معرفی شاخص‌های اثرگذار بر اکوسیستم تجاريسازي مؤسسات پژوهشی کشاورزی با رویکرد فراترکیب
محورهای موضوعی : انتقال فناوري و تجاريسازي پژوهشعباس خمسه 1 , ودیعه چراغعلی 2 , رضا رادفر 3
1 - گروه مدیریت صنعتی، واحد کرج، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، کرج، ایران.
2 - مدیریت تکنولوژی، واحد علوم تحقیقات ، دانشگاه آزاد، تهران، ایران
3 - استاد گروه مدیریت صنعتی، واحدعلوم تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی،تهران، ایران
کلید واژه: دانش تجاری‌سازی, اکوسیستم, فراترکیب, دستاوردهای پژوهشی, کشاورزی.,
چکیده مقاله :
امروزه یکی از الزامات و مقدم‌ترین سیاست‌ها در سازمان‌های تحقیقاتی آمادگی برای تجاری‌سازی دستاوردهای پژوهشی است. تجاريسازي فعالیتی چند بعدی است که مستلزم نگرشی نظام‌مند می‌باشد که در آن ذي‌نفعان، کارکردها، شرایط محیطی و سایر عوامل تأثیرگذار در فرایند تجاريسازي مورد توجه واقع شوند. مؤسسات تحقیقات کشاورزی هم علاوه بر تولید، انتقال و ترویج دانش رسالت تبدیل و بهره‌برداری از دانش یا همان تجاری‌سازی را بعهده دارند. ولی اغلب درك روشنی از اهمیت و ضرورت تجاريسازي در بین دست‌اندرکاران پژوهش‌هاي کشاورزي وجود ندارد و تاکنون فرایند، ساختار سازمانی و تشکیلاتی و سازوکارهاي اجرایی منسجمی در قالب یک الگوي مقتضی براي تجاريسازي پژوهش‌هاي کشاورزي تعریف نشده است. بر این اساس مقاله فعلی به شناسایی شاخص‌ها و الزامــات مؤثــر بــر اکوسیستم تجاری‌ســازی دستاوردهای پژوهشی کشاورزی می‌پردازد. این پژوهش با مرور نظام‌مند 39 مقاله مرتبط با هدف پژوهش از بین 325 مقاله اولیه انجام شده است. روایی پژوهش بر طبق معیارهای ورود به بررسی برگزاری جلسات با اعضای تیم پژوهش، استفاده از یک متخصص و ممیزی کل فرایند برای اجماع نظری تأیید شد. پایایی نیز از طریق برنامه مهارت‌های ارزیابی انتقادی تأیید گردید. اکوسیستم تجاری‌سازی پژوهش‌های کشاورزی را می‌توان به سه مقوله (تمایل و توان تجاری‌سازی، راهبری تجاری‌سازی و نوآوری و بازاریابی) کلاسه‌بندی نمود. با شناسایی این عوامل می‌توان در بر‌طرف‌نمودن چالش‌های تجاری‌سازی و افزایش نرخ بهره‌برداری از تحقیقات و افزایش بازده اقتصادی استفاده نمود.
Today, one of the requirements and foremost policies in research organizations is preparation for commercialization of research achievements. Commercialization is a multi-dimensional activity that requires a systematic approach in which stakeholders, functions, environmental conditions and other influencing factors in the commercialization process are considered. In addition to producing, transferring and promoting knowledge, agricultural research institutes are responsible for the mission of converting and exploiting knowledge, or commercialization. According to the relatively new approach of universities and domestic research institutes to the commercialization category, in many cases there is no clear understanding of the importance and necessity of commercialization among those engaged in agricultural research, and so far the process, organizational and organizational structure, and coherent executive mechanisms in the form of a model The requirement for the commercialization of agricultural research has not been defined. Based on this, the current article identifies the indicators and requirements affecting the commercialization ecosystem of agricultural research achievements. This research has been conducted through Sandelowski and Barso's metacombination method with a systematic review of 36 articles related to the purpose of the research out of 325 primary articles. The validity of the research was confirmed according to the entry criteria of holding meetings with the members of the research team, using an expert and auditing the entire process for theoretical consensus. Reliability was also confirmed through the critical evaluation skills program. The agricultural research commercialization ecosystem can be classified into three categories (willingness and ability to commercialize, commercialization leadership, and innovation and marketing).
