entrepreneurial competencies via higher education, cultivating an enterprising culture and tackling both personal and collective social concerns (Hägg & Schölin, 2018). Simultaneously, NGOs, especially in areas such as Uttarakhand, India, empower marginalised populations, particularly women, by offering specialised support, mentorship, and resource access, thereby cultivating entrepreneurial skills and inclusivity (Lenka & Agarwal, 2017). In Romania, NGOs frequently collaborate with public administrations to execute social entrepreneurship initiatives, utilising public funds and community networks to tackle local development issues (Schin et al., 2023).

Governments frequently spearhead initiatives via national and regional programs that incorporate entrepreneurship into higher education, promote innovation centres, and cultivate public-private collaborations. In India, the T-Hub and analogous programs in Telangana cultivate startups and promote innovation-driven entrepreneurship (Mallareddy, 2025; Suresh et al., 2025; Wei, 2022). The South African government has implemented numerous programs, policies, and initiatives to foster and assist entrepreneurs via tax incentives, grants, subsidies, funding schemes, and mentorship programs (National Youth Development Agency, 2023). In Tunisia, governmental initiatives including tax incentives, skills enhancement, and ecosystem development have markedly improved social entrepreneurship and sustainable development (Altwaijri, 2024; Ben Chikha et al., 2025). Research indicates that entrepreneurship education, provided by universities, government entities, or incubators, favourably impacts entrepreneurial intents and firm establishment, particularly when these initiatives are collaboratively executed across sectors (Breznitz & Zhang, 2022).

The efficacy of these initiatives may be constrained by structural barriers, and their influence is optimised when integrated with strong educational institutions and ICT infrastructure (Altwaijri, 2024; Omotosho, et al., 2024). The collaboration among government policies, NGO initiatives, and educational institutions is essential for fostering entrepreneurial mindsets and promoting sustainable economic and social advancement (Altwaijri, 2024; Omotosho, et al., 2024; Suresh, et al., 2025; Wei, 2022). Government and NGO initiatives serve complementary functions in advancing entrepreneurial education.

Current state of entrepreneurship education in Zimbabwe

In Zimbabwe, entrepreneurship education is being offered as a course in all higher education institutions nationally to bolster the Government’s initiatives aimed at enhancing entrepreneurial skills among graduates. Only a limited number of universities, such as Chinhoyi University of Technology, offer entrepreneurship as a degree program, while the Women’s University in Africa is reformulating its entrepreneurship course to align with the Education 5.0 areas of commercialisation and innovation to foster job creation. Despite increasing acknowledgement of its significance in tackling unemployment and promoting innovation, substantial obstacles persist in curriculum development, pedagogical approaches, and resource distribution. Most universities depend on conventional, lecture-centric pedagogy and written assessments, with minimal incorporation of practical or experience learning. Instructors frequently possess insufficient practical entrepreneurial experience, hence diminishing the efficacy of their teaching (Manhimanzi et al., 2024; Mauchi et al., 2011; Mawonedzo et al., 2020).

Entrepreneurship education is predominantly accessible to students in business-related disciplines and is not currently mandated across the university or school-wide. In some instances, it is absent from primary or secondary school curricula (Mauchi et al., 2011; Nani, 2019; Uzhenyu, 2017). Furthermore, there is a significant deficiency in experiential, practical training. Experiential learning initiatives, including industry placements, are frequently inadequately executed and fail to deliver pertinent entrepreneurial experience (Mawonedzo et al., 2020; Manhimanzi et al., 2024). Research has shown that inadequate support from educational institutions and government, characterised by constrained budgets and resources allocated to entrepreneurship education (Mauchi et al., 2011; Saiden, 2017).

The Zimbabwean government has established policy frameworks to foster entrepreneurship and innovation, aiming to facilitate the establishment of new enterprises, generate employment, and promote socio-economic growth (Herrington & Kelly, 2012). The findings of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into Education and Training, commonly referred to as the Nziramasanga Commission (1999), revealed that the populace attributed high unemployment rates among graduates to the curriculum, which fostered a white-collar mentality, leading graduates to continue seeking employment post-graduation. Furthermore, in 2017, the Ministry of Higher and Tertiary Education (MHTE) mandated all educational institutions to adopt the Education 5.0 doctrine, which seeks to cultivate knowledgeable, pertinent, and high-quality graduates equipped with advanced entrepreneurial skills for job creation, self-employment, and dignified work (MHTE, 2017). Zimbabwe’s National Development Strategy 1 endorses the establishment of new enterprises, so indirectly fostering the demand for individuals possessing entrepreneurial abilities to initiate and oversee these organisations, consequently generating employment and possibilities (NDS1, 2021-2025).

A deficiency exists in the literature about entrepreneurship education and sustainable development within rural learning environments in Zimbabwe. This study is significant as it adds to the NDS1 and the United Nations Sustainable Development targets, namely targets 4 and 8 (SDG universal report, 2015). Resolving these difficulties necessitates extensive reforms, inclusive policies, and focused assistance for youth and marginalised populations to promote job creation and sustained, equitable development.

Research objectives

The study is guided by the following research questions.

1. To explore the impact of entrepreneurship education on sustainable development in rural learning spaces in Zimbabwe.
2. To examine the integration of entrepreneurship education into rural school curricula on students’ entrepreneurial competencies.
3. To examine the relationship between entrepreneurship education and employability among students in rural Zimbabwe.

Research hypotheses

2. H1: Entrepreneurship education has a statistically significant positive effect on sustainable development in rural learning spaces.
3. H2: Integration of entrepreneurship education into rural school curricula significantly improves students’ entrepreneurial competencies.
4. H3: There is a positive relationship between entrepreneurship education and increased employability among students in rural Zimbabwe.

LITERATURE REVIEW

The following sections highlights the theoretical framework and literature related to the study.

