Gender, entrepreneurship, and marketing: Barriers and drivers for rural women in Iran
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Entrepreneurship involves the development of economic activities through the combination of risk, creativity, and innovation. This study uniquely integrates cross-cultural theoretical perspectives on entrepreneurial behavior and marketing challenges, particularly within the under-researched rural Iranian context. By combining qualitative and quantitative methods, it advances the literature by providing a nuanced understanding of the interplay between individual, socio-cultural, and structural factors influencing women entrepreneurs’ marketing practices. Marketing is widely recognized as a critical determinant of business performance. This study explores the barriers and enablers of marketing activities for rural women entrepreneurs, employing a mixed-methods approach. The qualitative stage involved 36 women entrepreneurs, while the quantitative stage included 307 respondents selected via snowball and stratified random sampling, respectively. The analysis of qualitative data identified marketing as a primary challenge for these entrepreneurs, which was further categorized into individual, socio-cultural, legal, technical, and economic factors through factor analysis. The causal model results demonstrated the significant impact of environmental factors, marketing strategy, and marketing mix on the implementation of marketing methods. Furthermore, key barriers, such as lack of technical skills, inadequate legal support, and restrictive socio-cultural norms, were found to hinder marketing success. The study recommends the development of empowerment programs to enhance personal skills, the implementation of marketing and sales workshops, and the creation of a supportive legal and socio-cultural environment to facilitate women’s entrepreneurial activities. Additionally, fostering access to financial resources and establishing better distribution channels are essential to improving the marketing effectiveness of rural women entrepreneurs. These findings underscore the need for a multi-faceted approach, incorporating education, financial support, and structural changes, to drive sustainable growth for women-led businesses in rural areas.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".