32nd ANPAD Symposium of Innovation, Technology and Entrepreneurship
SITE 2024

In recent years, there has been a considerable increase in interest in business models that aim for more than just financial profit, and seek to generate positive impacts on society and the environment (Usman et al., 2022). These models, known as Social and Environmental Impact Businesses (SEIB) (Barki, Rodrigues & Comini, 2020), encompass various approaches, such as social businesses, inclusive businesses, the base of the pyramid businesses, social impact solutions, and social enterprises (Dees, 1998; Yunus et al., 2010).

Although SEIBs emerged in the early 21st century, they are relatively new in Brazil, generally operating for less than five years (Pipe.Social, 2021). They lie between the second and third sectors and aim to solve social or environmental challenges, using business methods to generate positive and sustainable impact (Koppell, 2003; Marins, 2019). While they seek to sustain their operations and growth, they face unique challenges. Their priorities, values, stakeholders, and success metrics are distinct from traditional businesses, requiring a particular approach.

In addition to SEIBs, there are also temporary and specific initiatives developed by companies through projects (PMI, 2017) with social and/or environmental purposes. Social impact projects, for instance, have focused on social justice to promote social innovation in areas such as finance, health, and education (Dodescu et al., 2021; Villiers, 2021). Organizations, through projects, can play a role as facilitators of positive societal impact (Reale, 2022).

This topic invites the development of papers from basic and applied research, allowing for a better understanding of how entrepreneurship, innovation, and technologies can be used for the benefit of social and environmental impact projects and businesses. Best management practices, anchored in entrepreneurship, innovation, and technology theories, can improve their performance and contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals.

This research theme focuses on examining the challenges and opportunities of innovation management in a context of rapid technological and social changes, which we will refer to as a critical context. As new disruptive technologies, such as artificial intelligence (perhaps the most profoundly disruptive technology of the last century), digitalization, and the transition to Industry 5.0 transform the competitive environment, studies that seek to understand how innovation management can help organizations remain relevant and resilient are necessary. Thus, the guiding question for this theme is: How can innovation management help organizations face critical contexts?

We suggest the following themes, though not limited to these:

• The coordination of innovation in disruptive and critical contexts, such as pandemics and the effects of climate change, remains a relevant topic.

• How can companies structure innovation processes that incorporate resilience practices, enabling innovative projects to be maintained or adjusted even in adverse scenarios, with a focus on long-term sustainability?

• Mission-oriented policies set social impact goals, mobilizing resources and actors to tackle challenges that go beyond market interests and address societal demands.

• Company size is a factor that directly influences their approaches to innovation management. While large companies may have dedicated innovation structures and resources to invest in cutting-edge technologies, small and medium-sized enterprises often rely on adaptive solutions and may benefit from collaborative environments.

• Another area of study that could contribute to this theme is research on deep techs—technology-based companies that develop innovations with high scientific and technological impact.

The complex challenges faced by companies increasingly demand creative and sustainable solutions. However, traditional organizational structures can pose obstacles that hinder or prevent new value propositions. Thus, Innovation Ecosystems (IE) represent organizational formats for interdependent cooperation in value creation (Adner, 2006; Gomes et al., 2018). At the same time, the public sector continues to struggle in incorporating these new organizational configurations into public policy. Therefore, beyond advancing the differentiation between innovation ecosystems and those of business, entrepreneurship, and knowledge (Scaringella, Radziwon, 2017; Cobben et al., 2022), it is essential to enhance the analytical structures for IEs (Coletto et al., 2024). This call for papers invites studies that investigate the following aspects, among others:

1. Tangible and intangible structural elements and factors of innovation ecosystems; 
2. Dynamics, genesis, orchestration, management, and governance of innovation ecosystems, along with their lifecycle, performance metrics, and maturity aspects; 
3. Regional, sectoral, corporate, and national dimensions of IEs; 
4. Environments that promote innovation (science and technology parks, research parks, technopoles, etc.); 
5. Public policies for fostering, evolving, and expanding innovation ecosystems; 
6. Open innovation mechanisms and practices for co-creation within IEs; 
7. Innovation ecosystems focused on responsibility and sustainability; 
8. Incremental, radical, disruptive, or sustaining innovation in IEs;
9. Research methods and tools for IE studies.

In recent decades, the concept of grand challenges (GCs) has encompassed debates on climate change, inequality and global health crises, and calls for innovative solutions that transcend traditional disciplinary and organizational boundaries. By considering innovation as a process, the focus is on the key dimensions of Responsible Innovation.

