Introduction

The role of entrepreneurship in society has been highlighted due to its contributions to economic development, job creation, productivity growth, innovation development, and poverty reduction (Acs et al., 2008; Ribeiro-Soriano, 2017; Van Praag et al., 2007). In recent years, entrepreneurship has even been highlighted as one of the major forces in addressing significant social and environmental challenges, leading to better conditions for people and the planet (Hall et al., 2010; Markman et al., 2019; Stephan et al., 2016). Despite the role of entrepreneurship in society, the relationship between ethics and entrepreneurship is increasingly debated due to certain questionable behaviors by some entrepreneurs. Although entrepreneurs are often seen as value creators, research shows that they do not always act ethically. Entrepreneurs are associated with shrewd maneuvers and creative overcoming of constraints to ensure business success, and these behaviors can lower their ethical standards (Morris et al., 2002). Factors such as scarce resources, limited legitimacy, dependence on suppliers, and external pressures can lead to increased risk-taking and unethical actions. This highlights the need for further study of the intersection between ethics and entrepreneurship (EE) (Clarke et al., 2010; Hägg et al., 2024; Hannafey, 2003).

Entrepreneurship is a multidimensional and complex phenomenon that has different definitions, classifications, and approaches (Gedeon, 2010; Iversen et al., 2007). The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor defines entrepreneurship as “any attempt to create a new business or new venture, such as self-employment, a new business organization or the expansion of an existing business, by an individual, a team of individuals or an established firm” (GEM, 2024). In pursuit of new opportunities, entrepreneurship has been challenged by diverse technological, environmental, social, political, and economic changes. These challenges have raised new ethical questions, leading to an explosive growth in business scholars’ research on EE. The discussion of traditional thematic areas such as ethics and entrepreneurs (e.g., Ahsan, 2020; Baron et al., 2015; Higgins-Desbiolles et al., 2021), corporate social responsibility (e.g., Bandyopadhyay et al., 2020; Luque et al., 2019), and gender (e.g., Althalathini et al., 2022; De Clercq et al., 2022) has intensified and deepened. Moreover, a broad range of topics has been added, ranging from sustainability (e.g., Markman et al., 2016; Rui et al., 2021) and artificial intelligence, blockchain or big data (e.g., Obschonka et al., 2020; Saheb et al., 2021) to social entrepreneurship (Sengupta et al., 2022; Slavec Gomezel et al., 2023) and even animal ethics (e.g., Notzke, 2019). The emergence of new societal challenges requires analysis of the evolution of new EE-related issues.

In this vein, there are three critical reviews. Hannafey (2003) offers the first specific literature review that highlights the relevance of the topic. Daradkeh (2023) is a systematic literature review of 75 papers that focus on entrepreneurial and ethical decision-making and behavior, and Vallaster et al. (2019) are a bibliometric and systematic analysis. The latter is the most comprehensive and cited review of the literature; however, it focuses mainly on a qualitative review of the literature up to 2016 and does not account for thematic evolution. An evolutionary approach is essential for quantitatively understanding mature and emerging topics, including new ethical challenges. In addition, recent literature reviews require standardized protocols to provide a transparent and replicable review and structured frameworks or theoretical propositions to shape future research. Therefore, despite these efforts, there is a gap in the literature from the methodological and theoretical perspectives applied to current societal challenges. These gaps are addressed in our study. From a methodological perspective, this paper presents a comprehensive and timely review of the literature on EE, which has attracted considerable interest among scholars in recent years. The period under review also encompasses recent studies that concern, among other challenges, a pandemic, revolutionary technological changes, and cultural and generational shifts. In addition, this study adopts a hybrid literature review approach that uses qualitative and quantitative methods such as bibliometric analysis, thematic analysis, and structured review and allows for the identification of gaps in research on the main constructs based on the information obtained (Paul et al., 2020). From the theoretical perspective, based on this thematic evolution, the main themes that emerge from the entrepreneurship and ethics literature are identified and summarized. Then, through the analysis of papers from each cluster, gaps are identified and structured and used to build theoretical proposals for future research agendas applied to current societal challenges. In this way, this study aims to develop a hybrid critical review of the literature on EE and societal challenges and uses it to develop a research proposition that features standardized protocols and a broad time limit.

Accordingly, this paper responds to calls for additional research on EE (Obschonka et al., 2020; Saheb et al., 2023; Vallaster et al., 2019). In line with the abovementioned research, this study addresses the following research questions (RQs):

  • RQ1. What is the evolution of publications in ethics and entrepreneurship research? The answer to this research question provides information on the dynamism and relevance that researchers have given to the field.

  • RQ2. What are the top articles, journals, authors, and collaboration networks in ethics and entrepreneurship research? Responding to this research question enables researchers to identify the foundational theories, methodologies and knowledge that are fundamental for researchers to understand and draw from. It also allows editors to benchmark their journal’s productivity in the field. A collaborative network fosters knowledge sharing and leads to more innovative research and a greater impact on research output.

  • RQ3. How have the themes in research on ethics and entrepreneurship evolved? Answering this research question provides a comprehensive understanding of the content of the body of knowledge in the field.

  • RQ4. What opportunities exist for future studies of ethics and entrepreneurship? The answer to this research question is expected to assist researchers in addressing gaps, exploring emerging trends, establishing innovative methodologies and contributing to practical solutions, thereby increasing the relevance and impact of the field.

This study makes significant methodological and theoretical contributions to current societal challenges. First, this study is one of the first hybrid literature reviews of both the ethics and entrepreneurship literature and is certainly the first to address the relationship between ethics and entrepreneurship; it thereby contributes to research at the methodological level. This study broadens the coverage of published research in several key ways: (i) instead of using databases such as Web of Science (WoS), it utilizes a larger database, Scopus, and expands the period under review; (ii) it applies the SPAR-4-SLR protocol, which is explicitly designed for use in the social sciences, thus promoting the transparency and reproducibility of the review results; (iii) it employs modern software, including the Bibliometrix package in R, Rayyan, and Stata 15; and (iv) it cross-references all data with the SCImago Journal & Country Rank database to determine the number of papers published in each quartile and thereby introduces a new measure for assessing the quality of publications in performance analysis. Using this procedure, 516 papers published between 1988 and 2023 were collected from journals indexed in the Scopus database. This procedure made it possible to identify the most relevant and high-impact scientific authors, papers, sources, and coauthorship networks in the EE literature. Consequently, this study responds to calls for enhancing the quality of review studies in business and management (e.g., Alshater et al., 2023; Donthu et al., 2021; Lim et al., 2022; Paul et al., 2021; Robledo et al., 2023).

