INTRODUCTION

Between criticisms and evidence of entrepreneurship in the global world

In the last two decades, globalization has influenced all dimensions of human activity, making it possible to analyze most realities and phenomena globally. Moreover, this can be seen, for example, in the research carried out in the following areas: education for global citizenship, which presupposes an increased awareness of the interdependence and need for cooperation among all people and nations (Bosio & Torres, 2019; Davies et al., 2005, Davies et al., 2018; Goren & Yemini, 2017b, Goren & Yemini, 2017a; Jardim, 2021b; Marshall, 2011; Tanner, 2007; VanderDussen Toukan, 2018); global leadership, which presupposes the relevance of standard general guidelines (Cantón & Garcia, 2018; Cavey, 2020; Kyvik, 2018; Likhotal, 2020; Rosser et al., 2020; Winck et al., 2016); tourism, which involves travel between multiple countries (Fu et al., 2019; Jardim, 2019b; Rusu et al., 2016).

Furthermore, specific themes of this phenomenon have also been researched, such as that of global government (Auld et al., 2019), global ethics (von Eschenbach, 2020), global health(Huster et al., 2017; Rosser et al., 2020; Zeanah et al., 2018) and the global born (Gabrielsson et al., 2014; Jones & Coviello, 2005; Lopez et al., 2009; Thai & Chong, 2008). In this context, entrepreneurship education is also influenced and studied as a global reality (Coulibaly et al., 2018; Kiss et al., 2012; Nguyen, 2016; Othman et al., 2012; Radović-Marković et al., 2019; Zajda, 2015). Nevertheless, to identify its actual impact, it is essential to explain the meaning of the phenomenon of globalization and what the process of education for entrepreneurship consists of.

Taking into account the multiple approaches to this phenomenon, it can be seen that there is a convergence in the definition of the term globalization, being understood as the process of interaction and integration between people, companies and governments around the world, resulting from the advances seen mainly in transport and communication technologies (Bottazzi & Dindo, 2013; Ndidiamaka et al., 2019), but also in culture, education and the resolution of social and environmental problems (Coulibaly et al., 2018; Halunko et al., 2018; Nyame-Asiamah et al., 2020; Radović-Marković et al., 2019; Ramsey & Lorenz, 2016). Thus, the exponential increase in exchanges and interactions between multiple countries has led to the integration of economic, social, cultural, political and educational aspects. On the other hand, entrepreneurship education promotes individual skills that allow them to convert ideas into actions (European Commission, 2019). This is a relevant skill for each person, regardless of their profession and function, the region and the cultural context in which they reside. Because it is a field, par excellence, of the development of societies since it is a triggering factor for economic growth, social cohesion, organizational success and personal fulfillment (Jardim, 2021b; Sarkar, 2014; Timmons, 1989). Over the last few decades, entrepreneurship education programs have increased exponentially on all continents (Abdelkarim, 2018; Basu, 2014; Byun et al., 2018; Carree et al., 2011; Cheung, 2008; Hernández-Sánchez et al., 2019; Nieuwenhuizen et al., 2016; Solomon, 2007; Valerio et al., 2014; Vang, 2017).

To contextualize, it is essential to mention that this educational phenomenon originated at Harvard Business School, where the first entrepreneurship course, called Management of New Enterprises, was held by Myles Mace. A year later, a research centre in this field, the so-called Research Centre in Entrepreneurial History, was set up (Cooper, 2005; Landström, 2020). In the meantime, courses began to appear at several universities in the United States of America (USA), and in 1967 the first Master Business Administration (MBA) on entrepreneurship was held at Stanford University and New York University (Katz, 2003). The following year, 1968, Babson College offered the first degree in entrepreneurship (Cooper, 2005). This phenomenon has gradually spread worldwide, given its relevance in solving emerging problems. However, if initially, the focus was on the creation and management of companies, in recent decades, the focus has also opened to entrepreneurial skills, attitudes and behaviors (Comissão Europeia, 2004; European Commission, 2006b; Jardim, 2021b; Krueger, 2015).

Thus, entrepreneurship education has begun to take an approach that allows it to cover students from all higher education courses and at all levels of education who need to develop these skills, without which it becomes complicated to face professional challenges. However, the general population also needs this mindset, as it allows for creating original and valuable solutions to various emerging social and economic problems, such as unemployment, the environment, poverty and exclusion. In this way, EE has promoted this culture (Mwasalwiba et al., 2010; Plourde & Pelletier, 2007; Römer-Paakkanen & Suonpää, 2017).

However, it was also organized from a pedagogical point of view to be effective. In this sense, it has developed as an education based on criteria, such as the precise definition of the objectives to be achieved, the progression of the teaching-learning process throughout all levels of education, the integration of entrepreneurship teaching into curricula and interdisciplinary approaches (Eurofound, 2015; Fayolle et al., 2019; Gibb, 2011). Consequently, in terms of teaching methods, the literature on the speciality favors very diverse strategies, such as learning by doing (Banha, 2016; Chang et al., 2014; Jardim & Silva, 2019), a action research (Warner, 2016), the integration of this theme into the academic curriculum (Daraban, 2016), the innovation paradigm (Gibb & Price, 2014) and the design thinking (Baldacchino et al., 2014).

However, there is no unanimity in the acceptance of this educational approach. There are thinkers and schools that oppose EE, such as the current called critical entrepreneurship studies (Ayers & Saad-Filho, 2015; Campos & Soeiro, 2016; Dashtipour & Rumens, 2018; Essers et al., 2018; Jardim, 2019a; Verduijn et al., 2014), which points to the need for a critical reflection on this global phenomenon, which can lead to the defence of an inhumane economy, to the anxiety of always wanting more, to the creation of erroneous expectations about the time-consuming and laborious process of being an entrepreneur, to the incongruity of seeking social change, but in a way in which only a few enjoy the benefits of economic growth. The main criticisms aim to unveil the alleged neoliberal objective that dominates current states' political thought and practice, reaching neoliberal democracy and its neoliberalism, incompatible with the affirmation of democracy in crucial areas of societies. Despite these critical perspectives, the need for EE has become an unavoidable reality in today's global world. For this reason, this study aims to explain and evaluate the effects of globalization on promoting entrepreneurial culture.

The following is a section on the methodology followed in this study. As a conceptual study, the reasons that justify the promotion of entrepreneurship, the global entrepreneurial policies, and the international networks that interconnect the professionals and researchers who work in this field are systematized in the following section. Finally, it concludes with the global challenges underlying the theme of educational policies, both local, regional and international.

METHODOLOGY

This study is based on a theoretical-reflexive review of the literature, aiming to explain the existing data on the impact of globalization on entrepreneurship education. Moreover, it aims to answer the following research questions: how does globalization affect EE in today's world? What are the socio-educational problems that justify the global promotion of EE? Which international organizations have disseminated global EE policies? What are the leading global networks focused on entrepreneurship?

To find the answer to these questions, thematic analysis was used, which, as a qualitative research technique, allows the identification and interpretation of thematic patterns in a dataset (Braun & Clarke, 2021; Christou, 2023). Furthermore, the procedures recommended in the literature on this technique were followed. In the first phase, 51 articles published by experts in the field were identified; 35 documents or reports from international institutions were found, such as the OECD, the European Commission, and the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. In addition, 18 books and nine book chapters were identified. All of them answered the research questions previously posed in some way. After familiarization with these data, themes organized the documents, and the articles were read based on these themes, i.e., contexts and problems, global policies of entrepreneurial education, entrepreneurial behaviors and international networks that promote entrepreneurship. Considering each of the themes, the writing of the texts resulted in a frame of reference on the trends of entrepreneurial education in today's world.

It should also be noted that one of the main reasons which justified the use of this technique was the flexibility of the thematic analysis, which, unlike other more rigid methods, allows researchers to adapt the analysis process to the specific needs of their study (Braun & Clarke, 2021; Lochmiller, 2021). Other approaches to qualitative research were also considered, namely the theoretical-reflexive review (Creswell & Creswell, 2022; Creswell & Poth, 2017; Saldaña, 2021; Tuckman, 2012; Wee & Banister, 2016).

The search was carried out in several databases of recognized academic articles, such as Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar, among others, to obtain a comprehensive and up-to-date view. The search criteria involved the keywords "globalization", "entrepreneurial education", "entrepreneurship policies", "international networks", "entrepreneurial behaviors" and "global educational communities". In addition, articles that addressed relevant organizations in this field of study were considered. Given that this is not a systematic review of the literature but a theoretical review, which is presupposed to be critical and reflective, we do not list the documents analyzed but were simply placed in the bibliographic references of this article.

The selection of articles was carried out in two stages. Initially, based on reading the titles and abstracts, studies that did not directly address this topic were excluded. Then, the other articles were read in full and included in the review if they presented a pertinent approach, adequate methodology, and significant results on the research objective. The data extracted from the selected articles included the study objective, methodology, main findings, and conclusions. This information was then critically analyzed to identify patterns, similarities, divergences, and gaps in the existing literature.

Given that this was a theoretical-reflexive review of the literature, we adopted a critical stance regarding the data, considering the possible limitations of the included studies and the need for further research in certain areas. This approach allowed us to formulate a comprehensive and differentiated view of the effects of globalization on entrepreneurship education and to suggest directions for future research, as presented below. Figure 1, which proves the usefulness of this type of review, summarizes the proposal of emerging trends in the current global world in three parts: global policies, entrepreneurial behaviors, and international entrepreneurship education networks.

The explanatory categories presented in this figure resulted from the reflexive and critical process developed throughout the thematic analysis process. To this end, the themes that stood out in each of the questions were searched, and the reflective reading of the themes allowed us to define and name each of the categories presented in this model of the impact of globalization on entrepreneurship education.

