Naira Libermann1*
Ana Cecilia Bisso Nunes- 1Department of Social and Management Sciences (DCSG), Business School, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil
- 2Department of Social Sciences and Management (DCSG), Open University of Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal
- 3School of Communication, Arts and Design, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil
This article presents the results of a systematic literature review (SLR) that investigated the impact of multicultural approaches on entrepreneurship education in universities, with a special focus on how ethno-cultural principles influence the strategic design of programs aimed at teacher training. Using the PRISMA protocol, rigorous selection criteria were applied, resulting in the inclusion of 42 relevant studies. The results indicate that although multiculturalism appears sporadically in pedagogical practices of entrepreneurship education, its integration into the design of programs focused on teacher training remains incipient. The analysis highlights gaps in literature and points to the need for more integrated, critical, and intercultural approaches in the development of entrepreneurial education programs.
Introduction
In a world marked by globalization, cultural diversity, and the growing challenges of social inclusion, entrepreneurship education has proven effective in training critical, creative citizens capable of generating positive impact in their communities. Universities, as privileged spaces for knowledge construction and pedagogical innovation, are called upon to integrate strategies into their curricula that not only foster the entrepreneurial spirit but also recognize and value the ethno-cultural plurality of their students (Klucznik-Tӧrő, 2021; Pita et al., 2021; Setiawan and Basri, 2023).
Despite the growing interest in entrepreneurship education in higher education, a significant gap is observed in the systematic integration of multicultural approaches, especially concerning teacher training and the design of pedagogical programs sensitive to diversity (Crammond, 2020). The literature reveals that many entrepreneurship education programs remain anchored in homogeneous paradigms, often disregarding the intercultural dynamics that characterize contemporary university environments (D’Souza and Nayak, 2024; Jardim et al., 2023; Pittaway et al., 2023).
In this context, it becomes imperative to understand how the principles of multiculturalism influence—or could influence—the conception and implementation of programs aimed at training teachers in entrepreneurship education. This systematic literature review aims to map and analyze scientific contributions addressing this intersection, identifying best practices, research gaps, and pedagogical potential yet to be explored.
Theoretical framework
The concept of culture is broad and presents different interpretations across various fields of knowledge. According to UNESCO (2002), culture is understood as the set of spiritual, material, intellectual and emotional traditions that distinguish a society or social group, including ways of life, value systems, beliefs and forms of communication. This concept reflects the complexity and dynamism of culture, showing its relevance in the educational context. Jardim (2022) defines ethics as a set of principles and values that guide conduct in human societies. Promoting an entrepreneurial culture implies that a community experiences a set of values, such as respect, dignity, honesty, integrity, among others; these values qualify organizations and institutions, relationships, and culture.
Cultural diversity in the university environment reflects the social and economic transformations of recent decades. According to Halter (2006), “entrepreneurship education programs can reflect the cultural diversification of the business world” (p. 123). Recognizing these population changes and incorporating the concept of culture into classrooms strengthens pedagogical approaches and broadens learning opportunities. Thus, promoting an inclusive entrepreneurial culture requires considering ethnic and cultural principles as central components in the formulation of university curricula. According to Jardim (2022), “entrepreneurial culture comprises a set of competencies, habits, values, and behaviors shared by a community, organization, or society that prioritizes innovation and the realization of original and valuable ideas” (p. 76). In this sense, university education should encourage creativity and disruptive thinking, preparing students to face global challenges innovatively and aligned with cultural dynamics. On the other hand, the exclusion of ethno-cultural principles in entrepreneurship curricula perpetuates structural inequalities. As highlighted by O’Brien et al. (2019), broader access to university entrepreneurial ecosystems can support the development of human and social capital in underrepresented communities.
Entrepreneurship education has emerged as a pedagogical response to the need to train more dynamic, innovative learners oriented toward opportunity creation (Banha et al., 2022; Fayolle and Gailly, 2008; Neck and Greene, 2011). Far from being restricted to the business domain, this approach now extends to various disciplinary areas and levels of education, promoting transversal competencies such as creativity, initiative, adaptability, and the ability to generate value (Jardim, 2021; Jardim et al., 2023). The transition from “education about entrepreneurship” to “education for and through entrepreneurship” reflects a commitment to experiential learning, social relevance, and personal agency in the educational context (Lackéus, 2015).
Multicultural education is based on the principle that educational institutions should not only reflect but also actively engage with the cultural diversity of their communities. According to Banks (2016), the goal of multicultural education is to promote equity through the reform of curriculum content, pedagogical practices, and assessment systems. Gay (2018) advocates for culturally responsive teaching as an effective way to connect students’ cultural contexts to educational content. Nieto (2009) further emphasizes the importance of critical multiculturalism, where social justice, power dynamics, and cultural identities are central elements in teaching and learning processes. Thus, multicultural education is not merely additive but transformative, challenging dominant monocultural paradigms.