Theoretical framework

The research utilised Human Capital Theory (HCT), asserting that entrepreneurial success depends on knowledge, skills, and experiences (Becker, 1964). This hypothesis posits that investments in education, training, and health can enhance outcomes. Enhance economic productivity and promote elevated degrees of growth among societies (Becker, 1964). The improvement of human capital via quality education is a vital element that drives economic growth and sustainable development (Olaniyan & Okemakinde, 2008). With regards to entrepreneurship studies, Human Capital Theory (HCT) provides significant insights into the essential role of education and training in fostering entrepreneurial success (Audretsch & Thurik, 2001). Additionally, Schumpeter (1934) posits that entrepreneurial education facilitates creative destruction, suggesting that education serves as a catalyst for the generation of novel ideas, enhanced methodologies, innovative technology, and new goods. The theory assists in evaluating the effectiveness of entrepreneurial education in improving individuals’ entrepreneurial skills and results, thereby guiding policymakers and educators in developing effective entrepreneurship development initiatives (Wyrwich et al., 2016). The HCT emphasises the obtaining and development of skills and experiences pertinent to certain educational environments.

Meaning of entrepreneurship education

Entrepreneurship denotes the process of identifying and utilising entrepreneurial opportunities to generate and secure economic, environmental, and social value (Baron & Shane, 2007). Mauchi et al. (2011) define entrepreneurship education as the process of equipping individuals with the capacity to identify economic possibilities, together with the requisite knowledge, skills, and attitudes to pursue them. Entrepreneurial abilities that entrepreneurship education seeks to enhance include recognising novel opportunities in the currently unknowable, generating value in ambiguous circumstances, and making decisions with limited tangible information (Nabi et al., 2017). Entrepreneurship education encompasses more than merely initiating firms; it is a transforming process that cultivates entrepreneurial mindsets, abilities, and ambitions in students. The primary results of entrepreneurship education pertain to alterations in attitude, knowledge and skills, feasibility, entrepreneurial intention, socio-economic effect, business start-up rates, and business performance (Nabi et al., 2017).

Entrepreneurial knowledge constitutes a synthesis of primary and secondary entrepreneurial experiences, with primary experience being the act of entrepreneurship and secondary experience involving reflection on that act (Hägg & Kurczewska, 2020). Martin et al. (2013) identified a statistically significant correlation between entrepreneurship education and human capital results, including entrepreneurship-related knowledge and skills.

Importance of entrepreneurship education

Entrepreneurship education is crucial for mitigating unemployment and attaining sustainable development.

Employment generation

Numerous studies indicate a robust correlation between entrepreneurial education and employment creation. Graduates engaged in entrepreneurship education are more inclined to establish businesses with paid staff, hence facilitating employment creation among recent university graduates (Sá et al., 2024). By imparting entrepreneurial skills and mindsets, educational institutions can stimulate job creation, economic growth, and social stability, rendering it an essential element of national development initiatives. A study indicates that entrepreneurship education equips students and graduates to establish their own enterprises, hence diminishing dependence on scarce formal employment options and directly tackling elevated unemployment rates (Chinopokota et al., 2024; Ewumi et al., 2013; Gaiya & Yaki, 2020).

Equips entrepreneurial skills and mindsets to students 

Entrepreneurship education is acknowledged as a crucial catalyst for cultivating entrepreneurial intentions, competencies, and attitudes in students, hence facilitating economic development and employment creation (Nabi et al., 2017; Owoseni & Akambi, 2010; Ratten & Usmanij, 2021). Studies indicate that this type of education not only provides practical knowledge and skills but also enhances students’ confidence and enthusiasm to pursue entrepreneurial professions, particularly when programs feature exposure to successful entrepreneurial role models (Boldureanu et al., 2020; Matlay, 2008). Thereby transforming them into enterprising individuals through immersive real-life learning experiences that enable them to take risks, manage outcomes, and derive lessons from the results. Furthermore, Owoseni (2009) affirmed that entrepreneurship education fosters the development of managerial skills and competencies necessary for self-employment. Akpomi (2009) asserted that entrepreneurial talents and mindsets confer advantages to society that extend beyond their corporate applications.  Both formal and non-formal entrepreneurship education are significant, with non-formal methods frequently exerting a greater influence on cultivating entrepreneurial mindsets and constructive abilities (Debarliev et al., 2022; Nabi et al., 2017).

Local innovation

Entrepreneurship education fosters job development and enhances local creativity. Incorporating entrepreneurship into education provides students with vital abilities, like originality, adaptability, and resilience, which are crucial for manoeuvring through evolving labour markets and promoting a more innovative society (Kaiyanan, 2024). Action-oriented entrepreneurship education, which prioritises experiential learning, has demonstrated its efficacy in motivating and equipping graduates to engage in innovative and entrepreneurial endeavours, such as founding new enterprises and commercialising research (Rasmussen & Sørheim, 2006). Numerous entrepreneurship educators (Kassean et al., 2015; Nabi et al., 2017; Pittaway & Cope, 2007) contend that entrepreneurship education ought to furnish students with experiential learning opportunities that involve authentic entrepreneurial activities alongside reflective processes in a low-risk financial environment. Human resource education, when integrated with entrepreneurship, connects local innovation to global markets, fostering an inclusive atmosphere for economic development (Hanif et al., 2024).

Partnership mechanisms

The efficacy of entrepreneurship education is augmented when it integrates academic, professional, and experiential methodologies, and is bolstered by collaboration among institutions, governmental entities, and industry (Breznitz & Zhang, 2021; Rasmussen & Sørheim, 2006). Elevated educational attainment and expertise enhance entrepreneurial foresight and skills, hence positively impacting business formation and worldwide economic engagement (Jafari‐Sadeghi, et al., 2019). The literature underscores the necessity for the strategic organisation of entrepreneurship education within community support frameworks to optimise its influence on economic development and job creation (McMullan & Long, 1987).

Facilitates economic development

Furthermore, entrepreneurship education enhances economic development by promoting innovation, facilitating the establishment of small and medium enterprises (SMEs), and advocating for the efficient utilisation of resources (Olumoyo, 2024; Yahya et al., 2022). It fosters social cohesion, political stability, and environmental security by advocating for good corporate practices and mitigating poverty and inequality (Anggendari & Nurhasanah, 2023). Mandating entrepreneurship instruction throughout all educational tiers equips students to recognise possibilities, use resources, and enhance sustainable economic systems (Chinopokota et al., 2024; Yahya et al., 2022).