Second, by mapping thematic evolution concerning EE, this study presents the state of the field, highlights the theoretical concepts used, and reveals the connections among them. Specifically, six research streams that consolidate previous findings (gender, digital technologies and innovation, sustainability and corporate social responsibility, social entrepreneurship, ethical entrepreneurs, and entrepreneurship ethics) are identified. The in-depth analysis provides theoretical propositions that form a basis for future lines of research highlighting the importance of ethical considerations in all aspects of entrepreneurial practices. Finally, the study offers practical contributions by emphasizing the need for tailored ethical training programs, integrating sustainability into entrepreneurial strategies, promoting gender-inclusive practices, supporting social entrepreneurs, and developing ethical guidelines for digital technologies.

As noted above, ethical entrepreneurial practices contribute to economic growth and can address societal challenges. Understanding the relationship between entrepreneurship and ethics is therefore crucial, as it guides ethical entrepreneurial practices, improves decision-making, addresses emerging challenges, promotes sustainable development, informs policy, enhances academic understanding, and builds public trust. This fosters a responsible, sustainable, and trustworthy entrepreneurial environment that benefits both society and the economy.

Methodology

To improve the understanding of a topic and serve as a basis for future research, review papers identify and critically evaluate scattered literature, adopting approaches ranging from clearly qualitative to overtly quantitative (Pedroletti et al., 2023). To answer the specific research questions addressed, this paper adopts two complementary techniques. On the one hand, a bibliographic analysis identifies the research tendencies that articulate the academic debate on entrepreneurship and ethics. On the other hand, a thematic evolution systematizes the focal contributions made by the literature, and an interpretative review elaborates the existing academic knowledge. This mixed approach integrates the principles of the bibliometric review with those of a structured review and thereby allows the identification of gaps in research on the main constructs on the basis of the information obtained; thus, the current work represents a hybrid systematic literature review (Paul et al., 2020). In the academic literature, this method has recently been used in areas of the social sciences, such as management, business, and entrepreneurship (Alshater et al., 2023; Baier-Fuentes et al., 2020; Bhukya et al., 2023; Lashitew et al., 2022).

Academic bibliometric analysis is an objective quantitative tool that makes it possible to evaluate the development of a specific subject through the application of statistical and mathematical methods that are recognized and validated by the scientific community (Baier-Fuentes et al., 2019; Lim et al., 2022). Bibliometric analyses identify salient developments and trends as well as the most relevant scientific authors and documents and the sources that have the greatest impact on a specific topic; these analyses are characterized by their accuracy, reliability, and verifiability (Alshater et al., 2023). Bibliometric analysis provides a comprehensive analysis of the performance of units of study, such as papers, authors, and journals (Donthu et al., 2021). Similar to other research (Baier-Fuentes et al., 2019; Lim et al., 2022; Magni et al., 2022), this study applies two performance analysis techniques: descriptive analysis and citation analysis. In addition, this study develops a coauthorship network map that can be used to understand the collaboration network among authors.

Moreover, this study presents the thematic evolution of entrepreneurship and ethics research. A longitudinal study provides insights into internal dynamics and developmental patterns (Sharma et al., 2023). This is achieved by analyzing the relationships among authors’ keywords and displaying them in a thematic cluster map (Pedroletti et al., 2023). Themes are ordered according to Callon’s centrality and density metrics (Callon et al., 1991). Callon’s centrality quantifies the degree of interaction of a network with other networks. It can be understood as a theme’s relevance within the development of the entire research field analyzed (Cobo et al., 2011). The density of callons measures the strength of internal ties among all keywords describing the research theme. A high Callon density indicates that the terms are often used together, implying a well-developed and coherent subfield or topic within the broader research landscape (Cobo et al., 2011). On the basis of these two metrics, this study visualizes the themes in a two-dimensional strategic diagram with four quadrants (Sharma et al., 2023). Motor themes are conceptually important and internally coherent themes that drive the research literature in a particular period; niche themes are well developed—showing strong internal cohesion—but are of minor importance to the broader field of study; basic themes are central but are not well developed as independent fields of study; finally, emerging or declining themes are not central to the body of work and do not show a strong internal structure, implying less conceptual or theoretical development (Callon et al., 1991; Cobo et al., 2011). The Louvain clustering algorithmFootnote 1 (Blondel et al., 2008) is used to perform the analyses that produce the thematic evolution and coauthorship networks presented above. The Louvain clustering algorithm outperforms other algorithms, such as Walktrap, Fast Greedy and Leiden, in terms of modularity and processing time, providing a fair compromise between the computational complexity and accuracy of the maximum modularity estimation (Lee et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2021).

Finally, a reliable literature review must adopt a consistent and replicable protocol. Following Paul et al. (2021), this study adheres to the Scientific Procedures and Rationale for Systematic Reviews of the Literature (SPAR-4-SLR) guidelines. Unlike the available alternatives, such as the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA), this protocol explicitly concerns the social sciences, where entrepreneurial research resides, and provides guidelines for the inclusion and exclusion of publications. More importantly, adopting a review protocol is the best practice for systematic literature reviews because it promotes the transparency and replication of review findings (Lim et al., 2022). The SPAR-4-SLR protocol stipulates that a systematic literature review consists of three stages: assembling, arranging, and assessing scholarly literature (Paul et al., 2021). Figure 1 shows a summary of the steps, and the following sections explain the most relevant definitions.

Fig. 1
figure 1

The SPAR-4-SLR protocol

Full size image

Assembling

This study focuses on journals because journal publications represent completed research that has been submitted to rigorous peer review (Paul et al., 2021). Other sources, such as books, book chapters, conference papers, commentaries, and editorials, are not considered, as they do not usually receive the same level of scrutiny to which conceptual, empirical, and review papers in journals are subjected (Baier-Fuentes et al., 2020) This study used Scopus as a measure of source quality. Scopus is one of the most important databases in the scientific community. It was designed for use in both searching for bibliographic material and performing content or thematic analysis, and it thereby offers the same analytical tools that are offered by other frequently used databases, such as the Web of Science (WoS) (Baier-Fuentes et al., 2019). In fact, this study cross-referenced all the papers in the WoS and Scopus databases that included the word “entrepreneurship” and found 91% of the WoS papers in Scopus.Footnote 2

The search period extended through December 31, 2023, the end of the most recent period at the time of the preparation of this paper. The search keywords related to ethics and entrepreneurship were accompanied by asterisks to account for any potential variations in these terms, and the search in the “title, abstract and keywords” was as follows: (“start-up*” OR “startup*” OR “startup*” OR “entrepren*” OR “venture*” OR “new firm*”) AND (ethic*). The assembly stage yielded 3,823 articles.

Arranging

This study includes only “papers and reviews,” as other published items such as “editorials” and “notes” may not have undergone peer review; these were written in “English” and published in “journals” in the areas of “business, management and accounting,” the umbrella discipline in Scopus that covers entrepreneurship and business research. This protocol substage resulted in the inclusion of 937 publications and the exclusion of 2,886 publications. The retrieved contributions were screened on the basis of three exclusion criteria: (i) no direct relationship to the study topic (i.e., contributions in areas outside ethics and entrepreneurship); (ii) no direct relationship to the scope of the research (i.e., irrelevant reports concerning ethics or entrepreneurship); and (iii) no direct relationship to the study’s focus (i.e., records that did not involve practices/tools/approaches targeted to ethics and entrepreneurship). The authors independently analyzed the titles, abstracts, and keywords of the retrieved articles and excluded those that fell within one of the three above categories. At the end of the independent selection, the authors agreed to exclude 421 articles. The final dataset consists of 516Footnote 3 relevant and impactful contributions.