The effectiveness of entrepreneurship education depends not only on the curriculum but also on the adequate preparation of teachers capable of handling pedagogical and entrepreneurial complexity. Teacher training programs, therefore, assume a strategic role in incorporating innovative methodologies, including experiential practices, critical reflection, and student-centered learning (Jones and Iredale, 2010). However, despite calls for transformation, many of these programs remain rooted in traditional models, lacking cultural sensitivity and global perspectives (Jardim, 2024; Seikkula-Leino et al., 2015, 2019). Effective program design must go beyond technical skills, integrating intercultural awareness, ethical principles, and contextualized educational objectives (Rieckmann, 2012).
The intersection between multiculturalism, teacher training, and entrepreneurial pedagogy remains underexplored in research and educational practice. While entrepreneurship education emphasizes autonomy, innovation, and real-world applicability, it rarely incorporates a structured multicultural perspective. On the other hand, multicultural education, although rich in critical and inclusive frameworks, is rarely integrated into entrepreneurship programs. This disconnection highlights the need for a more holistic approach — one that prepares educators to develop entrepreneurial competencies in culturally diverse contexts. Designing teacher training programs that articulate entrepreneurship with multicultural sensitivity is essential for building more inclusive, innovative, and socially responsible universities (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Critical connection between multiculturalism, training, and entrepreneurial pedagogy. (Image: A Venn diagram with three overlapping circles labeled “Multiculturalism: Promote inclusion of everyone in the community,” “Teacher Training: Prepare for diversity in the classroom,” and “Entrepreneurial Pedagogy: Empower for the entrepreneurial culture.” The overlapping area is labeled “CRITICAL CONNECTION.”). Source: prepared by the authors.
Methods
A literature review consists of the initial theoretical mapping of knowledge on the topic in question (Lozada, 2019). This research is classified as bibliographic research using a systematic review (Mascarenhas, 2017), aiming to verify the theoretical viability of the idea, i.e., to understand the existence of scientific production in this field. This study sought to investigate multicultural approaches in entrepreneurship education at universities with an emphasis on teacher training, based on the following two research questions:
Q1: How does scientific literature articulate the concepts of multiculturalism, entrepreneurship education, and teacher training?
Q2: How are ethno-cultural principles being integrated into pedagogical practices focusing on teacher training?
To support the existence of a possible gap in this theme and the potential for advancements, the methodology employed in this article was the systematic review protocol (PRISMA) Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews, Meta-Analyses (Moher et al., 2009) and the software NVivo (QSR International, 2023). The PRISMA framework highlights four main phases for conducting review studies: identification, screening, eligibility, and analysis (Table 1).
Table 1. Reviewed articles.
Starting from a broad selection of literature on the theme, the 42 articles included in this review for final analysis were based on the following criteria:
• Articles dealing with the theme of interculturality and Entrepreneurship Education in undergraduate and postgraduate university settings;
• Articles touching upon issues of teacher training and entrepreneurship education;
• Articles in the English language;
• Articles published in peer-reviewed journals, from primary data collection by authors;
• Recent articles, with a temporal scope of 2023–2025.
Search strategies
Between August 06th and 15th, 2025, a systematic search was conducted in the Academic Search Premier, Web of Science, Emerald, Scopus, Springer and Taylor and Francis databases. Although these platforms are widely recognized for their comprehensiveness and relevance in disseminating scientific knowledge, a limited number of studies directly addressing the interaction between ethno-cultural principles and entrepreneurship education were identified. This gap indicates that the theme is still emerging and lacks academic depth, reinforcing the need for research on the topic.
To expand research possibilities and gain a broader view of the problem, the search terms were broadened. This strategy revealed that although many of the articles found do not directly address the issue, they may offer valuable information on related topics, such as cultural diversity, pedagogy, and entrepreneurship education in diverse contexts. The terms “ethnic principles,” “ethnic groups,” “cultural factors,” “Ethnic minorities,” “Cultural values,” “Entrepreneurship education,” “Entrepreneurial education,” “education for Entrepreneurialism,” “Enterprise education” were more comprehensive options for the theme. Thus, the search focused on these keywords: (“ethno-cultural” OR “ethnic principles” OR “ethnic groups” OR “cultural factors” OR “Ethnic minorities” OR “Cultural values”) AND (Education OR Teaching OR Learning) AND (Entrepreneurship OR Entrepreneurship OR Entrepreneurial OR Entrepreneurialism OR Enterprising) AND University.