Nonetheless, there remains a persistent discourse over the optimal methodologies for structuring and imparting entrepreneurship education, in addition to assessing its enduring effects on tangible entrepreneurial results (Pittaway & Cope, 2007; Nabi et al., 2017). The efficacy of these programs may also hinge on individual student characteristics, such as entrepreneurial zeal, and may differ across business and non-business students (Turner & Gianiodis, 2018; Boldureanu et al., 2020). Entrepreneurship education is seen as a valuable instrument for imparting the skills and attitude necessary for innovation and venture creation; nevertheless, additional study is required to enhance its effectiveness and execution (Pittaway & Cope, 2007; Nabi et al., 2017). Despite its increasing popularity, obstacles persist in guaranteeing that entrepreneurship education is pertinent, broadly embraced by educators, and adaptable to diverse educational environments (Fejes, et al., 2019).

Challenges of implementing entrepreneurship education

Marginalised communities encounter considerable and complex obstacles in obtaining and executing entrepreneurial education, as detailed below.

Structural and infrastructural challenges

The inadequate transport network engenders “isolation” in rural schools, and restricted access to transit poses numerous challenges in attracting highly skilled personnel, facilitating staff attendance, and enabling student access to education (Ovenden-Hope & Passy, 2019). Numerous studies demonstrate that inadequate infrastructure, including substandard internet, transportation, and facilities, restricts access to educational resources and commercial prospects (Azis et al., 2023; Fuertes-Callén et al., 2025; Guzman et al., 2020). Furthermore, the isolation and sparse population in rural regions hinder the provision of consistent, high-quality training and support (Guzman et al., 2020; Fuertes-Callén et al., 2025). These barriers impede both the adoption and efficacy of entrepreneurship education in rural areas.

Financial and educational barriers

Restricted financial access and insufficient collateral hinder rural entrepreneurs from investing in education and business expansion (Azis et al., 2023; Donga & Chimucheka, 2024; Mashapure et al., 2022). Inadequate educational and training options, particularly in business and digital competencies, hinder rural inhabitants’ capacity to participate in entrepreneurship (Donga & Chimucheka, 2024; Sequira, 2025; Prasad & Naveena, 2021). The absence of business networks and mentorship further alienates rural entrepreneurs from possibilities for learning and growth (Semkunde et al., 2021; Mashapure et al., 2022).

Resource constraints

Rural schools are more prone to deficiencies in technical educational resources (Farrington et al. 2015). The atmosphere and transportation may hinder the retention of qualified instructors (Ovenden-Hope & Passy, 2019). Collaboration and resource sharing among rural schools is constrained by physical isolation and scattered populations (Muijs, 2015). The persistent challenges of population decline and reduced population densities complicate teacher recruitment efforts. Rural schools must identify methods to distribute scarce resources to address intricate challenges, while facing the threat of increased budget reductions (Lavalley, 2018).

Rural schools must identify methods to utilise scarce resources to address intricate challenges, while facing the potential for increased budget reductions (Lavalley, 2018). There exists a significant gap in the textbooks, handouts, and other educational resources provided to colleges conducting entrepreneurship education courses. Ifedili and Ofoegbu (2011) noted that due to the lack of standardised learning resources and textbooks for entrepreneurship education, students were compelled to rely on limited handouts and training manuals provided by their instructors.

Lack of qualified entrepreneurial educators

A significant obstacle hindering the advancement of entrepreneurship education is the scarcity of proficient instructors in the discipline, which results in a lack of practical engagement and goal-oriented instruction, favouring excessive theoretical emphasis (Gabadeen & Raimi, 2012). Ifedili and Ofoegbu (2011) observe that educators are experiencing significant challenges regarding the theoretical aspects of entrepreneurship education being provided. Molefi (2015) asserted that the primary problem of teaching entrepreneurship in colleges is that many professors lack personal experience in entrepreneurship or have not developed and managed their own small firms.

Inadequate students’ exposure and educational system

A significant number of students lack experience in entrepreneurship. The elevated poverty percentage indicates that students from impoverished backgrounds are typically not exposed to the broader world (UNDP, 2007). Current tertiary-level institutions lack a comprehensive curriculum that prioritises the advantages of entrepreneurial education (Akpa, 2007). Entrepreneurship requires a skilled workforce; but the existing educational system inadequately equips individuals for this role. Confronting these challenges necessitates focused interventions, enhanced infrastructure, sufficient resource distribution, comprehensive training, and supporting policies to realise the complete potential of rural entrepreneurship.

Entrepreneur education and sustainable development to rural learning spaces

Numerous studies indicate that programs combining entrepreneurship with sustainability enhance learners’ practical skills, foster innovation, and advance social responsibility, all of which are essential for rural resilience and prosperity (Armenia et al., 2024; Forcher-Mayr & Mahlknecht, 2020; Römer-Paakkanen & Suonpää, 2023). These educational initiatives frequently employ interactive, multi-stakeholder methodologies and practical projects, which not only augment business acumen but also fortify community connections and facilitate the establishment of sustainable local enterprises (Armenia, et al., 2024; Martínez-Campillo, et al., 2019; Römer-Paakkanen & Suonpää, 2023). The study hypothesized that; H1: Entrepreneurship education has a statistically significant positive effect on sustainable development in rural learning spaces.

Entrepreneurship education and students’ entrepreneurial competencies

Research conducted in Spain indicates that this form of education enhances students’ professional competencies, civic involvement, and dedication to sustainability, while simultaneously augmenting their employability and entrepreneurial aspirations (Martínez-Campillo, et al., 2019). Targeted entrepreneurship education can enable specific groups, such as women and older persons, to surmount obstacles, use local resources, and enhance the preservation of cultural heritage and community well-being (Farroñán et al., 2024; Römer-Paakkanen & Suonpää, 2023). Nonetheless, obstacles persist, such as the necessity for continuous assistance beyond initial training and the deeper incorporation of sustainability into curricula and assessment (Hagebakken et al., 2021; Forcher-Mayr & Mahlknecht, 2020). Entrepreneurship education in rural areas serves as a catalyst for sustainable development, promoting innovation, economic diversification, and enhanced rural-urban connections (Armenia et al., 2024; Forcher-Mayr & Mahlknecht, 2020). The study hypothesized that; H2: Integration of entrepreneurship education into rural school curricula significantly improves students’ entrepreneurial competencies.