We expect discussions that address, among other topics: a) How entrepreneurship can be a driving force in overcoming global grand challenges, integrating sustainable solutions from conception to implementation; b) Innovation strategies that integrate ESG principles to generate sustainable value and positive impact; and c) Entrepreneurial initiatives that have been guided by a responsible innovation agenda, aiming to address specific global challenges; d) Strategies to increase public dialogue, bioethics, research integrity and risk management are all mechanisms that support Responsible Innovation (RI) governance. These mechanisms must be aligned and integrated to provide a coherent and legitimate governance approach. This alignment can be achieved through approaches such as Constructive Technology Assessment, which integrates multiple levels of governance to address public policies (macro level), laboratory research (micro level) and institutional structures and practices (meso level); and e) strategies tools and practices aligned with the track’s proposal.

The goal is to bring together research demonstrating a clear intersection between innovation, entrepreneurship, and a conscious and ethical approach to global challenges, providing insights into how these areas can reinforce each other to create a lasting impact. To this end, research directed at this theme must necessarily establish a clear and robust connection between the topics addressed and the division’s central proposal.

Sustainability transition models are supported by the understanding that productive and even survival dynamics, such as population growth and technological and economic development, profoundly affect the planet, requiring objectives, metrics, and indicators that guide the search for sustainability (Viola & Mendes, 2022). Some models have been developed in response to these demands. Geels (2011) proposed a multilevel approach, understanding that structures support a paradigm and through them sustainable solutions can be achieved. In the search for the transition to sustainability, authors such as Avelino and Wittmayer (2016) also stand out, focusing on the understanding that relationships between multiple actors can describe interactions on different axes (public-private, for-profit-nonprofit, formal-informal), allowing us to understand who supports possible changes and innovations, identifying who exercises power in the transition processes to sustainability. The promotion of innovation ecosystems has been used by territories and companies as an alternative to connect and engage actors in facing these major challenges (Nilsson and Ritzén, 2023) and in promoting sustainable development (Xin, Miao and Cui, 2023). These actors are structured in networks and interact in a complex way, seeking a balance between conflicting interests and converging objectives (Foss, Schmidt and Teece, 2023).

This theme will seek to explore how innovation ecosystems can influence the sustainability-oriented transition. It covers the following topics:

• Proposal of new approaches for Sustainability-Oriented Innovation Ecosystems in the context of the global South;
• Theoretical and Empirical Studies on Sustainability-Oriented Transition in Innovation Ecosystems;
• Articulation of stakeholders and development of artifacts for sustainability in the context of innovation ecosystems;
• Governance and Orchestration of Sustainability-Oriented Innovation Ecosystems;
• Contribution of Innovation Ecosystems to the Sustainable Development Goals;
• Comparative studies between the global South and the global North in the sustainability-oriented transition.

The proposed theme seeks to foster conceptual, methodological and empirical discussions on the dynamic evolution of entrepreneurial ecosystems (EEs) and their future trajectories. EEs are complex, interconnected networks that include entrepreneurs, institutions, investors, and supporting infrastructure (BROWN; MASON, 2017; SPIGEL, 2017). Understanding their evolution is crucial for enabling sustainable growth, innovation, and regional development (WURTH; STAM; SPIGEL, 2021).

Building on seminal works such as ISENBERG (2010), which highlights the systemic nature of EEs, and SPIGEL (2017), which explores the socio-material aspects of these systems, this theme aims to encourage scholarly research that unpacks the intricacies of EEs, their adaptability, and resilience. This theme will promote interdisciplinary collaboration, bringing together insights from entrepreneurship, regional development, innovation studies, among others. We invite discussions expanding the full potential of the ecosystem metaphor (HARRISON; ROCHA, 2024), encouraging research that informs policymakers and ecosystem stakeholders about strategies to foster long-term growth, adaptability and sustainability in cities and regions.

Key research objectives include understanding ecosystems' adaptive mechanisms, identifying factors promoting ecosystem health, and exploring how technology and resource circulation reshape entrepreneurial ecosystems in different contexts.

Topics of interest include but are not limited to: Investigating how EEs adapt and recover from economic, social, and environmental shocks; Exploring the impact of digital platforms, AI, and blockchain on EEs; Understanding how EEs can better support marginalised or underrepresented entrepreneurial communities; Analysing the stages of development and evolution of EEs over time; Examining the role of government policies in shaping and nurturing EEs; Assessing how cross-border collaborations and global networks influence local EEs; Defining and measuring the success of EEs beyond traditional metrics; Examining the role of financial and non-financial resources, including how capital, knowledge, and talent.

