Sustainable city

Sustainable city

A Structural Analysis of Effective Entrepreneurial Development in the Sustainability of New Cities: A case study of Parand new town

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors
1 Department of Geography, YI. C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 Department of Urban Planning, Shi.C., Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran
10.22034/jsc.2025.540423.1869
Abstract
A B S T R A C T
The development of new cities in Iran, especially Parand, is a key strategy to alleviate the population pressure on megacities and achieve regional balance. However, many of these cities, including Parand, have become dependent and unproductive settlements due to weak economic links, poor infrastructure, and a lack of sustainable employment opportunities. This research aims to analyze the role of entrepreneurship in the sustainability of new cities, with a focus on Parand. A mixed-methods approach was used, combining descriptive-analytical and exploratory-explanatory methodologies. The qualitative phase involved interviews with 20 experts, identifying six main themes and 28 indicators for the entrepreneurial ecosystem. In the quantitative phase, data from 384 residents were analyzed using SPSS and LISREL software. The results revealed that institutional structures and supportive policies, local leadership, and collective action are the most influential factors in promoting entrepreneurship and urban sustainability. Economic dependence and weak urban identity emerged as significant barriers to entrepreneurial development. This study emphasizes the importance of integrating institutional, infrastructural, and cultural interventions in development policies for new cities and offers a conceptual framework for promoting sustainable entrepreneurship.
Extended Abstract
Introduction
Rapid urbanization and population growth have presented significant urban planning challenges, impacting housing, employment, and quality of life. To address these issues, many governments, including Iran, have adopted new city development policies to manage urban growth and achieve regional balance. Cities like Parand were established to alleviate demographic pressure on metropolises, improve urban living, and ensure equitable service access. However, these initiatives often face substantial obstacles, including weak economic infrastructure, insufficient sustainable employment opportunities, and a lack of organic connections with the mother city, leading to dependent settlements. Parand, despite its physical and demographic potential, largely functions as a dormitory city due to limited local economic prospects. Urban entrepreneurship is increasingly recognized as a vital strategy for economic revitalization, social dynamism, and enhancing resilience in new cities. It acts as a multi-dimensional tool to address job scarcity, economic dependence, and low social capital, simultaneously impacting economic, social, and institutional sustainability. Beyond mere economic activity, entrepreneurship transforms social and institutional processes, fostering new job creation, promoting innovation, strengthening local belonging, and generating knowledge networks. This research aims to structurally analyze the effective development of entrepreneurship in the sustainability of new cities, with a case study of Parand New Town, by exploring the interconnectedness of entrepreneurial ecosystems. These ecosystems involve various actors, institutions, policies, resources, and social interactions that facilitate business creation and growth. This study highlights the need to foster sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems that integrate institutional, infrastructural, and cultural interventions, moving these emerging cities towards economic independence and a distinct urban identity. Key components of successful entrepreneurial ecosystems include access to skilled labor, supportive social culture, financial capital, intermediary institutions, inter-sectoral collaboration, and stable supportive policies.
 
 
Methodology
This applied research employs a mixed-methods approach, combining descriptive-analytical and exploratory-explanatory methodologies, to improve entrepreneurial development in new cities for urban sustainability. The study population includes experts, urban managers, entrepreneurial activists, and residents of Parand New Town, which serves as the case study area. For the qualitative phase, 20 experts in urban planning, entrepreneurship, and urban planning were selected using purposeful and snowball sampling. In the quantitative phase, a stratified random sampling method was applied to 384 Parand residents, with the sample size determined using Cochran's formula at a 95% confidence level. Data collection involved library and documentary studies for the theoretical framework and literature review. A researcher-made questionnaire was used for residents and entrepreneurs, while semi-structured interviews with academic elites and urban managers provided in-depth analysis of institutional and policy factors. Field observations also documented physical and institutional challenges and capacities in Parand. Content validity of the questionnaire was assessed through expert opinions and the CVR index, and reliability was confirmed using Cronbach's Alpha (values above 0/7). Quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS and LISREL software, employing Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), Path Analysis, one-sample T-test, and Friedman test. Qualitative data from interviews were analyzed using Thematic Analysis.
 