1- حاجی میررحیمی، سیدداود. راهکارهای استقرار و نهادینه‌سازی نظام تجاری‌سازی دستاوردهای فناورانه کشاورزی مورد مطالعه: مراکز تحقیقات و آموزش کشاورزی وزارت جهادکشاورزی. راهبردهای کارآفرینی در کشاورزی. 9 (17): 1-14، 1401.
2- شریفی، مهنوش.، رضوانفر، احمد.، حسینی، سیدمسعود و موحدمحمدي، سید حمید. طراحی الگوي فرآیندي تجاريسازي تحقیقات دانشگاهی در بخش کشاورزي. مجله تحقیقات اقتصاد و توسعه کشاورزي ایران، 48 (2):271-285. 1396.
3- شاه‌آبادي، ابواافضل.، سهرابي‌وفا، حسین و سلماني، يونس. تأثیر انباشت سرمايه تحقيق و توسعه و سرمايه فيزيكي بر رشد اقتصادي: شواهدي از كشورهاي ايران، تركيه و مالزي. فصلنامه علمي پژوهشي پژوهش‌های رشد و توسعه اقتصادي، ٦ (23): 75-90. 1395
4- طیبی ابوالحسنی، سیدامیرحسین. نگرش راهبردی بر عوامل مؤثر بر تجاری‌سازی و ورود به بازار در ایران، مبتني بر رویكرد فراتركيب فصلنامه رهیافت. 3(26). 19-1395.
5- آقاقلی‌زاده‌سار، علیرضا.، قادری رهقی، مجید.، رحیمی، کامران و ایزدیار، مهدی. طراحي و تبيين الگوي راهبردي كاهش ضايعات در زنجيره تأمين با رويكرد پويايي سيستم‌ها. پژوهش‌هاي مديريت راهبردي. 29(88): 181-202. 1402.
6- بندری، رضا.، راهبردهای اجرای طرح‌های توسعه و تجاری‌سازی فناوری در پژوهشگاه صنعت نفت. فصلنامه مدیریت توسعه فناوری. 1(2). 87-110. 1392.
7- رادفر، رضا.، عباس، خمسه و حسام‌الدین مدنی. تجاری‌سازی فناوری عامل مؤثر در توسعه فناوری و اقتصاد. فصلنامه رشد فناوری, 20(5). 33-40. 1388.
8- شریفی، مهنوش.، رضوانفر، احمد.، حسینی، سید. مسعود و موحدمحمدي، سید. حمید. شناسایی و اولویت‌بندی سازوکارهای بدیل تجاری‌سازی تحقیقات دانشگاهی در بخش کشاورزی. مجله تحقیقات اقتصاد و توسعه کشاورزی ایران، 50 (1): 189-200. 1398.
9- حاجی میررحیمی، سیدداوود، مخبر دزفولی، عبداله و تیموری، مهرداد. بررسی و تعیین عوامل و راهبردهاي استقرار و نهادینه‌سازي نظام تجاريسازي دستاوردهاي فناورانه (مورد مطالعه: مراکز تحقیقات و آموزش کشاورزي وزارت جهاد کشاورزي). علوم ترویج و آموزش کشاورزي ایران، 1(15). 1398.
10- یاوری، غلامرضا و عزیزی، وحید. تحلیل موانع و چالش‌های عدم دستیابی به اهداف برنامه‌های توسعه اقتصادی، اجتماعی و فرهنگی جمهوری اسلامی ایران در بخش کشاورزی. مجله پژوهش‌های ترویج و آموزش کشاورزی، 13(2): ۱6-21. 1399.
11- Illiashenko, S., Shypulina, Y., & Illiashenko, N. Management of commercialization of knowledge in the system of innovative development of the enterprise in the conditions of transformation of technological institutions (Doctoral dissertation, Teadmus OÜ, Estonia), 2023.
12- Gómez-Baquero, F. Experimentation in academic technology commercialization. In Intellectual Property Management for Start-ups: Enhancing Value and Leveraging the Potential (pp. 263- 279). Cham: Springer International Publishin, 2023.
