Keywords

1 Introduction

The term and the underlying concept of the transformation of the society framework have dominated political discourse in Germany for some time. The reasons for this are, above all, the destruction of the environment visible in many places, the rampant waste of resources, and accelerating climate change with complex consequences for people’s coexistence, their future prospects, and their safety (Radtke, 2021; Wiedmann et al., 2020). As the recent German parliamentary election campaign in 2021 showed, transformation debates touch almost all areas of society. These debates revolve around the relationship between economics and ecology, the role of digitization, new approaches to a more environmentally conscious lifestyle, responsibility for the future, intergenerational justice, social inclusion, and more (Lang-Wojtasik, 2019; Wissenschaftlicher Beirat der Bundesregierung Globale Umweltveränderungen (WBGU), 2019; Sturn & Klüh, 2021; Kanning, 2022). “Sustainability”—an umbrella term covering many of these aspects—has long become a central concept of our time (Adloff & Neckel, 2019).

Yet, the challenges and questions outlined are by no means new. Back in 1972, the Club of Rome already predicted dangerous developments as a result of misguided patterns of production and consumption as well as exponential population growth in certain parts of the planet in its study “The Limits to Growth” (Meadows et al., 1972; Schneidewind, 2018). The years that followed saw a gradually increasing engagement with environmental issues at a national level, which was also reflected in political action, for example, in the establishment of the Federal Ministry for the Environment in 1986. In the following years, individual ecological topics continued to feature on the agenda in politics, business, and society (Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz, Bau und Reaktorsicherheit (BMUB), 2016; Kahlenborn et al., 2019; Radtke, 2021). However, the major interdisciplinary discourse we can observe today is a recent phenomenon.

In light of the growing pace of fundamental ecological and economic developments and challenges for society as a whole, calls for a much more resolute and accelerated approach to sustainability transformation are becoming increasingly loud in Germany (Deutsche Energie-Agentur GmbH (dena), 2021; Scientist for Future, 2019; Stiftung 2°—Deutsche Unternehmer für Klimaschutz, 2021). It is argued that especially against the backdrop of ever-more evident climate change and resulting environmental damage, it is no longer enough to simply react to changing circumstances once they have occurred. Instead, a completely new agenda was needed, or else society would inevitably reach and pass certain tipping points, after which certain ecological and social processes would lead to disaster scenarios that could not be avoided or reversed (Kopatz, 2021; Rat für nachhaltige Entwicklung & Deutsche Akademie für Naturforscher Leopoldina, 2021). Accordingly, change should ultimately be actively designed (“change by design”) and not the result of the externally forced change (“change by disaster”) (Sommer & Welzer, 2017; Luks, 2019).

As vociferous—and frequently quite justified—as these demands from an increasing number of groups in society are, at the same time critics point out that up to now, action has been sluggish and measures have not been very sustainable (Dyllick & Muff, 2016; Müller-Christ, 2017; Vermeir & Verbeke, 2006). Blühdorn, for instance, argues that even if the urgency of a social and ecological transformation to sustainability has long been recognized by almost all sides, modern societies are more determined than ever to defend their prosperity and lifestyle (Blühdorn, 2020a). As a first summary, it can therefore be stated: On the one hand, society as a whole in Germany and Europe considers climate and environmental protection as a vital topic for the present and future (European Commission, 2020; Umweltbundesamt, 2021); on the other hand, there are serious weaknesses in the implementation of the transformation processes proposed (Blühdorn et al., 2019). This implementation deficit is evident in a number of areas, whether in politics, business, society, or at the individual level. This raises the question of how the willingness to change that apparently exists within society can be transformed more sustainably and effectively into the ability and action to take the necessary steps toward that change both at the individual and societal level.

Opportunities to systematically bridge this gap between intention on one side and behavior on the other and thus drive intended processes of change (“change by design”) more quickly and actively than to date can be found in early entrepreneurship education starting in school. Because ultimately reflection on the need for change, the development of possible solutions, and their targeted implementation, as well as change in general (Schumpeter, 1997), are central elements of entrepreneurship in the broadest sense. Entrepreneurship is characterized by the development and implementation of new (technological) innovations. At the same time, entrepreneurial thinking and acting are central to quickly strike out in new directions or to adapt chosen paths appropriately. This also means that new ideas and their proactive realization in business and society can be key factors in turning ecological challenges into socioeconomic opportunities. Youth Entrepreneurship Education can thus (this is the central hypothesis) be an early starting point to impart such competencies to the upcoming generation systematically.