SOCIO-EDUCATIONAL CONTEXTS AND PROBLEMS THAT JUSTIFY ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION

Among the multiple contexts and needs of today that justify the introduction of entrepreneurship education globally, the literature highlights educational, social and labor issues (Bornstein & Davis, 2010; Jardim, 2021b; Lopes, 2010, 2017; Maritz et al., 2015; Porfírio et al., 2023; Seikkula-Leino et al., 2019; Vanclay, 2020). These problems are present in many countries, especially in those where the quality of education, health, democracy and work has not been improved. The analysis that follows, in general, considers these countries, focusing mainly on those with the lowest rates of entrepreneurship, according to the most recent data from GEM (Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, 2017, 2018, 2020).

Starting with educational issues, for example, in the Portuguese context, the low levels of professional qualification and schooling stand out, both for the general population and for the leaders of organizations (Assembleia da República, 1986; Barata et al., 2012; European Commission, 2019; Jardim, 2021b; Martins, 2017). Without training, innovation is complex, while behaviors consistent with the status quo predominate, strangling any attempt at organizational and social change. The persistence of the problem of school failure shows, on the one hand, the inability of the education system to ensure equal opportunities for all pupils and, on the other hand, the system's difficulty in reconciling quality education with education for all. According to Simão et al. (2005), it is predicted that, despite the initiatives developed in Portugal in recent decades to qualify the Portuguese, the European average will only be reached by the Portuguese in 2050.

In turn, the traditional school has become accustomed to standardized teaching, in which everything must be taught and evaluated in the same way, as if there were no notorious differences in the fundamental interests and most promising talents of each one (Jardim, 2010, 2021a; Marques, 1999). For this reason, the disciplines appeared isolated from each other, as well as the teachers and the students. This serial education served the period of the expansion of the industrial age, but it does not serve a period of history such as the present one, characterized by differentiation, creativity and innovation. Thus, the connection to the world of reality requires ceasing to teach and learning in series. Furthermore, considering that when teaching focuses more on know-how than on know-how, know-how, know-how and know-how, the school has difficulty fulfilling its mission of promoting an integral education, helping students be aware of their talents (Delors, 1996). Therefore, it is essential to understand the potential of education for entrepreneurship and the activation of the code that enhances differentiated and complementary talents and intelligence. Only in this way will the best talents be valued and well-paid nationally.

Regarding social problems, it should be noted that if development does not happen through talent and merit, some find the solution in dependence on subsidies (Fairlie et al., 2015; Fong, 2019; Jardim, 2021b). They allow themselves to be carried away by facilitating subsidies that infantilize and do not enable a real commitment to training, innovation and change (Sousa, 2011). Social life gets even more complicated when time is spent on excuses, laments, and subservience to political power, attracting incompetence rather than improvement and productivity. The vicious circle becomes even more severe when corruption becomes embedded in the institutions, to the point of becoming cultural and endemic. It is noted that objective conditions encourage individual acts of corruption, namely the monopoly of decision-making power, little transparency and accountability. It can also be seen that corruption, as a form of influence or purchase of decisions, has remained unchanged over the centuries despite having evolved based on new opportunities and new compensating returns for these illicit acts (Jardim, 2021b).

In addition to the two previous issues, there are labor problems. Moreover, this third domain of reasons, which justifies disseminating the entrepreneurial culture in society, begins to be perceived when there is a preferential search for employment in the State. When finding a public job is an ambition for most citizens, it becomes complicated to promote the realization of socio-professional projects following personal aptitudes and real societal needs, vitiating the development of society and the affirmation of one's merit (Lodi et al., 2020; Small et al., 2018; Succi & Canovi, 2020). Thus, more than the preference of preferences, the opportunity to work in civil service should be one more job among the many to choose from. Moreover, the cycle continues with the departure of the most talented and qualified citizens abroad. Because they are more socially and financially valued abroad, many choose a professional career abroad. Despite the positive evolution in recent years, there is still much work to be done so that students enter the job market when they complete a professional or higher education course. Hence, it is vital for entrepreneurship education to prepare students with the soft and hard skills necessary for today's job market.

Finally, this anti-development cycle is related to the low levels of entrepreneurship observed in many regions (Carvalho et al., 2015; Committee of the Regions, 2015; Etzkowitz & Klofsten, 2005; Jardim, 2020; Lawton Smith et al., 2013; Obschonka et al., 2015). Thus, regions with higher levels of entrepreneurship tend to see lower poverty rates. Furthermore, these indices justify an increasingly intense and collective effort so that everyone has access to logic to have a spirit of initiative and entrepreneurial culture. The seriousness of these problems lies precisely in the fact that they give rise to a vicious circle that triggers a succession of events that impede the quality of life in societies. In this sense, it is crucial to introduce strategic ideas to stop this circle. Moreover, that is precisely what is intended by the promotion of EE policies around the world. Furthermore, in this, it benefits from the phenomenon of globalization, which, among its multiple impacts, stands out for originating global EE policies, international support networks for the promotion of entrepreneurial culture and a set of entrepreneurial behaviors which leverage the transformation of society through the development of capacities to create original and valuable products and services, and to innovate in the solution of the most pressing problems.

GLOBAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION POLICIES

In addition to the literature allowing the systematization of the problems underlying entrepreneurship education, it also describes the definition of policies (Da Silva & Fernandes, 2019; European Commission, 2006c, 2014b, 2020; European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2012; Gomes et al., 2013; O’Connor, 2013; Xu, 2012). To this end, it points to the need to synergistically combine the efforts of local actors, such as universities, industry and governments, to originate entrepreneurial ecosystems, business clusters and entrepreneurial regions (Jardim, 2020). In this synergistic interaction, universities, industries and governments intervene with their knowledge, skills and resources, implementing projects on a growth trajectory to respond to challenges and pressures, both local and external, and carrying out properly planned and coordinated activities.

From a historical perspective, the literature shows how this phenomenon has gradually allowed the definition of concrete policies to promote entrepreneurship. Among the contents of these policies, the first thing that stands out is the fact that, if initially, the focus was on the creation and management of companies, in recent decades, the focus has also been on entrepreneurial skills, attitudes and behaviors (Comissão Europeia, 2004; European Commission, 2006b; Jardim, 2021b; Krueger, 2015). Thus, entrepreneurship education has begun to take an approach that allows it to cover students from all higher education courses and from all levels of education who need to develop these skills, without which it becomes complicated to face professional challenges. However, the general population also needs this mindset, as it allows for creating original and valuable solutions to various emerging social and economic problems, such as unemployment, the environment, poverty and exclusion. Thus, EE aimed to promote this culture (Mwasalwiba et al., 2010; Plourde & Pelletier, 2007; Römer-Paakkanen & Suonpää, 2017).

To achieve this objective, the most diverse programs were designed, which, by definition, consist of intentional and systematic interventions resulting from the identification of the needs of a population, directed to specific objectives, based on theoretical models, and suggesting activities and pedagogical resources for their execution and evaluation (Jardim, 2010). Regarding EE programmes, it is essential to note that their presence is truly global, with the most diverse recipients, such as higher education students (Dolabela, 2006, Dolabela, 2008; Soundarajan et al., 2016)from primary school (Barba-Sánchez & Atienza-Sahuquillo, 2016; Cárcamo-Solís et al., 2017; Hercz et al., 2021; Jardim et al., 2015, Jardim et al., 2018; Pinho et al., 2019) from secondary education (Jardim et al., 2019; Kirkley, 2017; Steenekamp et al., 2011); as well as the most diverse contexts outside the school, such as municipal (Audretsch et al., 2017; Karlsson, 2011), agricultural (Forcher-Mayr & Mahlknecht, 2020; Ulvenblad et al., 2020), reform (Cumberland, 2017; Kerrick et al., 2016).

Among the institutions that promote these global policies is the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which has conducted numerous studies on entrepreneurship (OECD, 2012, 2016, 2018, 2019b, 2019a; OECD/EU, 2020b, 2020a). From the perspective of promoting global policies, this body recently published a document highlighting wealth and inequality influencing education (OECD, 2019c). This publication, which brings together international and valuable evidence for strategic reflection on education, lays a foundation for current challenges. On globalization, he states that with rapid technological changes and decreasing transport costs, the flow of individuals between countries and continents has increased, bringing greater ethnic, linguistic and cultural diversity to OECD countries.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), which has education as one of its main objectives, has also had in its documents multiple references to the promotion of entrepreneurship (UNESCO, 2019, 2012, 2016, 2020b, 2020a; UNESCO and ILO, 2006). It points to entrepreneurial skills as fundamental for the development of small businesses, which should be acquired above all by the youngest, who have the necessary literacy to do so, as demonstrated through the innovative program administered by the Campaign for Female Education (CAMFED), a non-governmental organization (NGO) that supports the education of girls and women throughout the African continent. Also, several innovative programmes in Latin America focused on developing entrepreneurial and small business skills among disadvantaged youth, such as Indigenous women and youth, have shown positive results (UNESCO, 2012). In addition, this international body, which has long promoted a sense of initiative around the world, has also challenged everyone to have a worldview, defining global citizenship as the feeling of belonging to a broader community and common humanity and emphasizing the political, economic, social and cultural interdependence and interconnectedness between local levels, national and global (Lázaro et al., 2018).

For its part, the European Commission has also insistently promoted entrepreneurship policies (Bacigalupo et al., 2016; European Commission, 2004; European Commission, 2006c, European Commission, 2006b; European Commission, 2008; European Commission, 2011, 2013, 2014a, 2015, 2020; European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2016, European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2019). Here, it is vital to highlight one of the recent documents of this European body that points to the fundamental competencies to be developed, called the Reference Framework for Competences for Entrepreneurship (Bacigalupo et al., 2016). This document assumes that developing the entrepreneurial capacity of European organizations and citizens is one of the main policy objectives of the European Union (EU) and the Member States. As early as 2006, the European Commission identified initiative and entrepreneurship as one of the eight critical competencies needed for a knowledge-based society (European Commission, 2006a). The EntreComp framework proposes a shared definition of entrepreneurship as a competency, aiming to achieve consensus among all stakeholders and establish a bridge between education and work. Developed using a mixed-methods approach, the EntreComp framework should become a de facto reference for any initiative to promote European citizens' entrepreneurial capacity. This framework can be used to develop curricula and learning activities that promote entrepreneurship as a competency. In addition, it can be used to define parameters to assess the entrepreneurial skills of students and citizens.