13- Jha, S.K., Entrepreneurial ecosystem in India: Taking stock and looking ahead. IIMB management review, 2018. 30(2): p. 179-188.
14- Cho, I., Kwak, Y. H., & Jun, J. Sustainable idea development mechanism in University Technology Commercialization (UTC): Perspectives from dynamic capabilities framework. Sustainability, 11(21), 6156, 2019.
15- Weckowska, D.M., Learning in university technology transfer offices: Transactions-focused and relations-focused approaches to commercialization of academic research. Technovation, 2015. 41: p. 62-74.
16- Zaki, N. A. M., & Hashim, F. M. Effective Process of Commercialization at the Research Institutions in Malaysia. Journal of Advanced Research in Business and Management Studies, 30(1), 45-57, 2023.
17- Zahedi, M. R., & Hosseini Sarkhosh, S. M. Identifying and prioritizing the factors affecting the commercialization of the products of knowledge-based companies in the field of biotechnology using the DANP technique. Quarterly journal of Industrial Technology Development, 2023.
18- Toole, A.A. and D. Czarnitzki, Biomedical academic entrepreneurship through the SBIR program. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 2007. 63(4): p. 716-738.
19- Nambisan, S. and M. Sawhney, A buyer's guide to the innovation bazaar. Harvard Business Review, 2007. 85(6): p. 109.
20- Henttonen, K. and H. Lehtimäki, Open innovation in SMEs: Collaboration modes and strategies for commercialization in technology-intensive companies in forestry industry. European Journal of Innovation Management, 2017. 20(2): p. 329-347.
21- Abdul Razak, A. and P.A. Murray, Innovation strategies for successful commercialisation in public universities. International Journal of Innovation Science, 2017. 9(3): p. 296-314.
22- Sheth, B.P., S.R. Acharya, and S. Sareen, Policy implications for the improvement of technology transfer and commercialization process in the Indian context. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 2019. 10(1): p. 214-233.
23- Mehta, s.S., Commercializing successful biomedical technologies: basic principles for the development of drugs, diagnostics and devices. New york: cambridge university press. 2008.
24- Gibbons, M., Camille Limoges, Helga Nowotney, Simon Schwartzman, Peter Scott, & Martin Trow. 1994., The new production of knowledge: Dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Saga publications. 1994.
25- Cui, Z., S. Kumar PM, and D. Gonçalves, Scoring vs. ranking: An experimental study of idea evaluation processes. Production and Operations Management, 2019. 28(1): p. 176-188.
26- Sharp, B.M., D.N. Iyer, and T.H. Brush, Executive influence on invention and commercialization: The moderating role of innovation radicalness. American Journal of Business, 2017. 32(3-4): p. 134-151.
27- Daneshjoovash, S.K. and M.H. Hosseini, Evaluating impact of entrepreneurship education programs. Education+ Training, 2019. 61(7/8): p. 781-796.
28- Perkmann, M., et al., Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations. Research policy, 2013. 42(2): p. 423-442.
29- Upadhyayula, V.K., et al., Advancing game changing academic research concepts to commercialization: A Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) based sustainability framework for making informed decisions in Technology Valley of Death (TVD). Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 2018. 133: p. 404-416.
30- Belitski, M., A. Aginskaja, and R. Marozau, Commercializing university research in transition economies: Technology transfer offices or direct industrial funding? Research policy, 2019. 48(3): p. 601-615.
31- Lakitan, B., D. Hidayat, and S. Herlinda, Scientific productivity and the collaboration intensity of Indonesian universities and public R&D institutions: Are there dependencies on collaborative R&D with foreign institutions? Technology in Society, 2012. 34(3): p. 227-238.
32- Bikfalvi, A., et al., Technological trampolines for new venture creation in Catalonia: the case of the University of Girona. 2007.
33- Heinecke, S., On the route towards renewal? The Polish Academy of Sciences in post-socialist context. Science and Public Policy, 2018. 45(2): p. 246-256.