Entrepreneurship and innovation are engines of economic growth and social development. However, there is a dark side that casts light on a problematic dimension, still underexplored in studies of the phenomenon. This thematic proposal fits into this context, encompassing: (1) Negative aspects of entrepreneurship, including how the pressure for success and growth can lead to unethical practices, as well as addressing mental health issues related to business failure; (2) Risks of innovation, including the effects of innovation on social and economic inequalities, as well as adverse environmental impacts stemming from technologies (especially disruptive ones); (3) Governance challenges, control, and risk mitigation reflecting on the ethical responsibility of entrepreneurs and innovators; (4) Dilemmas related to breaking rules and regulations through innovative business models that result in market imbalance and predatory business practices; (5) Negative social, economic, and environmental impacts arising from the implementation of new businesses and innovations affecting local communities; (6) The relationship between disruptive innovation and job obsolescence, as well as its implications for the future of work and interpersonal relationships; (7) Inequalities resulting from restricted access to innovative alternatives and the pursuit of democratizing access to technologies; (8) Policies to regulate innovative business practices and protect the rights of companies and civil society, ensuring ethical and sustainable practices in entrepreneurship; (9) Cases of innovations that proved to be fraudulent and market manipulations that led to legal and reputational consequences. From this set of sub-themes, a platform can be offered to discuss the challenges and risks associated with entrepreneurship and innovation. By considering the dark side of the phenomena presented here, a more balanced understanding of reality can be achieved, contributing to more responsible and sustainable business practices.

The dynamics of entrepreneurship and innovation have been increasingly shaped by collaborative partnerships, whose increasing complexity, whether in ecosystems, clusters, networks, or non-ecosystem arrangements, requires a deeper understanding of their governance, implementation, and evaluation of outcomes. This theme invites contributions that explore how organizations can design, operationalize, and evaluate the performance of these collaborations, fostering value co-creation at different organizational levels.

Given this scenario, the aim is to develop a holistic understanding of how, when, where, and why certain governance models and operationalization of collaborative relationships are more effective than others. This theme encourages studies from different theoretical lenses that investigate the evolutionary challenges of partnerships, including misalignment of objectives, asymmetries of resources and capabilities, dependency risks, relationship stability, and unequal distribution of value. These issues are recurrent in ecosystems and other collaborative arrangements involving national and multinational corporations, SMEs, public companies, and social businesses at different stages of maturity.

Studies may address questions such as:

• How can collaborative innovation strategies be implemented within specific settings, such as alliances, networks, clusters, platforms, and ecosystems?
• How do partnerships vary across sectors, such as high-tech, low-tech, services, and creative industries at different organizational levels?
• Under what conditions do innovation collaborations between the private, public, and civil society sectors thrive or fail?
• How can organizations design governance models that increase the effectiveness of collaborative partnerships?
• How can complementarity and interdependence between business, government, and academia be used to foster collaborative innovation and value co-creation?

We encourage submissions that adopt a multi-level approach (micro, meso, and macro) to understand the complexity of collaboration across different organizational forms and sectoral contexts. Studies based on empirical data and conceptual papers that offer new frameworks are welcome.

We consider the “Global South” to be regions that are often marginalized politically or culturally, occupying peripheral positions of geopolitical power due to European colonization and its economic and social impacts (Dados & Connell, 2012). This influences the generation of knowledge in management, which generally mirrors the interests and theoretical approaches of developed countries (Wanderley et al., 2021). There has been a recent appreciation of solutions from the Global South (Sousa-Santos, 2015; Quijano, 2007), which often occur through the rescue of traditional (or pre-colonial) knowledge and practices. This is because the adaptation of Eurocentric innovations does not always constitute better innovations for local social needs. These innovations should be built through the involvement of actors engaged in the local context (Cajaiba-Santana, 2014). Thus, it is relevant to understand perspectives that lead to innovative solutions for inclusive social and economic development, and for addressing the problems found in the region. It is important to give visibility to stories and cases from the Global South. This offers new agendas for innovation management, which may particularly address, but are not limited to, the following issues:

• Innovation that enhances the integration between traditional and contemporary knowledge.
• Alliances and inter-organizational relationships (involving companies, community businesses, academia, government, civil society, etc.) for innovation aimed at solving socio-environmental problems in the Global South.
• The use of innovation in business/management models in countries of the Global South that enable inclusive social and economic development while minimizing environmental impacts.
• Practices or efforts made by multinational corporations to produce innovative solutions that contribute to inclusive social and economic development in the Global South.
• New methodological aspects and innovative methods in conducting community-engaged research, overcoming distrust and exploring different types of knowledge (e.g. participatory methodologies; action research; non-colonizing intervention, etc.)

The human factor of innovation and entrepreneurship has become increasingly central to both academic research and business practices. While traditional studies in these fields focus mostly on organizations and ecosystems, understanding the role of the individual in the process of innovation and entrepreneurship has gained increasing relevance. How can we empower individuals to be more innovative and entrepreneurial? What skills should be developed to encourage these behaviors? Furthermore, how can organizations create cultures that promote and sustain innovation? What metrics can be used to effectively evaluate innovative and entrepreneurial behavior? And which educational methodologies are most effective in fostering innovation and entrepreneurship?

