To understand the network’s current level of support for climate entrepreneurship, ANDE identified which of its members work in climate adaptation, mitigation, and resilience and mapped where and how this support is being provided. Data were collected between March and August 2021 through a survey of ANDE’s member organizations as well as supplementary desk research. While the analysis in this snapshot is static, the information is meant to serve as a catalyst for greater climate action in the SGB sector.

With support from The Lemelson Foundation, ANDE conducted interviews with 13 representatives from a select group of funders and impact investors to identify barriers to and opportunities for funding climate entrepreneurship. While not an exhaustive list of funders, these representatives provided practical insight on how climate entrepreneurship is seen among funders focused primarily on climate action and/or entrepreneurship and how greater funding could be allocated to the intersection.

Southeast Asia is one of the fastest-growing regions in the world, with a total GDP of over USD 2.7 trillion. However, its progress is threatened by the increasingly adverse impacts of climate change. Entrepreneurship has a leading role in developing solutions to both mitigate and adapt to climate change. This report evaluates the current support ecosystem for climate and environmental entrepreneurs in six developing Southeast Asian countries: Cambodia, Indonesia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam. Through ANDE's data collection and analysis, this report offers insights on the set of organizations supporting entrepreneurs that aim to address climate change mitigation, adaptation, and non-climate related environmental protection challenges.

In this article, empirical research on post-investment activities of business angels is reviewed and conceptualized as five distinct governance processes: boundary spanning, structuring, leadership, doing, and monitoring. These processes have the potential to reduce the exposure of business angels to relational risk and market risk. The identification of these governance processes also contributes towards understanding the social aspect of business angels’ post investment involvement. In particular, it is shown how the recognition of the cognitive/institutional dimension opens up for new questions about post-investment involvement. Finally, it is proposed that venture performance can be enhanced in practice if business angels and venture members develop skills that are connected to the governance processes.

This article examines the differences and features displayed by business angels (BAs), depending on the extent of their involvement with, and support for, the start-ups they finance measured by expertise, experience and contacts. With a sample of 293 Spanish BAs, using data obtained from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) survey, our results indicate that investors who develop more rigorous screening processes in the pre-investment process and hold regular meetings with founder teams are more likely to become High Value-Added Business Angels (HVBAs). Accordingly, the ability of BAs to transfer so-called ‘smart capital’ is conditioned by the levels of screening and assessment applied at the pre-investment stage in terms of both the quality of projects and founder teams and the extent to which the expectations and profiles of the two parties match.

With over 10 years of active involvement and experience, ANDE is committed to further deepening our role in the entrepreneurship and development ecosystem. Our updated global strategy, which informs ANDE’s global and regional work for the coming years, aligns with the United Nations’ Sustainable Devel­opment Goals (SDGs), specifically focusing efforts on three urgent issues: decent work and economic growth, gender equality, and climate and environmental action. This brief focuses on decent work and economic growth, for India. It has been developed in partnership with ANDE Members Upaya Social Ventures and Global Alliance for Mass Entrepreneurship (GAME). The brief highlights the current status quo of how small & growing businesses are contributing to creation of decent jobs and outlines strategies for collaborative action to strengthen the ecosystem.

This paper is part of the Compendium of Evidence on the Effectiveness of Innovation Policy Intervention. This paper examines publicly supported policies for entrepreneurship development. Entrepreneurship policies are directed to encouraging socially and economically productive activities by individuals acting independently in business. Their principal objective is to increase a level of entrepreneurial activity which is considered to be below the social optimum. Policies may be implemented directly to address entrepreneurs’ needs e.g. business advice programmes or through broadcast methods such as education policy. We have attempted to locate and focus on evaluations that reported on additionality / net effect or that use methods of causal inference to
determine the effectiveness and impacts of policy. While policies and programmes for entrepreneurship can be simplistically modelled as a series of inputs beginning with cultural change followed by general and then more specific skill development, it is hard nevertheless to assess impact or trace causality because of the difficulty of defining discrete units of input, the presence of confounding factors and the length of time over which effects can build.

Based on a review of existing literature, this paper discusses to what extent and how SMEs can
deliver green and inclusive growth. The OECD defines green growth as aligning economic growth and environmental objectives. Specifically, it involves transitioning to a resource-efficient, low carbon economy and preserving environmental resources while seizing the economic opportunities that this transition generates (OECD, 2015[9]). Similarly, the World Bank defines green growth as “economic growth that is environmental sustainable.” Put it more concretely, it means “enabling developing countries to achieve robust growth without locking themselves into unsustainable patterns” (World Bank, 2012[10]). Meanwhile, inclusive growth involves raising “societies’ welfare or living standards broadly defined.” It is a multidimensional measure of growth and includes both income-related measures of well-being and non-income elements such as health and education. Inclusive growth also emphasizes the question of distribution; that is, how are aggregate changes in measures of growth distributed across households and individuals (Boarini, Murtin and Schreyer, 2015[11])? Simply, green and inclusive growth involves a transition to an eco-friendly, low-carbon economy and simultaneously, broad improvements in societal welfare. Thus, the paper is concerned with discussing to what extent greening SMEs delivers widespread societal welfare gains."

"The purpose of this paper is to investigate the feasibility of the incubator and accelerator approaches towards climate technology entrepreneurship in developing countries. Because an accelerator is a specific type of new venture incubator, this paper will also more broadly consider the suitability of incubators and note the recent emergence of hybrid forms of incubator-accelerators."

"From the backstreets of Addis Ababa to the offices of Silicon Valley, people are transforming ideas into products that are used by society. Entrepreneurs, as such people are known, are vital to the growth and prosperity of communities. But what role can entrepreneurs play in tackling climate change? How can we help entrepreneurs to rise to this challenge? This policy brief seeks to answer these questions. It highlights the role of entrepreneurs in developing technologies, business models and services that society can use to achieve low-emission and climate-resilient sustainable development. It also suggests ways of encouraging, guiding and supporting entrepreneurs in their efforts to innovate climate technologies. This TEC Brief is part of a long-running series of policy briefs on innovation produced by the Technology Executive Committee. It focuses on the central actor in the innovation process: the entrepreneur."