INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and Sustainable SME Growth in Ghana:

The Mediating Role of Innovation Capability

Richard Oteng¹, Albert Armah²

¹Department of Business Management, University of Skills Training and Entrepreneurial Development,

Ghana

²Department of Information Technology, Amaniampong Senior High School, Mampong-Ashanti, Ghana

DOI: https://doi.org/10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2026.150600151

Received: 27 June 2026; Accepted: 02 July 2026; Published: 17 July 2026

ABSTRACT

Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) are foundational to economic development in Sub-Saharan Africa, yet

their sustainable growth potential remains persistently constrained by inadequate ecosystem conditions and

limited innovation capacity. This study investigates how entrepreneurial ecosystems, operationalized through six

dimensions comprising community support, university support, government support, access to finance,

institutional quality, and infrastructure, influence sustainable SME growth in Ghana, with innovation capability

serving as a mediating mechanism and entrepreneurial purpose as a moderating variable. Grounded in Dynamic

Capabilities Theory and the Resource-Based View, a quantitative cross-sectional survey design was employed,

gathering data from 350 SME owners and managers across selected regions of Ghana. Partial Least Squares

Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) was applied for hypothesis testing. Measurement model assessment

confirmed strong construct reliability (Cronbach's α range: 0.80–0.91; composite reliability range: 0.85–0.93),

adequate convergent validity (AVE range: 0.55–0.65), and acceptable discriminant validity, with all Heterotrait-

Monotrait (HTMT) ratios below the 0.85 threshold. The structural model explained 72.4% of variance in

innovation capability (R² = 0.724) and 67.1% of variance in sustainable SME growth (R² = 0.671), with

predictive relevance confirmed (Q² = 0.463 for innovation capability; Q² = 0.407 for sustainable SME growth).

Model fit was acceptable (SRMR = 0.058; NFI = 0.908). The findings confirm that all six ecosystem dimensions

directly and positively influence both innovation capability and sustainable SME growth. Innovation capability

significantly mediates the relationship between the entrepreneurial ecosystem and sustainable SME growth,

while entrepreneurial purpose positively moderates the innovation capability–sustainable growth nexus. This

study extends entrepreneurial ecosystem literature to the Sub-Saharan African context and provides actionable

insights for policymakers, university administrators, and SME practitioners seeking to foster innovation-driven

sustainable growth in developing economies.

Keywords: Entrepreneurial Ecosystem, Innovation Capability, Sustainable SME Growth, Community Support,

University Support, Government Support, Access to Finance, Institutional Quality, Infrastructure,

Entrepreneurial Purpose, Ghana

INTRODUCTION

Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) occupy a central position in Ghana's economic architecture. They

constitute approximately 92% of all registered businesses in the country and contribute significantly to

employment generation, poverty alleviation, and gross domestic product (Ghana Statistical Service, 2022).

Despite their numerical dominance and developmental significance, Ghanaian SMEs continue to face deep-

rooted challenges including limited access to finance, weak institutional linkages, inadequate technological

infrastructure, and low innovation activity, all of which undermine their capacity for sustainable long-term

growth (World Bank, 2022; OECD, 2021).

Page 2099

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

In the face of these challenges, the concept of the entrepreneurial ecosystem has emerged as a compelling

framework for understanding how environmental and institutional conditions shape entrepreneurial

performance. An entrepreneurial ecosystem is broadly defined as a set of interdependent actors and structural

factors that are coordinated in such a way as to enable productive entrepreneurship within a particular territorial

context (Stam & van de Ven, 2021). Unlike firm-level analyses, the ecosystem perspective recognizes that

entrepreneurial success is inherently relational and systemic, shaped not only by the capabilities of individual

entrepreneurs and their firms, but also by the richness of the external environment in which they operate. This

richness encompasses multiple interlocking dimensions, including community social capital, university

knowledge transfer, government policy and regulatory support, access to financial resources, institutional quality,

and the adequacy of physical and digital infrastructure (Isenberg, 2011; Stam & van de Ven, 2021; Wurth, Stam

& Spigel, 2022).

While the entrepreneurial ecosystem framework has generated substantial scholarly interest over the past decade,

the bulk of empirical work has focused on high-income, knowledge-intensive contexts such as Silicon Valley,

London, and Tel Aviv (Wurth et al., 2022). Research examining how ecosystem dynamics operate in developing

country settings, where institutional frameworks are weaker, market failures more prevalent, and resource

environments more constrained, remains comparatively underdeveloped (Audretsch & Belitski, 2022; Spigel,

2022). Ghana, as one of West Africa's most economically dynamic nations, offers a particularly valuable context

for such investigation. The country has made notable strides in building entrepreneurship support infrastructure

through university business incubators, government SME development programs, and growing university-

industry collaborations, yet the extent to which these ecosystem investments translate into innovation capacity

and sustainable SME growth remains poorly understood (Acheampong & Tweneboah-Koduah, 2021).

A critical but underexplored question in this literature concerns the mechanism through which ecosystem

resources generate firm-level performance outcomes. Innovation capability, defined as a firm's ability to

continuously develop and renew products, services, processes, and organizational arrangements in response to

changing market demands, has been theorized as a central mediating mechanism linking ecosystem inputs to

performance outputs (Teece, 2022; Guerrero & Urbano, 2021). However, empirical evidence for this mediation

pathway, particularly in the African context, is sparse. Furthermore, the boundary conditions under which

innovation capability translates into sustainable growth outcomes have received limited investigation.

Entrepreneurial purpose, the motivational orientation, values, and broader goals that guide an entrepreneur's

actions, has been proposed as one such boundary condition, given that purpose-driven entrepreneurs tend to

channel their innovation efforts toward solutions that create long-term, multidimensional value (Bacq & Janssen,

2021). Nevertheless, this moderating dynamic has not been rigorously tested in the Ghanaian SME context.

This study therefore pursues three specific objectives: first, to assess the effects of six entrepreneurial ecosystem

dimensions, community support, university support, government support, access to finance, institutional quality,

and infrastructure, on innovation capability and sustainable SME growth in Ghana; second, to examine the

mediating role of innovation capability in the relationship between the entrepreneurial ecosystem and sustainable

SME growth; and third, to evaluate the moderating role of entrepreneurial purpose in the relationship between

innovation capability and sustainable SME growth.

The study makes several important contributions. Theoretically, it enriches the entrepreneurial ecosystem

literature by providing empirical evidence from a Sub-Saharan African context with a comprehensive, multi-

dimensional ecosystem operationalization, extends Dynamic Capabilities Theory by modeling innovation

capability as the linking mechanism between ecosystem inputs and growth outcomes, and advances the

understanding of purpose-driven entrepreneurship as a boundary condition in the innovation–performance

relationship. Practically, the findings generate actionable guidance for policymakers, university administrators,

and SME practitioners in Ghana and comparable developing economy contexts.

The remainder of this article proceeds as follows. Section 2 presents the theoretical framework underpinning the

study. Section 3 develops literature review and hypotheses. Section 4 describes the conceptual framework.

Section 5 outlines the research methodology. Section 6 presents and discusses the findings. Section 7 draws

conclusions, discusses implications, and identifies limitations and future research directions.

Page 2100

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Dynamic Capabilities Theory

Dynamic Capabilities Theory (DCT), as formalized by Teece, Pisano and Shuen (1997) and substantially

extended by Teece (2022), provides the primary theoretical architecture for this study. DCT holds that sustainable

competitive advantage in rapidly changing environments is grounded not in static resource stocks but in a firm's

capacity to sense opportunities and threats, seize strategic opportunities, and reconfigure existing asset bases and

organizational routines in response to environmental changes. Within this framework, innovation capability

represents the most prominent and consequential dynamic capability in the SME context, enabling firms to

continuously renew their products, processes, and business models in alignment with evolving market demands

(Teece, 2022).

Critically for the present study, DCT does not treat dynamic capabilities as purely internally generated

phenomena. Rather, Teece (2022) and subsequent scholars have emphasized that dynamic capability

development is substantially shaped by the richness of the external knowledge and resource environment in

which the firm operates. Ecosystem elements, including university knowledge transfer, community relational

networks, government support infrastructure, financial market development, institutional quality, and physical

infrastructure, constitute the environmental inputs that provide the raw material for capability building. Without

adequate ecosystem support, dynamic capabilities may remain underdeveloped regardless of entrepreneurial

intent (Stam & van de Ven, 2021). This theoretical logic provides the primary justification for treating innovation

capability as the mediating mechanism through which ecosystem inputs generate sustainable growth outcomes.