ENTREPRENEURIAL BEHAVIORS

The literature review showed that entrepreneurial education policies are implemented by promoting concrete behaviors related to entrepreneurial attitudes (Henley, 2017; Kirkley, 2016; Schmidt et al., 2018). An example is Jardim's proposal (2021b, 2022b), which defines entrepreneurial behavior as thinking and acting that aims to materialize ideas and develop innovative projects. Considering the various explanatory models of this type of behavior, a practical framework is proposed for the various socio-educational and socio-economic contexts.

Taking into account the most pressing needs of today's society and the profile of entrepreneurs, ten entrepreneurial behaviors are highlighted and organized into three groups: (1) thinking creatively, which presupposes knowing reality and dealing with its circumstances, recognizing and valuing individual talents, and learning from mistakes; (2) having a spirit of initiative, which points to the ability to make strategic decisions, to move forward with determination to the end and to keep an open mind to new realities; (3) making it happen, which means developing the ability to continually improve practices, to use tools to be more effective, and to cultivate meaningful relationships. These are necessary behaviors for any professional to be successful in the face of the transformations inherent to human societies, hence their progressive relevance in current educational projects (Jardim, 2022a).

Regarding the expression "thinking creatively", it is essential to refer to the ability to examine a problem by considering ideas and solutions that are different from those already tried. It means approaching an issue in a different way to achieve singular results. In this process, imagination plays a fundamental role since it allows you to enter the world of ideas, create scenarios and stories, create products and services, and be out of the ordinary. Originality allows you to be creative and express different ideas (de Bono, 2005). On the other hand, visual thinking helps explore unusual ideas that lie beyond the usual "boxes". In a highly competitive world, innovation becomes a permanent requirement to be successful. Furthermore, entrepreneurship education contributes to competitiveness since thinking creatively is one of its essential pedagogical strategies (Sternberg, 2005).

On the other hand, the spirit of initiative refers to someone's ability to act by daring to undertake something (Jardim, 2022a). It is one of the most characteristic attitudes of entrepreneurs, which consists of being more proactive than reactive. This spirit allows us to conduct new experiments and look for alternatives to solve emerging problems (Brooks, 2012). Therefore, entrepreneurs do not wait for events; they make them happen and determine the course of events. The initiative resembles a catalyst that activates the motivation to take the necessary steps to reach the goal, creating what was dreamed and designed. There are a few reasons why education for the spirit of initiative is justified (Jardim, 2022a). First, it is the basis for promoting self-employment: the spirit of initiative is the basis for promoting self-employment, and it is present in people of all ages with ideas and projects that respond to the needs of niche markets. Secondly, it is the key to realising small and large projects: the initiative has made many inventors, composers and writers start their work from imagination but then realize its full potential. Thirdly, it is the manifestation of someone's decision-making: initiative is the expression of decision-making, without which no one makes a purchase, trip or project, allowing them to choose what helps to achieve goals. Fourthly, it is the manifestation of trust: initiative presupposes that the person assumes the responsibilities and consequences of his actions. Finally, it is the expression of creativity and innovation: inventors, scientists, and entrepreneurs have a habit of doing various experiments, continually trying and starting over until they achieve their aim.

Regarding the materialization of ideas, it is essential to mention that it points to the act or effect of realizing a concept, making concrete something abstract. Entrepreneurs distinguish themselves by being pragmatic in the materialization of their purposes. They realize their ideas because they have practical intelligence (Isaacson, 2019; Sternberg, 2005). Furthermore, they develop ideas that are appropriate to their surroundings. For this reason, entrepreneurship cannot simply be transmitted to someone as if it were a theory; he apprehends it through his actions and reflection. Learning is associated with practice, trial and error, exploration of new technologies, and critical thinking. The quality of an idea is judged by whether it is feasible (Isaacson, 2016; Sternberg, 2005). Therefore, action is the accurate measure of intelligence. It does not matter what you think, say or plan, but what you do. Success never lies in knowing but in doing. The books read, the lectures attended, and the lessons learned are engaging if they lead to action. Entrepreneurs, being people of action, know how to do things, how to solve problems, and how to decide. Furthermore, they discover the most suitable ways to start, develop and finish their projects.

Moreover, their pragmatism taught them that the secret of achievement is to pay particular attention to the beginning and end of the action. They manifest this ability to materialize in prototyping, making it possible to make an idea tangible through paper, staging or simulation of material artefacts. It can be a thumbnail, mockup, or simulation as close as possible to a product, service, process, or business model. A dream pedagogy, which is intended to lead to success, requires this kind of intelligence. Hence, education's relevance is investing in realising students' ideas through projects that solve local problems and bring added value to themselves and society.

INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT NETWORKS FOR ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION

The literature review also showed that globalization has led to the creation of networks that have favored both the observation and global evaluation of entrepreneurship and research and its promotion.

The network that stands out internationally in this field is the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM), which systematically conducts comprehensive studies on entrepreneurial activity in the world through global reports, such as the most recent ones (Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020), but there are also other reports and studies originated by this institution that demonstrate the relevance of this international network in the development of entrepreneurial culture (Arafat et al., 2020; Coduras et al., 2010; Dvouletý & Orel, 2020; Schott et al., 2015; Singer et al., 2003; Thurik & Dejardin, 2012; Velilla & Ortega, 2017). Bringing together data from more than 300 academic and research institutions spread across more than 100 countries, they generate information that allows the dynamization and development of organizational and administrative services and activities, thus playing a significant role in the development of business ideas and economic opportunities at a global level.

The Kauffman Foundation, founded by entrepreneur and philanthropist Ewwing Marion Kauffman (1916-2016) in Kansas City, aspires to promote the financial independence of individuals and the involvement of citizens in the betterment of their communities (Dees, 2001; Foundation, 2004; Foundation et al., 2017; Torrance & Rauch, 2013). To this end, it works within the scope of disseminating entrepreneurship and improving the education of children and young people. Regarding entrepreneurship, the foundation works in the USA to contribute to American society's becoming more entrepreneurial through job creation, innovation, and economic prosperity. With teams of educators and researchers, it works with its partners seeking to explain the economic impact of entrepreneurship, train young entrepreneurs, and develop entrepreneurial skills programs. In addition to giving particular attention to disadvantaged children and supporting their academic training, it promotes mathematics, science, engineering and technology as a privileged way to prepare the professionals needed for today's world. Among its main initiatives are the global Kauffman program, which promotes international entrepreneurship by immersing young entrepreneurs from around the world in American business culture; the Kauffman 'campus' initiative that aims to revamp the way universities train for entrepreneurship; the FastTrac program is a project simulation for developing, managing, and expanding a business idea; the Kauffman fellows program is aimed at venture capital entrepreneurs, in the context of investing in global innovation; and the publication of the Kauffman Entrepreneurial Activity Index, which is one of the leading indicators of new business creation in the USA. In this way, this foundation develops a set of activities by the global education policies for entrepreneurship, supporting pedagogical intervention and scientific research.

Another international network is Ashoka, which connects social entrepreneurs (Ashoka U, 2011; Ashoka U & Brock, 2011; Brock, 2008; McAnany, 2013). It is a non-profit organization focused on social entrepreneurship. It was founded in India by Bill Drayton in 1980 and became well known through the book How to Change the World (Bornstein, 2007), which discusses how social entrepreneurs realize innovative ideas. Bill Drayton was inspired by Mahatma Gandhi and the Civil Rights Movement, with the primary goal of reducing inequalities through social entrepreneurship. The organization was named after Emperor Ashoka, the ruler of the Mauryan Empire during the third century B.C. Emperor Ashoka recognized the suffering he caused by the unification of his empire and promoted religious and philosophical tolerance and the paramount importance of morals when working for the public.

It is also worth mentioning that Red EmprendeSur, officially established in 2004 in Argentina, plays a relevant role in the panorama of entrepreneurship and innovation in Latin America. Initially focused on Mercosur, the network expanded its operations to the entire Latin American region in 2008, reinforcing its importance in globalization and forming entrepreneurship networks. Its mission is to encourage entrepreneurship and innovation as a condition of citizenship in the 21st century. The specific objectives of Red EmprendeSur include promoting education for entrepreneurship and innovation at all levels of the formal education system, from basic to higher education (Vera Castillo, 2015; Vera Castillo et al., 2019). This network comprises a community of volunteer individuals focused on the solidarity and sustainable development of the Latin American people. In short, Red EmprendeSur is a catalyst for innovation and sustainable development in Latin America.

In the Brazilian context, SEBRAE - Serviço Brasileiro de Apoio às Micro e Pequenas Empresas (Brazilian Support Service for Micro and Small Enterprises) (Da Silva & Fernandes, 2019; Rosa et al., 2015; SEBRAE, 2013). The Brazilian Micro and Small Business Support Service (SEBRAE) is a private and non-profit entity whose primary mission lies in creating, supporting, developing and promoting micro and small enterprises in Brazilian territory. With 700 service stations and about 5000 direct employees, located in all states of Brazil, the agency provides consulting services to entrepreneurs, present and future, in the most varied areas of the business world, from finance, management, marketing, human resources, production, law, quality, information technology, international trade, among others (Da Silva & Fernandes, 2019).

In the Portuguese context, a network that is increasingly acquiring an international dimension is the Empreende Office - Education Office for Entrepreneurship and Citizenship (GabEECG, CEG-CIPSH, UAb) (Jardim, 2021b; Jardim & Franco, 2013, 2019). Started in 2008 in the context of the European Institute of Cultural Sciences - Padre Manuel Antunes (IECC-PMA), its primary mission is to promote the entrepreneurial culture by developing the skills, emotions, values and tools of that culture. It has a markedly transdisciplinary team of researchers, teachers and trainers, assisted by national and international collaborators. It develops research projects and intervention programs using an interdisciplinary approach to contribute to people's self-realization, the success of organizations, social cohesion, and economic growth. Gabinete Empreende combines research, intervention and evaluation to ensure the social impact of its action. It is based on theoretical models and reflective and empirically validated teaching and learning strategies. Among these models, cognitive-behavioral models, differentiated pedagogy, cooperative learning, positive psychology, and the humanistic approach stand out. On the other hand, it privileges strategies for the construction and application of programs, as well as the organization of academic and training events on topics related to the sciences of entrepreneurship.