Based on the results of this broader data, it was deemed necessary to employ a systematic review approach with inclusion filters as mentioned earlier in the criteria.
A first cut was applied to the databases after applying compatible filters: material type: article, full text, English language, time frame of the last 2 years. The results are represented in Table 2, with a total of N = 1,517.
Table 2. Database search results.
The results from the second cut were exported in Bibtex format and imported into the Zotero reference manager. After exporting the reference list and checking for duplicate publications, the final list consisted of 1,503 articles. It is noteworthy that due to the constant updating of the searched databases, new searches with the same search strategies may yield slightly different results.
Throughout the identification and screening process, articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded. These articles were analyzed according to the theme and approach criteria highlighted in the method. Consequently, a final list of 42 articles was assigned for in-depth reading.
Data synthesis
Table 3 illustrates the process of data collection, aggregation, and synthesis, highlighting the stages of identification, screening, acceptance, and selection of the articles comprising the final review.
Table 3. Article selection flowchart.
Results and discussion
According to the data presented in the article selection flowchart (Table 1), the database search yielded a total of 1,517 articles. Initially, 14 studies were excluded due to duplication. Subsequently, from the 1,503 articles assessed based on abstract screening and the application of eligibility criteria, 1,461 were deemed not directly related to the study topic. Therefore, this systematic review comprised 42 articles, all of which met the predefined inclusion criteria.
With the support of NVivo (QSR International, 2023), a detailed analysis of the selected articles was conducted, correlating the research objective and the study questions (Table 4). This initial stage enabled the identification of recurring terms in the content and the creation of coding categories, which structured the categorization process. From this procedure, the following codes were defined: Culture, Social Norms, and Values, Family and Generational Influence, Educational Methods and Pedagogical Innovation, Entrepreneurial Intention, Self-Efficacy, and Motivation, Institutional Ecosystems and Contexts, Community Engagement and Internationalization, Inclusion and Teaching Approaches, The systematic review of the selected studies reveals recurring themes regarding the impact of multicultural approaches, cultural norms, institutional practices, and pedagogical strategies on entrepreneurial education in higher education. By correlating categories, authors, and findings, the analysis highlights both convergences and divergences across geographical contexts, methodological approaches, and cultural perspectives.
Table 4. Research relationships and main findings.
The first group of studies emphasizes the role of culture and social norms in shaping entrepreneurial education. Barrero et al. (2024) demonstrated that entrepreneurship training is strongly influenced by national cultural contexts, suggesting that curricula must be adapted to regional realities. Similarly, Li et al. (2023) identified how Confucian traditions and uncertainty avoidance negatively affect motivation for digital startups in China, while Tabachnikova and Vinokurova (2024) showed that Russian students’ conservative attitudes toward entrepreneurship are rooted in cultural values and gender stereotypes. Donald et al. (2023) confirmed that entrepreneurial intentions are moderated by cultural differences between the United Kingdom and China, emphasizing the importance of considering well-being and employability in specific contexts. Likewise, Affum-Osei et al. (2024) demonstrated that both collectivist and individualist cultural structures shape entrepreneurial motivations, although some factors remain universal.
The role of family and generational influence also emerged as significant. Gao and Lu (2024) found that parental psychological control can weaken the positive effects of entrepreneurship education on self-efficacy, while Martins et al. (2023) showed that family and institutional support increase entrepreneurial intentions in Pakistan. Intergenerational conservatism was highlighted by Tabachnikova and Vinokurova (2024), who observed that more experienced academics often retain traditional approaches that constrain innovation.
Another group of studies focused on educational methods and pedagogical innovation. Becker and Roessingh (2024) compared etic and emic perspectives to reveal how entrepreneurship is understood by both “outsiders” and “insiders” across multiple contexts. Chamba and Chikusvura (2024) highlighted that integrated assessment systems foster deeper learning, although they face contextual limitations. Sofiullah et al. (2023) tested simulation games in five countries, showing that such tools indirectly influence entrepreneurial intentions by strengthening underlying skills. Eyüboğlu and Sirtkaya (2025) examined science instructors’ teaching orientations in Türkiye, concluding that younger faculty are more aligned with student-centered reforms, while senior colleagues prioritize academic rigor. Ferri et al. (2024) further reinforced the validity of the theory of planned behavior (TPB), demonstrating that attitudes, social norms, and university-acquired competencies remain central in Europe, while complementing the model with the importance of skills acquired in higher education.
Applying the PRISMA checklist resulted in Table 1 – reviewed articles.