34- Cartalos, O., A.N. Svoronos, and E.G. Carayannis, The Evaluation Process of Research Commercialization Proposals and its Links to University Technology Transfer (TT) Strategy: A Case Study. From Agriscience to Agribusiness: Theories, Policies and Practices in Technology Transfer and Commercialization, 2018: p. 277-315.
35- Schaufeld, J., Commercializing Innovation. Turning Technology Breakthroughs into Products. New York: Apress, 2015.
36- Bakhtiar, A., A. Aslani, and S.M. Hosseini, Challenges of diffusion and commercialization of bioenergy in developing countries. Renewable energy, 2020. 145: p. 1780-1798.
37- Muizniece, L., University autonomy and commercialization of publicly funded research: The case of Latvia. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 2021. 12: p. 1494-1516.
38- Al Natsheh, A., et al., Identifying the challenges in commercializing high technology: A case study of quantum key distribution technology. Technology Innovation Management Review, 2015. 5(1).
39- Min, J.-W., Y. Kim, and N.S. Vonortas, Public technology transfer, commercialization and business growth. European Economic Review, 2020. 124: p. 103407.
40- Sandelowski, M., & Barroso, J., Handbook for Synthesizing Qualitative Research. New York. 2007.
41- Checklist, C.Q. and C. How, Critical appraisal skills programme. 2018. URL: https://casp-uk. net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/CASP-Qualitative-Checklist-2018. pdf [accessed 2021-05-04], 2022.
42- Prajogo, D.I. and P.K. Ahmed, Relationships between innovation stimulus, innovation capacity, and innovation performance. R&d Management, 2006. 36(5): p. 499-515.
43- Vanderford, N.L. and E. Marcinkowski, A case study of the impediments to the commercialization of research at the University of Kentucky. F1000Research, 2015. 4.
44- Hamel, G., Competition for competence and interpartner learning within international strategic alliances. Strategic management journal, 1991. 12(S1): p. 83-103.
45- Hedberg, B., How organizations learn and unlearn. In: Nystrom, P.C., Starbucks, W.H. (Eds.), 1981.
46- Nystrom, P.C., Starbuck, W.H., To avoid organizational crises, unlearn. Organizational Dynamics, 1984. 12(4): p. 53–65.
47- Wu, R., Z. Wang, and Q. Shi, Increment of heterogeneous knowledge in enterprise innovation ecosystem: an agent-based simulation framework. Complexity, 2021. 2021: p. 1-16.
48- Asim, Z. and S. Sorooshian, Exploring the role of knowledge, innovation and technology management (KNIT) capabilities that influence research and development. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 2019. 5(2):
p. 21. 49- Cummings, J.L. and B.-S. Teng, Transferring R&D knowledge: the key factors affecting knowledge transfer success. Journal of Engineering and technology management, 2003. 20(1-2): p. 39-68.
50- Liu, H., et al., A system dynamic approach for simulation of a knowledge transfer model of heterogeneous senders in mega project innovation. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 2021. 28(3): p. 681-705.
51- Sun, J., X. Ren, and C.J. Anumba, Analysis of knowledge-transfer mechanisms in construction project cooperation networks. Journal of Management in Engineering, 2019. 35(2): p. 04018061.
52- Xiao, L., S. Xu, and X. Zeng, Design and analysis of knowledge transfer in the process of university-industry collaborative innovation based on social network theory. Journal of Internet Technology, 2018. 19(4): p. 1155-1167.
53- Bacon, E., M.D. Williams, and G.H. Davies, Recipes for success: Conditions for knowledge transfer across open innovation ecosystems. International Journal of Information Management, 2019. 49: p. 377-387.
54- Dwyer, A.L. and A.L. Cummings, Stress, self-efficacy, social support, and coping strategies in university students. Canadian Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy, 2001. 35(3).
55- Choi, K. and S.W. Kim, From R&D to commercialization: A system dynamic approach. Asian Journal on Quality, 2008. 9(3): p. 123-144.
56- Stamboulis, Y.A., E.D. Adamides, and T.E. Malakis. Modeling the Product-Process R&D Dynamics. in Proceedings of the 20th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society. 2002.
57- Hmieleski, K.M. and E.E. Powell, The psychological foundations of university science commercialization: A review of the literature and directions for future research. Academy of Management Perspectives, 2018. 32(1): p. 43-77.