Resource-Based View

The Resource-Based View (RBV), initially formulated by Barney (1991) and updated by Barney (2021),

provides a complementary theoretical lens by explaining how external ecosystem resources are internalized as

firm-level capabilities that generate sustainable competitive advantage. The RBV holds that competitive

advantage accrues to firms that possess resources and capabilities that are valuable, rare, inimitable, and non-

substitutable. In the developing economy context examined in this study, entrepreneurial ecosystem elements,

including community social capital, university knowledge, government advisory support, financial resources,

institutional frameworks, and infrastructural endowments, constitute the external resource environment from

which SMEs draw to build their innovation capabilities. The RBV thus explains the micro-level process through

which ecosystem resources are absorbed and transformed into firm-level capabilities that underpin sustainable

performance (Barney, 2021).

Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Theory

Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Theory, synthesized by Stam and van de Ven (2021) and advanced by Wurth et al.

(2022), provides the contextual theoretical framework for understanding the role of the external environment in

shaping entrepreneurial outcomes.

The theory conceptualizes the entrepreneurial ecosystem as a set of interdependent actors and structural

elements, encompassing formal institutions, networks, talent, finance, leadership, and culture, that together

create the conditions for productive entrepreneurial activity in a given territorial context. Importantly, ecosystem

theory emphasizes that individual ecosystem elements do not operate in isolation but generate outcomes through

their systemic interdependence.

The present study operationalizes this systemic perspective by treating community support, university support,

government support, access to finance, institutional quality, and infrastructure as six interconnected dimensions

of a comprehensive entrepreneurial ecosystem construct. This expanded operationalization responds to calls for

more comprehensive and contextually grounded ecosystem measurement in developing economy research

(Audretsch & Belitski, 2022; Spigel, 2022).

Page 2101

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT

Entrepreneurial Ecosystems in Developing Economies

The entrepreneurial ecosystem concept has undergone considerable conceptual refinement since Isenberg's

(2011) seminal formulation. Stam and van de Ven (2021) provide a rigorous delineation of ecosystem elements

encompassing networks, leadership, finance, talent, formal institutions, and culture, and distinguish between

ecosystem inputs and the systemic outputs they generate. Wurth et al. (2022) build on this by proposing a

comprehensive research agenda for the field, emphasizing the need for greater process-oriented and mechanism-

focused investigation of how ecosystem elements generate entrepreneurial outcomes.

In developing economies, entrepreneurial ecosystems exhibit distinctive structural characteristics that

differentiate them from their counterparts in high-income contexts. These include weaker formal institutional

environments, less developed financial markets, greater reliance on informal community networks, a more

prominent role for public universities in knowledge creation and technology transfer, and significant

infrastructure deficits (Audretsch & Belitski, 2022; World Bank, 2022). In Ghana specifically, the entrepreneurial

ecosystem has evolved notably over the past decade, with the establishment of government-backed SME support

programs, growing university incubation centers, increasingly active trade associations and chambers of

commerce, and expanding digital infrastructure (Acheampong & Tweneboah-Koduah, 2021; Ghana Statistical

Service, 2022). Despite these developments, the literature examining how these ecosystem features influence

innovation and sustainable growth among Ghanaian SMEs remains limited and tends to under-specify the range

of relevant ecosystem dimensions.

Community Support and Sustainable SME Growth

Community support refers to the informal and formal social resources available to entrepreneurs within their

local communities, including social networks, informal finance mechanisms, mentorship relationships,

collective market access, and community-generated trust (Roundy & Bayer, 2022). In Ghana and other sub-

Saharan African contexts, community-based support systems, including susu (rotating savings and credit)

groups, trade associations, family business networks, and communal mentoring, play a foundational role in

sustaining entrepreneurial activity, particularly in the absence of well-developed formal market institutions

(Boateng & Agyei-Frempong, 2021).

The literature consistently demonstrates that community support positively influences SME performance by

reducing transaction costs, improving information access, and providing social capital that substitutes for formal

institutional resources (Stam & van de Ven, 2021; Roundy & Bayer, 2022). In the context of sustainable SME

growth, community support enables firms to build long-term market relationships, access community-level

resources, and align their operations with local development aspirations, all of which contribute to economic,

social, and environmental dimensions of sustainability (Boateng & Agyei-Frempong, 2021). This leads to the

following hypothesis:

H1a: Community support has a direct and positive effect on sustainable SME growth.

University Support and Sustainable SME Growth

University support encompasses the mechanisms through which higher education institutions facilitate

entrepreneurial activity and firm performance, including knowledge and technology transfer, business incubation

services, research collaboration, graduate employment and skills pipelines, and policy advocacy for the SME

sector (Guerrero & Urbano, 2021). The concept of the entrepreneurial university has gained considerable traction

in the ecosystem literature, recognizing universities as active participants in the broader innovation system rather

than passive producers of graduates and research publications (Audretsch & Belitski, 2022).

In Ghana, a growing number of universities have adopted explicitly entrepreneurial orientations, establishing

technology transfer offices, business incubation centers, and structured industry linkage programs designed to

Page 2102

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

channel university knowledge and talent into the broader economy. These initiatives expose SMEs to new

technical knowledge, qualified human capital, and collaborative research opportunities, all of which support

growth (Acheampong & Tweneboah-Koduah, 2021). Empirical evidence from comparable sub-Saharan African

contexts confirms a positive association between university support and SME performance, particularly through

knowledge spillover and human capital development pathways (Guerrero & Urbano, 2021). Accordingly, the

following hypothesis is proposed:

H1b: University support has a direct and positive effect on sustainable SME growth.

Government Support and Sustainable SME Growth

Government support refers to the formal policy and regulatory environment, publicly funded programs, and

institutional instruments through which the state facilitates SME development. These include SME-specific tax

incentives, subsidized credit guarantee schemes, export promotion programs, business development services,

regulatory simplification initiatives, and public procurement preferences (OECD, 2021; World Bank, 2022). In

developing economies, government support is particularly critical given the structural weaknesses of private

sector markets, and government action frequently fills institutional voids that constrain entrepreneurial activity

(Audretsch & Belitski, 2022).

In Ghana, the government has established several SME support frameworks, including the National Board for

Small Scale Industries (NBSSI), the Ghana Enterprises Agency, and government-backed credit guarantee

schemes. Empirical studies in comparable contexts confirm that favorable government policies, regulatory

frameworks, and direct support programs positively influence SME performance and growth outcomes (World

Bank, 2022; OECD, 2021). Government support reduces compliance burdens, improves market access, and

signals institutional legitimacy to broader stakeholders, all of which facilitate sustainable SME growth. The

following hypothesis is therefore proposed:

H1c: Government support has a direct and positive effect on sustainable SME growth.

Access to Finance and Sustainable SME Growth

Access to finance represents one of the most consistently identified constraints on SME performance in

developing economies (World Bank, 2022). Finance access encompasses the availability and affordability of

formal bank credit, microfinance and alternative lending products, equity financing, trade credit, and

government-backed loan guarantee instruments (Beck & Demirguc-Kunt, 2006; OECD, 2021). Financial

resources enable SMEs to invest in productive capacity, acquire technology, hire skilled employees, and expand

market reach, all prerequisites for sustainable growth (World Bank, 2022).

In the Ghanaian context, access to finance has been persistently identified as a binding constraint on SME

growth, with many firms relying on internal cash flows and informal community finance mechanisms due to the

difficulty of accessing formal bank credit (Ghana Statistical Service, 2022; Boateng & Agyei-Frempong, 2021).

Despite ongoing financial sector development, gaps in SME credit markets, high collateral requirements, and

information asymmetries continue to limit the financial ecosystem available to SMEs. Cross-country evidence

consistently confirms a positive association between financial ecosystem development and SME growth

outcomes (World Bank, 2022; OECD, 2021). Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H1d: Access to finance has a direct and positive effect on sustainable SME growth.

Institutional Quality and Sustainable SME Growth

Institutional quality refers to the strength, reliability, and effectiveness of the formal rules, norms, and

enforcement mechanisms that govern economic activity, encompassing property rights protection, contract

enforcement, rule of law, regulatory efficiency, and anti-corruption standards (North, 1990; World Bank, 2022).

High institutional quality reduces uncertainty, lowers transaction costs, promotes investment confidence, and

Page 2103

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

creates the stable regulatory environment necessary for long-term entrepreneurial commitment (Audretsch &

Belitski, 2022).