This track seeks to explore research that examines the human and relational side of innovation and entrepreneurship, welcoming both theoretical essays and empirical work. Topics include, but are not limited to:

• Education and Pedagogy for Innovation and Entrepreneurship;
• Entrepreneurial Intention and its Developments;
• Leadership, Learning and Organizational Culture for Innovation;
• Skills and Behaviors required for Innovation and Entrepreneurship;
• Methodologies and Tools for Fostering Innovation and Entrepreneurship.

Digital transformation presents itself as a solution to the demands of organizations in different economic sectors and society in general. Technological innovations involving IoT, Cloud Computing, Blockchain, Artificial Intelligence, Geotechnologies, among others, have brought cost, efficiency and competitiveness gains to those who adopt them. In this sense, we are still trying to understand how digital innovations benefit the environments where they are applied? However, there is also a side that deserves attention when it comes to the negative impacts of adopting these technologies. Behavioural changes in communities that depend on tacit knowledge to remain productive, restrictions on the development of creativity and analytical capacity in professionals and future professionals, the emergence of new epidemics among users, among others, are concerns that go beyond organizational environments, but which have a direct impact on innovation ecosystems. It is therefore also important to understand what negative impacts digital innovations have on the environments where they are applied.  Furthermore, are the technologies effectively accessible to ecosystems? What market infrastructures enable digital innovation to take place?

Topics of Interest:

• Benefits perceived by organizations with the adoption of digital innovations;
• Negative consequences perceived by the different actors in the ecosystem with the adoption of digital innovations;
• Development of sustainable digital innovations;
• Co-creation of solutions to society's demands using digital technologies;
• Disruptive innovations generated through the adoption of digital technologies;
• Capacity to diversify markets through the adoption of digital technologies;
• The impact of digital transformation on organizational culture;
• The impact of digital technologies on market habits and behavior;
• The different market infrastructures that allow digital innovations to take place
• Correlation between digital technologies, their adoption and diffusion, and market infrastructures
• The importance of connectivity and extension and training systems.

The use and development of artificial intelligence (AI) has been accelerated in recent years in several economic sectors, consolidating itself as an important tool for management. AI has also been seen as a matter of national sovereignty and the object of national strategies (BRASIL, 2024). In the organizational context, AI can be used as a tool to support managers in processing information in several areas (Hafner, Wincent, Parida and Gassmann, 2021), such as 1) generation and development of ideas; 2) collection and analysis of data in management systems; 3) recognition of bottlenecks and proposal of solutions; 4) automation of processes. More specifically, when we relate AI to Innovation Management, there is a range of opportunities for researchers and managers in the area to focus on its possible applications in routines, practices and research (Mariani, Machado, Magrelli, & Dwivedi, 2023; Paschen, Pitt, & Kietzmann, 2020; Roberts & Candi, 2024). The objective of this theme is to explore tools, techniques, practices, perspectives and approaches of artificial intelligence applied to innovation management, from a practical perspective as well as in applications in academic studies in the area.
Thus, it is possible to list possible areas of study between Innovation Management and Artificial Intelligence, among them:
1. Use of AI in any stages of the innovation process in the public, private and third sectors;
2. AI in open innovation processes and in the management of innovation ecosystems;
3. Comparative view of the application of AI to innovation management in different geographies, sectors and sizes of organization;
4. Critical approaches to AI in the context of innovation management (e.g.: biases, innovation protection, risks, etc.);
5. Use of AI for organizational management, in organizational systems, in knowledge management.

Note: this topic does not include works that are not linked to the area of ​​Applied Social Sciences.

Current economic development models have led to the expansion of heavily urbanized societies, dependent on various public and private services, at the cost of over-exploiting natural resources. In this context, entrepreneurship arises as a key tool to address society’s pressing issues, serving as a catalyst for positive impacts, particularly in environmental restoration and social justice.

Entrepreneurs operating outside traditional entrepreneurship face significant challenges. This proposal highlights research on social entrepreneurship (SE) and micro-entrepreneurship (ME), especially in peripheral regions and among those at the Base of the Pyramid. These forms of entrepreneurship act as effective tools for poverty reduction and the productive inclusion of socioeconomically vulnerable populations, fostering their active engagement in economic activities while reinforcing the social fabric in marginalized areas.