This paper therefore goes on to explore the possible role of Youth Entrepreneurship Education (YEE) in actively shaping great transformations—like the sustainability transformation—that are important for the future in Germany. To that end, Sect. 2 first outlines the characteristics and challenges that great transformations involve by definition. Based on this, the subsequent section reflects on the meaning of entrepreneurship against the backdrop of the current economic and societal parameters and needs. Section 4 then draws on that reflection to explore the significance of YEE when dealing with transformational challenges. The fifth section concludes this paper with a short, reflective summary and an outlook.

2 The Nature of Great Transformations

The basis for a systematic analysis of the role of youth entrepreneurship education in shaping great transformations—as in the field of sustainability—is first to take a closer look at the nature of such transformations. With the focus on the (educational) goal of being able to recognize the need for transformational processes earlier and to shape them more actively, a brief discussion of what the basic characteristics and implications of great transformations are is first required. Etymologically, the word transformation comes from the Latin verb transformare (= to convert, reshape, transmute, change). The term transformation thus refers to a process of reshaping, to change itself, or to the result of such a change process (Berlin-Brandenburgischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2021; Reißig, 2009). Partly because of its use as a technical term in various academic disciplines, such as mathematics, biology, linguistics, pedagogy, and social sciences (Kollmorgen et al., 2015), “transformation” has become an established term in both daily use and theory to refer to fundamental processes of change. If change has a particular direction—observable through shifts in certain variables—Günter Hesse refers to it as development (Hesse, 1987). Following this definition, transformation can be regarded as a special form of change and development (Luks, 2019).

Overall, we can now observe a general understanding of the term transformation that relates to the extent and dynamics of the changes in question on the one hand and to the sociopolitical will to actively shape them on the other. Recent works in the fields of economics and social sciences make references to Karl Polanyi and his work “The Great Transformation” (1944) (Blühdorn, 2020b; Luks, 2019; Schneidewind, 2018; Wissenschaftlicher Beirat der Bundesregierung Globale Umweltveränderungen (WBGU), 2011). At the heart of particularly extensive and complex transformations (Kollmorgen et al., 2015) is the reversal of traditional circumstances and structures, which Polanyi identified when observing the change in social and economic order in the nineteenth century (Henseler, 2010; Polanyi, 2001). In universal and abstract terms, “great transformations” are characterized by a very intense and dynamic development (understood as directed change) that is initiated and driven by a combination of factors that interact with each other. The associated profound change processes at a structural and functional level tend to relate to a wide variety of aspects of life, which are considered to be relevant in the course of the transformation in question (Kollmorgen et al., 2015; Reißig, 2009, 2014).

Braukmann et al., who focused on the digital and sustainability transformation in their reconstructive and systematizing review of great transformations, identified the following four basic characteristics of great (societal) transformations (Braukmann et al., 2022). These make it clear that transformations cannot be shaped by a few individual political or economic measures and by experts alone. Rather, the challenges facing society as a whole, which affect every individual, become evident:

  • Persistence: As a result of their durability, great transformations lead to comprehensive, fundamental structural changes in numerous aspects of socioeconomic life in the medium and long run.

  • Multidimensionality/complexity: Great transformations do not relate to a single target group or a specific sector but rather to numerous areas of business, politics, work, and life. This results in various interdependencies and a degree of complexity in the desire for and in interactions with these developments. Such interdependencies and complexity can be reinforced by inhibitory or dynamizing interactions within and between transformations (such as between digitization and sustainability).

  • Mightiness/unavoidability: Transformation processes and their implications can be disregarded briefly or in the short term. In the medium and long term, societies cannot escape them.

  • Ubiquity/globality: Great transformations, like those in the context of sustainability or digitization, are not limited to specific geographic areas but are in principle important everywhere; i.e., they are of global significance like, for example, the multilateral negotiations at the Glasgow Climate Conference in 2021 illustrate.