Assessing

A performance analysis was conducted using Microsoft Excel and Stata 15 to delineate the publication trends and the top journals, articles, authors, countries, and institutions in the field. The Bibliometrix package in R allowed science mapping according to a collaboration network between the authors and countries, analysis of co-occurrence of the keywords, and cocitation analysis. The agenda proposal involved the use of thematic analysis, which was also performed using the Bibliometrix package in R.

Results of the Bibliometric Analysis

Ethics and Entrepreneurship Performance

Publication Productivity of Ethics and Entrepreneurship Research (RQ1)

Figure 2 shows the productivity in terms of total publications (TPs) and total accumulated citations (TCs) related to the topic of entrepreneurship and ethics (EE) from 1988 to 2023. The first relevant studies were published at the end of the twentieth century. In particular, Longenecker et al. (1988) focused on the independent and egoistic tendencies that may lead entrepreneurs down different ethical paths to financial gain. Vyakarnam et al. (1997) identified entrepreneurial activity itself, conflicts of interest, social responsibility, and personal issues as four significant ethical dilemmas.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Evolution of publications and cumulative citations by year

Full size image

From this starting point until 2013,Footnote 4 which this study labels the “formative phase,” the number of articles increased constantly and significantly, peaking in 2009, when the Journal of Business Venturing published a special issue. The theoretical foundations of the field under study were established during this period. The following five years (2014–2018), which this study calls the “consolidation phase,” began a period during which research remained relatively constant, with an average of 18 papers published per year. The period since 2019 includes approximately half of the publications on the topic and is marked by topics related to contingency, technology, and new business models. Therefore, this study labels this phase the “pragmatic phase.” However, despite the distribution of the total number of publications, the cumulative total number of citations shows a linear trend, with no apparent exponential increase or decrease. Another way to analyze the literature’s growth and influence on this research topic is through the general citation structure of the publications, as presented in Table 1.

Table 1 Structure of Research Topic Citations
Full size table

In Table 1, the publications are ordered according to year, total number, and citations received in the papers published in the same year. The table also includes the number of papers published in each quartile according to the SCimago Journal & Country Rank. During the last few years, the average number of publications more than doubled, but the average number of citations per publication decreased. However, because the data were categorized using quartiles, this study revealed considerable variations and improvements in the quality of the literature. For example, in 2022 and 2023, more than 74% of the publications were in first-quartile journals (Q1). Similarly, in 2002, 2006, and 2008, more than 80% of the publications were in high-impact journals. During the period of topic consolidation (2014–2018), 45% of the publications were in first-quartile journals.

Top Articles for Ethics and Entrepreneurship Research (RQ2)

An exciting aspect to review is the most influential publications on this research topic, i.e., those that have received the most citations. The number of citations each paper received reflects its popularity and influence in the scientific community (Baier-Fuentes et al., 2019). Table 2 presents the ten most cited papers on the research topic in each phase defined above.

Table 2 Top Articles
Full size table

As mentioned previously, Zahra et al. (2009) published the most cited paper in the Journal of Business Venturing, with 1,573 citations. This study was published during the formative phase and has been one of the most important papers in research on social entrepreneurship. André et al. (2016) and Hechavarría et al. (2017) were the most cited publications during the consolidation phase. In the pragmatic phase, this study highlights Obschonka et al. (2020); Vallaster et al. (2019), and Hota et al. (2020). The latter also have a high average number of citations per year. This reflects the fact that despite their later publication dates, these studies have had a high impact.

Top Journals for Ethics and Entrepreneurship Research (RQ2)

Table 3 shows a classification of the 10 most influential and productive journals in the field of EE. Notably, the journal in which entrepreneurship and ethics research are most concentrated is the Journal of Business Ethics, with 121 articles and 23% of the articles published on this topic. Other journals with renowned reputations are highlighted for their publication of EE papers exceeding a threshold of 100 citations. These include the Business Ethics Quarterly, the Journal of Business Venturing, the Journal of Business Research, the Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, the International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Behavior Research, and Small Business Economics.

Table 3 Top journals
Full size table

Another important issue that Table 3 reveals is the progress of EE research in journals over time. For this purpose, the papers published in these journals were grouped into the three periods defined above (i.e., 1999 to 2013, 2014 to 2018, and 2019 to 2023). Overall, the results show that the number of publications on EE research in several journals has progressively increased. In fact, the last five years have been very productive, and almost all the focal journals have published at least one document associated with this field of research.

The results also show that almost all these journals began publication during the formative phase. However, this study highlights the Journal of Business Ethics (JBE), the Business Ethics Quarterly (BEQ), and the Journal of Business Venturing (JBV) as pioneering journals in this field. For example, JBE published an article titled “Toward an understanding of ethical behavior in small firms” (Vyakarnam et al., 1997), the first paper that dealt with ethics from an entrepreneurial and small business perspective. In 2003, the JBV published “Ethics and Entrepreneurs: An international comparative study,” in which the authors developed a conceptual framework for examining cross-cultural differences in the ethical attitudes of businesspeople on the basis of integrative social contract theory (Bucar et al., 2003). The BEQ then published “Managing social-business tensions: A review and research agenda for social enterprise” (Smith et al., 2013), one of the first literature reviews to study the tensions between social missions and business ventures.

With respect to the consolidation phase, this study highlights the International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business and the International Journal of Business and Globalization. Both journals presented concentrated publications in the EE field in this phase. Critically, in this phase, the authors began to diversify the scope of their work and deepen the topic in terms of, e.g., social entrepreneurship (e.g., André et al., 2016), religion (e.g., Ramadani et al., 2015; Tlaiss, 2015) and crowdfunding (e.g., Jancenelle et al., 2018).

As noted above, the pragmatic phase was the most productive period in the EE field. For example, the Journal of Business Research, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, and Entrepreneurship and Regional Development published all their contributions on ethics and entrepreneurship during this period. In this phase, more contingent topics, such as COVID-19 and digital technologies, were also explored (e.g., Nylund et al., 2022).

An important insight is that journals that are primarily interested in business ethics are among the most productive. This presents a challenge for entrepreneurship-focused journals.