Concluding the presentation of these results, this study presented evidence on how globalization influences the recent development of entrepreneurship education, triggering, internationally, the creation of common trends (Banha et al., 2022; Jardim, 2021b; Pittaway & Cope, 2007; Seikkula-Leino et al., 2019). Considering these data, this theoretical-reflexive review allowed us to design a model of the impact of globalization on entrepreneurship education, as seen in Figure 1.

This model highlights the emerging contexts and problems in today's global and digital world as well as the educational challenges and opportunities it provides. Thus, considering the multiple consequences of globalization, the impact of globalization on entrepreneurship education has been organized into three main areas: the joint definition of global education policies, the creation of international research and development networks, and the promotion of entrepreneurial behavior.

DISCUSSION

This study, which was based on a theoretical-reflexive review following the thematic analysis approach, allowed us to describe the most relevant patterns and emerging themes on the impact of globalization on entrepreneurial education. The following discussion takes a deeper look at these topics in more depth and implication, connecting with the existing literature and highlighting the new perspectives that emerge from our results. In addition, we reflect on the limitations of this study and the prospects for future research.

Taking into account the data collected and critically analyzed, it can be seen that in the current global world, characterized by rapid changes and technologies, the literature converges to promote entrepreneurship education policies, privileging, for this, creative educational environments that optimize individual talents and enable innovation and flexibility in the exercise of professional responsibilities in completely new professions (Adedeji et al., 2020; Nikolov & Timpe-Laughlin, 2021; Susskind & Susskind, 2019). This perspective is in line with those that defend the relevance of international networks in this field, since they allow specialized support focused on solving emerging problems at the international level, such as those related to the environment, health, poverty and unemployment (Awogbenle & Iwuamadi, 2010; Olasehinde et al., 2015; Zoberman, 2020).

We also find that the qualitative promotion of entrepreneurship will only be achieved through the development of a set of socio-educational and training procedures that develop predispositions in the younger generations to create and innovate (Awogbenle & Iwuamadi, 2010; Bottazzi & Dindo, 2013; Jardim et al., 2021). Indeed, the development of entrepreneurial behaviors presupposes an educational context where the individual talents of children and young people are valued (Henley, 2017; Isaacson, 2016; Jardim, 2021c). Based on an active and interactive pedagogy, it is possible to give dynamism to learning, especially when individual talents and their consequent maximization are identified, respected and promoted, as well as the minimization of personal weaknesses (Chang et al., 2014; Foundation, 2004).

We also found that, since one of the main impacts of globalization on EE is the activation of entrepreneurial behaviors, which are being worked on on all continents, success in overcoming the challenges of this time, such as those related to employability and social cohesion (Da Silva & Fernandes, 2019; Jardim, 2020; Sarkar, 2014). Furthermore, this will happen as long as schools are actual global educational communities, groups and teams that act taking into account the current socio-economic context, characterized by the demands of economic development, of overcoming problems related to unemployment, of a labor market that has changed radically in the last decade and also characterized by the requirement of all professionals to possess entrepreneurial skills (Mitra, 2017; Souto et al., 2022).

In this sense, the research points to the need for entrepreneurship education to achieve three essential purposes. The first refers to strengthening employability potential, allowing access to specific and practical training in the various fields of entrepreneurship, namely social entrepreneurship, technological entrepreneurship, cooperative entrepreneurship, local entrepreneurship and other areas of interest (European Commission, 2006c, European Commission, 2006b, European Commission, 2019; European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2016, 2019). The second relates to developing innovative, creative and proactive skills, attitudes and processes for self-employment, enhancing and maximizing the previously acquired theoretical, scientific and experiential knowledge (Jardim et al., 2023). The third refers to the empowerment of citizens with some tools that lead to the implementation of projects and organizations that create innovative products and services, making available technical and structural resources to successfully start their entrepreneurial projects (European Commission, 2006c; Hernández-Sánchez et al., 2019).

Regarding socio-educational contexts and issues, the analysis reaffirmed the need for entrepreneurship education, particularly in countries with lower rates of entrepreneurship (Dvouletý & Orel, 2020; Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, 2020). The educational, social and labor issues identified in the literature reflect challenges related to the quality of education, health, democracy and work. These issues underline the need for educational and policy measures to combat these issues. The role of entrepreneurship as a means of promoting economic growth and addressing these issues is crucial.

In the context of global entrepreneurship education policies, it has become evident that globalization has facilitated the definition of such policies globally (Datta, 2015; Jardim, 2022b; Vickery, 2019). It was found that synergistic collaboration between different local actors - universities, industry and governments - is essential for creating entrepreneurial ecosystems. These interactions enable the development of coordinated and planned projects that respond to local and external challenges.

Finally, this review points out that globalization has created a multiplicity of networks relative to international research and development networks (Arafat et al., 2020; Coduras et al., 2010; Dvouletý & Orel, 2020; Schott et al., 2015; Singer et al., 2003; Thurik & Dejardin, 2012; Velilla & Ortega, 2017). These allowed for an overall observation and evaluation of entrepreneurship, research and promotion. These networks are vital for disseminating knowledge and good practices and establishing strategic partnerships.

It should also be noted that this study showed that qualitative methods, namely through theoretical-reflective review, are valuable and appropriate for constructing scientific knowledge, as demonstrated in other areas of study (Cheng et al., 2016; Fischer & Walker, 2022). Adopting a critical stance towards data and considering its possible limitations allowed the formulation of a comprehensive view of the effects of globalization on entrepreneurship education.

The present research has provided relevant information on the impact of globalization on entrepreneurial education, but it is essential to recognize its limitations. Firstly, while comprehensive, the nature of our thematic analysis and theoretical-reflective review may have left out specific perspectives or cases that could further enrich our understanding of the topic. In addition, the particularities of the selected context or data may limit the generalization of our results in different geographical and cultural contexts.

As we look to the future, we realize this is a promising field for further investigation. The research could be expanded to include a wider variety of educational and cultural contexts to assess the applicability and consistency of our results. In addition, longitudinal studies could provide a more in-depth understanding of emerging trends and the progress of globalization's impact on entrepreneurial education over time. An interdisciplinary study that follows the perspectives of areas such as economics, sociology, and information technology could contribute significantly to broadening the understanding of this complex and dynamic topic.

In the continuation of this study, it is also suggested the creation of instruments to evaluate the impact of globalization, to rigorously measure its results in the activation of behavioral changes, which are intended according to the indicators of quality of life and the objectives of sustainable development. In this way, it will be verified which behaviors are most promoted through global entrepreneurship education, as well as those that prove to be effective in overcoming current problems, such as those related to the environment, poverty, health and quality of life.

CONCLUSION: TOWARDS BUILDING GLOBAL EDUCATIONAL COMMUNITIES

This theoretical review of the literature presented and analyzed several aspects related to the influence of globalization on entrepreneurship education. The analysis focused mainly on socio-educational contexts and issues that underpin entrepreneurship education, global entrepreneurship education policies and international research and development networks on entrepreneurship education.

It is concluded that globalization plays a crucial role in shaping entrepreneurship education. The challenges and opportunities identified in this analysis highlight the importance of entrepreneurship education as an essential component of economic growth and a solution to social and educational problems. It is recommended that future research focus on how to maximize the positive impact of globalization in this area and on the creation and validation of instruments that can effectively assess this impact.

This study underlined the need for strategic policies and actions that place education at the heart of building global educational communities. Entrepreneurial education is not only a means of encouraging innovative skills and behaviors. Because it elicits innovative behaviours and connects professionals and institutions, it constitutes and plays an essential role in solving some of humanity's most pressing challenges, such as the search for peace between nations and social and environmental sustainability.

It is imperative that education systems adapt and evolve to promote an entrepreneurial mindset, which is not limited to the economic sphere but permeates all spheres of human life. This educational approach should aim to develop critical, creative and collaborative skills, empowering individuals to actively contribute to more just, peaceful and sustainable societies.

Education policies should, therefore, be designed with a holistic view, integrating entrepreneurial education into the curriculum and encouraging partnerships between schools, universities, businesses and governments. This multidimensional collaboration is critical to creating an educational ecosystem that responds to global challenges and anticipates them, promoting a culture of responsible and sustainable innovation.

In short, the critical and thematic analysis of the data collected in the documents allowed the elaboration of an explanatory model of the impact of globalization on entrepreneurship education. This model identifies three explanatory dimensions of this impact: educational, labor and social policies; behaviors related to the ability to think creatively, to act with initiative and to make things happen; and international networks that stimulate entrepreneurial skills, employability and social cohesion. Furthermore, it also allowed us to conclude on the need to define policies and strategic actions that place education as a determining factor in the construction of global educational communities that promote entrepreneurial behaviors, which presupposes the execution of educational programs and research projects in the field of entrepreneurial education.