The proposal also seeks to integrate innovative research methodologies, emphasizing close collaboration between researchers and practical study contexts. Researchers play an active role in enhancing the understanding of these phenomena, ensuring that theoretical and practical approaches align with the real needs of communities and the initiatives being studied. This promotes a more participatory and transformative research process, combining academic rigor with hands-on experience.

This theme aims to gather research in the following areas:

• Challenges and opportunities for the development of SE and ME in peripheral regions, considering the institutional, cultural, and socio-economic environment.
• Analysis of entrepreneurs' behavioral aspects, institutional influences, and the effects of informality and stigma on business development in peripheral areas.
• Examination of intersectionality and the impact of gender and race on the challenges and opportunities faced by micro-entrepreneurs and social entrepreneurs.
• Studies on monitoring and impact assessment of SE and ME in peripheral areas.
• Research methods and approaches focused on SE and ME in peripheral contexts.

The contemporary scenario, marked by major global challenges such as the climate crisis and social inequality, demands a profound reassessment of the role of entrepreneurship and innovation in response to society's emerging needs and to stimulate the creation of opportunities.

In this context, this issue emerges as crucial, requiring a critical analysis of how to build a dynamic, sustainable and inclusive economic development model, with a central focus on the strategic role of public policies for entrepreneurship and innovation.

We propose an in-depth debate, with an emphasis on research, on the intersection between entrepreneurship, innovation, sustainability, equity, social justice and other major global challenges, with a focus on the development of effective public policies. We seek to stimulate research and the development of new theoretical and methodological approaches to understand and drive the formulation, implementation and evaluation of public policies for entrepreneurship and innovation in different frameworks of “science, technology and innovation” from a “transformative” perspective.

Key questions to be explored:

- How can we develop public policies that promote the creation of sustainable and inclusive business models, prioritizing "missions and mission-driven innovation policies"?

- What are the implications of sustainability for financial management and decision-making in organizations, taking into account theoretical and methodological advances in entrepreneurship and innovation policies, and how do these issues impact the formulation of public policies?

- How can we encourage entrepreneurship and innovation in a context of global challenges, considering their "rationale, lessons and challenges", and how can we translate these reflections into effective public policies?

We believe that this topic can be a fertile space for the exchange of knowledge, the production of innovative research and the construction of effective solutions to today's challenges, with a focus on the formulation of public policies capable of driving the transformation towards a more sustainable future.

The theme “Fundraising for Technological Innovation” encompasses the landscape, challenges, opportunities, and recommendations, as well as other essential factors for the sustainable development of innovative projects in an increasingly competitive global environment. Access to financial resources is essential to transform ideas into processes, products, services, and solutions that drive the economy and promote technological and social advancement.

National funding programs, including non-reimbursable options (grants) such as FINEP, Programa Centelha, Rota 2030, Embrapii, and PIPE-FAPESP, offer direct and indirect financial support, complemented by tax incentives such as Lei do Bem and Lei de Informática; reimbursable resources, such as those from BNDES, increase project feasibility.

Private investment, through venture capital, corporate venture, private equity, crowdfunding, and business angels, is also essential, especially for high-tech businesses. International programs, such as the SBIR (USA) and others from the European Union, Israel, and BRICS, along with mandatory investments regulated by agencies such as ANP and ANEEL, expand opportunities. Additionally, financing focused on sustainability, such as Green Bonds, Sustainability Bonds, and Social Bonds, also contribute to this scenario.

Organizational arrangements, such as incubators, consortia, and alliances between companies, innovation centers, ICTs, universities, and government, form ecosystems that strengthen collaboration on integrated projects in search of funding.

It is essential to prioritize regional funding and financial access for SMEs, startups, and organizations at different stages of maturity, overcoming bureaucratic barriers that limit these initiatives. It is fundamental to address thematic lines in strategic sectors and use enabling technologies and impact metrics to enable projects with higher technological risk. This management requires attention to documentation, call requirements, commercial, technical, scientific, and methodological aspects. It is also vital to consider accountability and intellectual property, ensuring effective and responsible execution.

Although entrepreneurship has been widely studied, female entrepreneurship has gained increasing academic and empirical relevance in recent years (Brush & Cooper, 2012; Cardella et al., 2020; De Bruin et al., 2007; De Vita et al., 2014; Owalla & Al Ghafri, 2020). Women entrepreneurs contribute significantly to socioeconomic development through activities such as job creation, poverty reduction, and reducing social exclusion (Brush & Cooper, 2012; Cardella et al., 2020; De Vita et al., 2014). The literature shows that this growth is particularly significant in emerging and developing countries (Zhang & Zhou, 2019), where female entrepreneurship plays a crucial role in economic development and societal well-being (Afshan et al., 2021; Owalla & Al Ghafri, 2020; De Vita et al., 2014). Women, however, face greater challenges than men, such as family conflicts (Santos et al., 2018; Surangi, 2018), limited access to resources (De Vita et al., 2014), and difficulties with human capital (Afshan et al., 2021). They also struggle to build and manage social networks (Afshan et al., 2021; Corrêa et al., 2022), face discrimination, prejudice, and harassment, and deal with inadequate government policies that fail to support female entrepreneurship (Moreira et al., 2019). Moreover, cultural factors and social norms impact women entrepreneurs' emotional behaviors and business decisions. In this complex scenario, female entrepreneurship remains multifaceted, influenced by numerous contextual factors. Research must focus on understanding the dynamics between female entrepreneurs, their businesses, and their environments to address contemporary challenges. Combining theoretical and empirical studies, future research should explore:

• Sustainable and Social Impact Female Entrepreneurship
• Inclusive Female Entrepreneurship and Diversity
• Barriers and Challenges of Female Entrepreneurship
• New Practices of Female Entrepreneurs
• Female Entrepreneurship and Technological Challenges
• Female Entrepreneurship and Self-Employment

A number of challenges and obstacles are inherent to the field of entrepreneurship, many of which take the form of threats and difficulties. Threats are problems that have the potential to occur; although the precise manner and likelihood of their occurrence is uncertain. Difficulties are problems that are actually faced, which usually impose barriers and require the expenditure of greater resources in order to achieve their desired outcomes. A lack of resources is a common problem faced by organizations, especially in the context of crises such as disasters and pandemics (Osiyevskyy et al., 2023; Nelson and Lima, 2020; Lima, 2022). However, this shortage is already a prevalent issue among small organizations, including small businesses and associations, and is further exacerbated by crises.

Entrepreneurship, particularly in small organizations, has demonstrated the capacity to surmount challenges in the context of limited resources. It is imperative to recognize the value of achieving significant outcomes with limited resources. This behavior, which may appear to be self-evident when resources are limited, requires further investigation. There is a lack of studies examining the methods of achieving a great deal with limited resources and the ways in which these methods interact and complement one another. For example, effectuation (Sarasvathy, 2001), bricolage (Baker and Nelson, 2005), and bootstrapping (Michaelis et al., 2020) are some of the studied modes. Nevertheless, further investigation is required to ascertain how these approaches interact and complement one another, as well as to identify their respective limitations and the types of challenges they are most effective in addressing. Other modalities, such as gambiarras, knack (jeitinhos), and the Indian jugaad, also exist but have yet to be subjected to sufficient research.

This call for submissions invites theoretical and empirical papers, as well as quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods studies, which may include international comparisons and perspectives.

The theme highlights the role of public entrepreneurship as a tool to face complex challenges in order to contribute with its efficiency to mitigate public problems and generate social value for the community and its surroundings. Based on an analysis of the main barriers to government efficiency – such as bureaucracy, scarcity of resources and the lack of integration between different levels of government – ​​the theme searches for collaborative solutions, involving public servants, citizens and companies. Collaborative efforts and behaviors are observed beyond the public sector, involving business and third sector organizations to co-create projects and solutions for the common good or of a given community. In this sense, it seeks to bring together researchers and strengthen inter(multi)disciplinary research agendas, through collaborative and networked actions. It is expected to receive works with different epistemologies and methods that address: 

• Entrepreneurship in the Public Sector linked to contemporary aspects such as public strategy, resilience, co-participation and generation of public value by generating innovative solutions to chronic problems in the sector at different territorial scales: supranational, national, regional and local;
• Tools such as Design Thinking for the construction of more efficient and citizen-centered public policies based on digital transformation and technological innovation;
• Practical cases of public and social entrepreneurship to demonstrate collaboration between government, civil society and the private sector to foster public and social innovation;
• Configurations, formulation, implementation and evaluation of policies to support entrepreneurship, enterprises and the creation and development of (new) markets and impact actions for intrapreneurship in the public sector;
• Manifestations, appropriations and resignifications of (intra)entrepreneurial Culture in the Public Sector and its relations with Society and Sustainable Development.

The economy and society continue to undergo rapid transformation. This context requires the reformulation of the role of governments, academia, companies and institutions as a whole. Specifically, in business dynamics, national and regional innovation models and policies face changes with technological trends, implying new organizational configurations.

The Triple Helix metaphor, formed by the connections between actors in the university-business-government spheres, proposed by Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff (1995), has been incorporating new relevant actors for the generation of innovation, such as society (Quadruple Helix) and sustainability (Quintuple Helix), specifically in this context of rapid technological transformations (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 1995; Carayannis & Campbell, 2009). This evolution has led to the design of a helix theory and the neo-Triple Helix model, as a synthesis of this model (Carayannis & Campbell, 2022; Cai, 2022).