The findings also reinforce the relevance of entrepreneurial intention, self-efficacy, and motivation as central dimensions, yet strongly mediated by cultural, familial, and institutional contexts. Studies such as those by Tsaknis et al. (2024) and Silesky-Gonzalez et al. (2024) demonstrated that perceived behavioral control and individual attitudes are decisive for the formation of intention, in line with the theory of planned behavior, TPB. Martins et al. (2023) confirmed that family support, self-efficacy, and risk-taking propensity enhance entrepreneurial intention in Pakistan, while Magableh and Kannan (2023) identified significant differences between Japan and Australia — in the former, personality traits and achievement needs weigh more, whereas in the latter, self-efficacy plays a stronger role. Similarly, Kariv et al. (2024) emphasized that locus of control and self-efficacy, combined with entrepreneurship education, shape entrepreneurial intentions. Complementing these insights, Kolarov (2024) highlighted that entrepreneurial intention results from the interaction between endogenous and exogenous factors, underscoring the importance of entrepreneurial training for dynamic ecosystems and reaffirming the centrality of the TPB.
At the institutional level, Choi et al. (2023) illustrated how migration status influences academic entrepreneurship in the United States, while Hou et al. (2023) applied embeddedness theory to explain internal determinants of innovation efficiency in 90 Chinese universities. Their study showed that high-quality entrepreneurship education alone does not guarantee strong outcomes; contextual factors such as culture, opportunity structures, and economic development condition program effectiveness, reinforcing the need for contextual adaptation. Karahan (2024) demonstrated that sustainable transformation in German incubators depends on leadership and external partnerships, whereas Guerrero and Lira (2023) examined how Latin American universities contribute to the SDGs through social entrepreneurial initiatives. Colombelli et al. (2023) highlighted the role of specializations related to artificial intelligence in Italy, while Etzkowitz et al. (2023) evidenced that university venture capital fosters high-tech startups in differentiated contexts across the U.S., the U.K., and China.
O’Brien and Cooney (2025) broadened the scope of entrepreneurial education by including community engagement as a path toward more inclusive practices, while Pham et al. (2023) advocated for multidimensional approaches integrating law, human rights, and innovation in Vietnam. Soulé et al. (2025) also emphasized the role of internationalization at home, linking intercultural exposure to competence development, but noted linguistic and structural barriers. In the same vein, Geesa et al. (2023) evaluated student teaching abroad programs, showing that international practicum experiences strengthen preparation but still face challenges regarding institutional support and communication.
Other studies emphasized inclusive practices and teaching approaches. Álvarez-Castillo et al. (2025) showed that inclusive practices among university professors depend on personal traits such as agreeableness and diversity orientation. Fitriati et al. (2024) identified gaps in mathematics teacher preparation for 4C competencies, suggesting collaborative training programs. Research on remote and digital teaching — Chimpololo (2024), Reyes et al. (2024), and Dong et al. (2023) — revealed challenges but also opportunities for innovation and resilience. Liang and Yu (2024) and Qian (2024) analyzed critical pedagogies and culture teaching in English as a Foreign Language contexts in China, highlighting tensions between exam-oriented systems and intercultural approaches.
Finally, several studies addressed broader structural challenges. Geletu and Adige (2023) showed the weak integration of teaching, research, and innovation in Ethiopia, while Nhem (2023) revealed the limited articulation between teaching and research in Cambodia. Fuchs et al. (2023) emphasized the role of European university alliances in promoting joint learning, while Xu and Sze (2024) highlighted how artificial intelligence can transform institutional assessment. Herbert et al. (2024), as well as Caron (2025), discussed gender barriers and professional development challenges, while Zhang et al. (2024) reinforced the persistence of gender inequalities in entrepreneurship and innovation.
Overall, the review underscores that the integration of ethno-cultural principles into entrepreneurship education is most effective when approached holistically — addressing curriculum content, teaching methods, institutional structures, and societal engagement simultaneously. This enriched synthesis confirms and extends the earlier analysis, demonstrating that both micro-level (classroom) and macro-level (ecosystem) interventions are necessary to prepare educators and students for entrepreneurial practice in multicultural environments.
Research limitations
This research presents some limitations that should be considered. Entrepreneurship Education in universities is sometimes conducted not by faculty members, but by entrepreneurs and mentors. However, this study specifically focused on the role of professors, which may restrict the analysis of other perspectives on entrepreneurial training.
Additionally, the database search was limited to the last 2 years to obtain updated data. However, this choice may have resulted in the exclusion of relevant articles published 3–5 years ago. Finally, due to the bibliographic extent of the databases and access limitations to references, books and scientific journals on a broader time scale were not considered.