Top Authors in the Field of Ethics and Entrepreneurship Research (RQ2)

A total of 1,170 authors contributed to the development of this research topic. Table 4 lists the 30 most productive and influential authors in EE research. In terms of the focal field, the five EE authors with the most citations—the strongest influence—are Neubaum, Zahra, Gedajlovic, Shulman, and Gonin. However, these five authors have concentrated their citations on a single research study and have not contributed to subsequent research. With respect to productivity, Fassin, McVea, and Ratten are the top three authors. Fassin’s work on EE is rooted in conflicts between entrepreneurs and investors, ethics in entrepreneurial finance, and ethical considerations in the innovation industry. In contrast, McVea’s work on EE concerns entrepreneurial decision-making, while Ratten focuses on entrepreneurial activity and ethics as it relates to cloud computing and e-book devices. Importantly, Fassin and McVea have published their studies mainly in first-quartile journals, while Ratten has primarily published works in third-quartile journals, according to the SCimago Journal & Country Rank.

Table 4 Top Authors
Full size table

Analyzing the evolution over time of publications per author across the phases defined above, Fassin represents both the development and the consolidation phases. In the pragmatic phase, Hota and Steyaert are the most productive authors. Hota’s work on EE is rooted in social entrepreneurship, and Steyaert’s work is rooted in organizational ethics.

Because authors often collaborate and contribute to other research areas, we present these contributions at a general level. The indicators show that several prominent authors have impacted science in general. These include, for example, Vanessa Ratten, who has more than 8,794 citations and 488 papers.

Collaboration Networks (RQ2)

A collaboration network between authors and a country network can illustrate the social structure of an academic field. Figure 3 shows 10 clusters among the 50 most influential authors, although many authors are presented as isolated nodes. However, this does not mean that these authors do not collaborate. In fact, the average number of authors per publication is 2.4, and only 25% of publications have a single author. Furthermore, there is a high level of collaboration among authors from developed economies such as the United Kingdom, the United States, and European countries. The collaboration rate is represented by more robust lines in Fig. 4; in that figure, the countries shown in darker colors are the more productive countries. With the exception of China, collaboration among authors from developing countries is scarce.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Author collaboration network

Full size image
Fig. 4
figure 4

Collaborations across countries based on author affiliations

Full size image

These results imply that the topic has low barriers to entry and that few specialized authors have addressed it. Therefore, more scholars should be encouraged to consider contributing to the current debate, especially in collaboration with coauthors from developing countries.

Conceptual Thematic Map (RQ3)

The thematic analysis performed in this study identified the changes and continuities in research related to ethics and entrepreneurship between 1988 and 2023 across the three phases. Figure 5 shows the formative phase in terms of basic themes such as organization, business ethics, and entrepreneurship. The themes identified as motor—high relevance and high development—are sustainability, corporate social responsibility, and social enterprise. Moreover, the themes categorized as niche—low relevance and high development—include entrepreneurs and management. Finally, emerging or declining themes—those with low relevance and low development—encompass entrepreneurial opportunity and developing countries.

Fig. 5
figure 5

Thematic aspects of the topic in the formative phase (1988–2013)

Full size image

Figure 6, which shows the consolidation phase (2014–2018), illustrates the evolution of business ethics. This topic has lost relevance but has increased in terms of development. Entrepreneurship also shifted from a basic to a motor theme due to its increased development. New basic themes that emerged during this phase included gender issues and social entrepreneurship. With respect to the niche themes, research linked to innovation and digital technology gained relevance.

Fig. 6
figure 6

Thematic aspects of the topic in the consolidation phase (2014–2018)

Full size image

Finally, in Fig. 7, which shows the pragmatic phase (2019–2023), entrepreneurship and social entrepreneurship, along with sustainability, became basic themes, while innovation and digital technology transitioned from niche themes to motor themes. Finally, the emerging themes included aspects related to the organization.

Fig. 7
figure 7

Thematic aspects of the topic in the pragmatic phase (2019–2023)

Full size image

Figure 8 presents the aggregated thematic map for the entire period under study (1988–2023). From this thematic map, six relevant topics are identified. First, among the motor themes is gender. The emergence of women’s participation in entrepreneurship has raised interest among researchers in gender variations in terms of ethical and social value goals and discrimination. Another important connection with this field concerns the effects of various religions, such as Buddhism, Greek Orthodox Christianity, and, predominantly, Islam, on women’s entrepreneurial activity (e.g., Dissanayake, 2022; Gotsis et al., 2009; Gümüsay, 2015; Ramadani et al., 2015). Second, another motor theme is business ethics and entrepreneurs. For example, Hoang et al. (2023) examined the effects of ethical and entrepreneurial leadership on innovative service behavior in SME hotels in Vietnam, and Belas et al. (2022) evaluated the perceptions and impact of business ethical factors among entrepreneur-engineers and entrepreneur-nonengineers. Third, among the basic themes are the relationship between sustainability and corporate social responsibility (CSR). Although CSR and sustainability are distinct concepts, the two have overlapped over time in the EE literature. Sustainability is justified and motivated by ethics (moral considerations) and executed by following entrepreneurial principles (e.g., Markman et al., 2016). Several studies also link innovative business models that promote sustainable practices or those based on governance that incorporate social and environmental stakeholders (e.g., Cumming et al., 2016; Elkington, 2006) to sustainability. Fourth, social entrepreneurship is shown in the realm of basic themes. Studies of the ethics of social entrepreneurs have discussed the ethical nature of social entrepreneurs as a factor that differentiates between social and commercial entrepreneurship (Hota et al., 2020). Other studies (e.g., Di Lorenzo et al., 2019) argue that altruistic motives and values such as freedom or equality have significant elements that contribute to understanding the ethics of social entrepreneurship. Fifth, several studies have addressed the relationship between entrepreneurship and ethics using evidence from SMEs. For example, using small business data, Arend (2013) studied the effects of dynamic capabilities on ethical and competitive performance and whether these effects depend on a firm’s entrepreneurial characteristics. Despite its importance, this theme can be categorized as a declining topic. Finally, innovation and digital technologies are positioned as emerging themes. Research in this area has focused on several ethical considerations that are relevant at different stages in the life of innovative entrepreneurship, such as intellectual property issues, confidentiality of information, the negotiation process between the entrepreneur and the financier, fundraising, and insider trading, among others (e.g., Fassin, 2000; Long et al., 2020). Moreover, researchers have recently studied the ethical challenges associated with the use of digital technologies such as artificial intelligence and big data (e.g., Knieps, 2023; Obschonka et al., 2020; Racine, 2021).

Fig. 8
figure 8

Thematic map of the topic (1988–2023)

Full size image

Theoretical Propositions for Future Avenues for Entrepreneurship and Ethics Research (RQ4)

Ethical Considerations in Entrepreneurship

The relevance of this topic is reflected by Hannafey (2003), who highlighted its importance and proposed a series of issues that should be investigated, such as the role of entrepreneurship in the global economy and intercultural differences in the ethics of entrepreneurs, the evolution, over time, of changes in ethical interests, the perspectives and behaviors of entrepreneurs, the influence of family and academic training on the ethics of entrepreneurs, and the implications of technological changes for people.