58- Alibekova, G., et al., Determinants of technology commercialization ecosystem for universities in Kazakhstan. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business (JAFEB), 2019. 6(4): p. 271-279.
59- Wei, M., X. Ren, and S. Hao. Simulation of knowledge transfer within the project team. in 2018 8th International Conference on Logistics, Informatics and Service Sciences (LISS). 2018. IEEE.
60- Ekore, J.O., Impact of key organizational factors on knowledge transfer success in multi-national enterprises. Management-Journal of Contemporary Management Issues, 2014. 19(2): p. 3-18.
61- Cohen, W.M. and D.A. Levinthal, Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative science quarterly, 1990: p. 128-152.
62- Lyles, M.A. and J.E. Salk, Knowledge acquisition from foreign parents in international joint ventures: An empirical examination in the Hungarian context. Journal of international business studies, 1996. 27: p. 877-903.
63- Kenzhaliyev, O., et al., Conditions to facilitate commercialization of R & D in case of Kazakhstan. Technology in Society, 2021. 67: p. 101792.
64- Meijer, L., et al., Barriers and drivers for technology commercialization by SMEs in the Dutch sustainable energy sector. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2019. 112: p. 114-126.
65- Entezari, Y., Building knowledge-based entrepreneurship ecosystems: Case of Iran. Procedia-social and behavioral sciences, 2015. 195: p. 1206-1215.
66- Entezari, Y., Modelling the national knowledge ecosystem: Policy implications for Iran. Procedia Computer Science, 2019. 158: p. 826-835.
67- Vlăduţ, G. Innovation ecosystem model for commercialization of research results. in Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence. 2017.
68- Swieringa, J. and A. Wierdsma, Becoming a Learning Organization. 1992.
69- Albino, V., A.C. Garavelli, and G. Schiuma, Knowledge transfer and inter-firm relationships in industrial districts: the role of the leader firm. Technovation, 1998. 19(1): p. 53-63.
70- Kostova, T.T.t.o.s.o.p.A.c.p.A.o.m.r., 24(2), 308-324.
71- Szulanski, G., Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic management journal, 1996. 17(S2): p. 27-43.
72- Zander, U., Kogut, B., Knowledge and the speed of the transfer and imitation of organizational capabilities:an empirical test. . Organisation Science 1995. 6(1): p. 76-92.
73- Winter, S.G., Knowledge and competence as strategic assets. In: Teece, D. (Ed.), The Competitive Challenge.Ballinger Publishing, Cambridge, MA, pp. 159–184, 1987.
74- Jiang, J., Q. Shi, and Y. Yu, System dynamics modeling and simulation of knowledge transfer in industry-university-research cooperation. Inf. Sci., 2014. 32(8): p. 50-55.
75- Kwan, M.M. and P.-K. Cheung, The knowledge transfer process: From field studies to technology development. Journal of Database Management (JDM), 2006. 17(1): p. 16-32.
76- Ju Choi, C. and S.H. Lee, A knowledge-based view of cooperative interorganizational relationships. Cooperative strategies: European perspectives, 1997(2): p. 33.
77- Davenport, T.H. and L. Prusak, Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. 1998: Harvard Business Press.
78- De Wit-de Vries, E., et al., Knowledge transfer in university–industry research partnerships: a review. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 2019. 44: p. 1236-1255.
79- Hlaoittinun, O., Bonjour, E., & Dulmet, M. A team building approach for competency development. In 2007 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (pp. 1004-1008). IEEE. (2007, December).
80- Komarkova, I., Conrads, J., & Collado, A., Entrepreneurship Competence: An Overview of Existing Concepts. Policies and Initiatives. depth case study report. 2015.
81- Kaur, H. and A. Bains, Understanding the concept of entrepreneur competency. Journal of Business Management & Social Sciences Research, 2013. 2(11): p. 31-33.
82- Ibrahim, Z., Abdullah, F., & Ismail, A., International business competence and small and medium enterprises. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2016. 224: p. 393-400.
83- Hajimirrahimi, S.D. and M. Valadan, Factors Influencing the Establishment and Development of a Commercialization System of Research Findings and Determining the Knowledge of Those Involved in the Agricultural Sector of Iran.