Declaração de conflito de interesse

Os autores declaram não existir conflito de interesses

REFERENCES

Abdelkarim, A. (2018). Toward establishing entrepreneurship education and training programmes in a multinational Arab university. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 7(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v7i1.3833

Adedeji, S. B., Rahman, M. M., Abdul, M. B., Ghani, M. F. B. A., Uddin, M. J., & Rahaman, Md. S. (2020). Innovative teaching methods and entrepreneurship education: A synthesised literature review. Educational Administration Research and Review, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.17509/earr.v2i1.21713

Arafat, M. Y., Saleem, I., Dwivedi, A. K., & Khan, A. (2020). Determinants of agricultural entrepreneurship: A GEM data based study. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 16(1), 345-370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-018-0536-1

Ashoka U. (2011). Campus starter kit: Resources for faculty and staff for developing social entrepreneurship. The Algernon Sydney Sullivan Foundation. https://www.ashoka.org/en-us/media/23992/download

Ashoka U, & Brock, D. D. (2011). Social entrepreneurship education resource handbook. Ashoka. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1872088

Assembleia da República. (1986). Lei de bases do sistema educativo. Diário Da República, n.o 237/19, 3067-3081. https://diariodarepublica.pt/dr/detalhe/lei/46-1986-222418

Audretsch, D. B., Obschonka, M., Gosling, S. D., & Potter, J. (2017). A new perspective on entrepreneurial regions: Linking cultural identity with latent and manifest entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 48(3), 681-697. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-016-9787-9

Auld, E., Rappleye, J., & Morris, P. (2019). PISA for development: How the OECD and World Bank shaped education governance post-2015. Comparative Education, 55(2), 197-219. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2018.1538635

Awogbenle, a. C., & Iwuamadi, K. C. (2010). Youth unemployment: Entrepreneurship development programme as an intervention mechanism. African Journal of Business Management, 4(6), 831-835. https://academicjournals.org/journal/AJBM/article-abstract/841B08423424

Ayers, A. J., & Saad-Filho, A. (2015). Democracy against neoliberalism: Paradoxes, limitations, transcendence. Critical Sociology, 41(4-5), 597-618. https://doi.org/10.1177/0896920513507789

Bacigalupo, M., Kampylis, P., Punie, Y., & Van den Brande, G. (2016). EntreComp: The entrepreneurship competence framework. Publication Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2791/593884

Baldacchino, L., Geurts, J., Migoń, M. P., Politańska, J., Xerxen, S. P., & Weiner, E. (2014). Best practices in teaching entrepreneurship and creating entrepreneurial ecosys. Fundacja Światowego Tygodnia Przedsiębiorczości. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/290955195_Best_Practices_in_Teaching_Entrepreneurship_and_Creating_Entrepreneurial_Ecosystems_in_Europe

Banha, F. (2016). Educação para o empreendedorismo: O triunfo dos professores. Bnomics Editora: Lisboa, Portugal.

Banha, F., Coelho, L. S., & Flores, A. (2022). Entrepreneurship education: A systematic literature review and identification of an existing gap in the field. Education Sciences, 12(5). https://doi.org/10.3390/EDUCSCI12050336

Barata, M. C., Calheiros, M. M., Patrício, J., Graça, J., & Lima, M. L. (2012). Avaliação do programa mais sucesso escolar. CIS-IUL/ISCTE/IUL. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273120694_Avaliacao_do_Programa_Mais_Sucesso_Escolar

Barba-Sánchez, V., & Atienza-Sahuquillo, C. (2016). The development of entrepreneurship at school: The Spanish experience. Education and Training, 58(7-8), 783-796. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-01-2016-0021

Basu, R. (2014). Entrepreneurship education in India: A critical assessment and a proposed framework. Technology Innovation Management Review, 4(8), 5-10. https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview817

Bornstein, D. (2007). Como mudar o mundo: Os empreendedores sociais e o poder de novas ideias. Editora: Estrela Polar.

Bornstein, D., & Davis, S. (2010). Social entrepreneurship: What everyone needs to know. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/wentk/9780195396348.001.0001

Bosio, E., & Torres, C. A. (2019). Global citizenship education: An educational theory of the common good? A conversation with Carlos Alberto Torres. Policy Futures in Education, 17(6), 745-760. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478210319825517

Bottazzi, G., & Dindo, P. (2013). Globalising knowledge: How technological openness affects output, spatial inequality, and welfare levels. Journal of Regional Science, 53(4), 631-655. https://doi.org/10.1111/jors.12034

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE Publications.

Brock, D. D. (2008). Social entrepreneurship teaching resources handbook (Issue March). Ashoka. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1344412

Brooks, D. (2012). O animal social. Dom Quixote.

Byun, C.-G., Sung, C., Park, J., & Choi, D. (2018). A study on the effectiveness of entrepreneurship education programs in higher education institutions: A case study of Korean graduate programs. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 4(3), 26. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc4030026

Campos, A., & Soeiro, J. (2016). A falácia do empreendedorismo (1a. edição). Bertrand Editora.

Cantón, A., & Garcia, B. I. (2018). Global citizenship education. New Directions for Student Leadership, 2018(160), 21-30. https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.20307

Cárcamo-Solís, M. de L., Arroyo-López, M. del P., Alvarez-Castañón, L. del C., & García-López, E. (2017). Developing entrepreneurship in primary schools. The Mexican experience of "My first enterprise: Entrepreneurship by playing." Teaching and Teacher Education, 64, 291-304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.02.013

Carree, M., Della Malva, A., Santarelli, E., Carree, M., Malva, A. D., & Santarelli, E. (2011). The contribution of universities to growth: Empirical evidence for Italy. J Technol Transf, 39, 393-414. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-012-9282-7

Carvalho, L. C., Dominguinhos, P., Baleiras, R. N., & Dentinho, T. P. (2015). Empreendedorismo e desenvolvimento regional: Casos práticos. Edições Sílabo.

Cavey, R. (2020). Global leadership in the 21st century: A "Micro" perspective. Cadmus, 4(2), 301-307. https://www.cadmusjournal.org/files/pdfreprints/vol4issue2/GL-in-the-21-century-A-Micro-Perspective-RCavey-Cadmus-V4-I2-P3-Reprint.pdf

Chang, J., Benamraoui, A., & Rieple, A. (2014). Learning-by-doing as an approach to teaching social entrepreneurship. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 51(5), 459-471. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.785251

Cheng, Y.-L., Lee, C.-Y., Huang, Y.-L., Buckner, C. A., Lafrenie, R. M., Dénommée, J. A., ... Mathijssen, R. H. J. (2016). Thematic analysis in social work: A case study. In Intech (Ed.), Advanced biometric technologies (Vol. 11, 13). https://www.intechopen.com/books/advanced-biometric-technologies/liveness-detection-in-biometrics

Cheung, C. K. (2008). Entrepreneurship education in Hong Kong's secondary curriculum: Possibilities and limitations. Education and Training, 50(6), 500-515. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400910810901827

Christou, P. A. (2023). How to use thematic analysis in qualitative research. Journal of Qualitative Research in Tourism, 3(2), 79-95. https://doi.org/10.4337/jqrt.2023.0006

Coduras, A., Jonathan, L., Kelley, D., Saemundsson, R., & Schott, T. (2010). GEM special report: A global perspective on entrepreneurship education and training. GEM. https://www.gemconsortium.org/file/open?fileId=47119

Comissão Europeia. (2004). Fomentar a promoção das atitudes e competências empresariais no ensino básico e secundário. Publicações Direcção-Geral da Empresa. Bruxelas.

Committee of the Regions. (2015). Fostering innovation at regional level: Lessons from the European entrepreneurial region (EER) experience. European Union. https://doi.org/10.2863/728167

Cooper, A. (2005). Entrepreneurship: The past, the present, the future. In Handbook of entrepreneurship research (pp. 21-34). Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-24519-7_2

Coulibaly, S. K., Erbao, C., & Metuge Mekongcho, T. (2018). Economic globalisation, entrepreneurship, and development. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 127, 271-280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.09.028

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2022). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2017). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Cumberland, D. M. (2017). Training and educational development for "Vetrepreneurs." Advances in Developing Human Resources, 19(1), 88-100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422316682948

Da Silva, M. A., & Fernandes, E. F. (2019). O projeto educação 2030 da OCDE: Uma bússola para a aprendizagem. Revista Exitus, 9(5), 271-300. https://doi.org/10.24065/2237-9460.2019v9n5ID1108

Daraban, B. (2016). Building a curriculum for social business entrepreneurship. Studies in Business and Economics, 11(2), 19-25. https://doi.org/10.1515/sbe-2016-0017

Dashtipour, P., & Rumens, N. (2018). Entrepreneurship, incongruence and affect: Drawing insights from a Swedish anti-racist organisation. Organisation, 25(2), 223-241. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508417720022

Datta, A. (2015). New urban utopias of postcolonial India: 'Entrepreneurial urbanisation' in Dholera smart city, Gujarat. Dialogues in Human Geography, 5(1), 3-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/2043820614565748

Davies, I., Evans, M., & Reid, A. (2005). Globalising citizenship education? A critique of "global education" and "citizenship education." British Journal of Educational Studies, 53(1), 66-89. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8527.2005.00284.x

Davies, I., Ho, L. C., Kiwan, D., Peck, C. L., Peterson, A., Sant, E., & Waghid, Y. (2018). The Palgrave handbook of global citizenship and education. Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59733-5

de Bono, E. (2005). O pensamento lateral: Um manual de criatividade. Editora Pergaminho.

Dees, J. G. (2001). The meaning of social entrepreneurship. In J. Hamschmidt & M. Pirson (Eds.), Case studies in social entrepreneurship and sustainability (pp. 34-42). Greenleaf Publ. https://web.stanford.edu/group/e145/cgi-bin/spring/upload/handouts/dees_SE.pdf

Delors, J. (1996). Educação: Um tesouro a descobrir. Cortez Editora.

Dolabela, F. (2006). O segredo de Luísa - Uma ideia, uma paixão e um plano de negócios: Como nasce o empreendedor e se cria uma empresa. Editora de Cultura.

Dolabela, F. (2008). Oficina do empreendedor. Editora de Cultura.