Results and discussion
The qualitative phase, based on interviews with 20 key stakeholders in Parand, identified six main themes and 28 indicators for the entrepreneurial ecosystem: Entrepreneurial and Innovation Culture, Supportive Structures and Policies, Human Capital Development and Networking, Access to Capital and Infrastructure, Challenge of Urban Identity and Economic Independence, and Local Leadership and Collective Action. This structured approach aimed to enhance precision in the subsequent quantitative modeling.
Quantitative analysis of data from 384 residents using SPSS and LISREL confirmed the conceptual model's strong statistical fit (RMSEA = 0.067, p < 0.0000, χ2/df = 2.90). Most factor loadings were above 0.6, indicating robust relationships between indicators and their respective themes. High factor loadings were observed for indicators such as "public culture supports innovative ideas," "administrative processes for starting a business are facilitated," "possibility of networking with other entrepreneurs exists," and "access to new and innovative technologies is available," underscoring their critical importance. The t-value model further confirmed the statistical significance of all relationships (most t-values > ±2.58), indicating high reliability and generalizability. The Structural Model (Y-model) revealed that "Supportive Structures and Policies" and "Local Leadership and Collective Action" had the strongest direct impacts on entrepreneurial sustainability in Parand New Town. "Access to Capital and Infrastructure" acted as a significant mediator between institutional structures and local economic development. "Entrepreneurial and Innovation Culture" indirectly influenced urban sustainability by facilitating human capital development and network interactions. Conversely, "Challenge of Urban Identity and Economic Independence," characterized by strong dependence on Tehran and a lack of local job opportunities, emerged as a significant structural barrier, negatively impacting institutional linkages and sustainable development. These findings highlight that for new cities, a qualitative approach to development is crucial, moving beyond mere quantitative growth to foster genuine economic independence and identity.
 
Conclusion
This research aimed to structurally analyze effective entrepreneurial development in the sustainability of new cities, focusing on Parand New Town. Qualitative findings identified six core themes for the entrepreneurial ecosystem, which formed the theoretical framework for the quantitative model. Quantitative analysis confirmed the conceptual model's strong statistical fit and the validity of its indicators. The structural model revealed that supportive policies, local leadership, and collective action are the most influential factors. Human capital, technological infrastructure, and initial investment also play crucial mediating roles. For Parand, developing skilled training, strengthening financial support, and fostering collaborative entrepreneurial spaces are vital due to lacking local institutions, university-industry ties, and technological infrastructure. While entrepreneurial culture has a less direct impact, it facilitates internal ecosystem capacities through human capital and networking. The "challenge of urban identity and economic independence," reflecting Parand's strong reliance on Tehran and lack of local opportunities, was identified as a significant structural impediment, underscoring the need for new cities to transition from dependent residential areas to value-producing centers. The study concludes that achieving sustainable entrepreneurship in new cities necessitates integrating institutional reforms, infrastructure and human capital development, and the reconstruction of cultural and social entrepreneurial foundations. These findings offer a practical framework for policy design, entrepreneurial ecosystem evaluation, and localized entrepreneurial models for other emerging cities in Iran.
 
Funding
There is no funding support.
 
Authors’ Contribution
Authors contributed equally to the conceptualization and writing of the article. All of the authors approved thecontent of the manuscript and agreed on all aspects of the work declaration of competing interest none.
 
Conflict of Interest
Authors declared no conflict of interest.
 
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to all the scientific consultants of this paper.
Keywords