Entrepreneurship education and students’ employability

Audu (2022) asserts that entrepreneurship training fosters self-reliance, empowering individuals to earn money and mitigate the adverse effects of unemployment, including crime and poverty. A Nigerian study shown that entrepreneurial education is essential for mitigating elevated unemployment rates and fostering economic development (Olumoyo, 2024), as well as facilitating sustainable development (Queen, 2024; Mohammed, 2022). Incorporating vocational and entrepreneurial training into curricula enables students to acquire practical skills for small business management (Audu, 2022; Chinopokota et al., 2024; Inuwa & Bala, 2025). In the post-pandemic environment of China, entrepreneurship education is acknowledged for cultivating entrepreneurial skills and attitudes that promote employment creation, with policy proposals highlighting its incorporation into national economic policies (Lei, 2023). The study therefore proposed that; H3: There is a positive relationship between entrepreneurship education and increased employability among students.

Conceptual framework

Figure 1: Conceptual framework of variables

METHODOLOGY

The study employed a positivist research philosophy. The researcher employs existing theory for hypothesis formation to build a data gathering strategy based on this philosophy. To advance the aforementioned theory via the lens of positivism, hypotheses are subsequently evaluated for validation or refutation (Saunders et al. 2019). Positivism philosophy was used because quantitative data that lead to statistical analysis are commonly used with this paradigm (Harrison et al., 2017). The research utilised a quantitative research approach whose data can be measured easily and patterns clearly established. Bryman et al. (2016) contended that quantitative research enquiries can predispose respondents to answer in a particular manner, so compromising the study’s accuracy.

Population and sampling

The research population of the study comprised Marirangwe secondary school and Beatrice Secondary School located in Seke District, Mashonaland East Province. These schools were chosen as they form part of the rural learning ecologies in Zimbabwe. Finding from this study is also generalisable to most rural schools in the province. The population distribution is shown in table 1 below.

Table 1: Population

Source: Primary data (2025)

The Raosoft sample size calculator determined a sample size of 200, employing a stratified and simple random sampling procedure to assure representativeness of the population (Sekaran, 2016). The population was categorised into two homogeneous strata of teachers, school administrators or heads, and students. The simple random sample method was employed to pick participants from each stratum.

Measurement scale

The research created a 15-item, 3-point Likert scale (Agree, Neutral, Disagree) questionnaire for data collection. The questionnaire comprised four sections: Section A addressed the demographic profile, Section B focused on entrepreneurship education and sustainable development, Section C assessed the integration of entrepreneurship in rural schools, and the final section evaluated employability and livelihood skills. The questionnaire was physically distributed to all participants. The researchers collected the questionnaires after a week. The researchers upheld informed permission, confidentiality, and anonymity throughout the data collecting and analysis phases. Data was collected with the subjects’ agreement where consent from parents and guardians was sought before collecting data from the minors.

Data analysis

Data were examined utilising SPSS version 30. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and regression analysis.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The following section presents the findings of the analysed data and the discussion of the findings.

Response rate

Two hundred questionnaires were distributed, and 192 questionnaires were completed and returned, signifying a response rate of 96%, which is acceptable. This was attributed to the researchers’ constant follow ups with the respondents. This response rate was adequate to analyse the data and get objective results.

Sample demographics

Table 2: Sample demographics

Source: Primary data (2025)

The majority of respondents, 66%, were students, 26% were teachers, and 8% were school administrators. Most respondents were aged 13-17, and the other respondents ranged from 18 to above 46. The majority of respondents were female, contributing about 47% of the respondents. The majority of the schools were government schools (55%). Most teachers/instructors had 6-10 years of experience (38%). The research comprised respondents from diverse backgrounds, making the results generalizable.

Reliability analysis

Reliability analysis was conducted using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient.

Table 3: Cronbach’s Alpha Scores

Source: Primary data (2025)

Table 3 shows the results from the reliability analysis. All the scales were acceptable as they were above the threshold of 0.7. Entrepreneurship education, sustainable development, and employability and livelihood skills scales had a good coefficient, while integration of entrepreneurship in rural schools had an excellent coefficient. Hence, all the scales were retained for further analysis in the investigation.

Factor analysis and sample adequacy

Factor analysis and sample adequacy tests were carried out using KMO and Bartlett’s tests as illustrated in Table 3 below.

Table 4: KMO and Bartlett Tests

Source: Primary data (2025)

Table 4 shows that all three scales had good KMO results, indicating acceptable sample adequacy. Furthermore, the Bartlett’s test scores for the three were below the standard p-value of 0.05, meaning that all factors of the scales are acceptable.

Descriptive statistics

The indicators of each scale were compared using descriptive statistics to rank them according to importance.

Entrepreneurship education and sustainable development

Table 5: Descriptive statistics on entrepreneurship education and sustainable development

Source: Primary data (2025)

Table 5 above shows the nexus between entrepreneurship and sustainable development. The primary indicator identified is that entrepreneurship can reduce poverty in rural areas, as this had a mean of 1.05, suggesting that respondents agreed to this. This finding is congruent with Zinyama (2019), who observed that entrepreneurship education is an avenue to poverty eradication. The results demonstrate that the second primary indicator is that entrepreneurship education helps me understand how to solve problems in my community, with a mean of 1.17, demonstrating that respondents agreed with this. This finding is similar to Yahya et al. (2022), who observe that community problem-solving is increased through entrepreneurship education. The research demonstrates that entrepreneurship education helps me think of ways to improve my village or neighbourhood, as this had a mean of 1.22, highlighting that respondents agreed to this. This is also observed by Wei (2022), who highlights that villages are improved by entrepreneurship education. Furthermore, the study found that students are taught entrepreneurship concepts as signified by a mean of 1.34. This deviates from Uzhenyu (2017), who found that educational institutions lag in entrepreneurship education. However, respondents were neutral on learning entrepreneurship, which helps promote development in their rural area. This deviates from the seminal work of Suresh et al. (2025), who demonstrate that learning entrepreneurship helps encourage community development.