In sub-Saharan African economies including Ghana, institutional quality has been identified as a key ecosystem

condition that shapes the entrepreneurial environment. Weak contract enforcement, inadequate intellectual

property protection, and bureaucratic inefficiencies increase the cost and risk of entrepreneurial activity, while

strong institutions facilitate market coordination, encourage investment, and support sustainable business

development (World Bank, 2022). Empirical research across developing economies confirms a positive

relationship between institutional quality and SME performance and growth (Audretsch & Belitski, 2022). The

following hypothesis is therefore proposed:

H1e: Institutional quality has a direct and positive effect on sustainable SME growth.

Infrastructure and Sustainable SME Growth

Infrastructure encompasses the physical and digital systems that enable economic activity, including

transportation networks, energy supply, telecommunications, information and communication technology (ICT)

systems, and logistics facilities (World Bank, 2022). Adequate infrastructure reduces operational costs, improves

connectivity to markets, enables access to digital technologies, and supports the logistical requirements of

growing businesses (OECD, 2021).

In Ghana, infrastructure deficits, including energy unreliability, inadequate road networks in peri-urban areas,

and uneven access to high-speed digital connectivity, represent significant constraints on SME growth,

particularly outside the Greater Accra and Ashanti regions (Ghana Statistical Service, 2022). The literature

consistently documents the positive effects of infrastructure development on firm performance and growth in

developing economies (World Bank, 2022). Digital infrastructure in particular has emerged as an increasingly

important enabler of SME growth, facilitating access to digital markets, cloud-based services, and online

networks (Nambisan & Baron, 2021). The following hypothesis is accordingly proposed:

H1f: Infrastructure has a direct and positive effect on sustainable SME growth.

Community Support and Innovation Capability

Innovation capability is understood as a multi-dimensional organizational construct encompassing a firm's

capacity for product innovation, process innovation, marketing innovation, and organizational innovation (Yam,

Lo, Tang & Lau, 2020). The development of innovation capability is not an isolated internal process but is deeply

embedded in the relational and knowledge-sharing environment in which the firm operates (Nambisan & Baron,

2021). Community support fosters innovation capability by providing SMEs with access to tacit knowledge

embedded in local networks, exposure to diverse problem-solving approaches, and the relational trust necessary

for collaborative innovation activities.

In Ghana, where formal R&D infrastructure is limited, community-based innovation networks and informal

knowledge exchange arrangements often serve as important alternative channels for innovation knowledge

(Boateng & Agyei-Frempong, 2021). Local trade associations and community business networks facilitate the

sharing of market intelligence, technical know-how, and problem-solving experience among member firms, all

of which enrich SMEs' innovation capability over time (Stam & van de Ven, 2021; Roundy & Bayer, 2022). The

following hypothesis is therefore proposed:

H2a: Community support has a direct and positive effect on innovation capability.

University Support and Innovation Capability

The relationship between university support and firm innovation capability is well-established in the

management and entrepreneurship literature. Universities are primary generators of codified scientific

knowledge, emerging technologies, and the human capital that feeds the innovation process, and through

Page 2104

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

mechanisms such as technology licensing, collaborative research, spin-off creation, and graduate talent pipelines,

they transfer these resources to SMEs that would otherwise lack the capacity to generate innovations

independently (Guerrero & Urbano, 2021; Audretsch & Belitski, 2022).

For Ghanaian SMEs, university partnerships represent a particularly critical source of innovation capability. In

a context where private sector R&D investment is minimal and most SMEs lack dedicated innovation

departments, the knowledge spillovers generated by university collaborations can make a decisive difference in

a firm's ability to innovate (Acheampong & Tweneboah-Koduah, 2021). Comparative evidence from other

developing economy contexts confirms that university support significantly and positively influences SME

innovation capability (Guerrero & Urbano, 2021; Nambisan & Baron, 2021). The following hypothesis is

accordingly proposed:

H2b: University support has a direct and positive effect on innovation capability.

Government Support and Innovation Capability

Government support contributes to SME innovation capability through multiple channels. Public R&D subsidies,

tax credits for innovation investment, national innovation programs, and government-sponsored technology

adoption initiatives directly reduce the cost and risk of innovation activity for SMEs (OECD, 2021). Regulatory

frameworks that promote technology adoption, digital transformation, and knowledge-intensive business

practices similarly create an enabling environment for innovation capability development (World Bank, 2022).

In Ghana, government-led initiatives such as national digitalization programs and SME-focused technology

support services have the potential to meaningfully increase firm-level innovation capability. Empirical evidence

from developing economies confirms that government support for innovation is positively associated with SME

innovation outcomes (Audretsch & Belitski, 2022). Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H2c: Government support has a direct and positive effect on innovation capability.

Access to Finance and Innovation Capability

Financial resources are a foundational prerequisite for innovation capability development, enabling SMEs to

invest in new technologies, hire skilled innovation talent, acquire external knowledge, and prototype and test

new products and processes (World Bank, 2022; Yam et al., 2020). The innovation investment-finance nexus is

particularly pronounced for SMEs in developing economies, where internal cash flows are limited and external

financing constraints restrict firms' ability to fund innovation activities (OECD, 2021). In the Ghanaian context,

limited access to affordable credit represents one of the most significant barriers to innovation among SMEs,

with financially constrained firms unable to invest in the capabilities necessary to generate sustainable

competitive advantage (Ghana Statistical Service, 2022). The following hypothesis is therefore proposed:

H2d: Access to finance has a direct and positive effect on innovation capability.

Institutional Quality and Innovation Capability

Strong institutional environments support innovation capability development by protecting intellectual property,

enforcing innovation-related contracts, reducing the regulatory burden on new product development, and

creating stable policy frameworks that encourage long-term innovation investment (North, 1990; Audretsch &

Belitski, 2022). Conversely, weak institutions, including inadequate intellectual property protection, corruption,

and bureaucratic inefficiency, increase the appropriability risks associated with innovation and reduce the

expected returns on innovation investment, thereby discouraging capability development (World Bank, 2022).

In developing economies such as Ghana, institutional strengthening has therefore been identified as an important

lever for promoting private sector innovation activity (Audretsch & Belitski, 2022). The following hypothesis is

proposed:

Page 2105

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

H2e: Institutional quality has a direct and positive effect on innovation capability.

Infrastructure and Innovation Capability

Adequate infrastructure, particularly digital and ICT infrastructure, is an increasingly critical enabler of firm-

level innovation capability in the twenty-first century economy. Digital connectivity enables SMEs to access

global knowledge networks, adopt cloud-based innovation tools, engage with digital market platforms, and

leverage data analytics for product and process development (Nambisan & Baron, 2021). Physical infrastructure

supports the logistical and operational reliability necessary for sustained innovation activity (World Bank, 2022).

In Ghana, where digital infrastructure coverage has expanded significantly but remains uneven, firms with better

access to digital infrastructure demonstrate higher rates of technology adoption and innovation activity (Ghana

Statistical Service, 2022). The following hypothesis is accordingly proposed:

H2f: Infrastructure has a direct and positive effect on innovation capability.

Innovation Capability and Sustainable SME Growth

Sustainable SME growth, as conceptualized in this study, refers to the capacity of SMEs to achieve continuous,

long-term performance improvement across economic, social, and environmental dimensions, consistent with

the triple bottom line framework and its extensions in the sustainability entrepreneurship literature (Dyllick &

Muff, 2020; United Nations, 2023). This holistic conceptualization acknowledges that SME growth in the

twenty-first century cannot be evaluated purely in financial terms; it must also encompass the creation of social

value for employees, communities, and other stakeholders, as well as responsible stewardship of natural

resources.

Innovation capability is theorized as a central driver of sustainable SME growth because it enables firms to

differentiate their offerings, access new markets, improve operational efficiency, and develop business models

that integrate social and environmental considerations (Teece, 2022; Guerrero & Urbano, 2021). A robust body

of empirical evidence confirms that firms with higher innovation capability demonstrate superior performance

outcomes, including revenue growth, employment expansion, enhanced market share, and greater resilience to

market shocks (Yam et al., 2020; Acquah, Agyabeng-Mensah & Afum, 2021). In developing country contexts,

innovation capability has been particularly emphasized as a mechanism through which SMEs can overcome

resource constraints and institutional voids to build sustainable competitive positions (Audretsch & Belitski,

2022). The following hypothesis is proposed:

H3: Innovation capability has a direct and positive effect on sustainable SME growth.