  1. Acs, Z. J., Autio, E., & Szerb, L. (2014). National systems of entrepreneurship: Measurement issues and policy implications. Research policy43(3), 476-494.
  2. Acs, Z. J., Szerb, L., Autio, E., Acs, Z. J., Szerb, L., & Autio, E. (2015). National systems of entrepreneurship. Global Entrepreneurship and Development Index 2014, 13-26.
  3. Ali, M. A., Kabil, M., Alayan, R., Magda, R., & Dávid, L. D. (2021). Entrepreneurship ecosystem performance in egypt: An empirical study based on the global entrepreneurship index (gei). Sustainability13(13), 7171.
  4. Audretsch, D. B., & Belitski, M. (2017). Entrepreneurial ecosystems in cities: establishing the framework conditions. The Journal of Technology Transfer42, 1030-1051.
  5. Audretsch, D. B., Belitski, M., & Cherkas, N. (2021). Entrepreneurial ecosystems in cities: The role of institutions. PloS one16(3), e0247609.
  6. Audretsch, D., Cruz, M., & Torres, J. (2022). Revisiting entrepreneurial ecosystems. World Bank.
  7. Audretsch, D.B., Belitski, M., & Eichler, G.M.  (2024). Entrepreneurial ecosystems, institutional quality, and the unexpected role of the sustainability orientation of entrepreneurs. Small Bus Econ, 62, 503–522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-023-00763-5
  8. Autio, E., & Cao, Z. (2019). Fostering digital start-ups: Structural model of entrepreneurial ecosystems.
  9. Ayini, M. (2019). Investigating the challenges of urban management in Iranian new towns based on structural equation modeling. Urban and Regional Development Planning Quarterly, 4(9), 115‑146. https://doi.org/10.22054/urdp.2021.49913.1185 [In Persian]
  10. Baron, R. A., & Henry, R. A. (2010). How entrepreneurs acquire the capacity to excel: Insights from research on expert performance. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal4(1), 49-65.
  11. Cohen, B. (2006). Sustainable valley entrepreneurial ecosystems. Business strategy and the Environment15(1), 1-14.
  12. Crowley, F., & Jordan, D. (2022). Do local start-ups and knowledge spillovers matter for firm-level R&D investment?. Urban Studies59(5), 1085-1102.
  13. Dieleman, M. (2011). New town development in Indonesia: Renegotiating, shaping and replacing institutions. Bijdragen tot de taal-, land-en volkenkunde/Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences of Southeast Asia167(1), 60-85.
  14. Dizdaroglu, D. (2017). The role of indicator-based sustainability assessment in policy and the decision-making process: A review and outlook. Sustainability9(6), 1018.
  15. Eesley, C. E., & Roberts, E. B. (2012). Are you experienced or are you talented?: When does innate talent versus experience explain entrepreneurial performance?. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal6(3), 207-219.
  16. Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone Publishing.
  17. Feld, B. (2020). Startup communities: Building an entrepreneurial ecosystem in your city. John Wiley & Sons.
  18. Gregori, P., Wdowiak, M. A., Schwarz, E. J., & Holzmann, P. (2019). Exploring value creation in sustainable entrepreneurship: Insights from the institutional logics perspective and the business model lens. Sustainability11(9), 2505.
  19. Huggins, R., Munday, M., Thompson, P., & Xu, C. (2023). Entrepreneurial ecosystems, agency and regional development: Emergence and new path creation in the Cardiff city region. Local Economy38(6), 538-561.
  20. Huggins, R., Munday, M., Thompson, P., & Xu, C. (2024). Entrepreneurial ecosystems, agency and regional development: Emergence and new path creation in the Cardiff city region. Local Economy38(6), 538-561. https://doi.org/10.1177/02690942241237779 (Original work published 2023)
  21. Isenberg, D. J. (2010). How to start an entrepreneurial revolution. Harvard business review88(6), 40-50.
  22. Kazemi, H., Bakhshandeh, F., & Tooranloo, H. S. (2020). Development of the sustainable entrepreneurship model. Malaysian Management Journal24, 103-143.
  23. Kouzehgar‑Kalaji, L., & Salimi‑Sobhan, M. (2020). Mass housing and residents’ satisfaction in periurban spaces: Case of Parand and Pardis in Tehran Province. Development of Peri‑Urban Spaces Journal, 2(1), 35‑50. [In Persian]
  24. Lee, C., Lee, K., & Pennings, J. M. (2001). Internal capabilities, external networks, and performance: a study on technology‐based ventures. Strategic management journal22(6‐7), 615-640.