As these four core characteristics indicate, societal transformation processes involve challenges in many different areas of life for every single person. If there is also an increasing pressure to change, deep structural changes in society as a whole become inevitable eventually. Thus, in order to avoid a situation, in which the majority of those affected feel they are being “dragged along” without having any choice or say, but to rather create an environment, which offers people the chance to help shaping developments instead, there is a need to involve all parties and engage with the phenomena outlined as early as possible. Breaking new ground, developing new solutions, and realizing new ideas can therefore not only make a fundamental contribution for shaping transformations. Rather, it is also important that as many people as possible in the economy and society contribute their share.

When doing so, the peculiarities of long-term, large-scale development processes and the accompanying “visions of transformation” must be made transparent for all in society (Kristof, 2020). It is in the nature of things that great transformation goals for the distant future must remain relatively abstract, as discussions at the aforementioned climate conference in Glasgow demonstrated. For example, even though the exact national costs and possible global effects of transformation processes launched later or too late can be modeled, it is very difficult to make them palpable and tangible. It is not surprising that future impacts and interdependencies of past and present actions are therefore difficult to transfer into the minds and understanding of the general public. Hence, these future impacts and interdependencies do not have enough impact on people’s action soon enough or even at all. Such effects are also amplified by the fact that people affected by great transformations—unlike in Homo oeconomicus modeling—do not seem to act completely rationally (Brunner, 2019). This is, for instance, confirmed by studies on the so-called intention-behavior gap (Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2002; Sheeran & Webb, 2016; Rausch & Kopplin, 2021). These studies show, for example, with reference to food consumption, that the rationally desired and prescribed action does not correspond to the everyday action (Meyer & Simons, 2021). Even though there is support for more abstract transformation goals, such as more sustainability in Germany in principle, issues of daily politics, operational targets in business, and individual problems in civil society push such objectives into the background on a regular basis. Thus, they often have little impact in terms of driving practical action (Luks, 2019; Reißig, 2011).

Yet, as great transformations, by definition, have an impact on all of society in the long run, each individual will be affected by them—positively or negatively. In a free and democratic economic and social system like it can be found in Germany, every person must therefore have the opportunity to face and deal with great transformation issues, given that the aim is to enable enlightened, autonomous involvement in shaping a new future rather than heteronomy. Against this background, it is important to think even more systematically about how future citizens can be prepared for these challenges and supported in their development process. Youth entrepreneurship education can play here a significant role possibly. This is not only evident with regard to the challenges of great transformations outlined above. This is also shown below by a look at the characteristics and meaning of entrepreneurship and innovation in the context of societal demands and needs.

Overall, this short discussion of the nature of great transformations underlines the complexity and inescapable power that characterizes them. Great transformations are always accompanied by reactions on various levels of a sociotechnological system. The goal of methodical, effective, and early involvement comes with immense challenges, which are amplified by the many global interdependencies. This is illustrated by the genesis of and status quo in dealing with the sustainability transformation in Germany, Europe, and the world.

3 Entrepreneurship and Innovation in the Context of Current Societal, Environmental, and Economic Needs and Conditions in Germany

Moving from a general examination of great transformations and their characteristics to the sustainability transformation that is currently the focus of public debate, that transformation process can also be placed in a broader historical context. Like other regions of the world, Germany has repeatedly experienced comprehensive economic and social upheaval over the years. True to the topos that change is the only constant in socioeconomic systems, economic and ecological circumstances as well as needs and values are in a constant state of change. The only thing that varies is the absolute and relative speed of that change. Consolidation and realignment marking historical milestones have happened repeatedly and continue to happen. A good example is the various phases of industrialization and globalization, which led to massive changes in production and consumption, new demands on employees, and many other socioeconomic implications in Germany and other countries. In our post-industrial system of competition economics today, dealing with challenges and problems and developing potential solutions is no longer just a task for specialists but rather increasingly becomes a task for everyone who plays a part in businesses and society (Koch et al., 2021).