The Mediating Role of Innovation Capability

Drawing on the hypotheses developed in preceding sections, this study argues that innovation capability mediates

the relationship between the entrepreneurial ecosystem, encompassing all six dimensions, and sustainable SME

growth. This mediation proposition is anchored in the logic of Dynamic Capabilities Theory, which holds that

ecosystem resources only translate into performance outcomes through the development and activation of

dynamic capabilities, of which innovation capability is the most prominent in the SME context (Teece, 2022).

Community support, university support, government support, access to finance, institutional quality, and

infrastructure collectively equip SMEs with the knowledge, resources, and enabling conditions necessary to

build and exercise innovation capabilities; innovation capability, in turn, enables SMEs to convert these inputs

into sustainable growth outcomes. Without the mediating mechanism of innovation capability, ecosystem

resources may remain latent or fail to produce meaningful performance improvements at the firm level (Stam &

van de Ven, 2021; Wurth et al., 2022). This argument aligns with calls in the ecosystem literature for more

rigorous investigation of the output mechanisms through which ecosystem inputs generate entrepreneurial

outcomes (Spigel, 2022). Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:

Page 2106

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

H4: Innovation capability mediates the relationship between the entrepreneurial ecosystem (community

support, university support, government support, access to finance, institutional quality, and

infrastructure) and sustainable SME growth.

The Moderating Role of Entrepreneurial Purpose

Entrepreneurial purpose refers to the underlying motivational orientation, values, and long-term goals that drive

entrepreneurial behavior beyond the pursuit of immediate financial returns (Bacq & Janssen, 2021). Purpose-

driven entrepreneurs are characterized by a commitment to creating meaningful and lasting value for their

stakeholders, a long-term orientation in their strategic decision-making, and a willingness to invest in innovation

and sustainability even when short-term pressures might discourage such investment.

The moderating role of entrepreneurial purpose in the innovation capability–sustainable growth relationship is

theorized on the basis that purpose shapes the direction and intensity with which entrepreneurs deploy their

innovation capabilities. Purpose-driven entrepreneurs are more likely to channel innovation efforts toward the

creation of durable, multidimensional value encompassing economic, social, and environmental outcomes, rather

than toward short-term profit maximization (Bacq & Janssen, 2021; United Nations, 2023). Consequently, high

levels of entrepreneurial purpose are expected to amplify the positive effect of innovation capability on

sustainable SME growth, while lower levels of purpose may attenuate this relationship. The following hypothesis

is therefore proposed:

H5: Entrepreneurial purpose positively moderates the relationship between innovation capability and

sustainable SME growth, such that the positive effect of innovation capability on sustainable SME growth

is stronger for entrepreneurs with higher levels of entrepreneurial purpose.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

The conceptual framework (Figure 1) depicts the proposed theoretical relationships among the study's key

constructs. The entrepreneurial ecosystem, operationalized through six dimensions, community support,

university support, government support, access to finance, institutional quality, and infrastructure, constitutes

the independent variable. Innovation capability functions as the mediating variable through which ecosystem

support influences sustainable SME growth. Entrepreneurial purpose is positioned as a moderating variable that

shapes the strength of the innovation capability–sustainable SME growth relationship. The framework integrates

direct effects (H1a–H1f, H3), direct effects on the mediator (H2a–H2f), indirect mediated effects (H4), and the

conditional moderating effect (H5).

Figure 1: Conceptual Framework

Page 2107

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

The framework reflects the study's integrated theoretical grounding in Dynamic Capabilities Theory (explaining

the ecosystem–innovation–growth chain), the Resource-Based View (explaining how external ecosystem

resources are internalized as firm-level capabilities), and Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Theory (contextualizing the

role of the six ecosystem elements). The inclusion of entrepreneurial purpose as a moderator acknowledges that

individual-level motivational factors constitute important boundary conditions in the innovation–performance

relationship.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Design

This study adopts a quantitative research design, underpinned by a positivist philosophical orientation.

Positivism is consistent with the study's objective of testing theoretically derived hypotheses about relationships

among objectively measurable constructs (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, 2023). A cross-sectional survey

approach was employed, which is widely accepted in the SME and entrepreneurship literature and is appropriate

for simultaneously examining multiple constructs and their interrelationships within a defined timeframe (Hair,

Sarstedt, Ringle & Gudergan, 2022).

Population and Sample

The target population comprised owners and managers of SMEs operating in Ghana, defined in accordance with

the National Board for Small Scale Industries (NBSSI) classification as businesses employing between 1 and 99

persons (Ghana Statistical Service, 2022). A multi-stage stratified random sampling technique was employed to

ensure representativeness across geographical regions, industrial sectors, and firm size categories. Sampling was

conducted across the Greater Accra, Ashanti, Western, and Northern regions of Ghana, selected to capture both

urban and peri-urban entrepreneurial environments and to represent the geographical diversity of Ghana's SME

sector.

Following the minimum sample size guidelines for PLS-SEM recommended by Hair et al. (2022), which apply

both the ten-times rule and statistical power analysis, a minimum of 310 valid observations was determined to

be necessary. To account for anticipated non-responses and incomplete questionnaires, 430 questionnaires were

distributed in total. Atotal of 380 questionnaires were returned, yielding a raw response rate of 88.4%. Following

data cleaning and removal of incomplete or inconsistently answered responses, a final analytical sample of 350

valid responses was retained, representing an effective response rate of 81.4%, considered adequate for the

study's analytical requirements (Hair et al., 2022).

Measurement Instrument

Data were collected using a structured self-administered questionnaire comprising two sections. Section A

captured respondent and firm-level demographic information, including gender, age, educational background,

firm age, industry sector, and number of employees. Section B measured the study's nine key constructs,

community support, university support, government support, access to finance, institutional quality,

infrastructure, innovation capability, sustainable SME growth, and entrepreneurial purpose, using multi-item

reflective scales adapted from validated instruments in the existing literature.

Community support was measured using a five-item scale adapted from Roundy and Bayer (2022) and Stam and

van de Ven (2021), capturing dimensions of local network strength, informal finance access, mentorship

availability, and community trust. University support was measured using a six-item scale adapted from Guerrero

and Urbano (2021), covering dimensions of knowledge transfer, research collaboration, incubation support, and

graduate talent availability. Government support was measured using a five-item scale adapted from OECD

(2021) and World Bank (2022), capturing policy favorability, regulatory environment, and SME program

effectiveness. Access to finance was measured using a five-item scale adapted from World Bank (2022) and

Beck and Demirguc-Kunt (2006), capturing formal credit availability, microfinance access, and working capital

adequacy. Institutional quality was measured using a four-item scale adapted from North (1990) and Audretsch

Page 2108

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

and Belitski (2022), capturing property rights protection, contract enforcement, rule of law, and regulatory

quality. Infrastructure was measured using a four-item scale adapted from World Bank (2022) and Nambisan and

Baron (2021), capturing physical infrastructure reliability, digital/ICT access, energy availability, and

telecommunications quality. Innovation capability was measured using a seven-item scale adapted from Yam et

al. (2020), capturing product innovation, process innovation, and organizational innovation capabilities.

Sustainable SME growth was measured using a six-item scale adapted from Acquah et al. (2021) and Dyllick

and Muff (2020), encompassing economic performance, social value creation, and environmental responsibility.

Entrepreneurial purpose was measured using a five-item scale adapted from Bacq and Janssen (2021), capturing

mission orientation, stakeholder value commitment, and long-term impact focus. All items were rated on a five-

point Likert scale anchored by 1 (Strongly Disagree) and 5 (Strongly Agree). A complete listing of all construct

indicators, their sources, and item descriptions is presented .

Content validity was established through review of the instrument by five academic experts in entrepreneurship

and SME management, who assessed item clarity, relevance, and comprehensiveness and recommended minor

revisions prior to full data collection. A pilot test was conducted with 35 SME respondents outside the main

sample. Cronbach's alpha values from the pilot study ranged from 0.77 (infrastructure) to 0.89 (innovation

capability), indicating acceptable initial reliability for all constructs. Harman's single-factor test was applied to

assess common method bias; a single factor accounted for 28.3% of the total variance, well below the 50%

threshold, suggesting that common method bias was not a serious concern. A marker variable technique was

additionally employed to further evaluate this potential threat to validity.