Integration of entrepreneurship in rural schools

Table 6: Descriptive statistics on the integration of Entrepreneurship in Rural Schools

Source: Primary data (2025)

Table 6 above demonstrates how the integration of entrepreneurship in rural schools. The primary indicator identified is that teachers provide adequate support for entrepreneurship learning, as this had a mean of 1.10, suggesting that respondents agreed to this. This finding is consistent with Sánchez (2013), who demonstrates that teachers support learners to be entrepreneurial. The results elaborate that the second primary indicator is that schools encourage students to participate in entrepreneurship-related projects, with a mean of 1.12, showing that respondents agreed with this. This finding is congruent with Semkunde et al. (2021), who demonstrate that the education system stimulates youths to participate in entrepreneurship. The research also shows that students understand the importance of entrepreneurship in their daily life because of school lessons, as this had a mean of 1.37, signifying that respondents agreed to this. This is also shown by Wyrwich et al. (2016). However, respondents were neutral to the view that entrepreneurship is well integrated into our school curriculum, signified by a mean of 1.87. Uzhenyu (2017) also holds this view. However, respondents disagreed with the view that there are enough learning materials and resources for entrepreneurship education in schools, as this had a mean of 2.76. This diverges from the findings by Omotosho et al. (2025), who submit that students have adequate learning materials and resources for entrepreneurship education in schools.

Employability and livelihood skills

Table 7: Descriptive statistics on employability and livelihood skills

Table 7 above demonstrates the employability and livelihood measures. The primary indicator identified is that entrepreneurship education can help people to identify business opportunities in communities, as this had a mean of 1.01, highlighting that respondents agreed to this. This finding is consistent with Suresh et al. (2025), who show that entrepreneurship is essential for identifying opportunities. The table shows that the second primary indicator is that entrepreneurship training in school helps develop leadership and decision-making skills, with a mean of 1.13, indicating that respondents agreed. This finding is similar to Yahya et al. (2022) observation that there is a positive nexus between entrepreneurship education and leadership and decision-making skills. The research also elaborates that entrepreneurship education motivates learners to be self-reliant, as this had a mean of 1.19, meaning that respondents agreed to this. This concurs with Uzhenyu (2017), who shows that more entrepreneurship education results in self-reliance. Moreover, respondents demonstrated that entrepreneurship education improves their chances of getting or creating a job in the future, as shown by a mean of 1.41. This view is also held by Omotosho et al. (2025). However, respondents disagreed with the view that they have gained skills that will help them start a small business, as this had a mean of 2.85. This diverges from the findings by Sánchez (2013), who shows that entrepreneurship education helps learners start their businesses.

Regression analysis and hypothesis testing

Table 8: Regression analysis results

H1 tested the assumption that entrepreneurship education has a statistically significant positive effect on sustainable development in rural learning spaces in Zimbabwe. As shown in table 8 above, this hypothesis is supported by the p-value less than 0.05. Hence, confirming Omotosho et al. (2025)’s view that entrepreneurship education positively enhances sustainable development. H2 tested the assumption that integration of entrepreneurship education into rural school curricula significantly improves students’ entrepreneurial competencies. The p-value obtained is less than 0.05, thereby confirming the hypothesis. This is consistent with Uzhenyu (2017), who found that integrating entrepreneurship education enhances entrepreneurial competencies. H4 tested the assumption that there is a positive relationship between entrepreneurship education and increased employability among students in rural Zimbabwe. This hypothesis is supported, given that the p-value is below 0.05. This is congruent to the observations by Suresh et al. (2025) that the chances of employment are boosted by entrepreneurship education.

CONCLUSIONS

The research concludes that entrepreneurship is vital for sustainable development and learners’ employability. However, entrepreneurship has limited integration into the education system, especially in rural areas where the populations are marginalised. Furthermore, there is have resource constraints and limited support for both students and teachers on entrepreneurial education in rural areas.

Implications

Given the above conclusions, the implications for policymakers are an entrepreneurial-based curriculum. This curriculum will make students self-reliant, effective problem solvers, and decision makers in the community. Governments, NGOs and corporate world need to support entrepreneurship education initiatives for sustainable development in the country.

Limitations and future research

The research was limited to quantitatively measuring perceptions on entrepreneurship education. Future studies can utilise qualitative methodologies to generate insights on how entrepreneurship education can be enhanced in rural areas. Furthermore, the study was limited to the views of students, school administrators, and teachers/instructors. Future studies can also include parents who are essential stakeholders in entrepreneurship education.