Other contributions to the understanding of EE have focused on the formal and informal ethical structures that emerge in entrepreneurial firms over time. In this respect, Morris et al. (2002) indicated that implementing ethical structures impacts the perceived clarity and appropriateness of a firm’s ethical standards and the firm’s preparedness to address ethical challenges. They identified relevant factors such as the psychological profile of the entrepreneur, the stage of the firm’s life cycle, and the descriptive characteristics of the firm. Another analysis referred to ethics in situations in which entrepreneurs “break the rules,” a situation that is often regarded positively in the business world but can be questioned ethically and morally. In this vein, Brenkert (2009) has advocated a virtue-based ethics of entrepreneurship in which certain instances of rule-breaking, even if morally wrong, are ethically acceptable and are part of the creative destruction that entrepreneurs bring to the economy and morality. Similarly, Zhang et al. (2009) reported a positive relationship between “modest rule breaking” in adolescence and entrepreneurship in adulthood.

In these analyses of EE, approaches linked to small and medium-sized enterprises have also emerged. For example, Spence et al. (2001), in analyzing small business owner-managers’ social and ethical orientation, proposed four “frames” for reviewing and offering policies for small businesses: Profit-maximization priority, subsistence priority, enlightened self-interest, and social priority. Arend (2013) linked ethics to the dynamic capabilities of small and medium-sized enterprises, showing that these capabilities have positive effects on the ethical performance of these enterprises. In addition, topics such as how Protestant ethics influence entrepreneurship (Carr, 2003) have been discussed in relation to analyses of ethical and socially responsible practices in firms in emerging economies such as Malaysia. Ethical practices are positively associated with firm performance, but socially responsible practices are not, as these considerations are not relevant concerns for entrepreneurs (Ahmad et al., 2012). Additionally, themes linking ethics with fraud in the reward-based crowdfunding market (Cumming et al., 2023) and social value creation have emerged in recent years (Skinner, 2019).

Some open research questions may include the following: Do the ethical considerations of companies that exploit natural resources differ from those of other companies? How can organizational structures that encourage ethical decision-making within ventures and their relationships with their stakeholders be developed? How does venture capital address ethical issues in entrepreneurship based on digital technologies such as artificial intelligence? (Arend, 2013; Skinner, 2019; Spence et al., 2001). Accordingly, the following propositions are proposed for consideration in future research:

Proposition 1:

There are different ethical considerations in ventures depending on their nature: Formal or informal, the size of the company, and its relationship with stakeholders.

Gender Perspectives in Entrepreneurial Ethics

The emergence of women’s participation in entrepreneurship has raised interest among researchers regarding how gender variation is related to ethical and social value goals and discrimination. On the one hand, Hechavarría et al. (2017) found that women entrepreneurs are more likely than male entrepreneurs to emphasize social value goals over economic value creation goals. Other studies have suggested that females perceive ethics and socially responsible behaviors as more important (Ahmad et al., 2010) and engage more in social vocations than do their male counterparts (Berings et al., 2012). On the other hand, De Clercq et al. (2022) reported that women entrepreneurs indicate that their sense of work autonomy increases the likelihood that they are satisfied with their ability to balance the demands of their work with their personal lives and that this process is especially salient when they operate in countries characterized by discriminatory socioeconomic and institutional conditions. However, in culturally discriminatory environments, there is a mitigating rather than an invigorating effect.

Additionally, gender as a topic has been linked to religion, especially the Islamic religion (Althalathini et al., 2022; Gümüsay, 2015; Özkazanç-Pan, 2015; Ramadani et al., 2015; Tlaiss, 2015). Religious practices typically affect individual and societal perceptions of entrepreneurial activities (Gotsis et al., 2009). Studies of gender and entrepreneurship in the Arab world have addressed these problems and barriers and linked them to the teachings of Islam (e.g., Itani et al., 2011). In particular, Islam has been found to contribute to the systematic subordination of women in patriarchal societies. However, Islam neither forbids nor frowss women’s entrepreneurship; in fact, it is supported and encouraged (Tlaiss, 2015). From the Islamic perspective, entrepreneurship is thus based on the pursuit of opportunities, guided by a set of norms, values, and recommendations (socioeconomic/ethical), and has a religious-spiritual pillar that links people to God and to the ultimate goal of pleasing Allah (Gümüsay, 2015). Tlaiss (2015) studied how Islamic values and work ethics are embedded in the entrepreneurial activities of Arab women. Her results show how Muslim women entrepreneurs pursue well-being and excellence in their work while running their businesses. In addition, Muslim women entrepreneurs adhere to work-related Islamic values such as working effectively and hard, honesty and truthfulness, fairness and justice, and benevolence. Through these values and work ethics, Arab Muslim women structure and direct their entrepreneurial careers in ways that lie outside the traditional and doctrinaire interpretations of Islam. Similarly, Althalathini et al. (2022) explored how Islamic feminism empowers women entrepreneurs and their entrepreneurial activities and behaviors in conflict zones. They found that Islamic feminism shapes the business ethics of Muslim women entrepreneurs who are operating in conflict zones and removes the traditional, patriarchal, colonial, and other cultural restrictions that have veiled Islam. Similarly, Özkazanç-Pan (2015) proposed that through engagement in entrepreneurship, Islamic feminist positions enable praxis and represent an ethical–political commitment to dismantling neoliberal ideologies that perpetuate gender inequality.

Although gender is one of the most studied topics in the relationship between ethics and entrepreneurship, there are research questions with high potential for future studies. For example, how does work autonomy influence the work-life balance of women entrepreneurs, including factors such as time management, locus of control, and self-efficacy? How can these mechanisms foster ethical values in the work environment? How do female and male entrepreneurs experience and express traits such as resilience and power distance differently? What is the impact of Islam on female entrepreneurs in different countries, given their specific economic, political, and sociocultural contexts? How does the influence of Islam shape the personal lives and motivations of female entrepreneurs, including the challenges and obstacles they face in Middle Eastern countries with Islamic influence (Althalathini et al., 2022; De Clercq et al., 2022; Tlaiss, 2015)? Therefore, the following propositions are presented for future research:

Proposition 2:

Different contexts (e.g., cultural, geographic, and religious) influence men’s and women’s personal life balance, motivations, and ethical values related to entrepreneurship.

Social Entrepreneurship

The thematic map of the EE literature highlights “social entrepreneurship” as a basic theme for the period 1998–2023 (Fig. 8). Research has shown a growing focus on social entrepreneurship due to its importance in addressing social problems and enriching communities and societies with market-based methods (e.g., Scuotto et al., 2022; Tate et al., 2018). In this regard, Hota et al. (2020) performed a bibliometric analysis of works published between 1996 and 2017 and highlighted the importance of ethics in social entrepreneurship, which is itself ethical in nature, differentiating it from commercial entrepreneurship.