Data Analysis

Data were analyzed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), implemented via

SmartPLS 4.0 software (Ringle, Wende & Becker, 2022). PLS-SEM was selected for several reasons: its

suitability for prediction-oriented research, its robustness with non-normal data distributions, its appropriateness

for models involving both mediation and moderation, and its capacity to handle complex models with relatively

modest sample sizes (Hair et al., 2022). Analysis proceeded in two sequential stages. First, the measurement

model was assessed to evaluate the reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity of all constructs.

Second, the structural model was evaluated to test the hypothesized direct, mediating, and moderating

relationships.

Construct reliability was assessed through Cronbach's alpha and composite reliability (CR), with a threshold of

0.70 considered the minimum acceptable level (Hair et al., 2022). Convergent validity was evaluated through

Average Variance Extracted (AVE) values, with a threshold of 0.50 required (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).

Discriminant validity was assessed using the Heterotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) ratio, with values below 0.85

indicating adequate discriminant validity. Model fit was evaluated using the Standardized Root Mean Square

Residual (SRMR) and Normed Fit Index (NFI), with SRMR < 0.08 and NFI > 0.90 considered indicative of

acceptable fit (Ringle et al., 2022). Effect sizes were calculated using Cohen's f² statistic (small: 0.02–0.15;

medium: 0.15–0.35; large: ≥ 0.35). Predictive relevance was assessed through cross-validated redundancy (Q²)

using the blindfolding procedure with an omission distance of 7, with Q² > 0 confirming that the model has

predictive relevance beyond trivial levels (Hair et al., 2022). The indirect (mediation) effects of all six ecosystem

dimensions on sustainable SME growth through innovation capability were assessed using a bootstrapping

procedure with 5,000 re-samples, generating bias-corrected 95% confidence intervals. The moderating effect of

entrepreneurial purpose was tested using a product-indicator interaction approach within the PLS-SEM

framework, following the orthogonalization procedure recommended by Ringle et al. (2022).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Descriptive Statistics and Respondent Profile

The final analytical sample of 350 respondents comprised 58.3% male and 41.7% female SME owners and

managers, reflecting the slight male predominance characteristic of formal SME ownership in Ghana (Ghana

Statistical Service, 2022). In terms of educational background, 44.3% held a tertiary degree or higher, 36.0% had

Page 2109

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

completed senior high school education, and the remaining 19.7% held other educational qualifications. With

respect to firm age, 39.1% of SMEs were between 1 and 5 years old, 35.7% were between 6 and 10 years old,

and 25.1% had been in operation for more than 10 years. The trade, manufacturing, and service sectors were the

most represented in the sample, accounting for 34.9%, 29.4%, and 27.1% of respondents respectively. These

demographic characteristics align closely with the composition of the Ghanaian SME population documented

by the Ghana Statistical Service (2022), providing some assurance of the representativeness of the sample.

Measurement Model Assessment

The measurement model demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties for all nine constructs. Cronbach's

alpha values ranged from 0.80 to 0.91, and composite reliability (CR) values ranged from 0.85 to 0.93, all

exceeding the minimum acceptable threshold of 0.70. Average Variance Extracted (AVE) values ranged from

0.55 to 0.65, all surpassing the 0.50 convergent validity threshold (Fornell & Larcker, 1981), confirming that the

items within each construct share more variance with their underlying construct than with measurement error.

HTMT ratios for all construct pairs were below 0.85, confirming adequate discriminant validity (Hair et al.,

2022). Individual item loadings ranged from 0.68 to 0.89 and were all statistically significant at p < 0.001. The

complete measurement model results, including all construct indicators, item loadings, and reliability and

validity statistics, are presented in Table 1. The discriminant validity matrix (HTMT ratios) is presented in Table

2. These measurement model results provide a sound and reliable foundation for subsequent structural model

analysis.

Table 1: Measurement Model Results, Construct Indicators, Factor Loadings, Reliability, and Validity

Construct / Item

Community Support (CS)

CS1

Item Description

Loading

Cronbach's α

0.82

CR

0.86 0.55

AVE

Local business networks provide valuable 0.74

support for my SME

CS2

CS3

CS4

CS5

Informal finance mechanisms (e.g., susu) 0.71

are accessible for my business

Mentorship from experienced community 0.78

members is available to me

Community members and organizations 0.82

trust and support local businesses

Community trade associations facilitate 0.84

market access for my SME

University Support (US)

0.87

0.90 0.60

US1

Local

universities

provide

relevant 0.79

knowledge applicable to my business

University incubation and technology 0.73

transfer services are accessible to my

SME

US2

US3

US4

US5

US6

Collaborative research opportunities with 0.81

universities are available

University-trained

graduates

bring 0.87

valuable skills to my business

Universities facilitate industry-academia 0.76

linkage programs in my region

University-derived technical knowledge 0.83

contributes to my firm's innovation

Government Support (GS)

0.83

0.87 0.57

GS1

Government policies create a favorable 0.77

environment for SME growth

GS2

GS3

Government SME support programs 0.74

provide meaningful assistance

Regulatory frameworks are conducive to 0.79

entrepreneurial activity

Page 2110

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

GS4

GS5

Government-backed funding or loan 0.72

guarantee schemes are accessible to

SMEs

Government agencies provide useful 0.80

technical and advisory support to SMEs

Access to Finance (AF)

0.84

0.88 0.58

AF1

Formal bank financing is accessible for 0.73

my SME's needs

AF2

AF3

AF4

AF5

Microfinance and alternative financing 0.76

options are available to my business

Venture capital or equity financing is 0.68

available in my operating environment

Government-backed

credit

schemes 0.79

meaningfully support SME financing

My SME can access adequate working 0.84

capital to pursue innovation activities

Institutional Quality (IQ)

IQ1

0.80

0.81

0.91

0.85 0.59

0.86 0.55

0.93 0.65

The legal and regulatory system fairly 0.75

protects my business interests

IQ2

IQ3

IQ4

Contract

enforcement

mechanisms 0.72

function effectively in my context

Intellectual property rights are reasonably 0.78

protected for SMEs

Anti-corruption measures support a fair 0.74

competitive environment for business

Infrastructure (INF)

INF1

Physical infrastructure (roads, logistics) 0.74

adequately supports my business

Digital and ICT infrastructure supports 0.79

innovation activities in my firm

Energy availability and reliability support 0.76

my operational activities

INF2

INF3

INF4

Telecommunications

infrastructure 0.72

supports my business communication

needs

Innovation Capability (IC)

IC1

My firm regularly develops new or 0.83

improved products and services

IC2

IC3

IC4

My firm continuously improves its 0.85

production and service delivery processes

My firm adopts innovative marketing 0.76

strategies to reach and retain customers

My

firm

makes

organizational 0.79

adaptations to support and sustain

innovation

IC5

IC6

IC7

My firm actively seeks and acquires new 0.82

technological knowledge

My firm develops unique and creative 0.87

solutions to business challenges

My

firm's

innovations

generate 0.89

meaningful competitive advantages

Sustainable SME Growth

0.88

0.91 0.63

(SSG)

SSG1

My firm has achieved consistent revenue 0.81

and profitability growth over time

Page 2111

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

SSG2

SSG3

SSG4

SSG5

SSG6

My firm has progressively expanded its 0.78

customer base and market share

My firm creates meaningful employment 0.83

and contributes to community welfare

My firm actively manages and reduces its 0.72

environmental footprint

My firm's growth strategy is aligned with 0.85

social responsibility objectives

My firm pursues long-term, sustainable 0.86

competitive positioning

Entrepreneurial

Purpose

0.85

0.89 0.62

(EP)

EP1

My business is guided by a clear mission 0.78

that extends beyond financial profit

I am committed to creating lasting value 0.83

for all stakeholders in my business

My long-term business goals emphasize 0.84

meaningful social and environmental

impact

EP2

EP3

EP4

EP5

I

invest in innovation to achieve 0.88

purposeful, sustainable outcomes for my

community

My

entrepreneurial

vision

extends 0.74

meaningfully beyond short-term financial

returns

Note: CR = Composite Reliability; AVE = Average Variance Extracted. All item loadings significant at p < 0.001.