Conclusion
This systematic review provided a preliminary mapping of the scientific production related to the articulation between Entrepreneurship Education, Multiculturalism, and Teacher Training in the context of higher education. This analysis proved essential for identifying general trends, significant gaps, and points of convergence still little explored by academic literature. The methodological approach followed, based on the PRISMA protocol, ensured rigor in the selection of studies and consistency in identifying relevant analytical categories.
The main conclusion emerging from this theoretical and critical mapping is that the intersection between the three analyzed domains—Entrepreneurship Education, Multiculturalism, and Teacher Training—provides the foundations for building an Inclusive Entrepreneurial Pedagogy. This pedagogy, whose conceptual structure is illustrated in the Table 5 presented below, is proposed as an integrative model capable of responding to the contemporary challenges of cultural diversity, educational innovation, and social transformation.
Table 5. Intersection between entrepreneurship education, multiculturalism, and teacher training: foundations for an inclusive entrepreneurial pedagogy.
The proposal of an Inclusive Entrepreneurial Pedagogy has profound theoretical and practical implications: from a scientific point of view, it contributes to broadening the field of entrepreneurship education, incorporating often neglected ethical, cultural, and social dimensions; from an educational point of view, it offers guidelines for designing training programs more sensitive to cultural plurality and the realities of future teachers and social entrepreneurs.
The results of this systematic review highlight the need to rethink training models in higher education, especially those focused on entrepreneurship education and teacher training. It offers a framework for universities wishing to build ecosystems more sensitive to cultural diversity and oriented toward social transformation. In practical terms, it is recommended that educational institutions incorporate multicultural dimensions into the design of curricular programs and invest in training teachers to act in plural and innovative educational contexts.
Furthermore, relevant paths for future research are opened, namely empirical studies exploring the concrete application of these principles in different cultural and institutional contexts. It would also be pertinent to develop models for evaluating the effectiveness of inclusive-focused entrepreneurial pedagogical programs, as well as analyzing the impacts of this approach on the training experience of teachers and students.
By recognizing diversity as a strategic and pedagogical element, this perspective allows for reconfiguring entrepreneurial learning ecosystems in universities, promoting more equitable, collaborative, and transformative practices. The analysis conducted in this review therefore points to the need to invest in teacher training with multicultural and entrepreneurial intentionality, reinforcing the university’s role as an agent of inclusion and a driver of social innovation.
In summary, the relevance of this research lies in its ability to generate a useful and applicable conceptual framework that can guide future research, pedagogical practices, and educational policies focused on the critical integration between entrepreneurship, cultural diversity, and teacher training.
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Author contributions
NL: Writing – original draft. JJ: Writing – original draft. AN: Writing – original draft.
Funding
The author(s) declared that financial support was not received for this work and/or its publication.
Conflict of interest
The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declared that Generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript. Qualitative data were analyzed using NVivo software (QSR International, 2023), which integrates artificial intelligence tools through its AI Assistant to support data organization, coding, and thematic synthesis. The software facilitated the systematic categorization of data, the identification of emerging themes, and the generation of analytical summaries that informed the interpretation of findings. NVivo was also used to ensure transparency and traceability throughout the qualitative analysis process. The software is cited in the references section of this article.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
Affum-Osei, E., Goto, S. G., Yeung, J. C., Wang, R., Lam, H., Abdul-Nasiru, I., et al. (2024). A cross-cultural study of entrepreneurial motivation and entrepreneurial intentions amongst university students: the roles of individualism and collectivism. J. Glob. Entrepreneurship Res. 14. doi: 10.1007/s40497-024-00405-4
Álvarez-Castillo, J.-L., Fernández-Caminero, G., Hernández-Lloret, C.-M., González-González, H., and Espino Díaz, L. (2025). Inclusive practices among university teaching staff. Confirmation of a model based on personal predictors. Eur. J. High. Educ. 15. doi: 10.1080/21568235.2023.2276198
Banha, F., Coelho, L. S., and Flores, A. (2022). Entrepreneurship education: a systematic literature review and identification of an existing gap in the field. Educ. Sci. 12. doi: 10.3390/EDUCSCI12050336
Banks, J. A. (2016). Cultural diversity and education: Foundations, curriculum, and teaching. 6th Edn. Boston: Pearson.