Initially, this academic discussion focused on the ethical need to target social entrepreneurship to the social needs of stakeholders to contribute to their development, build legitimacy, and discover new opportunities (e.g., Harmeling et al., 2009; Renault, 2006). In addition, organizations related to social entrepreneurship, such as nongovernmental organizations and universities, have been analyzed (Easterly et al., 2009; Renault, 2006). Subsequently, Zahra et al. (2009) proposed the following definition: “Social entrepreneurship encompasses the activities and processes undertaken to discover, define, and exploit opportunities to enhance social wealth by creating new ventures or managing existing organizations in an innovative manner”. These authors identified three types of social entrepreneurship: Social bricoleurs, who act on locally discovered opportunities using locally available resources; social constructionists, who build, launch, and operate ventures that address the social needs that existing organizations inadequately address; and social engineers, who identify systemic problems within social systems and structures and address them by bringing about revolutionary change.

More recently, the tension between social missions and values of social entrepreneurship and the allocation of efficiency, innovation, and resources among traditional business ventures has been discussed (Smith et al., 2013). Similarly, Pies et al. (2010) indicated that the purpose of businesses in society is value creation and that companies can help solve global problems through global corporate citizenship if they participate as political and moral actors. The discussion has also turned to the management of social entrepreneurship through its discussion of the following points: The challenge of maintaining social objectives during the scaling-up process (André et al., 2016; Smith et al., 2016); the analysis of entrepreneurial intention and the ethics of social enterprise business models (Bull et al., 2019); the characteristics of ethical leadership, including moral entrepreneurship (Kaptein, 2019); the relevance of social entrepreneurship practices to sustaining social contributions expressed in a business’s social mission (Bruder, 2021); and the development of social innovation and responsible innovation in ways that create socioethical value for target beneficiaries and achieve sustainable development goals (Lubberink et al., 2019).

In recent years, the discussion of social entrepreneurship has continued to deepen our understanding of the ethical and managerial aspects of social enterprises (e.g., Sengupta et al., 2022; Slavec Gomezel et al., 2023), and new themes have emerged. These themes include the “prosocial” approach, which implies the intent to help or promote the benefit of other persons, groups, or society (e.g., Figueroa-Armijos et al., 2022; Yitshaki et al., 2022); the role of social media in social enterprises (e.g., Jacobson et al., 2022); the use of a religious approach (e.g., Anglin et al., 2023; Dissanayake, 2022); and an incipient discussion of gender (e.g., Freund et al., 2023). Although social entrepreneurship is a basic topic in the literature, there are still open research questions, for example, Are there ethical differences in entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial decisions when gender, religion, and cultural dimensions are considered simultaneously? What are the ethical tensions in companies that have a “prosocial” focus on achieving financial stability? Is there an ethical distinction between social entrepreneurship and sustainable entrepreneurship? What occurs in ventures regarding their ethical decisions to use social media and the types of content available for communicating and promoting such ventures? (Anglin et al., 2023; Figueroa-Armijos et al., 2022; Yitshaki et al., 2022).

Proposition 3:

Social entrepreneurs have different ethical considerations according to the stage of the venture (born, growth, maturity); these factors affect their relationships with stakeholders, the tension between social purpose and financial needs, and the use of social media.

Integrating Sustainability and Corporate Social Responsibility in Entrepreneurial Ventures

Another of the most developed and relevant topics in the EE literature is the balance between profitability and ethics. This review shows that, in the early years, corporate social responsibility (CSR) was the concept used to discuss the topic in both large companies and entrepreneurship. For example, Choi et al. (2008) studied socially responsible entrepreneurs—who balance the goal of profit with CSR—and discovered that they typically founded their ventures, at least in part, to achieve idealistic goals and pursue both financial and nonfinancial objectives simultaneously. The construct of sustainability has subsequently gained consensus in the literature in reference to this debate. For example, Markman et al. (2016) presented a special issue on sustainability, ethics, and entrepreneurship, arguing that the balance among social, environmental, and economic responsibility is insufficient. Sustainable, ethical, and entrepreneurial enterprises should thus regenerate the environment and drive positive social change rather than merely minimize damage. The overlap between CSR and sustainability is not surprising, as the two share an ethical basis, the pursuit of responsible business conduct. At their core, and essential for this review, both CSR and sustainability have emerged as responses to the growing recognition of an approach that meets ethical principles and in which the creation of economic value is pursued while social and environmental responsibilities are met in a way that may even achieve social progress and preserve the environment (Choi et al., 2008; Elkington, 2006; Keijzers, 2002; Markman et al., 2016).

In the EE literature, several authors have studied the determinants of sustainability. Hechavarría et al. (2017), for instance, found that entrepreneurs in strong postmaterialist societies are more likely to have social and environmental value creation goals and less likely to have economic value creation goals. They also showed that women entrepreneurs are more likely than men to emphasize social value creation goals than economic value creation goals and that postmaterialists tend to further widen the gender gap in these value creation goals. In another prominent study, Rui et al. (2021) suggested that entrepreneurs’ responsible leadership and environmental awareness positively impact the relationships among stakeholder pressure, entrepreneurial environmental ethics, and green innovation. Their study thus highlights the importance of improving entrepreneurs’ environmental awareness and leadership in motivating employees’ pro-environmental behavior and appropriately allocating company resources to support green innovation.

In terms of context, two industries have been the most studied, not least because of their high social and environmental impact: Tourism and fashion. On the one hand, the implementation of sustainable and ethical practices in the tourism industry can minimize the negative impact of tourism on the environment, local communities, and cultural heritage (Ryan, 2002). Additionally, entrepreneurship can ensure the long-term preservation of the charm of tourist destinations and guarantee to those who invest in tourism that their capital will not be harmed by social and environmental deterioration. Sustainable tourism development allows the management of resources while ensuring that humanity can satisfy its economic, social, and aesthetic needs and, at the same time, preserve basic ecological movements, biological diversity, and life sustenance (Dávid, 2011; Power et al., 2017). On the other hand, the fashion industry is known for its negative environmental and social impacts, exemplified by pollution, waste, and poor labor practices. Therefore, many companies have attempted to establish themselves as sustainable fashion brands. Hence, Bandyopadhyay et al. (2020) proposed product authenticity, entrepreneurial processes and local and traditional aspects of products, including their designs and appealing backstories with market relevance, as positioning strategies. However, although transnational textile companies claim to have implemented corporate social responsibility processes to promote ethical behavior, Luque et al. (2019) noted that this claim is often only an exception. The rule behind the masking of marketing campaigns can be defined as corporate social irresponsibility.

As noted above, sustainability has been a motor theme in entrepreneurship and ethics research; however, the current global trend still presents research questions. For example, what are the local and global benefits and the potential ethical challenges associated with implementing circular economic strategies in different cultural and socioeconomic contexts? How does sustainability impact entrepreneurs’ financial performance in different sectors, such as retail, mining, and agriculture? What is the profile of entrepreneurs who address the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals as part of their business models? How do ethical considerations influence the adoption and effectiveness of green marketing strategies in entrepreneurial ventures? (Hechavarría et al., 2017; Pla-Julián et al., 2019; Ploum et al., 2019; Rui et al., 2021; Tzanidis et al., 2024). Therefore, the following proposition is presented for future research to consider:

Proposition 4:

The impact of and the return on entrepreneurial activity will depend on the balance between exploiting innovative sustainable development opportunities and the entrepreneurs’ legitimate right to a return on their investments.