Table 2: Discriminant Validity, Heterotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) Ratio Matrix

CS

US

GS

AF

IQ

INF

IC

SSG EP

—

CS

US

GS

AF

IQ

INF

IC

SSG

EP

0.61 —

0.58 0.64 —

0.53 0.59 0.62 —

0.49 0.55 0.67 0.61

0.52 0.57 0.63 0.58

0.67 0.72 0.63 0.65

0.63 0.61 0.57 0.59

0.54 0.57 0.51 0.53

—

0.64 —

0.58 0.54

0.52 0.49

0.47 0.45

—

0.76 —

0.68 0.73 —

Note: CS = Community Support; US = University Support; GS = Government Support; AF = Access to Finance;

IQ = Institutional Quality; INF = Infrastructure; IC = Innovation Capability; SSG = Sustainable SME Growth;

EP = Entrepreneurial Purpose. All HTMT values below the 0.85 threshold, confirming adequate discriminant

validity (Hair et al., 2022).

Structural Model and Hypothesis Testing

The structural model demonstrated strong explanatory power across all endogenous constructs. The model

explained 72.4% of the variance in innovation capability (R² = 0.724) and 67.1% of the variance in sustainable

SME growth (R² = 0.671). Both R² values comfortably exceed the 0.26 threshold considered indicative of

substantial explanatory power in behavioral research (Hair et al., 2022). The Standardized Root Mean Square

Residual (SRMR) value of 0.058 and Normed Fit Index (NFI) of 0.908 indicated acceptable model fit (Ringle et

al., 2022). Cross-validated redundancy analysis (blindfolding) confirmed meaningful predictive relevance for

both endogenous constructs: Q² = 0.463 for innovation capability and Q² = 0.407 for sustainable SME growth,

both substantially above the zero threshold, indicating that the model has predictive relevance beyond baseline

Page 2112

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

levels (Hair et al., 2022). Effect sizes (Cohen's f²) for each path are presented alongside path coefficients in Table

3. The specific results for each hypothesis are summarized in Table 3 and discussed below.

H1a, Community Support → Sustainable SME Growth: The direct path from community support to

sustainable SME growth was positive and statistically significant (β = 0.231, t = 4.62, p < 0.001; f² = 0.08),

providing full support for H1a. This finding indicates that the strength and richness of community-level

networks, informal financial mechanisms, and local market support systems directly contribute to the sustainable

growth performance of Ghanaian SMEs. The small-to-medium effect size reflects the indirect competition from

other ecosystem pathways operating simultaneously.

H1b, University Support → Sustainable SME Growth: The direct effect of university support on sustainable

SME growth was also positive and significant (β = 0.198, t = 3.87, p < 0.001; f² = 0.07), supporting H1b. This

confirms that university-based support mechanisms, encompassing knowledge transfer, incubation services,

collaborative research, and graduate talent pipelines, make a meaningful direct contribution to sustainable SME

growth in Ghana.

H1c, Government Support → Sustainable SME Growth: Government support exerted a significant positive

direct effect on sustainable SME growth (β = 0.164, t = 3.12, p = 0.002; f² = 0.05), providing support for H1c.

This finding highlights the importance of enabling government policies, SME development programs, and

regulatory quality in creating conditions that directly support the sustainable performance of Ghanaian SMEs.

H1d, Access to Finance → Sustainable SME Growth: Access to finance demonstrated a significant positive

direct effect on sustainable SME growth (β = 0.187, t = 3.67, p < 0.001; f² = 0.06), supporting H1d. This result

is consistent with the extensive literature documenting the role of financial ecosystem development in facilitating

SME growth, and underscores that finance access constraints remain a binding limitation on sustainable SME

performance in the Ghanaian context.

H1e, Institutional Quality → Sustainable SME Growth: Institutional quality had a significant positive direct

effect on sustainable SME growth (β = 0.143, t = 2.89, p = 0.004; f² = 0.04), supporting H1e. This finding

confirms that the reliability of legal and regulatory institutions, including contract enforcement and property

rights protection, constitutes an important direct enabler of SME growth sustainability in Ghana.

H1f, Infrastructure → Sustainable SME Growth: Infrastructure exerted a significant positive direct effect on

sustainable SME growth (β = 0.119, t = 2.47, p = 0.014; f² = 0.03), providing support for H1f. While representing

the smallest direct effect among the ecosystem dimensions, this finding nonetheless confirms that physical and

digital infrastructure quality is a meaningful determinant of sustainable SME performance, particularly given the

known infrastructure challenges facing Ghanaian SMEs.

H2a, Community Support → Innovation Capability: Community support demonstrated a significant positive

direct effect on innovation capability (β = 0.287, t = 5.14, p < 0.001; f² = 0.12), providing support for H2a. This

result confirms that community-level relational resources play an important role in enabling Ghanaian SMEs to

develop the innovation capabilities necessary to compete and grow.

H2b, University Support → Innovation Capability: University support exerted a significant positive effect

on innovation capability (β = 0.342, t = 6.38, p < 0.001; f² = 0.18), supporting H2b. Notably, the effect of

university support on innovation capability (β = 0.342) was larger than that of community support (β = 0.287),

consistent with the expectation that universities, as dedicated knowledge creation and transfer institutions, are

particularly potent drivers of firm-level innovation capacity.

H2c, Government Support → Innovation Capability: Government support had a significant positive effect

on innovation capability (β = 0.198, t = 3.54, p < 0.001; f² = 0.07), supporting H2c. This finding confirms that

enabling government policies and programs, including technology adoption incentives and R&D subsidies,

contribute meaningfully to SME innovation capability development in Ghana.

Page 2113

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

H2d, Access to Finance → Innovation Capability: Access to finance demonstrated a significant positive direct

effect on innovation capability (β = 0.224, t = 4.21, p < 0.001; f² = 0.09), supporting H2d. This result underscores

that financial resource availability is not only a direct driver of sustainable growth but also an important enabler

of innovation capability development among Ghanaian SMEs.

H2e, Institutional Quality → Innovation Capability: Institutional quality had a significant positive effect on

innovation capability (β = 0.176, t = 3.28, p = 0.001; f² = 0.05), supporting H2e. This finding confirms that strong

institutions, particularly intellectual property protection and regulatory quality, contribute to a more favorable

environment for SME innovation capability development.

H2f, Infrastructure → Innovation Capability: Infrastructure exerted a significant positive effect on innovation

capability (β = 0.152, t = 2.94, p = 0.003; f² = 0.04), supporting H2f. Digital and physical infrastructure was

found to facilitate SMEs' capacity for innovation, consistent with the growing literature on infrastructure as an

enabler of technology adoption and knowledge-intensive activity.

H3, Innovation Capability → Sustainable SME Growth: Innovation capability demonstrated the strongest

direct path coefficient in the structural model (β = 0.391, t = 7.24, p < 0.001; f² = 0.22), supporting H3 and

confirming a medium-to-large effect. This finding firmly establishes innovation capability as the most powerful

proximal driver of sustainable SME growth among the constructs studied. The relatively high magnitude of this

effect in the Ghanaian context suggests that the impact of innovation capability on sustainable growth may be

amplified in environments where overall innovation activity is low, because firms that develop innovation

capabilities enjoy a more pronounced competitive advantage in less innovation-intensive markets.

H4, Mediating Role of Innovation Capability: Bootstrapping analysis confirmed statistically significant

indirect effects of all six ecosystem dimensions on sustainable SME growth through innovation capability. The

indirect effects and their corresponding 95% bias-corrected confidence intervals were as follows: community

support, β = 0.112 (95% CI: [0.071, 0.163]); university support, β = 0.134 (95% CI: [0.089, 0.189]); government

support, β = 0.077 (95% CI: [0.041, 0.121]); access to finance, β = 0.088 (95% CI: [0.049, 0.134]); institutional

quality, β = 0.069 (95% CI: [0.033, 0.113]); and infrastructure, β = 0.059 (95% CI: [0.024, 0.101]). All

confidence intervals excluded zero, confirming the significance of all six mediated pathways. Variance

Accounted For (VAF) analysis indicated partial mediation for all ecosystem dimensions: community support

(VAF = 32.6%), university support (VAF = 40.3%), government support (VAF = 31.9%), access to finance (VAF

= 32.0%), institutional quality (VAF = 32.5%), and infrastructure (VAF = 33.2%). The consistently partial nature

of the mediation across all six dimensions suggests that both direct and indirect pathways are operative in linking

each ecosystem element to sustainable SME growth outcomes. H4 is therefore fully supported.

H5, Moderating Role of Entrepreneurial Purpose: The interaction term between innovation capability and

entrepreneurial purpose was positive and statistically significant (β = 0.167, t = 3.21, p = 0.001; f² = 0.05),

providing support for H5. Conditional effects analysis confirmed that the positive relationship between

innovation capability and sustainable SME growth was significantly stronger for SME owners and managers

with higher levels of entrepreneurial purpose (high purpose group: β = 0.503) compared to those with lower

levels of entrepreneurial purpose (low purpose group: β = 0.279). These results confirm that entrepreneurial

purpose amplifies the effect of innovation capability on sustainable growth outcomes.