Such tasks and desiderata for action in politics, business, and society become particularly clear within the context of the sustainability transformation. Production processes currently commonly used in industry, business models (Dyllick & Muff, 2016), and traditional patterns of consumption and consumer behavior (Vermeir & Verbeke, 2006) are increasingly criticized in public discourse due to the finiteness of natural resources. Rising CO2 emissions caused by this type of human behavior and the resulting changes in the global climate are becoming more and more visible and tangible, for example, through natural disasters. All of this is leading to increasing societal pressure to take up a position on the matter and act, as well as to a vigorous discussion about the need for engagement. The most pressing question here is how the emerging ecological, economic, and social needs can be met in a holistic, coordinated manner if goals like economic prosperity and intergenerational social justice are to continue to be crucial factors in political decision-making.

Looking at the categories of innovation and entrepreneurship can be useful when trying to answer this question for a variety of reasons. This can be seen from the history of both economics and technology: Technological developments and innovations and their establishment on the market enable previous less sustainable—for example, emissions-intensive—technologies or even business segments to be replaced by more efficient, greener technologies and value-added processes. Following Schumpeter (1928, 1997), it is broadly accepted that innovations can further develop existing technologies and products or “creatively destroy” [original German: “schöpferisch zerstören”] them with new technologies and products. Innovations and entrepreneurship, understood as the personal dimension of change, are thus significant driving forces in socioeconomic development.

With regard to the sustainability context, this can be demonstrated using, for example, the Multi-Level Perspective (MLP) model, which was conceptualized by Geels et al. as a contribution to international transition research (Geels & Schot, 2010; Kemp et al., 2007; Loorbach, 2010). The MLP model systematically describes and analyzes patterns of transformation and change dynamics (Schneidewind & Scheck, 2012). In this model, “niche innovations” in particular have significant potential to lead to fundamental new developments. The system innovations that can emerge from the niches (Geels, 2004) hold the transformative capacity (Dolata, 2009), effectiveness, and dynamics to break apart stable structures in a sociotechnical regime and to help shape future new stable structures (as shown in Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
A cycle chart includes socio-technical landscape, socio-technical regime, niche, innovations, system innovations, socio-technical regime, and socio-technical landscape.

The role of innovations in the multi-level perspective [own illustration based on Geels and Schot (2010, p. 25)]

Full size image

Yet, the ability of innovations and entrepreneurship to be a key factor in the active shaping of great transformation processes is not restricted to this conventional technology and market economy logic, i.e., through new products, services, and business models. In fact, entrepreneurial thinking and acting in the broader sense have an even bigger potential. Ultimately, sustainability transformation is all about breaking away from traditional patterns of behavior that inhibit transformation. In order for this to succeed, social innovations have to be realized. Social innovations may, for example, manifest themselves in new ways of thinking and behaving in civil society or politics and are thus complementary to the conventional innovation mechanisms of the market economy (Kopatz, 2021; Christanell et al., 2019). Characteristics such as the willingness to take entirely new directions in thought and action, to create innovative structures, and to adapt one’s own actions in line with the relevant objectives are therefore of systemic relevance if transformation is to be active and not just reactive. Such characteristics enable political actors, society as a whole, and ultimately each individual to initiate and drive the right changes toward the stated objectives through creativity and innovation (Kahlenborn et al., 2019).

Entrepreneurial thinking and acting as a general mindset can consequently play a substantial role in dealing with or shaping the sustainability transformation. This is also plausible from a system theory perspective (Diesner, 2015; Ropohl, 2002). As it has been shown in chapter “The Nature of Great Transformations”, great transformations are characterized by a certain ubiquity, which is why in the medium to long term each individual will find themselves confronted with transformation-related issues and maybe even with a need for change due to these transformations. Accordingly, the sustainability transformation cannot be realized only by a few parts of society or by selected groups of experts. The more prevalent entrepreneurial thinking and acting in the abovementioned sense is in a society, the better equipped individual people and systems will be when facing those challenges. In the context of sustainability, Koch, Braukmann, and Bartsch argue along the same lines that the better the young people are prepared for this modern experiential world of change as a constant, the more confident and more independent they will be in meeting challenges (Koch et al., 2021). These various individual processes of change can merge into a bigger picture over time. Ideally, (individual) activities and (individual) measures in politics, business, and society would then no longer be disconnected but can instead synergistically contribute to the realization of larger sustainability goals. This way, if entrepreneurial thinking and acting become more prevalent across society, they could increase the transformation dynamics and therefore help to reach sustainability goals in a more rational and hereby faster way.