International Journal of Agricultural Management and Development (IJAMAD), 2020. 10(2): p. 113-133. 84- Osoro, O., Kirama, S., & Vermeulen, P. Factors affecting engagement and commercialization of innovation activities of firms in Tanzania. Tanzanian Economic Review, 4(1-2), 2017.
85- Brugelman, R.A., A Process Model of Internal Corporate Venturing in the Diversified Major Firm: Administrative Science Quarterly. 1988. 3(4): p. 454.
86- Galbraith, C.S., Transferring core manufacturing technologies in high technology firms. California Management Review, 1990. 32(4): p. 56-70.
87- Bresman, H., Birkinshaw, J.M., Nobel, R., Knowledge transfer in international acquisitions. Journal of International Business Studies 30 (3), 439–462, 1999.
88- Polanyi, M., The Tacit Dimension. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London. 1966.
89- Lippman, S.A. and R.P. Rumelt, Uncertain imitability: An analysis of interfirm differences in efficiency under competition. The bell journal of Economics, 1982: p. 418-438.
90- Davidson, W.H., The location of foreign direct investment activity: country characteristics and the theory of the firm. Journal of International Business Studies 11, 9–22. 1980.
91- Mansfield, E., Romeo, A., Wagner, S., Foreign trade and US research and development. Review of Economics and Statistics 61, 49–57. 1979.
92- Teece, D., Technology transfer by multinational firms: the resource cost of transferring technological know-how. The Economic Journal 87, 242–261., 1997. 87: p. 242-261.
93- Zander, U., Exploiting a technological edge: voluntary and involuntary dissemination of technology. Institute of International Business, Stockholm. 1991.
94- Boehlje, M., Business challenges in commercialization of agricultural technology. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 7 (1030-2016-82667), 91-104., 2004.
95- Amadi-Echendu, J. and R. Rasetlola. Technology commercialization factors, frameworks and models. in First International Technology Management Conference. 2011. IEEE.
96- Umum, K.K.D., W. & Larso, D. Higher Education Institution and Technology Transfer. Agse, pp. 461-474, 2008.
97- Diane, A., “S&T Commercialization of Federal Research Laborites and University Research. Carleton University Eric Sport, School of Business, Canada, 2004.
98- Bashmakov, A., et al., Generic heurorithm of innovation management from generating ideas to commercialization. 2015.
99- Utterback, J.M., & Abernathy, W. J. A dynamic model of process and product innovation. Omega, 3(6), 639-656, 1975.
100- Hwang, A.S., Training strategies in the management of knowledge. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2003. 7(3): p. 92-104.
101- Srivastava, R., & Yadav, S. A research study on the affect of emotional intelligence on the ability to handle the conflict and team building. Splint International Journal of Professionals, 4(5), 86-93, 2017.
102- Illiashenko, S., Knowledge management at industrial enterprises in the context of forming their innovative development strategies. 2020.
103- Goletti, F., Purcell, T., & Smith, D., Concepts of commercialization and agricultural development. Agrifood Consulting International Discussion Paper Series, 8. 2003.
104- Handy, C.U.O., London-UK, Penguin Books Ltd, 4th Edition.
105- Perrin, A., & Rolland, N. Mechanisms of intra-organisational knowledge transfer: the case of a global technology firm. M@ n@ gement, 10(2), 25-47, 2007.
106- Tushman, M.L., Special boundary roles in the innovation process. Administrative Science Quarterly 22, 587–605, 1997.
107- Ashyrov, G., et al., The future of university–industry collaboration: scenario analysis based on case of Estonia. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 2019. 17(4): p. 421-435.
108- Portuguez Castro, M., C. Ross Scheede, and M.G. Gómez Zermeño, The impact of higher education on entrepreneurship and the innovation ecosystem: A case study in Mexico. Sustainability, 2019. 11(20): p. 5597.
109- Faraji F, Rostami F, Naderi N and Khoshkhouy sh. Explaining Sustainable Development Strategies for Agricultural Entrepreneurship Activities in Kermanshah Province, Iran. International Journal of Agricultural Management and Development, 9(3): 213-227, 2019.