Asummary of the complete hypothesis testing results, including path coefficients, t-values, p-values, effect sizes,

and decisions, is presented in Table 3.

Table 3: Summary of Hypothesis Testing Results

Hypothesis Path

β

t-value

p-value

f²

Decision

H1a

Community Support → Sustainable 0.231

SME Growth

University Support → Sustainable 0.198

SME Growth

4.62

< 0.001

0.08

(small)

0.07

Supported

H1b

3.87

< 0.001

Supported

(small)

Page 2114

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

H1c

H1d

H1e

H1f

H2a

H2b

H2c

H2d

H2e

H2f

H3

Government Support → Sustainable 0.164

SME Growth

Access to Finance → Sustainable SME 0.187

Growth

Institutional Quality → Sustainable 0.143

SME Growth

Infrastructure → Sustainable SME 0.119

Growth

Community Support → Innovation 0.287

Capability

University Support → Innovation 0.342

Capability

Government Support → Innovation 0.198

Capability

Access to Finance → Innovation 0.224

Capability

3.12

3.67

2.89

2.47

5.14

6.38

3.54

4.21

3.28

2.94

7.24

0.002

0.05

(small)

0.06

(small)

0.04

(small)

0.03

(small)

0.12

(small)

0.18

(medium)

0.07

(small)

0.09

(small)

0.05

(small)

0.04

(small)

0.22

(medium)

—

Supported

< 0.001

0.004

0.014

< 0.001

0.001

Institutional Quality → Innovation 0.176

Capability

Infrastructure → Innovation Capability 0.152

0.003

Innovation Capability → Sustainable 0.391

SME Growth

Mediation via Innovation Capability 0.059– —

(all six dimensions) 0.134

Moderation of Entrepreneurial Purpose 0.167

< 0.001

Sig.

H4

H5

3.21

0.001

0.05

(small)

Note: R² (Innovation Capability) = 0.724; R² (Sustainable SME Growth) = 0.671; Q² (Innovation Capability) =

0.463; Q² (Sustainable SME Growth) = 0.407; SRMR = 0.058; NFI = 0.908. f² effect size interpretation: small

(0.02–0.15), medium (0.15–0.35), large (≥ 0.35) (Cohen, 1988; Hair et al., 2022).

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

The results of this study generate several important theoretical and empirical insights into the dynamics of

entrepreneurial ecosystems and sustainable SME growth in Ghana.

The confirmation of H1a through H1f establishes that all six ecosystem dimensions, community support,

university support, government support, access to finance, institutional quality, and infrastructure, exert

meaningful direct effects on sustainable SME growth. This multi-dimensional finding is consistent with the

broader entrepreneurial ecosystem literature's emphasis on the systemic and interdependent nature of ecosystem

elements (Stam & van de Ven, 2021; Wurth et al., 2022). The significant effects of community support and

university support replicate and extend findings from prior studies (Boateng & Agyei-Frempong, 2021; Guerrero

& Urbano, 2021; Acheampong & Tweneboah-Koduah, 2021), while the newly confirmed effects of government

support, access to finance, institutional quality, and infrastructure provide additional empirical validation for the

importance of these dimensions in developing economy entrepreneurial ecosystems. Notably, the effect sizes for

these four additional dimensions, while small, are nonetheless statistically significant and practically meaningful

in the Ghanaian context, underscoring that no single ecosystem dimension is sufficient on its own, it is the

collective richness of the ecosystem that enables sustainable SME growth.

The confirmation of H2a through H2f is theoretically significant because it establishes that all six ecosystem

dimensions independently contribute to SME innovation capability, the primary mediating mechanism in the

study's framework. The relatively stronger effect of university support on innovation capability compared to

other dimensions (β = 0.342) underscores the distinctive knowledge-generation and technology-transfer role of

universities in the innovation process, consistent with DCT's emphasis on knowledge as the primary input into

Page 2115

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

capability development (Teece, 2022) and with the university-entrepreneurship literature's documentation of

knowledge spillover effects (Audretsch & Belitski, 2022). At the same time, the significant effects of

community-based social capital, government programs, financial resources, institutional quality, and

infrastructure on innovation capability collectively highlight that innovation capability development in

developing economy SMEs is not reducible to any single ecosystem dimension but reflects the cumulative effect

of a supportive, multi-layered ecosystem environment. This finding has important implications for policy design,

suggesting that targeted interventions aimed at any single ecosystem dimension will be less effective than

coordinated investments across multiple ecosystem elements.

The strong and significant direct effect of innovation capability on sustainable SME growth (H3; β = 0.391; f² =

0.22), the largest path coefficient in the structural model and the only effect in the medium range, firmly positions

innovation capability as the central engine of sustainable growth performance for Ghanaian SMEs. This finding

is consistent with Yam et al. (2020), Acquah et al. (2021), and the broader innovation-performance literature that

consistently identifies innovation capability as a robust predictor of firm-level performance. The high predictive

relevance of the structural model for sustainable SME growth (Q² = 0.407) further confirms that the model's

constructs collectively provide a powerful and practically meaningful framework for understanding and

predicting sustainable growth outcomes among Ghanaian SMEs.

The consistent partial mediation finding across all six ecosystem dimensions (H4) is among the most

theoretically important contributions of this study. By establishing that innovation capability partially mediates

the relationships between all six ecosystem elements and sustainable SME growth, with VAF values ranging

from 31.9% to 40.3%, the study provides rare and comprehensive empirical evidence for the mechanism through

which diverse ecosystem resources are converted into firm-level growth outcomes. The partial nature of the

mediation (rather than full mediation) is also noteworthy: it indicates that ecosystem dimensions contribute to

sustainable SME growth through multiple pathways, only one of which involves innovation capability. Other

potential pathways, including direct resource provision, legitimacy enhancement, market access facilitation, and

network brokerage, appear to operate alongside the innovation capability channel, a finding that points toward

important avenues for future research.

Finally, the significant positive moderating effect of entrepreneurial purpose (H5; β = 0.167; f² = 0.05) adds an

important individual-level boundary condition to the innovation–sustainable growth relationship. The finding

that purpose-driven entrepreneurs (high purpose group β = 0.503) extract considerably greater sustainable growth

benefits from their innovation capabilities than less purpose-oriented counterparts (low purpose group β = 0.279)

aligns closely with the sustainable entrepreneurship literature's emphasis on the role of mission orientation in

shaping entrepreneurial outcomes (Bacq & Janssen, 2021; United Nations, 2023). This result suggests that the

relationship between innovation capability and sustainable growth is not deterministic but is shaped by the

motivational context of the entrepreneur, a finding with significant implications for entrepreneurship education

and the design of SME support programs.

CONCLUSION

This study examined the relationships among entrepreneurial ecosystem elements, innovation capability,

entrepreneurial purpose, and sustainable SME growth in Ghana, guided by three specific objectives and a

theoretically grounded conceptual framework. Using PLS-SEM analysis of survey data from 350 Ghanaian SME

owners and managers, the study confirmed all fifteen hypothesized relationships, establishing that all six

ecosystem dimensions, community support, university support, government support, access to finance,

institutional quality, and infrastructure, directly and positively influence both innovation capability and

sustainable SME growth; that innovation capability serves as a significant and consistent partial mediating

mechanism in the ecosystem–growth relationship across all ecosystem dimensions; and that entrepreneurial

purpose positively moderates the innovation capability–sustainable growth nexus. The structural model

demonstrated strong explanatory power (R² = 0.724 for innovation capability; R² = 0.671 for sustainable SME

growth), meaningful predictive relevance (Q² = 0.463 and Q² = 0.407 respectively), and acceptable model fit

(SRMR = 0.058; NFI = 0.908).

Page 2116

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

Theoretical Implications

This study contributes to three major areas of the management and entrepreneurship literature. First, it extends

entrepreneurial ecosystem theory to the Sub-Saharan African context, providing comprehensive empirical

evidence that a multi-dimensional ecosystem operationalization, encompassing community support, university

support, government support, access to finance, institutional quality, and infrastructure, produces effects

consistent with theoretical predictions even in institutional environments that differ substantially from the high-

income, developed economy contexts in which most ecosystem research has been conducted. This responds to

the urgent need for more geographically diverse and methodologically comprehensive ecosystem research

identified by Audretsch and Belitski (2022) and Spigel (2022).