Intra- and entrepreneurs would then serve as the promotors of free, democratic social and economic systems more than ever before. They would become decisive drivers in shaping great transformations. An immense reservoir of ideas and innovations offered by society for achieving the transformation goals could translate directly into significantly fewer restrictions (in the sense of imperatives and prohibitions) than some actors in politics envision up to this point in time. Nevertheless, it is important to have a functioning regulatory corridor that is aligned with the fundamental goal of transformation. This conglomerate of rules, laws, and regulations must be suitable to regulate the various forces in a market economy and set extrinsic incentives in such a way that they promote intrinsic motivation to achieve overarching goals (climate protection, resource equity, etc.) (Kopatz, 2021). Such an approach is in line with the enlightened humanism that has historically evolved and is constitutionally established in Germany. At its core, the goal of this approach is to strengthen individual sovereignty when dealing with future societal needs so that upcoming challenges can be met in a creative and effective way in accordance with a corresponding political framework.

But how can this be achieved? How can the potential, offered by innovation and entrepreneurship and by entrepreneurial thinking and acting in both the narrower and broader sense, be utilized for shaping the sustainability transformation in Germany in a better manner than is currently the case? These questions will be addressed in the following sections as they explore the potential of YEE when implemented early in youth development.

4 On the Potential and Relevance of Youth Entrepreneurship Education in Dealing with Great Transformations in Germany

As was already discussed, great transformations like the sustainability transformation are characterized by persistence, complexity, powerfulness, and ubiquity. This poses various challenges in how society deals with transformations of this kind. Straightforward and rapidly implementable individual political or economic measures are thus not enough if individuals and society are to engage with and shape the sustainability transformation (“change by design”). Instead, it is necessary to think in terms of the bigger picture and indeed also to be willing and able to implement far-reaching changes. Characteristics of entrepreneurial thinking and acting can be valuable here, which is why this section reflects on the early imparting of the abovementioned abilities and skills through YEE.

In general terms, YEE is understood as the education and upbringing of children and young people with regard to the field of entrepreneurship. Although elements of education and learning processes in the family and extracurricular contexts can be subsumed under the term (Bartsch, 2019), YEE predominantly manifests itself in systematic, intentional teaching and learning in schools of general education and vocational (business) schools in Germany and elsewhere (Braukmann et al., 2021). The learning content, the intention, and learning outcomes as well as the way in which YEE is integrated into the school system can vary significantly depending on the design of YEE in question (Bartsch, 2019; Koch et al., 2021), as can be seen in the overview in Fig. 2. While Educating for Entrepreneurship intends to prepare for an entrepreneurial activity in the sense of a direct start-up qualification, an Educating about Entrepreneurship has the goal to convey theories and characteristics about the entrepreneur, typical fields of action, and the entrepreneurial role in economy and society (Koch, 2003; Lackeus, 2015). Educating through Entrepreneurship is a third approach in which general and entrepreneurial (key-) competencies (Brüne & Lutz, 2020) can be developed by going through and overcoming entrepreneurial processes—often via business games or business plan competitions (Lackeus, 2015).

Fig. 2
An infographic depicts the components of societal values and norms as societal needs and business framework with entrepreneurship understanding, Y E E possibilities, and school and education system.

Differentiation and classification of different variants of (youth) entrepreneurship education in a socioeconomic context [taken from Koch et al. (2021, p. 52)]

Full size image

In order to be able to analyze the relevance and significance of YEE in the context of great transformations below, a differentiated examination of the various concepts of YEE is required. One area that offers considerable potential for actively shaping transformation is the concept of educating through entrepreneurship, which understands entrepreneurship first and foremost as entrepreneurial thinking and acting and is therefore a problem-centered and solution-oriented methodological principle. A number of different arguments with reference to the legitimacy, effectiveness, and efficiency of YEE can be presented to support this claim.