REFERENCES

1. Altwaijri, A., Omri, A., & Alfehaid, F. (2024). Promoting entrepreneurship for sustainable development: Are education capital and ICT diffusion important?. Sustainable Development, 32(5), 5463-5487.
2. Anggendari, T., & Nurhasanah, S. (2023). Exploring Entrepreneurship Education, SME Growth, Leadership, And Governance. Journal of Management and Creative Business. https://doi.org/10.30640/jmcbus.v1i4.2348.
3. Armenia, S., Guraziu, E., Popova, M., & De Angelis, T. (2024). An innovative multistakeholder approach to rural entrepreneurship education. Agricultural Sciences/Agrarni Nauki, 16(43).
4. Audretsch, D. and Thurik, A. (2001). What’s New about the New Economy? Sources of Growth in the Managed and Entrepreneurial Economies, Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(1), 267-315.
5. Audu, A. (2022). Role of entrepreneurship education and vocational education in the management of education. Journal of Advances in Education and Philosophy, 6(7), 377-382.
6. Azis, R., Mohamed, N., Naseri, R., Ahmad, N., Abas, N., & Ahmad, F. (2023). Rural Women Entrepreneurship in Malaysia: Issues and Challenges. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v13-i9/18643.
7. Baron, R. A., & Shane, S. (2007). Entrepreneurship: A process perspective. In eds.: Baum, J. R., Freese, M., & Baron, R. The psychology of entrepreneurship, 19–39. Taylor and Francis Group, New York.
8. Becker. G. (1994) Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
9. Ben Chikha, I., Salloum, C., El Hilali, N., & Jarboui, A. (2025). Fostering innovation through government initiatives for social entrepreneurship. EuroMed Journal of Business.
10. Boldureanu, G., Ionescu, A. M., Bercu, A. M., Bedrule-Grigoruță, M. V., & Boldureanu, D. (2020). Entrepreneurship education through successful entrepreneurial models in higher education institutions. Sustainability, 12(3), 1267.
11. Boon, A., Raes, E., Kyndt, E., & Dochy, F. (2013). Team learning beliefs and behaviours in response teams. European Journal of Training and Development, 37(4), 357–379.
12. Breznitz, S., & Zhang, Q. (2021). Entrepreneurship education and firm creation. Regional Studies, 56, 940 – 955. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2021.1878127
13. Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods. Oxford university press. New York.
14. Chigora, P., & Mcilo, A. (2021). Youth unemployment in urban Zimbabwe in the 21st Century: analysing the drivers, impacts and cultural implications. Hemispheres. Studies on Cultures and Societies. https://doi.org/10.60018/hemi.czcq9282.
15. Chigudu, A., & Chirisa, I. (2020). The quest for a sustainable spatial planning framework in Zimbabwe and Zambia. Land Use Policy, 92, 104442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104442.
16. Chigudu, D. (2021). Limits of youths’ participation in entrepreneurship against Zimbabwe’s rising unemployment.
17. Chinokopota, T., Ngorora-Madzimure, G., Msipa, N., & Bhebhe, T. (2024). A sustainable education system and the development of entrepreneurial skills among students in Zimbabwe. International Journal of Management Studies and Social Science Research. https://doi.org/10.56293/ijmsssr.2024.5003.
18. Chinokopota, T., Ngorora-Madzimure, G., Msipa, N., & Bhebhe, T. (2024). A Sustainable education system and the development of entrepreneurial skills among students in Zimbabwe. International Journal of Management Studies and Social Science Research. https://doi.org/10.56293/ijmsssr.2024.5003.
19. Dambudzo, I. (2015). Curriculum Issues: Teaching and learning for sustainable development in developing countries–Zimbabwe Case Study. Journal of Education and Learning, 4, 11-24. https://doi.org/10.5539/JEL.V4N1P11.
20. Debarliev, S., Janeska-Iliev, A., Stripeikis, O., & Zupan, B. (2022). What can education bring to entrepreneurship? Formal versus non-formal education. Journal of Small Business Management, 60(1), 219-252.
21. Donga, G., & Chimucheka, T. (2024). Rural women entrepreneurship in South Africa: Issues and challenges. African Journal of Inter/Multidisciplinary Studies. https://doi.org/10.51415/ajims.v6i1.1175.
22. Ewumi, A., Oyenuga, A., & Owoyele, J. (2012). Entrepreneurship education as panacea for youth unemployment: implication of vocational counselling for sustainable national development. Journal of Education and Practice, 3, 73-77.
23. Farrington, J., Philip, L., Cottrill, C., Abbott, P., Blank, G., & Dutton, W. H. (2015). Two-speed Britain: Rural internet use. Available at SSRN 2645771.
24. Farroñán, E. V. R., Ballesteros, M. A. A., García, F. S. M., Llatas, F. D. H., Chilicaus, G. C. F., Valle, M. D. L. Á. G., … & Castillo, J. C. A. (2024). Sustainability and rural empowerment: developing women’s entrepreneurial skills through innovation. Sustainability, 16(23), 1-17.
25. Fejes, A., Nylund, M., & Wallin, J. (2019). How do teachers interpret and transform entrepreneurship education?. Journal of Curriculum studies, 51(4), 554-566.
26. Forcher-Mayr, M., & Mahlknecht, S. (2020). A capability approach to entrepreneurship education: The Sprouting Entrepreneurs programme in rural South African schools. Discourse and Communication for Sustainable Education, 11(1), 119-133.
27. Fuertes-Callén, Y., Cuéllar-Fernández, B., & Serrano-Magdalena, A. (2025). Rural Entrepreneurship in the Face of Geodemographic Challenges. Growth and Change. https://doi.org/10.1111/grow.70017.
28. Gabadeen, W. O., & Raimi, L. (2012) Management of Entrepreneurship Education in Nigerian Higher Institutions: Issues, Challenges and Way Forward. Abuja International Journal of Education and Management Sciences (ABIJEMS), 2, 1-26.
29. Gaiya, D., & Yaki, A. (2020). Rising above the Gathering Storm of Unemployment through Entrepreneurship Education: Implication for National Development. 5, 91-96
30. García-Rodríguez, F. J., Gutiérrez-Taño, D., & Ruiz-Rosa, I. (2019). Analysis of the potential of entrepreneurship education in young children. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 9(1), 177. https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2017-0064
31. Gern, K. J., Kooths, S., Liu, W. H., Reents, J. & Sonnenberg, N. (2024). World Economy Summer 2024: Growth Remains Subdued. Available: https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/300295
32. Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (2019). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2018/2019 Global Report. Available: https://www.gemconsortium.org/report/gem-2018-2019-global-report