  25. Li, Y., Hsü, P., Hao, G., Sun, K., & Wang, Y. (2021). City brand image building and its impact on the psychological capital of new entrepreneurs following cultural construction. Frontiers in Psychology12, 717303.
  26. Mack, E., & Mayer, H. (2016). The evolutionary dynamics of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Urban studies53(10), 2118-2133.
  27. Malecki, E. J. (2018). Entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial ecosystems. Geography compass12(3), e12359.
  28. O’Shea, G., Farny, S., & Hakala, H. (2021). The buzz before business: A design science study of a sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystem. Small Business Economics56, 1097-1120.
  29. Olanrewaju, A. M., & Ismaila, K. B. (2020). Actors in industrial relations: growths and dwarfism of industrial relations system in Nigeria. Malaysian management journal24, 145-164.
  30. Peng, H., Zhou, C., & Liu, Y. (2020). Entrepreneurial experience and performance: From the aspect of sustainable growth of enterprises. Sustainability12(18), 7351.
  31. Rodríguez, S.., & Rehner, J.. (2021). Emprendimiento en ciudades intermedias en Chile: Sus vínculos con el empleo y la sustentabilidad urbana. Revista De Geografía Norte Grande, (78), 93–113. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-34022021000100093
  32. Roundy, P. T. (2017). “Small town” entrepreneurial ecosystems: Implications for developed and emerging economies. Journal of entrepreneurship in emerging economies9(3), 238-262.
  33. Sabouni, S., Behzadi‑Far, M., & Saremi, H. R. (2020). Competitiveness of Iranian new towns: Case study of Parand New Town. Economic Modelling Quarterly, 14(4), 121‑144. [In Persian]
  34. Sachs, J. D. (2015). The age of sustainable development. Columbia University Press.
  35. Schaltegger, S., & Wagner, M. (2011). Sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainability innovation: categories and interactions. Business strategy and the environment20(4), 222-237.
  36. Shamsoddini, A., Jafari, J., & Jahangir, S. (2023). Assessing the relationship between land‑use mix and urban sustainability in new towns: Case study of Parand New Town. Haft Hisar Environmental Studies Quarterly, 13(50), 145‑157. [In Persian]
  37. Shamsoddini, A., Jafari, J., & Jahangir, S. (2025). Land‑use policies and their effect on urban sustainability: Case analysis of landuse mix in Parand New Town. Urban and Regional Policy Making Quarterly, 4(14), 1‑22. [In Persian]
  38. Song, Y., Stead, D., & de Jong, M. (2020). New Town Development and Sustainable Transition under Urban Entrepreneurialism in China. Sustainability12(12), Article 5179. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12125179
  39. Spigel, B. (2017). The relational organization of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Entrepreneurship theory and practice41(1), 49-72.
  40. Spigel, B., & Harrison, R. (2018). Toward a process theory of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strategic entrepreneurship journal12(1), 151-168.
  41. Tolstykh, T., Gamidullaeva, L., Shmeleva, N., Woźniak, M., & Vasin, S. (2020). An assessment of regional sustainability via the maturity level of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity7(1), 5.
  42. Tur-Porcar, A., Roig-Tierno, N., & Llorca Mestre, A. (2018). Factors affecting entrepreneurship and business sustainability. Sustainability10(2), 452.
  43. UN-Habitat. (2020). World cities report 2020: The value of sustainable urbanization. United Nations Human Settlements Programme. https://unhabitat.org/world-cities-report-2020
  44. Urbano, D., Aparicio, S., & Audretsch, D. (2019). Twenty-five years of research on institutions, entrepreneurship, and economic growth: what has been learned?. Small business economics53, 21-49.
  45. Valipour‑Pashakelai, K., Rezvani, A. A., & Piri, S. (2021). Strategic analysis of sustainable development status in Parand New Town. New Approaches in Human Geography Journal, 2(2), 664‑681. [In Persian]
  46. Xie, L., Cheshmehzangi, A., Tan-Mullins, M., Flynn, A., & Heath, T. (2020). Urban entrepreneurialism and sustainable development: A comparative analysis of Chinese eco-developments. Journal of Urban technology27(1), 3-26.
  47. Zamani, B., & Arefi, M. (2013). Iranian new towns and their urban management issues: A critical review of influential actors and factors. Cities30, 105-112.
  48. Zhou, C., Peng, H., & Li, B. (2022). How risk prevention mechanisms regulate serial entrepreneurs to achieve sustainable entrepreneurship—A policy text analysis. Sustainability14(21), 13904.