Barrero, J. P., Delgado-Garcia, J. B., and Perez-Fernandez, H. (2024). Training entrepreneurs in culturally diverse countries. Influence of social norms on entrepreneurial intention. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 22. doi: 10.1016/j.ijme.2024.101059
Becker, B., and Roessingh, C. (2024). Beyond methodology: unveiling multisited entrepreneurship. J. Organ. Ethnography 13, 250–273. doi: 10.1108/JOE-05-2023-0022
Caron, J. (2025). Becoming a university educator in Canada: learning experiences of two tenure-track women faculty members. Stud. Educ. Adults 57, 59–75. doi: 10.1080/02660830.2023.2284036
Chamba, L. T., and Chikusvura, N. (2024). Future-proofing quality education using integrated assessment systems. Quality Education for All 1, 240–255. doi: 10.1108/QEA-11-2023-0014
Chimpololo, A. (2024). Using the five-stage model to examine engagement and communication processes with teaching staff during emergency education at a Malawian university. Innov. Educ. Teach. Int. 61, 1200–1212. doi: 10.1080/14703297.2023.2190904
Choi, H., Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., Frandell, A., and Kim, J. (2023). Role conflict, entrepreneurial identity, and academic entrepreneurship: the effects of immigration status. Small Bus. Econ. 63, 611–626. doi: 10.1007/s11187-023-00861-4
Colombelli, A., D’Amico, E., and Paolucci, E. (2023). When computer science is not enough: universities knowledge specializations behind artificial intelligence startups in Italy. J. Technol. Transf. 48, 1599–1627. doi: 10.1007/s10961-023-10029-7
Crammond, R. J. (2020). Advancing entrepreneurship education in universities: Concepts and practices for teaching and support. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
D’Souza, S. J., and Nayak, J. (2024). A comparative study of government and non-government entrepreneurship development programmes in promoting the transformation of businesses. Shanlax Int. J. Manag. 11, 44–50. doi: 10.34293/management.v11i3.7051
Donald, W. E., Mouratidou, M., Nimmi, P. M., and Ma, Y. (2023). Strategies for enhancing entrepreneurial intention and wellbeing in higher education students: a cross-cultural analysis. High. Educ. 88, 587–607. doi: 10.1007/s10734-023-01133-6
Dong, J., Zhang, Y., and Ma, K. (2023). Online teaching self-efficacy of Chinese university teachers amidst Covid-19: its changes and the moderation of adaptability and administration quality. Soc. Influ. 18. doi: 10.1080/15534510.2023.2187881
Etzkowitz, H., Weston-Smith, M., Beddows, J., Albats, E., Smith, H. L., Wilkinson, J., et al. (2023). University venture capital in big data, regional and historical perspective: where and why has it arisen? Ventur. Cap. 25, 219–254. doi: 10.1080/13691066.2023.2184287
Eyüboğlu, I. S. K., and Sirtkaya, F. O. (2025). University instructors’ orientations to teaching science. Pedagogies 20, 187–207. doi: 10.1080/1554480X.2023.2297686
Fayolle, A., and Gailly, B. (2008). From craft to science: teaching models and learning processes in entrepreneurship education. J. Eur. Ind. Train. 32, 569–593. doi: 10.1108/03090590810899838
Ferri, L., Spanò, R., Theodosopoulos, G., and Tsitsianis, N. (2024). University education and entrepreneurial intentions of European students: insights into the theory of planned behaviour complemented by skills. Stud. High. Educ. 49, 1625–1639. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2023.2272161
Fitriati, F., Rosli, R., Iksan, Z., and Hidayat, A. (2024). Exploring challenges in preparing prospective teachers for teaching 4C skills in mathematics classroom: a school-university partnership perspectives. Cogent Educ. 11. doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2023.2286812
Fuchs, L., Cuevas-Garcia, C., and Bombaerts, G. (2023). The societal role of universities and their alliances: the case of the EuroTeQ engineering university. Tert. Educ. Manag. 29, 263–277. doi: 10.1007/s11233-023-09126-x
Gao, Y., and Lu, J. (2024). Entrepreneurship education and self-efficacy among Chinese college students mediated by harmonious passion and moderated by parental psychological control. Sci. Rep. 14, 1–13. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-83426-z,
Gay, G. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. 3rd Edn. New York: Teachers College Press.