33. Green, D. D., Dwyer, B., Farias, S. G., Lauck, C. & Mayfield, J. (2019). Hip-Hop Culture: A Case Study of Beats by Dre for Entrepreneurship. Management and Economics Research Journal, 5, 1-7.
34. Guzman, M., Kim, S., Taylor, S., & Padasas, I. (2020). Rural communities as a context for entrepreneurship: Exploring perceptions of youth and business owners. Journal of Rural Studies, 80, 45-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.06.036.
35. Hagebakken, G., Reimers, C., & Solstad, E. (2021). Entrepreneurship education as a strategy to build regional sustainability. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13 (5), 1–17.
36. Hägg, G., & Kurczewska, A. (2020). Toward a learning philosophy based on experience in entrepreneur ship education. Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy, 4(1), 4–29.
37. Hägg, G., & Schölin, T. (2018). The policy influence on the development of entrepreneurship in higher education: A Swedish perspective. Education Training, 60(7/8), 656-673.
38. Hanif, M., Ukar, K., & Permana, B. (2024). The Role of Human Resource Education: An Essential Driver in Advancing Economic Progress through Entrepreneurship Exploration. Indo-Fintech Intellectuals: Journal of Economics and Business. https://doi.org/10.54373/ifijeb.v4i3.1418.
39. Harrison H., Birks M., Franklin R., & Mills J. (2017). Case Study Research: Foundations and Methodological Orientations. Forum Qualitative Social (SQS) research, 18(1):1-17
40. Hupile, M., & Siambombe, A. (2024). Economic inclusion in crisis: Challenges and opportunities for policy reform in Zimbabwe. African Journal of Inclusive Societies. https://doi.org/10.59186/si.4uj2srmf.
41. Ifedili, Chika & Ofoegbu, Felicia (2011). Managing Entrepreneurship Education in Nigerian Universities, European Journal of Educational Studies 3(1), ISSN 1946-6331, Ozean Publication.
42. Inuwa, I., & Bala, G. (2025). Addressing Unemployment through Entrepreneurship and Skill Acquisition. African Journal of Management and Business Research. https://doi.org/10.62154/ajmbr.2024.017.010568.
43. Jafari‐Sadeghi, V., Kimiagari, S., & Biancone, P. (2019). Level of education and knowledge, foresight competency and international entrepreneurship. European Business Review, 32, 46-68. https://doi.org/10.1108/ebr-05-2018-0098.
44. Kaiyanan, C., Atthakorn, S., Ludpa, Y., Seti, S., Lavong, A., Pliankham, P., & Phoorisophon, T. (2024). Integrating Entrepreneurship into Education: Cultivating Skills for Innovation, Leadership, and Future Workforce Success. Journal of Education and Learning Reviews. https://doi.org/10.60027/jelr.2024.795.
45. Kassean, H., Vanevenhoven, J., Liguori, E., & Winkel, D. E. (2015). Entrepreneurship education: A need for reflection, real-world experience and action. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 21(5), 690–708.
46. Lavalley, M. (2018). Out of the Loop: Rural Schools Are Largely Left out of Research and Policy Discussions, Exacerbating Poverty, Inequity, and Isolation. Center for Public Education.
47. Lei, Z. (2023). Examining the Relationship between Entrepreneurship Education and Job Creation in China’s Post-Pandemic Economy. Journal of Digitainability, Realism & Mastery (DREAM). https://doi.org/10.56982/dream.v2i05.119.
48. Lenka, U., & Agarwal, S. (2017). Role of women entrepreneurs and NGOs in promoting entrepreneurship: case studies from Uttarakhand, India. Journal of Asia Business Studies, 11(4), 451-465.
49. López, M., Zamora, M., & Campos, M. (2024). Factors Favoring Rural Entrepreneurship: Innovation in Action. International Journal of Religion. https://doi.org/10.61707/r8m4a249.
50. Mallareddy, D. (2025). Innovation and Entrepreneurship in India -A Study of Telangana Government (T Hub). SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5244728.
51. Manhimanzi, G., & Chagwedera, E. (2024). Moulding the Entrepreneurial Graduate in a Landscape of Competing Paradigms in Zimbabwe. Kuveza neKuumba: The Zimbabwe Ezekiel Guti University Journal of Design, Innovative Thinking and Practice. https://doi.org/10.71458/x2a23j13.
52. Maphosa, P. (2024). Factors influencing unemployment an economic analysis of unemployment in Zimbabwe. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications. https://doi.org/10.29322/ijsrp.14.07.2024.p15121.
53. Martin, B.C., McNally, J.J., & Kay, M.J. (2013). Examining the formation of human capital in entrepreneur ship: A meta-analysis of entrepreneurship education outcomes. Journal of Business Venturing, 28, 211–224.
54. Martínez-Campillo, A., Sierra-Fernández, M. D. P., & Fernández-Santos, Y. (2019). Service-learning for sustainability entrepreneurship in rural areas: what is its global impact on business university students?. Sustainability, 11(19), 5296.
55. Mashapure, R., Nyagadza, B., Chikazhe, L., Msipa, N., Ngorora, G., & Gwiza, A. (2022). Challenges hindering women entrepreneurship sustainability in rural livelihoods: Case of Manicaland province. Cogent Social Sciences, 8. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2022.2132675.
56. Matlay, H. (2008). The impact of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial outcomes. Journal of small business and enterprise development, 15(2), 382-396.
57. Mauchi, F. N., Karambakuwa, R. T., Gopo, R. N., Kosmas, N., Mangwende, S., & Gombarume, F. B. (2011). Entrepreneurship education lessons: A case of Zimbabwean tertiary education institutions. International Research Journals, 2(7), 1306-1311.
58. Maulani, N., & Agwanda, B. (2020). Youth Unemployment and Government Pro-Employment Policies in Zimbabwe. , 229-256. https://doi.org/10.26650/jspc.2019.78.0039.
59. Mawonedzo, A., Tanga, M., Luggya, S., & Nsubuga, Y. (2020). Implementing strategies of entrepreneurship education in Zimbabwe. Journal of Education and Training. https://doi.org/10.1108/et-03-2020-0068.
60. McMullan, W., & Long, W. (1987). Entrepreneurship education in the nineties. Journal of Business Venturing, 2, 261-275. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(87)90013-9.
61. Mohammed, F. (2022). Impact of Entrepreneurship Development on Employment Generation in SabonGari Local Government, Kaduna State. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Project Management. https://doi.org/10.47604/ijepm.1567.
62. Muijs, D. (2015). Collaboration and networking among rural schools: Can it work and when? Evidence from England. Peabody Journal of Education, 90(2), 294-305.
63. Muradya, T., & Modiba, F. (2019). The paradox of development initiatives and implementation issues in Zimbabwe.