Second, the study advances Dynamic Capabilities Theory by explicitly modeling innovation capability as the

mechanism through which all six ecosystem resource dimensions translate into sustainable firm performance.

This extends the theory beyond its traditional intra-firm focus, demonstrating that dynamic capability

development is not merely a function of internal organizational processes but is importantly and systematically

shaped by the breadth and richness of the external ecosystem environment.

Third, by establishing entrepreneurial purpose as a significant moderating boundary condition in the innovation

capability–sustainable growth relationship, this study contributes to the emergent literature on purpose-driven

entrepreneurship. The finding that entrepreneurial purpose amplifies innovation-led sustainable growth provides

theoretical grounding for the growing policy and practice interest in purpose-oriented entrepreneurship

development programs.

Practical Implications

The study's findings carry direct practical implications for several stakeholder groups. For policymakers, the

results provide strong empirical justification for multi-dimensional ecosystem investment strategies that

simultaneously strengthen community support structures, expand university-industry linkages, improve

government regulatory efficiency, deepen financial market access for SMEs, strengthen institutional quality, and

develop digital and physical infrastructure. The consistent role of innovation capability as a partial mediator

confirms that ecosystem investments generate the greatest sustainable growth returns when they are channeled

through interventions that enhance firm-level innovation capacity, suggesting that technology adoption

programs, innovation vouchers, and collaborative R&D schemes should be integrated into broader SME

development strategies.

For university administrators, the study confirms that Ghanaian universities represent uniquely powerful levers

for SME innovation capability development. Strengthening technology transfer offices, expanding industry-

embedded incubation programs, and increasing the practical relevance of university curricula for SME

innovation challenges are high-priority strategies suggested by the data. For SME practitioners themselves, the

moderating role of entrepreneurial purpose suggests that cultivating a long-term, mission-oriented

entrepreneurial orientation, rather than focusing narrowly on short-term financial returns, may substantially

amplify the sustainable growth returns on innovation investment.

Limitations and Future Research Directions

Several limitations of this study should be acknowledged and addressed in future research. First, the cross-

sectional survey design precludes causal inference and does not capture the dynamic, evolutionary nature of

ecosystem–capability–growth relationships over time. Future research should employ longitudinal designs,

ideally tracking cohorts of Ghanaian SMEs across multiple time periods, to examine how changes in ecosystem

conditions influence innovation capability development and sustainable growth trajectories. Panel data

approaches would allow researchers to better disentangle the causal sequence from ecosystem inputs to

capability development to growth outcomes, and to capture important lagged effects that cross-sectional designs

necessarily overlook.

Page 2117

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

Second, the rich but inherently static nature of quantitative survey data limits the depth of insight into the process

mechanisms through which ecosystem elements build innovation capability and translate into sustainable

growth. Mixed-methods approaches that combine quantitative survey analysis with in-depth qualitative inquiry,

including case studies, ethnographic observation, and process interviews with SME owners and ecosystem

actors, would provide a more textured understanding of the micro-level processes, contextual nuances, and

institutional dynamics that quantitative measurement cannot fully capture. Such approaches would be

particularly valuable for understanding how different ecosystem elements interact and reinforce one another in

the Ghanaian context.

Third, the study's geographical scope is limited to four regions of Ghana, and findings may not be fully

generalizable to other sub-Saharan African contexts or to regions of Ghana with markedly different economic

conditions. Future studies should employ larger and more geographically diverse samples, and comparative

cross-country research would help to identify the extent to which findings are context-specific or generalizable

across the African continent.

Fourth, while this study significantly expanded the ecosystem operationalization relative to prior work,

encompassing six dimensions, additional ecosystem elements such as cultural attitudes toward entrepreneurship

and risk-taking, leadership networks, specialized talent ecosystems, and inter-firm knowledge networks remain

outside the scope of the current measurement framework. Future research should continue to develop more

comprehensive and contextually validated ecosystem measurement instruments that capture the full breadth of

ecosystem conditions in the developing economy context.

Finally, the study's reliance on self-reported perceptual measures may be subject to social desirability bias and

common method variance despite the precautions taken. Future research could benefit from incorporating

objective firm-level performance data, multi-informant designs, and longitudinal tracking of both ecosystem

conditions and SME performance indicators to provide more robust tests of the study's theoretical propositions.

REFERENCES

1. Acheampong, G., & Tweneboah-Koduah, E. Y. (2021). How does institutional support enable SME

performance in Ghana? Management Research Review, 44(8), 1139–1157.

2. Acquah, I. S. K., Agyabeng-Mensah, Y., & Afum, E. (2021). Examining the link among green human

resource management practices, green supply chain management practices and performance.

Benchmarking: An International Journal, 28(1), 267–290.

3. Audretsch, D. B., & Belitski, M. (2022). The limits to open innovation and absorptive capacity in the

entrepreneurial ecosystem. Journal of Technology Transfer, 47(4), 1019–1043.

4. Bacq, S., & Janssen, F. (2021). The multiple faces of social entrepreneurship: A review of definitional

issues based on geographical and thematic criteria. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 33(5–6),

421–445.

5. Barney, J. B. (2021). Why resource-based theory's model of profit appropriation must incorporate a

stakeholder perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 42(1), 33–46.

6. Beck, T., & Demirguc-Kunt, A. (2006). Small and medium-size enterprises: Access to finance as a growth

constraint. Journal of Banking & Finance, 30(11), 2931–2943.

7. Boateng, S. L., & Agyei-Frempong, K. (2021). Social capital, entrepreneurial orientation and

performance of SMEs in Ghana. African Journal of Economic and Management Studies, 12(3), 441–456.

8. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates.

9. Dyllick, T., & Muff, K. (2020). Clarifying the meaning of sustainable business: Introducing a typology

from business-as-usual to true business sustainability. Organization & Environment, 29(2), 156–174.

10. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables

and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.

11. Ghana Statistical Service. (2022). Integrated Business Establishment Survey (IBES) Report. Accra:

Ghana Statistical Service.

Page 2118

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

12. Guerrero, M., & Urbano, D. (2021). A research agenda for entrepreneurship and innovation: The role of

alliances in the regional entrepreneurial ecosystem. Journal of Small Business Management, 59(4), 706–

733.

13. Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results

of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24.

14. Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Gudergan, S. P. (2022). Advanced Issues in Partial Least

Squares Structural Equation Modeling (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

15. Isenberg, D. (2011). The entrepreneurship ecosystem strategy as a new paradigm for economic policy:

Principles for cultivating entrepreneurship. Presentation at the Institute of International and European

Affairs, Dublin, Ireland.

16. Nambisan, S., & Baron, R. A. (2021). On the costs of digital entrepreneurship: Role conflict, stress, and

venture performance in digital platform-based ecosystems. Journal of Business Research, 125, 520–532.

17. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University

Press.

18. OECD. (2021). Entrepreneurship at a Glance 2021. Paris: OECD Publishing.

19. Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J. M. (2022). SmartPLS 4. Bönningstedt: SmartPLS GmbH.

Retrieved from https://www.smartpls.com

20. Roundy, P. T., & Bayer, M. A. (2022). Making the ecosystem: How social movements create the

conditions for entrepreneurial communities. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 34(3–4), 201–

225.

21. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2023). Research Methods for Business Students (9th ed.).

Pearson Education.

22. Spigel, B. (2022). Examining the cohesiveness of entrepreneurial ecosystems: A synthesis of research on

regional entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 34(1–2), 113–131.

23. Stam, E., & van de Ven, A. (2021). Entrepreneurial ecosystem elements. Small Business Economics,

56(2), 809–832.

24. Teece, D. J. (2022). Dynamic capabilities as (workable) management systems theory. Journal of

Management & Organization, 28(3), 359–368.

25. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic

Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.

26. United Nations. (2023). The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2023. New York: United Nations.

27. World Bank. (2022). World Development Report 2022: Finance for an Equitable Recovery. Washington,

DC: World Bank Group.

28. Wurth, B., Stam, E., & Spigel, B. (2022). Toward an entrepreneurial ecosystem research program.

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 46(3), 729–778.

29. Yam, R. C. M., Lo, W., Tang, E. P. Y., & Lau, A. K. W. (2020). Analysis of sources of innovation,

technological innovation capabilities, and performance: An empirical study of Hong Kong manufacturing

industries. Research Policy, 49(3), 103896.

Page 2119

www.rsisinternational.org