Dvouletý, O., & Orel, M. (2020). Individual determinants of entrepreneurship in Visegrad countries: Reflection on GEM data from the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 8(4), 123-137. https://doi.org/10.15678/EBER.2020.080407

Essers, C., Dey, P., Tedmanson, D., & Verduyn, K. (2018). Critical entrepreneurship studies - A manifesto. In Critical perspectives on entrepreneurship (pp. 1-14). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315675381-1

Etzkowitz, H., & Klofsten, M. (2005). The innovating region: Toward a theory of knowledge-based regional development. R&D Management, 35(3), 243-255. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2005.00387.x

Eurofound, Mascherini, M., & Bisello, M. (2015). Youth entrepreneurship in Europe: Values, attitudes, policies. Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2806/274560

European Commission, Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry. (2004). Contribuir para a criação de uma cultura empresarial: Um guia de boas práticas para a promoção de atitudes e competências empresariais através da educação. Publications Office. https://op.europa.eu/s/zNaP

European Commission. (2006a). Competências essenciais para a aprendizagem ao longo da vida: Quadro de referência europeu. Comunidade Europeia. https://op.europa.eu/s/zNaO

European Commission. (2006b). Entrepreneurship education in Europe: Fostering entrepreneurial mindsets through education and learning. European Union. https://www.eesc.europa.eu/en/our-work/opinions-information-reports/opinions/fostering-entrepreneurial-mindsets-through-education-and-learning

European Commission. (2006c). Implementing the Community Lisbon Programme: Fostering entrepreneurial mindsets through education and learning. In Commission of the European Communities. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM%3A2006%3A0033%3AFIN%3AEN%3APDF

European Commission. (2008). Survey of entrepreneurship in higher education in Europe. Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry. https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/8973/attachments/1/translations/en/renditions/native

European Commission. (2011). Entrepreneurship education: Enabling teachers as a critical success factor. Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry. https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/9272/attachments/1/translations/en/renditions/native

European Commission. (2013). Social economy and social entrepreneurship: Social Europe guide (Vol. 4). Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2767/79109

European Commission. (2014a). Entrepreneruship education: A guide for educators. Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2769/51003

European Commission. (2014b). The circular economy: Connecting, creating and conserving value. https://doi.org/10.2779/80121

European Commission. (2015). Ways to succeed with entrepreneurship education: Best practice guide. https://aer.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/YES-best-practice-guide.pdf

European Commission. (2019). Education and training monitor 2019 - Portugal. In Brussels: European Commission. https://doi.org/10.2766/180281

European Commission. (2020). Circular economy action plan. European Union. https://doi.org/10.2775/855540

European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice. (2012). Developing key competences at school in Europe: Challenges and opportunities for policy. Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2797/93204

European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice. (2016). Entrepreneurship education at school in Europe. Eurydice Report. Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2797/301610

European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice. (2019). Digital education at school in Europe. Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2797/339457

Fairlie, R. W., Karlan, D., & Zinman, J. (2015). Behind the GATE experiment: Evidence on effects of and rationales for subsidised entrepreneurship training. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 7(2), 125-161. https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.20120337

Fayolle, A., Kariv, D., & Matlay, H. (Eds.). (2019). The role and impact of entrepreneurship education: Methods, teachers and innovative programmes. Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786438232

Fernandes, N. (2019). SEBRAE. In J. Jardim & J. E. Franco (Eds.), Empreendipédia - Dicionário de educação para o empreendedorismo (pp. 691-693). Gradiva: Lisboa, Portugal.

Fischer, S., & Walker, A. (2022). A qualitative exploration of trust in the contemporary workplace. Australian Journal of Psychology, 74(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/00049530.2022.2095226

Fong, G. R. (2019). Export dependence versus the new protectionism: Constraints on trade policy in the industrial world. Routledge.

Forcher-Mayr, M., & Mahlknecht, S. (2020). A capability approach to entrepreneurship education: The sprouting entrepreneurs programme in rural South African schools. Discourse and Communication for Sustainable Education, 11(1), 119-133. https://doi.org/10.2478/dcse-2020-0011

Foundation, E. M. K. (2004). Entrepreneurship education: Learning by doing. Kaufman Foudation. https://www.iicseonline.org/Educational_Entrepreneurship2.pdf

Foundation, E. M. K., Morelix, A., Hwang, V., & Tareque, I. (2017). Zero barriers: Three mega trends shaping the future of entrepreneurship. SSRN Electronic Journal, 32. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2919020

Fu, H., Okumus, F., Wu, K., & Köseoglu, M. A. (2019). The entrepreneurship research in hospitality and tourism. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 78, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.10.005

Gabrielsson, M., Gabrielsson, P., & Dimitratos, P. (2014). International entrepreneurial culture and growth of international new ventures. Management International Review, 54(4), 445-471. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11575-014-0213-8

Gibb, A. (2011). Concepts into practice: Meeting the challenge of development of entrepreneurship educators around an innovative paradigm. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 146-165. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552551111114914

Gibb, A., & Price, A. (2014). A compendium of pedagogies for teaching entrepreneurship. International Entrepreneurship Educators Programme. IEEP and NCEE. https://ncee.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Compendium-of-Pedagogies.pdf

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2017). Global report 2016/2017. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association (GERA). https://www.gemconsortium.org/report/49812

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2018). Global report 2017/2018. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association (GERA). https://www.gemconsortium.org/report/50012

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2019). Global report 2018/2019. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association (GERA). https://www.gemconsortium.org/report/50213

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2020). Global report 2019/2020. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association (GERA). https://www.gemconsortium.org/report/50443

Gomes, M. V. P., Alves, M. A., & Fernandes, R. J. R. (2013). Políticas públicas de fomento ao empreendedorismo e às micro e pequenas empresas. Programa Gestão Pública e Cidadania.

Goren, H., & Yemini, M. (2017a). Global citizenship education redefined - A systematic review of empirical studies on global citizenship education. International Journal of Educational Research, 82, 170-183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2017.02.004

Goren, H., & Yemini, M. (2017b). The global citizenship education gap: Teacher perceptions of the relationship between global citizenship education and students' socio-economic status. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 9-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.05.009

Halunko, V., Ivanyshchuk, A., & Popovych, T. (2018). Global experience of social entrepreneurship development. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, 4(1), 62-67. https://doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2018-4-1-62-67

Henley, A. (2017). Does religion influence entrepreneurial behaviour? International Small Business Journal, 35(5), 597-617. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242616656748

Hercz, M., Pozsonyi, F., & Flick-Takács, N. (2021). Supporting a sustainable way of life-long learning in the frame of challenge-based learning. Discourse and Communication for Sustainable Education, 11(2), 45-64. https://doi.org/10.2478/dcse-2020-0018

Hernández-Sánchez, B. R., Sánchez-García, J. C., & Mayens, A. W. (2019). Impact of entrepreneurial education programs on total entrepreneurial activity: The case of Spain. Administrative Sciences, 9(25), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci9010025

Huster, K., Petrillo, C., O’Malley, G., Glassman, D., Rush, J., & Wasserheit, J. (2017). Global social entrepreneurship competitions: Incubators for innovations in global health? Journal of Management Education, 41(2), 249-271. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562916669965

Isaacson, W. (2016). Os inovadores. Porto Editora.

Isaacson, W. (2019). Leonardo da Vinci. Porto Editora.

Jardim, J. (2010). Programa de desenvolvimento de competências pessoais e sociais: Estudo para a promoção do sucesso académico. Instituto Piaget.

Jardim, J. (2019a). Antiempreendedorismo. In J. Jardim & J. E. Franco (Eds.), Empreendipédia - Dicionário de educação para o empreendedorismo (pp. 17-23). Gradiva.

Jardim, J. (2019b). António J.M. Trindade: O empreendedor do turismo, o estratega do PortoBay e o madeirense das águas profundas. In C. Trindade (Ed.), Madeira empreendedora - 40 figuras empreendedoras da cultura madeirense (pp. 249-265). Edições Esgotadas.

Jardim, J. (2020). Regiões empreendedoras: Descrição e avaliação dos contextos, determinantes e políticas favoráveis à sua evolução. Revista de Divulgação Científica AICA, 12(1), 197-212. https://www.calameo.com/read/00216777380176cf8705a

Jardim, J. (2021a). A educação como utopia e as utopias da educação: Razões para inovar disruptivamente na educação. In J. E. Franco (Ed.), Utopia global do Espírito Santo - Vol. I: Cultura, culto e inspirações utópicas (pp. 587-600). Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra.

Jardim, J. (2021b). Empreende: Manual global de educação para o empreendedorismo. Mais Leituras.

Jardim, J. (2021c). Entrepreneurial skills to be successful in the global and digital world: Proposal for a frame of reference for entrepreneurial education. Education Sciences, 11, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11070356

Jardim, J. (2022a). 365+ Dicionário de empreendedorismo. Mais Leituras.

Jardim, J. (2022b). As soft skills dos políticos com impacto social: Quadro de referência das competências políticas criado com base na obra antuniana. In J. E. Franco & G. d’Oliveira Martins (Eds.), Repensar Portugal, a Europa e a globalização: Saber Padre Manuel Antunes, SJ, 100 anos (pp. 547-569). Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra.

Jardim, J., Bártolo, A., & Pinho, A. (2021). Towards a global entrepreneurial culture: A systematic review of the effectiveness of entrepreneurship education programs. Education Sciences, 11(8), 398. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11080398

Jardim, J., & Franco, J. E. (2013). Portugal empreendedor: Trinta figuras empreendedoras da cultura portuguesa - Relevância dos modelos para a promoção do empreendedorismo. Imprensa Nacional Casa da Moeda.

Jardim, J., & Franco, J. E. (Coords.). (2019). Empreendipédia - Dicionário de educação para o empreendedorismo. Gradiva.

Jardim, J., Lima, J., & Grilo, C. (2019). Os originais: Programa de empreendedorismo social com jovens. Theya.

Jardim, J., Pereira, A., Bartolo, A., Pinho, A., Cardoso, M., & Catanho, P. (2023). Promoting an entrepreneurial culture: Development, feasibility and acceptability of a primary school-based program focused on soft skills. Education Sciences, 13(11), 1074. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13111074

Jardim, J., Rodrigues, R., Gouveia, T., Pereira, M., Gomes, F., Paolineli, L. A., ... Pinho, R. B. (2018). Exploradores de sonhos. Theya.