The relationships between the actors analyzed by the helix theories reflect the transformation of the university, from traditional to entrepreneurial, as a key element in the creation of technical-scientific knowledge in the knowledge economy. And how innovation mechanisms and environments (IEM) decode scientific knowledge into innovation, whether in environments such as business incubators, technology parks, innovation hubs, regional economic development projects, among others.

This topic will be receiving submissions in the following themes:

- Creation, management, consolidation and impacts of innovation environments (ecosystems; business incubators; science and technology parks; innovation hubs, areas and districts, among others)

- Knowledge protection and technology transfer mechanisms (marketing offices, technology innovation centers, among others);

- Innovation systems (national/regional) and the Triple Helix approaches and derived models;

- The role of organized civil society in innovation and economic development;

- The role of the university in the 21st century, entrepreneurial university, engaged university, sustainable university, sustainable entrepreneurial university and university management.

Discussions about climate change have intensified, especially in the face of recurrent and severe disasters affecting various countries around the world. Diplomatic mechanisms, such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the Kyoto Protocol, and the Paris Agreement, as well as governance instances like the Conference of the Parties (COP), aim to establish and manage proposals, agreements, and targets to mitigate and reduce the rapid increase in global temperature and its consequences. In this context, the development of sustainable technologies becomes crucial to support countries in meeting their climate goals, positioning innovation as an essential vector for the transition towards a low-carbon economy. Despite the efforts of middle-income countries in developing innovations and transferring climate technologies - exemplified by the creation of the Technology Implementation Programme - asymmetries persist between developed and developing countries regarding the capacity to create and rapidly deploy new technologies that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Thus, it becomes urgent to expand studies on effective technology transfer mechanisms, with a focus on the transition to a low-carbon economy, especially in developing countries. Research on technology transfer and technological cooperation to support the transition towards a low-carbon economy is of interest to this thematic axis, as well as studies that explore ways to strengthen the technological absorption capacity of developing countries in order to reduce technological gaps. Additionally, the role of the bioeconomy in reducing these asymmetries between nations at different stages of development is also of special interest to this thematic area. 

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) include promoting inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all. However, in countries like Brazil, the rate of young people aged 15 to 24 who are neither employed nor studying stood at 20.6%. The country have integrated entrepreneurship education at both basic and higher education levels with the purpose of providing means for individuals to develop skills and competencies that enable them to engage in increasingly complex activities. Since the late 20th century, authors have proposed that entrepreneurship can and should be taught and encouraged, aiming to foster active citizenship attitudes and entrepreneurial competencies, generating and transforming new ideas into social, economic, and cultural values.

In this regard, it is essential to pay attention to the educational ecosystem. This topic encompasses both theoretical and empirical studies from articles that examine, among other possibilities within the scope of this call:

- The ecosystem of entrepreneurship education.

- International perspectives on collaboration between schools/universities.

- Entrepreneurship education in a world impacted by technological revolution and the development of Industry 4.0.

- Entrepreneurship education and the promotion of inclusive and sustainable economic growth and the promotion of decent work for all.

- Entrepreneurship education as continuing education.

- Entrepreneurship education in Basic Education and Higher Education.

- Pedagogical and organizational practices for the development of entrepreneurship education.

- Integration of Vocational Education and Entrepreneurship Education.

- Educator training for teaching entrepreneurship and Educational methodologies for entrepreneurship.

- Innovative learning environments.

- Didactic-pedagogical practices oriented toward entrepreneurship for comprehensive professional training.

- Studies and research, technical-technological products, and teaching cases in Entrepreneurship.

Current social, economic, political, and environmental challenges have mobilized diverse organizations at local, regional, and national levels to address these issues. Despite this, few analyses have been undertaken regarding social innovations and their ecosystems in terms of theories, epistemologies, and responses to these problems (Pradel Miquel, M.; García Cabeza, M.; Eizaguirre Anglada, S., 203). Brazil, with its territorial diversity, is a hotbed of these innovations, and the country's different territorial configurations suggest the need to situate the debate globally (Andion, Alperstedt, Graëff, 2020). In this perspective, the theme proposes to debate social innovations and their consequences in rural and urban contexts (Domanski, Howaldt; Kaletka, 2020). In this sense, it seeks to discuss social innovation and its relationship with social change and transformation, based on its consequences, highlighting multisectoral and multilevel perspectives. It is interested in the results of research on social innovations, social innovation ecosystems and their consequences in the territories, directing the focus to the collective responses directed at the capacity of the different actors to develop socially innovative practices. The approach of Social Innovation and Social Innovation Ecosystems (SIEs) and  their influence on the promotion of more sustainable cities is central to this research agenda and also in the practice of social innovation (Kaletka; Markmann; Pelka, 2016; Alijani Et Al, 2016; Hodson; Kaika, 2017; Howaldt et al, 2018; 2019; Andion, C.; Alperstedt, G. D.; Graeff, 2020). The theme invites authors to submit articles on the following topics, but not limited to them:

- Discussion on paradigms, epistemologies and theories of social innovation;

- Experiences of social innovation and social innovation ecosystems in rural and urban areas;

- Social innovation and governance for sustainability;

- Social innovations and multi-sector and multi-level perspective;

- Comparative studies on social innovation and social innovation ecosystems;

Valuation and selection of patents, technologies, innovations, and startups are central issues for the development of new technologies and the advancement of innovative ventures, including technology-based businesses, startups, academic spin-offs, and deep tech companies. This topic is particularly relevant today, as traditional sources of financing, such as banks and institutional investors, have been complemented by more dynamic alternatives, including venture capital, crowdfunding, and corporate venture capital. Furthermore, the role of government funding, in the form of economic grants and support for innovative entrepreneurship, remains crucial, especially in the early stages of technological innovation.

Additionally, the relationship between the type of financing and the lifecycle of innovative companies is a fundamental aspect to investigate, as different stages of development require specific approaches and sources of capital. Understanding how selection and valuation processes influence the success and sustainability of innovation and startups can benefit entrepreneurs, managers, and policymakers alike.

Therefore, studying the selection and valuation of patents, technologies, innovations, and startups is essential for promoting a knowledge-based economy and creating new opportunities for socioeconomic development. This aligns with ANPAD’s goals of encouraging research and international collaboration in the fields of administrative and accounting sciences.

International entrepreneurship has gained increasing relevance in the academic landscape as technological advancements have reduced barriers, allowing entrepreneurs, even those with limited resources, to position themselves internationally. Recent technological progress, such as artificial intelligence, has accelerated the rise of startups and "born global" companies—a movement that began in the 1990s—that today represent a significant share of international business.

The view of international entrepreneurship as the discovery, evaluation, and exploitation of opportunities in the global context for the creation of products and services has been largely transformed by the influence of technology. This reshaping of the phenomenon calls for new perspectives, beyond the traditional analysis of individuals and companies, including the impact of technology.

This proposal encourages discussion on international entrepreneurship, exploring aspects related to individuals, companies, and the global environment, with an emphasis on the role of technology. It broadens the understanding of how these entrepreneurs expand their operations across borders, facing cultural, regulatory, and market challenges.

As a result, it aims to encourage studies on the development of international entrepreneurial intention, the role of expatriation and repatriation, and international entrepreneurial education and orientation. The topic contributes to a better understanding of the effects of internationalization on entrepreneurs, companies, and ecosystems. Furthermore, it creates space for research on the impact of internationalization on minority groups, including social enterprises. Finally, it offers a solid foundation for the development of innovative methodologies for international entrepreneurship studies.

By highlighting this theme, the ITE division expands its contribution to the literature and promotes insights to strengthen the international presence of Brazilian companies in global markets. The proposal also enriches the debate on the evolution of international entrepreneurship studies, with a special focus on emerging economies, suggesting an analysis of sectors where innovation and entrepreneurship play a crucial role in competitiveness.

Blue Entrepreneurship refers to a set of economic and innovative initiatives that utilize ocean, sea, and coastal resources in a sustainable and regenerative manner. This theme aims to explore the various facets of entrepreneurship in the maritime context, fostering an interdisciplinary dialogue that spans from the exploration of new markets to environmental conservation. The blue economy encompasses a wide range of activities, including sustainable aquaculture, marine bioeconomy, and renewable ocean energies, such as wind and tidal power. Additionally, practices like sustainable coastal tourism and responsible fishing are essential to balancing resource utilization with ecosystem preservation.

In this context, the issue of greenwashing will also be analyzed, where companies promote a sustainable image that does not align with their actual practices. The proposal encourages the study of communication and marketing strategies that are transparent and effective, contributing to public awareness and environmental education.

The development of business models that integrate sustainability and environmental regeneration is one of the main focuses of this theme, highlighting initiatives that promote the restoration of marine ecosystems, such as algae farming and coral reef restoration. Public policies and regulatory frameworks that support or hinder the advancement of blue entrepreneurship will also be addressed, as well as opportunities for creating international collaboration networks and public-private partnerships.

This proposal aims to stimulate research that deepens the understanding of how innovative and sustainable practices can transform society's relationship with the oceans, promoting economic and social development without compromising the integrity of marine and coastal environments. By fostering a robust and collaborative debate, it is expected to contribute to a more prosperous and balanced future for ocean resources.