First, this type of YEE can in fact be closely connected to traditional educational goals in German schools. These are, building on a neo-humanist concept of education, guided by the intention to support each individual in their personal development and thereby enabling them to make independent, responsible, mature, and emancipated decisions (Barz, 2010; Konrad, 2010). Educating through entrepreneurship, which places special emphasis on the (education) subject (Koch et al., 2021), can play a role here in particular because it is concerned with teaching learners basic skills related to substantial ways of thinking, acting, and problem-solving in line with formal educational theory (Jank & Meyer, 2018). Students are systematically equipped with abilities and skills that are not solely and primarily useful in a conventional entrepreneurial context, i.e., within the framework of specific, future entrepreneurial activity. Those abilities and skills can also be important when dealing with complex, everyday problem situations like those we are currently facing with regard to climate, the environment, and the use of resources.

This also applies to entrepreneurial personality traits, such as the locus of control, which describes the extent to which situations and results are perceived as controllable or influenceable (Fallgatter, 2002; Neyer & Asendorpf, 2018); or resilience, which refers to the ability to deal with stress factors and adverse situations (Neyer & Asendorpf, 2018). A high internal locus of control and pronounced resilience are traits that are important not only for conventional entrepreneurs operating in the commercial sphere. They can also be just as important in mastering everyday challenges at or outside of work, as well as when dealing with potential setbacks and delays in the initiation and implementation of measures as part of the sustainability transformation.

In a YEE design like the one proposed here, general educational goals and necessary societal transformations therefore go hand in hand. Skills such as the ability to recognize problems and a need for change, the autonomous development of solutions, the mature assessment of what action is required to achieve a goal, and finally yet importantly the ability to independently and actively contribute to shaping overarching societal changes can be supported by systematic and intentional YEE. In other words, a YEE based on Klafki’s categorial understanding of education (Klafki, 2007) could be a key element in shaping the processes of the sustainability transformation. In Klafki’s categorial understanding of education, education arises from a constant reciprocal exchange between the individual and the world (Klafki, 1967). In this educational theory, subject (human) and object (world) are mutually related (Klafki, 1971, 2007). Transferred to Youth Entrepreneurship Education, this means: The crucial point here is that entrepreneurship education not only helps the individual be better prepared for the world but also the world to be better prepared for the future. The abovementioned skills and abilities taught in YEE ultimately help to make structures, aspects, and challenges of natural, cultural, societal, and political reality visible to the individual (Klafki, 1971, 2007). Knowledge of these characteristics and parameters in general, but also of the problems and challenges posed by the sustainability transformation in particular, can then in turn provide a basis for future action within the framework of great transformations. YEE thus has the potential to lead to fundamental and categorially educational insights and findings about individual action.

Against this background, YEE offers major opportunities to reduce or, in the longer term, even close the intention-behavior gaps, which can frequently be identified in the context of the sustainability transformation (see chapter “The Nature of Great Transforations”). After all, a YEE does not only addresses taking notice and intending to tackle challenges or important issues. It also aims at establishing an educational framework for future abilities and actions. Unlike in the concept of education for entrepreneurship, which aims to prepare students for the process of starting a business, the focus is not on a direct qualification in one single, distinct field or for a specific entrepreneurial start-up project. It rather is on personality development and on systematic preparation for future challenges and situations.

Entrepreneurial thinking and acting, or else an entrepreneurial personality, become evident in the ability to tackle challenges and problems proactively, appropriately, and on one’s own initiative. Actively shaping and implementing the new in particular is, according to Schumpeter, a central characteristic that distinguishes the entrepreneur from a conventional businessperson [original German: “Wirt”] and capitalist (Schumpeter, 1997). Entrepreneurs are attributed the ability to recognize the need for change at an early stage and also to initiate and actively pursue changes. This ability can be applied to individual actions in the context of the sustainability transformation; for example, not simply waiting for decisions from others, such as political decision-makers, but instead independently, autonomously, and confidently finding one’s own solutions to ecological, social, and economic challenges. Overall, such traits are promoting transformations and their presence and prevalence in politics, business, and (civil) society pose a useful premise for the active shaping of transformations in Germany.