64. Mutandwa, B., & Genc, B. (2018). Leveraging Zimbabwe’s mineral endowment for economic transformation and human development. Resources Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RESOURPOL.2018.05.009.
65. Nabi, G., Liñán, F., Fayolle, A., Krueger, N., & Walmsley, A. (2017). The impact of entrepreneurship education in higher education: A systematic review and research agenda. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 16(2), 277–299.
66. Nani, G. (2019). Entrepreneurship Intervention: Towards Transforming Education in Institutions of Higher Learning: A Case of One Public University in Zimbabwe. Journal of Education and Practice. https://doi.org/10.7176/jep/10-35-03.
67. National Youth Development Agency. 2023. NYDA Grant Programme. https://www.nyda.gov.za/Products-Services/NYDA-Grant-Programme.html
68. Neck, H. M., & Corbett, A. C. (2018). The scholarship of teaching and learning entrepreneur ship. Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy, 1(1), 8–41.
69. O’Connor, A. (2013). A conceptual framework for entrepreneurship education policy: Meeting government and economic purposes. Journal of business venturing, 28(4), 546-563.
70. Olumoyo, A., Olukorede, M., & Abiyere, O. (2024). Entrepreneurship Education for Sustainable Knowledge Based Economy. International Journal of Development and Economic Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.37745/ijdes.13/vol12n417.
71. Omotosho, A. O., Mathew, K., Modise, A., & Ayandibu, A. (2024). Advancing women entrepreneurship in a developmental state: an agenda for higher education institutions. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2309743.
72. Ovenden-Hope, T., & Passy, R. (2019). Educational Isolation: A challenge for schools in England.
73. Pittaway, L., & Cope, J. (2007). Entrepreneurship education: A systematic review of the evidence. International Small Business Journal, 25(5), 479-510.
74. Prasad, B., & Naveena, L. (2021). A Study on Problems and Challenges of Rural Entrepreneurs in India. Management Science, 8, 13-20. https://doi.org/10.34293/MANAGEMENT.V8IS1-FEB.3753.
75. Queen, O. (2024). Entrepreneurship Education: A Panacea for Job Creation and Sustainable Development in Nigeria. International Journal of Operational Research in Management, Social Sciences & Education. https://doi.org/10.48028/iiprds/ijormsse.v10.i2.07.
76. Rasmussen, E., & Sørheim, R. (2006). Action-based entrepreneurship education. Technovation, 26, 185-194. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TECHNOVATION.2005.06.012.
77. Ratten, V., & Usmanij, P. (2021). Entrepreneurship education: Time for a change in research direction?. The International Journal of Management Education, 19(1), 100367.
78. Römer-Paakkanen, T., & Suonpää, M. (2023). Entrepreneurship education with purpose: Active ageing for 50+ entrepreneurs and sustainable development for rural areas. Education Sciences, 13(6), 572.
79. Sá, C., Cowley, S., & Husain, A. (2024). Entrepreneurship education participation and job creation. Entrepreneurship Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41959-024-00122-9.
80. Saiden, T. (2017). Towards An Entrepreneurship and Stem Education Primary School Curriculum in Zimbabwe: A Case Study of Bumburwi of Gweru District. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 4. https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.418.3723.
81. Sánchez, J. C. (2013). The impact of an entrepreneurship education program on entrepreneurial competencies and intention. Journal of Small Business Management, 51(3), 447–465. https:// doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12025
82. Schin, G. C., Cristache, N., & Matis, C. (2023). Fostering social entrepreneurship through public administration support. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 19(2), 481-500.
83. Schwab, K. 2015. The Global Competitiveness Report Available: https://www3.weforum.org/docs/gcr/2015-2016/Global_Competitiveness_Report_2015-2016.pdf
84. Semkunde, M., Elly, T., Charles, G., Gaddefors, J., & Chiwona-Karltun, L. (2021). Rural entrepreneurship and the context: navigating contextual barriers through women’s groups. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijge-01-2021-0013.
85. Sequeira, R. (2025). Entrepreneurial/Business And marketing Challenges of Rural Entrepreneurship in India. International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research. https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2025.v07i01.37405.
86. Suresh, T. S., Thomas, T., & Mathew, J. (2025). Contemporary Insights and Future Outlook of Entrepreneurship Education and Training In India. Journal of Information Systems Engineering and Management. https://doi.org/10.52783/jisem.v10i36s.6310.
87. Turner, T., & Gianiodis, P. (2018). Entrepreneurship unleashed: Understanding entrepreneurial education outside of the business school. Journal of Small Business Management, 56(1), 131-149.
88. University of Cape Town. (n.d.). Bertha Centre for Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Available: https://www.gsb.uct.ac.za/berthacentre/
89. University of Pretoria. 2017. Entrepreneurship Programme. Available: https://www.up.ac.za/student affairs/news/post_2575404-free-entrepreneurship-programme-supports-budding-entrepreneurs-at-up
90. Uzhenyu, D. (2017). Entrepreneurship curriculum development in Open and distance learning: a remedy to unemployment challenges facing Zimbabwe. A case study of the Zimbabwe Open University. International Open and Distance Learning Journal.
91. Wei, Y. (2022). Regional governments and opportunity entrepreneurship in underdeveloped institutional environments: An entrepreneurial ecosystem perspective. Research Policy, 51(1), 104380.
92. Wyrwich, M., Stuetzer, M., & Sternberg, R. (2016). Entrepreneurial role models, fear of failure, and institutional approval of entrepreneurship: A tale of two regions. Small business economics, 46, 467-492.
93. Yahya, A., Bala, Y., & Girei, M. (2022). Entrepreneurship education and training:an imperative towards effective sustainable development in Nigeria economy. International Journal of Management Studies and Social Science Research. https://doi.org/10.56293/ijmsssr.2022.4503.
94. Zinyama, T. (2019). Critical Examination of the Implications of Youth Unemployment in Zimbabwe. Participation of Young People in Governance Processes in Africa. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-9388-1.CH008.