Ethical Decision-Making in Entrepreneurship

Initially, it was thought that entrepreneurs have a different ethical orientation than other businesspeople and that their specific differences depend upon the economic, cultural, and religious contexts in which they operated. For example, Confucian entrepreneurs do not follow the traditional rational logic of business management, which can be very costly (Bucar et al., 2003; Cheung et al., 2004). Understanding the ethical dimension of entrepreneurs’ decision-making is also relevant, especially in contexts that involve uncertainty and ambiguity (McVea, 2009). Bryant (2009) highlighted that entrepreneurs with high self-regulation characteristics are more morally aware and seek to maintain their integrity and interpersonal trust-building. In contrast, entrepreneurs with less self-regulation seem more morally conscious and focus more on failure and loss. Baron et al. (2015) argued that entrepreneurs’ motivation for financial gain is related to their “moral disengagement” and tendency to make unethical decisions.

The following specific topics have also been addressed: The ethical decisions of small entrepreneurs linked to natural resources (Lahdesmaki, 2005); the characteristics of green entrepreneurship, in which different types can be distinguished, such as those that seek to improve environmental conditions through ethics; and other types of green entrepreneurs, such as innovative opportunists, visionary champions, and accidents (Taylor et al., 2004). Similarly, Rae (2010) proposed that university education in entrepreneurship should be directed toward new economic, social, and cultural challenges, whereby ethical and environmental concerns should be reflected in new social ventures.

In addition, studies that adopt specific approaches and have specific contexts have been conducted in recent years. For example, Zhu (2015) analyzed decision-making processes in Chinese ventures and proposed a vision that integrates Confucianism. Ahsan (2020) evaluated the ethical dimension of the collaborative economy or “gig economy” ventures by reviewing UBER and concluded that from the point of view of employment (drivers), the neoliberal regime has intensified, producing inequalities. Higgins-Desbiolles et al. (2021) analyzed the business events industry in Australia from the perspective of feminist ethics. Despite the development of this topic, there are still open research questions. For example, how do volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity (VUCA—environment) affect the ethical decisions of entrepreneurs? What is the relationship among the different types of entrepreneurs (e.g., informal, hybrid, habitual, green, social) and ethics (Uriarte et al., 2023; Williams et al., 2016)? What are the effects of teaching ethics on entrepreneurship in preschool, school, and high school? What are the ethical dimensions of specific areas of entrepreneurship, such as events, clothes, and tourism? Can the impact of the failure of entrepreneurial innovation decrease or increase the ethical standards of the entrepreneur (Scuotto et al., 2024)? What are the ethical choices and characteristics of entrepreneurs who do business with companies and countries that do not respect human rights? What ethical decisions are involved in the exploration and exploitation stages, and what are their implications (Hägg et al., 2024; Higgins-Desbiolles et al., 2021; Rae, 2010; Zhu, 2015)?

Proposition 5:

Entrepreneurship, the entrepreneurial process, and entrepreneurial responsibility produce different ethical dilemmas and interpretations according to ethical perspectives such as normative ethics, deontology, teleology and metaethics.

Ethical Challenges in the Age of Digital Innovation

The most relevant and emerging theme in the EE literature in recent years has been the emergence of new technologies and the new ethical problems that may arise from them. For example, Hall et al. (2006) investigated these new possibilities and the ethical dilemmas associated with technological progress. According to them, the emergence of new technologies can “change the rules of the game” (p.245). However, technical feasibility is not the only requirement for success, as the decisive factor in this case is the legitimacy provided by society.

In terms of the formative phase of the EE literature, Vanessa Ratten has been a pioneer in studies of a specific type of digital technology. She has evaluated the relationships among entrepreneurship, ethics, and cloud computing and e-book adoption. Cloud computingFootnote 5 creates ethical issues related to privacy, security, and anonymity (Jaeger et al., 2008; Ratten, 2012). Ratten concluded that a person’s ethical orientation influences his or her intention to adopt cloud computing (Ratten, 2012) and that marketing influences the person’s final decision to adopt it (Ratten, 2012). Ethical attitudes toward cloud computing are shaped by the false sense of reality provided by the internet, which allows one to adopt a virtual persona that inhibits the detection of misconduct. Similarly, although there is an ethical dilemma if the material presented is illegal, she found that an individual’s entrepreneurial orientation and the marketing of e-book devices influence his or her intention to adopt them (Ratten et al., 2011).

In recent years, the debate on EE has focused on signaling and identifying the ethical risks associated with new technologies such as artificial intelligence, big data, and blockchain. Only a few studies have advanced theories about the relationship between these technologies and entrepreneurial ethics. On the one hand, blockchainFootnote 6 technology is used by firms, startups, governments, and nongovernmental organizations (Kher et al., 2021) and presents challenges and ethical considerations. The challenges associated with blockchain include scalability, security, privacy, and energy consumption, while the ethical issues include privacy and the potential for use of the technology for illegal activities (Kher et al., 2021). However, blockchain may resolve ethical dilemmas. For example, most debates about the application of science that involves living subjects concern the dilemma of whether to allow research to use living subjects. Several startups (e.g., Nebula Genomics, LunaDNA, and EncrypGen) have proposed a technological solution using blockchain, allowing them to claim that their data collection and sharing procedures will advance scientific progress as well as protect the informational privacy of individuals (Racine, 2021). On the other hand, AI-based entrepreneurship presents new ethical challenges. These include concerns about privacy and data protection, bias and fairness, transparency and accountability, the ethical use of AI in decision-making, and safety and trust (Kamishima et al., 2018; Obschonka et al., 2020; Saheb et al., 2023). Despite the importance and explosive rise of artificial intelligence-based entrepreneurship, studies on the ethics of this branch of entrepreneurship remain scarce. Kamishima et al. (2018), for example, provided a framework, the capability-effectiveness approach, for the ethical development and implementation of AI robotics entrepreneurship that ensures that these technologies align with core human capabilities and ethical considerations. Thus, there is a large potential for new research questions on the topic; for example, how can the disclosure of relevant information to the public be balanced without exposing critical or sensitive data? What are the ethical aspects of governance when implementing blockchain or AI-based entrepreneurship in different sectors? How do human and organizational aspects influence the ethical implementation of emerging technologies in entrepreneurship? Can entrepreneurs be held accountable for the decisions made by AI and big data systems? How can entrepreneurs balance technological innovation with ethical considerations, such as algorithmic bias (Kamishima et al., 2018; Kher et al., 2021; Obschonka et al., 2020; Saheb et al., 2023)? Therefore, the following proposition is presented for future research to consider:

Proposition 6:

AI-based entrepreneurs must consistently manage ethical dilemmas such as the use and collection of data related to privacy, informed consent, transparency in the use of data, and the ethical responsibility to protect user information at different stages of the entrepreneurship process.