Although it follows that YEE in the design outlined here does offer potential for shaping great transformations, a closer look at the status quo also clearly shows that YEE has not been a standard element of the various state-specific school and education systems in Germany so far. Entrepreneurial skills and abilities in terms of entrepreneurial thinking and acting are still not taught neither systematically nor professionally to the next generation across society. The de facto relevance of YEE in practice has been neglected (Bartsch, 2019). The reasons for this are manifold, and in Germany, they can be traced back to traditional critical and in some cases also ideological reservations about traditional commercial entrepreneurs (Koch et al., 2021). However, a look at the current and future societal needs and circumstances shows that a modern, socially responsible entrepreneurship can be a key factor in both, in terms of generalized entrepreneurial thinking and acting like outlined above and in terms of modern forms of social and sustainable entrepreneurship. The latter in particular do not solely pursue the goal of maximizing individual profit. They equally endeavor to increase benefits for society. Ecological and social issues understood as a challenge for society as a whole can thus inspire and drive action and be tackled using entrepreneurial instruments. Hence, YEE can take on greater societal significance in terms of its content (Klafki, 2007) and thereby generate both individual and societal educational benefits. Finally, such a YEE can provide a strong basis on which individuals can engage much more actively and constructively with current and future societal challenges. Future discussions on education theory and policy at least draw more attention to YEE, as it is capable of making a central contribution to the development of educated, socially responsible, and proactive individuals.

5 Conclusion

This paper set out to demonstrate that a categorical-educational YEE can be a central element in modern, free, and democratic societies in the medium and long run. With YEE, crucial skills, abilities, and traits that are necessary for autonomous, intrinsic, creative, and innovative participation in periods of increased societal change toward overarching goals can be developed and honed. These skills and traits include the ability to develop and effectively implement solutions and the individual perception and accurate anticipation of future societal needs. YEE can become a key factor in helping the members of our society to become more independent, responsible, proactive, and aware of problems and thus be able to shape our future. Due to its nature, YEE can contribute not only to the desire but also to the ability of every individual to act. Ultimately, it can thus reduce the intention-behavior gap that is particularly striking in the context of the sustainability debate.

All this will continue to play an important role in our society in the future, also because the sustainability transformation is characterized by persistence, complexity, powerfulness, and ubiquity. On the one hand, every individual will be affected by a need for change in the medium to long run and cannot escape the ecological, social, and economic transformation processes. On the other hand, changes in the climate, the environment, and the availability of resources cannot be counteracted by isolated ad-hoc measures by individual ministries or interest groups alone. If natural resources are to be preserved, economic prosperity is to be secured, and social justice is to be aspired, early, comprehensive, and lasting engagement by all members of society is needed. This requires social innovations just as much as traditional entrepreneurial and technological innovations. In accordance with an enlightened humanist view, individuals must be helped and encouraged early on to reflect independently upon the new and highly complex sustainability paradigm and to become a part of the value-based proactive whole.

A YEE focused on the promotion of entrepreneurial thinking and acting must therefore be capable of creating a strong foundation for the active shaping of great transformations both systematically and at an early stage. YEE can be of particular transformational relevance in our society if it supports the development of the enlightened and sovereign personality for valued-adding intersections and synergies will then emerge between transformation competence and traditional educational goals in the school and education system.

Despite all that is discussed above, it must be noted that a YEE as it is proposed here has so far not had a prominent role in educational practice. This is in part because the civil society and education and school system perspective was not given such weight in defining the need for YEE in the past. Nevertheless, as it has been shown, the YEE described here has the potential to holistically support personal development and in doing so meet societal needs and challenges in a system-inherent way. The exploration of YEE presented here may therefore also lead to further discussions about a different, more modern understanding of education in the sense of “Humboldt 2.0.” This discussion is a prerequisite for transferring the theoretical opportunities of YEE into practice and into concrete lessons. Although there are at least some important theoretical insights into EE in schools and their entrepreneurial outcomes (Brüne & Lutz, 2020) and already many successful YEE projects in Germany (Bartsch, 2019; Ivanova et al., 2018), the outlined potential of YEE cannot be used systematically and across the entire social spectrum yet. YEE in a form of Educating through Entrepreneurship would generally only be taught on an optional basis and for a limited period of time in the traditional school system, in which the teaching of knowledge often still dominates. If school systems aim to prepare the next generation for their role in society, they must synergistically consider both tradition and innovation in order to ensure a worldview centered on proactive involvement.