Geesa, R. L., Elam, N. P., Teeters, A. D., and Mulvihill, T. M. (2023). University supervisors’ perceptions of their personal experiences and professional effectiveness in a study abroad student teaching program in Germany. Act. Teach. Educ. 45, 260–277. doi: 10.1080/01626620.2023.2222089
Geletu, G. M., and Adige, A. Y. (2023). Effectiveness of teaching-learning, research and innovative actions in Hawassa university, Ethiopia. Cogent Educ. 10. doi: 10.1080/2331186x.2023.2214222
Guerrero, M., and Lira, M. (2023). Entrepreneurial university ecosystem’s engagement with SDGs: looking into a Latin-American University. Community Dev. 54, 337–352. doi: 10.1080/15575330.2022.2163411
Herbert, K., van der Laan, L., and Danaher, P. A. (2024). Towards an Australian regional university professional development typology: a qualitative exploration of the academic voice. Int. J. Acad. Dev. 29, 480–496. doi: 10.1080/1360144X.2023.2242816
Hou, B., Jin, P., Tang, X., Hong, J., and Zhou, P. (2023). The internal determinants of innovation efficiency in Chinese universities: a perspective from embeddedness theory. Res. High. Educ. 65, 1679–1713. doi: 10.1007/s11162-023-09771-6
Jardim, J. (2021). Entrepreneurial skills to be successful in the global and digital world: proposal for a frame of reference for entrepreneurial education. Educ. Sci. 11, 1–13. doi: 10.3390/educsci
Jardim, J. (2024). Modelo explicativo do impacto da globalização na educação empreendedora: Políticas globais, comportamentos empreendedores e redes internacionais. REGEPE Entrep. Small Bus. J. 13, 1–14. doi: 10.14211/regepe.esbj.e2400
Jardim, J., Pereira, A., Bartolo, A., Pinho, A., Cardoso, M., and Catanho, P. (2023). Promoting an entrepreneurial culture: development, feasibility and acceptability of a primary school-based program focused on soft skills. Educ. Sci. 13:1074. doi: 10.3390/educsci13111074
Jones, B., and Iredale, N. (2010). Enterprise education as pedagogy. Educ. Train. 52, 7–19. doi: 10.1108/00400911011017654
Karahan, M. (2024). Advancing sustainable entrepreneurial universities: sustainability transformations of university business incubators in Germany. Small Bus. Econ. 63, 575–609. doi: 10.1007/s11187-023-00860-5
Kariv, D., Giglio, C., and Corvello, V. (2024). Fostering entrepreneurial intentions: exploring the interplay of education and endogenous factors. Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 21. doi: 10.1007/s11365-024-01020-1
Klucznik-Tӧrő, A. (2021). The new progression model of entrepreneurial education—guideline for the development of an entrepreneurial university with a sustainability approach. Sustainability 13:11243. doi: 10.3390/su132011243
Kolarov, K. (2024). Entrepreneurship in a challenged world: specific educational needs and the role of universities in the development of entrepreneurship. Entrep. Educ. 7, 107–109. doi: 10.1007/s41959-024-00115-8
Lackéus, M. (2015). Entrepreneurship in education: What, why, when, how. OECD Local Economic and Employment Development (LEED) Papers, 2015/06. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Li, L., Kang, K., and Sohaib, O. (2023). Investigating factors affecting Chinese tertiary students’ online-startup motivation based on the COM-B behaviour changing theory. J. Entrep. Emerg. Econ. 15, 566–588. doi: 10.1108/JEEE-08-2021-0299
Liang, C., and Yu, S. (2024). Investigating critical language awareness pedagogy in China: a case study of a Chinese university EFL teacher. Lang. Awareness 33, 488–506. doi: 10.1080/09658416.2023.2284352
Magableh, K. N., and Kannan, S. (2023). Early recognition of entrepreneurial traits and intentions: a comparative study on university students in Australia and Japan. Entrep. Educ. 6, 99–124. doi: 10.1007/s41959-023-00097-z
Martins, J. M., Shahzad, M. F., and Xu, S. (2023). Factors influencing entrepreneurial intention to initiate new ventures: evidence from university students. J. Innov. Entrep. 12. doi: 10.1186/s13731-023-00333-9
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., and Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ 339:b2535. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2535,
Neck, H. M., and Greene, P. G. (2011). Entrepreneurship education: known worlds and new frontiers. J. Small Bus. Manag. 49, 55–70. doi: 10.1111/J.1540-627X.2010.00314.X
Nhem, D. (2023). So, is there a teaching-research nexus in Cambodia? Evidence from EFL students at one public university. Res. Post-Compuls. Educ. 28, 48–69. doi: 10.1080/13596748.2023.2166692
Nieto, S. (2009). The light in their eyes: Creating multicultural learning communities. New York: Teachers College Press.