Jardim, J., & Silva, H. (2019). Estratégias de educação para o empreendedorismo. In J. Jardim & J. E. Franco (Eds.), Empreendipédia - Dicionário de educação para o empreendedorismo (pp. 338-342). Gradiva.

Jardim, J., Soares, J. H., Moutinho, A., Calheiros, C., Cardoso, P., Cardoso, M. S., ... Vargas, A. e P. (2015). Brincadores de sonhos. Theya.

Jones, M. V., & Coviello, N. E. (2005). Internationalisation: Conceptualising an entrepreneurial process of behaviour in time. Journal of International Business Studies, 36(3), 284-303. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400138

Karlsson, H. (2011). Summer entrepreneur an activity for stimulating entrepreneurship among youths: A case study in a Swedish County. US-China Education Review, 1(5), 715-725. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED527682.pdf

Katz, J. A. (2003). The chronology and intellectual trajectory of American entrepreneurship education. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(2), 283-300. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(02)00098-8

Kerrick, S. A., Cumberland, D. M., & Choi, N. (2016). Comparing military veterans and civlians responses to an Entrepreneurship education program. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 19(1), 9-23.

Kirkley, W. W. (2016). Entrepreneurial behaviour: The role of values. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 22(3), 290-328. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-02-2015-0042

Kirkley, W. W. (2017). Cultivating entrepreneurial behaviour: Entrepreneurship education in secondary schools. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 11(1), 17-37. https://doi.org/10.1108/apjie-04-2017-018

Kiss, A. N., Danis, W. M., & Cavusgil, S. T. (2012). International entrepreneurship research in emerging economies: A critical review and research agenda. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(2), 266-290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2011.09.004

Krueger, N. (2015). Entrepreneurial education in practice: Part 1 - The entrepreneurial mindset. Secretary-General of the OECD. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

Kyvik, O. (2018). The global mindset: A must for international innovation and entrepreneurship. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 14(2), 309-327. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-018-0505-8

Landström, H. (2020). The evolution of entrepreneurship as a scholarly field. Foundations and Trends® in Entrepreneurship, 16(2), 65-243. https://doi.org/10.1561/0300000083

Lawton Smith, H., Glasson, J., Romeo, S., Waters, R., & Chadwick, A. (2013). Entrepreneurial regions: Evidence from Oxfordshire and Cambridgeshire. Social Science Information, 52(4), 653-673. https://doi.org/10.1177/0539018413499978

Lázaro, L. M., Rosa, V. M. de la, & Montes, C. P. (2018). A educação para a cidadania mundial como aposta de construção de um novo paradigma educativo. Roteiro. https://doi.org/10.18593/r.v43i1.13089

Likhotal, A. (2020). Global leadership in the 21st century. Cadmus, 4(2), 134-140.

Lochmiller, C. R. (2021). Conducting thematic analysis with qualitative data. Qualitative Report, 26(6), 2029-2044. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2021.5008

Lodi, E., Zammitti, A., Magnano, P., Patrizi, P., & Santisi, G. (2020). Italian adaption of self-perceived employability scale: Psychometric properties and relations with the career adaptability and well-being. Behavioral Sciences, 10(5), 82. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs10050082

Lopes, R. M. A. (2010). Educação empreendedora: Conceitos, modelos e práticas. Elsevier.

Lopes, R. M. A. (2017). Ensino de empreendedorismo no Brasil: Panorama vírgula tendências e melhores práticas. Alta Books Editora.

Lopez, L. E., Kundu, S. K., & Ciravegna, L. (2009). Born global or born regional: Evidence from an exploratory study in the Costa Rican software industry. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(7), 1228-1238. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2008.69

Maritz, A., Jones, C., & Shwetzer, C. (2015). The status of entrepreneurship education in Australian universities. Education and Training, 57(8-9), 1020-1035. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-04-2015-0026

Marques, R. (1999). Modelos pedagógicos actuais. Plátano Editora.

Marshall, H. (2011). Instrumentalism, ideals and imaginaries: Theorising the contested space of global citizenship education in schools. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 9(3-4), 411-426. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2011.605325

Martins, G. d’Oliveira. (2017). Perfil dos alunos à saída da escolaridade obrigatória. Ministério da Educação/Direção-Geral da Educação (DGE).

McAnany, E. (2013). Social entrepreneurship and communication for development and social change. Nordicom Review, 33(Special-Issue), 205-217. https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2013-0036

Mitra, J. (2017). Holistic experimentation for emergence: A creative approach to postgraduate entrepreneurship education and training. Industry and Higher Education, 31(1), 34-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950422216684072

Mwasalwiba, E. S., Samwel Mwasalwiba, E., & Mwasalwiba, E. S. (2010). Entrepreneurship education: A review of its objectives, teaching methods, and impact indicators. Education and Training, 52(1), 20-47. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400911011017663

Ndidiamaka, E. C., Charity, E., James, A., Benedict, I., Lawrence, O., & Fabian, U. (2019). Economic globalisation and entrepreneurship development in an emerging economy. Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal, 25(3), 1-11.

Nguyen, L. (2016). Entrepreneurial culture: Some initial assessments in Vietnam. Ekonomski Horizonti, 18(3), 233-246. https://doi.org/10.5937/ekonhor1603233N

Nieuwenhuizen, C., Groenewald, D., Davids, J., Van Rensburg, L. J., & Schachtebeck, C. (2016). Best practice in entrepreneurship education. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 14(3), 528-536. https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.14(3-2).2016.09

Nikolov, M., & Timpe-Laughlin, V. (2021). Assessing young learners' foreign language abilities. Language Teaching, 54(1), 1-37. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444820000294

Nyame-Asiamah, F., Amoako, I. O., Amankwah-Amoah, J., & Debrah, Y. A. (2020). Diaspora entrepreneurs' push and pull institutional factors for investing in Africa: Insights from African returnees from the United Kingdom. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 152, 119876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119876

Obschonka, M., Stuetzer, M., Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., Lamb, M. E., Potter, J., & Audretsch, D. B. (2015). Entrepreneurial regions: Do macro-psychological cultural characteristics of regions help solve the "knowledge paradox" of economics? PLoS ONE, 10(6), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0129332

O'Connor, A. (2013). A conceptual framework for entrepreneurship education policy: Meeting government and economic purposes. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(4), 546-563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2012.07.003

OECD. (2012). A guiding framework for entrepreneurial universities. OECD & European Commission. https://www.utadeo.edu.co/files/collections/documents/field_attached_file/ec-oecd_entrepreneurial_universities_framework.pdf

OECD. (2016). Supporting youth in transition (Issue September 2014). https://doi.org/10.1787/7082fbbd-en

OECD. (2018). The future of education and skills: Education 2030. OECD Publishing. https://search.oecd.org/education/2030-project/contact/E2030%20Position%20Paper%20(05.04.2018).pdf

OECD. (2019a). OECD future of education and skills 2030: Concept note. OECD Publishing. https://beta.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/about/projects/edu/education-2040/concept-notes/Skills_for_2030_concept_note.pdf

OECD. (2019b). Social impact investment 2019. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264311299-en

OECD. (2019c). Trends shaping education 2019. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/trends_edu-2019-en.

OECD/EU. (2020a). Policy brief on recent developments in youth entrepreneurship. OECD SME and Entrepreneurship Papers. No. 19. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/5f5c9b4e-en.

OECD/EU. (2020b). SME policy index: Eastern partner countries 2020: Assessing the implementation of the small business act for Europe. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/8b45614b-en.

Olasehinde, M. O., Akanmode, O. A., Alaiyemola, A. T., & Babatunde, O. T. (2015). Promoting the reading culture towards human capital and global development. English Language Teaching, 8(6), 194-200. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n6p194

Othman, N., Othman, N. H., & Ismail, R. (2012). Impact of globalisation on trends in entrepreneurship education in higher education institutions. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, 3(4), 267-271. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJTEF.2012.V3.212

Pinho, M. I., Fernandes, D., Serrão, C., & Mascarenhas, D. (2019). Youth start social entrepreneurship program for kids: Portuguese UKIDS-Case Study. Discourse and Communication for Sustainable Education, 10(2), 33-48. https://doi.org/10.2478/dcse-2019-0016

Pittaway, L., & Cope, J. (2007). Entrepreneurship education: A systematic review of the evidence. International Small Business Journal, 25(5), 479-510. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242607080656

Plourde, H., & Pelletier, D. (2007). Introduction to entrepreneurial culture. Gouvernement du Québec - Ministère de l’Éducation, du Loisir et du Sport. https://doi.org/10.2307/3034656

Porfírio, J. A., Augusto Felício, J., Carrilho, T., & Jardim, J. (2023). Promoting entrepreneurial intentions from adolescence: The influence of entrepreneurial culture and education. Journal of Business Research, 156, 113521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113521

Radović-Marković, M., Brnjas, Z., & Simović, V. (2019). The impact of globalization on entrepreneurship. Economic Analysis, 52(1), 56-68. https://doi.org/10.28934/ea.19.52.12.pp56-68

Ramsey, J. R., & Lorenz, M. P. (2016). Exploring the impact of cross- cultural management education on cultural intelligence, student satisfaction, and commitment. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 15(1), 79-99. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2014.0124

Römer-Paakkanen, T., & Suonpää, M. (2017). Multiple objectives and means of entrepreneurship education at Finnish universities of applied sciences. Haaga-Helia University of Applied Sciences. https://esignals.fi/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Multiple-Objectives.pdf

Rosa, C. A., Couto, G. M., & Lage, M. G. (2015). Guia essencial para empreendedores: 1 descoberta. SEBRAE/MG.