Conclusions

The literature on entrepreneurship and ethics has experienced a boom in recent years, primarily due to new entrepreneurship challenges such as sustainability and social entrepreneurship and the emergence of new technologies such as artificial intelligence and big data. However, the publications related to EE are still fragmented, which justifies the need to systematize this work. Using a mixed approach—bibliographic and thematic evolution analysis—this study provides an overview of the business and social science literature on entrepreneurial ethics. In doing so, this research makes several theoretical, methodological, and managerial contributions.

First, for researchers in ethics and entrepreneurship, the results provide a dynamic research landscape in which the number of publications is increasing but the impact of individual publications is decreasing, possibly due to increased competition and saturation of the field. However, the significant proportion of publications on EE that appear in high-impact journals indicates a positive trajectory in the quality of the field and in its recognition and suggests that despite these challenges, the discipline is evolving toward greater academic rigor and influence. According to the relevant results of the performance analysis and the social structure, there are only ten coauthor clusters among the most influential academics, indicating that they primarily represent selective circles. However, single-authored publications represent approximately 25% of the total number of records in the dataset. This implies that the topic presents few barriers to entry but that few specialized authors have addressed it. Furthermore, with the exception of China, collaboration among authors in developing countries is scarce. Thus, these results should encourage more scholars to consider contributing to the current debate, especially in collaboration with coauthors in developing countries. For this purpose, international conferences are an effective source for networking research.

Second, for editors, as noted above, the Journal of Business Ethics is the most productive journal; it is more than nine times more productive than the next most productive journal. Other journals with a primary interest in business ethics are also among the most productive journals. This provides a challenge for journals focusing on entrepreneurship; those journals should include and encourage additional studies on ethics in entrepreneurship.

Third, this work is one of the first hybrid literature reviews of both the ethics and entrepreneurship literature, and it is certainly the first review that addresses the relationship between ethics and entrepreneurship. It thereby contributes to research at the methodological level in numerous ways. (i) This study broadens the coverage of published research by using a larger database, in this case, Scopus, rather than other databases, such as Web of Science (WoS), and by expanding the period under review. (ii) This study applied a protocol that was explicitly designed for the social sciences (SPAR-4-SLR), thereby promoting the transparency and reproducibility of the review results. (iii) This study uses modern software such as the Bibliometrix package in R, Rayyan and Stata 15. (iv) All the data are cross-referenced with the SCimago Journal & Country Rank database to determine the number of papers published in each quartile. This constitutes a new measure for the quality of publications in performance analysis. On the other hand, this study responds to calls to increase the quality of review studies in business and management (e.g., Alshater et al., 2023; Donthu et al., 2021; Lim et al., 2022; Paul et al., 2021; Robledo et al., 2023).

Nevertheless, this study has several methodological limitations that should be acknowledged. Although this study attempted to minimize the disadvantages of quantitative and qualitative research designs by bringing them together, qualitative analysis is especially subject to potential researcher bias. Additionally, because inclusion and exclusion criteria for the academic literature were established in this research, the analysis performed and the conclusions reached in this study are limited to papers that met the established criteria. Therefore, the conclusions cannot be applied to the entire body of studies on the role of ethics in entrepreneurship. Moreover, only papers written in English in the areas of business, management, accounting, or the social sciences were examined in this study. Therefore, the analysis did not include research reported in other languages or research that falls within other domains. These are some of the possible limitations of this study.

Fourth, this study makes several theoretical contributions to the field of entrepreneurial ethics. This research traces the field’s evolution through three phases—formative, consolidation, and pragmatic—emphasizing shifts from basic themes such as entrepreneurial ethics to more complex issues such as sustainability, digital technologies and innovation. This evolution highlights the increasing sophistication and integration of ethical considerations into entrepreneurial theory. By categorizing themes into motor, basic, niche and emerging/declining, the analysis provides a clear conceptual structure and offers a systematic approach to understanding the ethical dimensions of entrepreneurship and identifying gaps that should be addressed in future research.

In this regard, the analysis revealed that the relationship between dynamic capabilities and ethical performance in entrepreneurship highlights the role of ethical leadership in enhancing both ethical standards and competitive performance, indicating that ethical considerations vary according to the nature of ventures, including their formal and informal structures, their size, and their stakeholder relationships (Proposition 1). In addition, the analysis incorporates the influences of gender and religion and provides a theoretical basis for how these sociocultural factors shape ethical behavior in entrepreneurship, with different contexts influencing the personal life balance, motivations and ethical values of male and female entrepreneurs (Proposition 2). Furthermore, the analysis identifies social entrepreneurship as a basic theme, suggesting that ethical considerations change according to the stage of a business and its relationship with its stakeholders in a way that balances social purposes and financial needs (Proposition 3). The integration of sustainability and CSR as basic themes reinforces their theoretical importance in promoting ethical entrepreneurial practices and suggests that the impact and performance of entrepreneurial activity depend on the balance between innovative opportunities for sustainable development and the legitimate right to a return on investment (Proposition 4). Furthermore, the analysis reveals that the entrepreneurship process presents different ethical dilemmas and interpretations according to various ethical perspectives, such as normative ethics, deontology, teleology, and metaethics (Proposition 5). Finally, the emergence of digital technologies such as AI, blockchain, and big data is recognized as an emerging theme, and this requires a theoretical exploration of the ethical implications of these technologies, particularly with respect to data privacy, algorithmic fairness, and transparency in entrepreneurial ventures. The analysis proposes that AI-based entrepreneurs must consistently manage ethical dilemmas related to data privacy, informed consent, transparency, and the ethical responsibility to protect user information at different stages of the entrepreneurship process (Proposition 6).

Finally, from a management perspective, the analysis highlights the need for comprehensive ethical training programs that are tailored to the specific challenges faced in each sector and can enable entrepreneurs to improve their ethical decision-making. In addition, it emphasizes the strategic importance of integrating sustainability into entrepreneurial strategies by encouraging entrepreneurs to align ethical practices with long-term sustainability goals. The analysis also highlights the importance of gender-inclusive practices and policies, advocating for environments that support diversity and address gender-specific challenges. Additionally, it suggests that robust support mechanisms for social entrepreneurs, including resources, mentoring, and funding opportunities, be provided to help them navigate ethical challenges while achieving social goals. The focus on ethical leadership highlights the need to cultivate transparency, accountability, and integrity within organizational cultures. Finally, given the importance of digital technologies, the analysis advises managers to develop detailed ethical guidelines for using AI, blockchain, and other innovations, ensuring their responsible use in a way that sustains ethical standards in modern entrepreneurial businesses.