O’Brien, E., and Cooney, T. M. (2025). Enhancing inclusive entrepreneurial activity through community engagement led by higher education institutions. J. Enterprising Communities People Places Glob. Econ. 19, 177–201. doi: 10.1108/JEC-10-2023-0189
O’Brien, E., Cooney, T. M., and Blenker, P. (2019). Expanding university entrepreneurial ecosystems to under-represented communities. J. Entrepreneursh. Public Policy 8, 384–407. doi: 10.1108/JEPP-03-2019-0025
Pham, S. H. T., Do, D. N. M., and Tran, T. (2023). Entrepreneurship education in Vietnamese universities: multi-dimensional approach from economic law and human rights. J. High. Educ. Theory Pract. 23, 88–98. doi: 10.33423/jhetp.v23i6.5974
Pita, M., Costa, J., and Moreira, A. C. (2021). The effect of university missions on entrepreneurial initiative across multiple entrepreneurial ecosystems: evidence from Europe. Educ. Sci. 11:762. doi: 10.3390/EDUCSCI11120762
Pittaway, L., Brush, C., Corbett, A. C., and Tantawy, M. M. (2023). Doctoral programs in entrepreneurship: building cognitive apprenticeships. Entrepreneursh. Educ. Pedagog. 6, 608–642. doi: 10.1177/25151274231153487
Qian, L. (2024). Chinese EFL university teachers’ perceptions of culture teaching and their pedagogical practices. Lang. Intercult. Commun. 24, 679–692. doi: 10.1080/14708477.2023.2283702
QSR International (2023). NVivo (version 14) [computer software]. New York, NY, USA: QSR International.
Reyes, C., Thompson, C. D., Lawrie, G. A., and Kyne, S. H. (2024). Insights into a community of inquiry that emerged during academics’ emergency remote university teaching of chemistry in response to concern for students. Res. Sci. Technol. Educ. 42, 1042–1068. doi: 10.1080/02635143.2023.2202387
Rieckmann, M. (2012). Future-oriented higher education: which key competencies should be fostered through university teaching and learning? Futures 44, 127–135. doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2011.09.005
Seikkula-Leino, J., Ruskovaara, E., Pihkala, T., Rodríguez, I. D., and Delfino, J. (2019). “Developing entrepreneurship education in Europe: teachers’ commitment to entrepreneurship education in the UK, Finland and Spain” in The role and impact of entrepreneurship education. eds. A. Fayolle, D. Kariv, and H. Matlay (EE Elgar), 130–145.
Seikkula-Leino, J., Satuvuori, T., Ruskovaara, E., and Hannula, H. (2015). How do Finnish teacher educators implement entrepreneurship education? Educ. Train. 57, 392–404. doi: 10.1108/ET-03-2013-0029
Setiawan, A., and Basri, J. B. H. (2023). Evaluation of entrepreneurship education for university students: a scale development study. Pegem J. Educ. Instr. 13, 243–251. doi: 10.47750/pegegog.13.02.29
Silesky-Gonzalez, E., Lezcano-Calderon, Y., and Mora-Cruz, A. (2024). Effects of education for entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial intention in university students. Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 21. doi: 10.1007/s11365-024-01039-4
Sofiullah, M., Gomes Vale, E., and Darr, D. (2023). Effectiveness of an interactive start-up simulation to foster entrepreneurial intentions among undergraduate university students. Entrep. Educ. 6, 445–467. doi: 10.1007/s41959-023-00108-z
Soulé, M. V., Parmaxi, A., and Nicolaou, A. (2025). Internationalization at home in higher education: a systematic review of teaching and learning practices. J. Appl. Res. High. Educ. 17, 29–60. doi: 10.1108/JARHE-10-2023-0484
Tabachnikova, O., and Vinokurova, N. (2024). Entrepreneurship as career choice of Russian students: the role of university education, cultural traditions, and gender stereotypes. Entrep. Educ. 7, 135–153. doi: 10.1007/s41959-024-00118-5
Tsaknis, P. A., Sahinidis, A. G., and Kavagia, C. A. (2024). Entrepreneurship education reveals antecedents of intention: what really matters? Dev. Learn. Organ. 38, 27–30. doi: 10.1108/DLO-02-2023-0035,
Xu, S., and Sze, S. (2024). Enhancing university performance evaluation through digital technology: a deep learning approach for sustainable development. J. Knowl. Econ. 15, 20578–20594. doi: 10.1007/s13132-024-01928-7
Keywords: entrepreneurship education, higher education, multiculturalism, program design, teacher training
Citation: Libermann N, Jardim J and Nunes ACB (2026) The impact of multicultural approaches on entrepreneurial education in universities: systematic review with emphasis on the strategic design of programs aimed at teacher. Front. Educ. 10:1721646. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2025.1721646
Edited by:
Sheldon Oliver Watts, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, United StatesReviewed by:
Adamantios Koumpis, University Hospital of Cologne, GermanyAna Ivenicki, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Copyright © 2026 Libermann, Jardim and Nunes. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Naira Libermann, bmFpcmEubGliZXJtYW5uQHB1Y3JzLmJy