Rosser, E., Buckner, E., Avedissian, T., Cheung, D. S. K., Eviza, K., Hafsteinsdóttir, T. B., ... Waweru, S. (2020). The Global Leadership Mentoring Community: Building capacity across seven global regions. International Nursing Review, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1111/inr.12617

Rusu, S., Isac, F., & Cureteanu, R. (2016). Worldwide tourism entrepreneurship, a global perspective. In Lucrări Ştiinţifice (Vol. 17, Issue 4, pp. 64-68). https://lsma.ro/index.php/lsma/article/download/643/pdf

Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.1108/qrom-08-2016-1408

Sarkar, S. (2014). Empreendedorismo e inovação (3a. ed). Escolar Editora.

Schmidt, S., Bohnenberger, M. C., Panizzon, M., Silvana Regina Ampessan, M., Toivonen, E., & Lampinen, M. (2018). Students entrepreneurial behaviour: An eight-construct scale validation. International Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22(2), 1-20. https://www.abacademies.org/articles/students-entrepreneurial-behaviour-an-eightconstruct-scale-validation-7254.html

Schott, T., Kew, P., & Cheraghi, M. (2015). Future potential - A GEM perspective on youth entrepreneurship 2015. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association (GERA). https://www.gemconsortium.org/file/open?fileId=49200

SEBRAE. (2013). Como elaborar um plano de negócios. Serviço Brasileiro de Apoio à Micro e Pequenas Empresas. Sebrae. https://sebrae.com.br/Sebrae/Portal%20Sebrae/UFs/RN/Anexos/gestao-e-comercializacao-como-elaborar-um-plano-de-negocios.pdf

Seikkula-Leino, J., Ruskovaara, E., Pihkala, T., Rodríguez, I. D., & Delfino, J. (2019). Developing entrepreneurship education in Europe: Teachers' commitment to entrepreneurship education in the UK, Finland and Spain. In A. Fayolle, D. Kariv, & H. Matlay (Eds.), The role and impact of entrepreneurship education (pp. 130-145). EE Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786438232.00014

Simão, J. V., Santos, S. M. dos, & Costa, A. de A. (2005). Ambição para a excelência: A oportunidade de Bolonha. Gradiva.

Singer, S., Šarlija, N., Pfeifer, S., & Peterka, S. O. (2003). What makes Croatia a (non) entrepreneurial country? CEPOR - SMEs and Entrepreneurship Policy Centre. https://www.cepor.hr/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/EN-GEM-2017-za-web.pdf

Small, L., Shacklock, K., & Marchant, T. (2018). Employability: A contemporary review for higher education stakeholders. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 70(1), 148-166. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2017.1394355

Solomon, G. (2007). An examination of entrepreneurship education in the United States. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 14(2), 168-182. https://doi.org/10.1108/14626000710746637

Soundarajan, N., Camp, S. M., Lee, D., Ramnath, R., & Weide, B. (2016). NEWPATH: An innovative program to nurture IT entrepreneurs. Advances in Engineering Education, 5(1), 1-27. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1090561.pdf

Sousa, L. de. (2011). Corrupção. Fundação Francisco Manuel dos Santos.

Souto, I., Brito, E., & Pereira, A. (2022). Self-efficacy, resilience and distress: Challenges in education for sustainable entrepreneurship in a health context. Education Sciences, 12(10), 720. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100720

Steenekamp, A. G., Van der Merwe, S. P., & Athayde, R. (2011). An investigation into youth entrepreneurship in selected South African secondary schools: An exploratory study. Southern African Business Review, 15(3), 46-75. https://hdl.handle.net/10520/EJC92936

Sternberg, R. (2005). Inteligência de sucesso: Como a inteligência prática e criativa são determinantes para uma vida de sucesso. Coleção Psykhé. Ésquilo.

Succi, C., & Canovi, M. (2020). Soft skills to enhance graduate employability: Comparing students and employers' perceptions. Studies in Higher Education, 45(9), 1834-1847. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1585420

Susskind, R., & Susskind, D. (2019). O futuro das profissões: Como a tecnologia transformará o trabalho dos especialistas humanos. Gradiva.

Tanner, J. (2007). Global citizenship. In Teaching the global dimension: Key principles and effective practice. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203962770

Thai, M. T. T., & Chong, L. C. (2008). Born-global: The case of four Vietnamese SMEs. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 6(2), 72-100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-008-0021-y

Thurik, R., & Dejardin, M. (2012). Entrepreneurship and culture. In M. van Gelderen & E. Masurel (Eds.), Entrepreneurship in context (pp. 1-9). Routledge.

Timmons, J. A. (1989). The entrepreneurial mind. Brick House.

Torrance, C. J., & Rauch, J. (2013). Entrepreneurship education comes of age on campus: The challenges and rewards of bringing entrepreneurship to higher education. Kauffman Foundation. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2307987

Tuckman, B. W. (2012). Manual de investigação em educação: Metodologia para conceber e realizar o processo de investigação científica (4a. ed). Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian.

Ulvenblad, P., Barth, H., Ulvenblad, P.-O., Ståhl, J., & Björklund, J. C. (2020). Overcoming barriers in agri-business development: Two education programs for entrepreneurs in the Swedish agricultural sector. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 26(5), 443-464. https://doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2020.1748669

UNESCO. (2012). Education for all: Youth and skills - Putting education to work. EFA Global Monitoring Report. https://doi.org/10.54676/LIIT3478

UNESCO. (2016). Training tools for curriculum development - Reaching out to all learners: A resource pack for supporting inclusive education. Unesco. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000243279?posInSet=1&queryId=5cebf8d5-83d3-40f3-a451-fe5c961a3f22

UNESCO. (2019). 4th global report on adult learning and education. UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning. UNESCO UIL. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED612532

UNESCO. (2020a). Global education monitoring report 2020: Inclusion and education: All means all. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000373724

UNESCO. (2020b). Humanistic futures of learning: Perspectives from UNESCO chairs and UNITWIN networks. UNESDOC. https://doi.org/10.54675/AYFL2310

UNESCO and ILO. (2006). Towards an entrepreneurial culture for the twenty-first century: Stimulating entrepreneurial spirit through entrepreneurship education in secondary schools. UNESDOC. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000147057?posInSet=1&queryId=34637381-146e-4af9-989a-a4b13968f10b

Valerio, A., Parton, B., & Robb, A. (2014). Entrepreneurship education and training programs around the world: Dimensions for success. World Bank Publications. The World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-0202-7

Vanclay, F. (2020). Reflections on social impact assessment in the 21st century. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 38(2), 126-131. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2019.1685807

VanderDussen Toukan, E. (2018). Educating citizens of 'the global': Mapping textual constructs of UNESCO's global citizenship education 2012-2015. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 13(1), 51-64. https://doi.org/10.1177/1746197917700909

Vang, J. (2017). Entrepreneurship in Western Europe: A contextual perspective. European Planning Studies, 25(6), 1099-1100. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2017.1294380

Velilla, J., & Ortega, R. (2017). Determinants of entrepreneurship using fuzzy set methods: Europe vs. non-Europe. Applied Economics Letters, 24(18), 1320-1326. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2016.1276262

Vera Castillo, P. (2015). Red Emprendesur: Universidad, educación, emprendimiento e innovación. Ingeniería Solidaria, 11(18), 57-63. https://doi.org/10.16925/in.v11i18.991

Vera Castillo, P., de Souza Neto, B., Higuita Palacio, A. M., & Sela, J. P. (2019). Red EmprendeSur - Red Emprendedorismo e Innovación en América Latina. In J. Jardim & J. E. Franco (Eds.), Empreendipédia - Dicionário de educação para o empreendedorismo (pp. 666-667). Gradiva.

Verduijn, K., Dey, P., Tedmanson, D., & Essers, C. (2014). Emancipation and/or oppression? Conceptualising dimensions of criticality in entrepreneurship studies. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 20(2), 98-107. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-02-2014-0031

Vickery, J. (2019). Creative economy, cultural economics and entrepreneurship - Questions for a masters programme in its adolescence. An interview with Mariangela Lavanga and Ellen Loots. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 18(2-3), 269-278. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022219831613

von Eschenbach, W. J. (2020). Can public virtues be global? Journal of Global Ethics, 16(1), 45-57. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2020.1722728

Warner, K. D. (2016). Action research for social entrepreneurship education. Miller Center for Social Entrepreneurship.

Wee, B. Van, & Banister, D. (2016). How to write a literature review paper? Transport Reviews, 36(2), 278-288. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2015.1065456

Winck, M. F., Froehlich, C., Bohnenberger, M. C., Bessi, V. G., & Schreiber, D. (2016). O desenvolvimento das competências de líderes globais: Uma abordagem baseada nos estudos de global mindset leadership. Internext, 11(2), 35. https://doi.org/10.18568/1980-4865.11235-48

Xu, X. (2012). Analysis of national policies for entrepreneurship education in China. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 10(3), 403-420. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2012.710483

Zajda, J. (2015). Second international handbook on globalisation, education and policy research. In Second international handbook on globalisation, education and policy research. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9493-0

Zeanah, P., Burstein, K., & Cartier, J. (2018). Addressing adverse childhood experiences: It's all about relationships. Societies, 8(4), 115. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc8040115

Zoberman, Y. (2020). Uma história do desemprego: Da antiguidade aos nossos dias. Teodolito.

Author notes

Corresponding author: jacinto.jardim@uab.pt

Additional information

Article ID: 2539

JEL classification: F60, I20, M10

Editor-in-Chef1 or Adjunct2: ¹Dr. Edmundo Inácio Júnior, Univ. Estadual de Campinas, UNICAMP

Associate Editor: Dra. Rose Mary Almeida Lopes, ANEGEPE

Executive1 or Assistant2 Editor: ²M. Eng. Patrícia Trindade de Araújo and ²Camille Guedes Melo

Translation / Proofreading: The autor

Related item (isTranslationOf): https://doi.org/10.14211/regepe.esbj.e2400

How to cite: Jardim, M. J. A. Explanatory model of the impact of globalisation on entrepreneurial education: Global policies, entrepreneurial behaviours and international networks. REGEPE Entrepreneurship and Small Business Journal, 13(2), e2539. https://doi.org/10.14211/regepe.esbj.e2539

Additional information

redalyc-journal-id: 5615

IR