Interstate wars, civil wars, and other forms of armed conflict are becoming increasingly common, challenging the assumptions in entrepreneurship theories developed under conditions of societal stability. Wars have devastating effects on the economy, including entrepreneurship. Paradoxically, while one might expect entrepreneurship to decline in war zones, recent research suggests otherwise; however, it also provides no insights into the motivation to start a new business during wartime. This study investigates what unique factors motivate people in war zones to start businesses, focusing particularly on women entrepreneurs in Ukraine during the Russo–Ukrainian War. Through in-depth interviews (n = 24) both with Ukrainian women who started a new business during the war and with entrepreneurship experts, we inductively develop an understanding of various unique motivations to start businesses in wartime. A central finding of this study is that wartime entrepreneurship is a complex mix of reacting to circumstances and taking initiative. People start businesses during wars not just for survival, but also to have a sense of control and to help their families and communities. This is different from entrepreneurship in peacetime, where motivation is more frequently associated with seizing opportunities and achieving personal gain. A CALL FOR ACTION. When war breaks out, most people focus on survival and safety. Yet, even in these conditions, some people start businesses. Our research shows that war does not end entrepreneurship — it transforms it. In Ukraine, despite missile strikes and economic collapse, entrepreneurs are creating new ventures. They are doing this not out of opportunism, but as a way to protect their families, rebuild their communities, and take back a sense of control. Entrepreneurship during war is not just a diluted version of peacetime enterprise. It is a distinct type, shaped by unique motivations. We saw entrepreneurs seeking to restore agency, to provide essential goods and services when institutions failed, and to contribute to the national effort as an act of solidarity and resistance. These drivers do not fit the standard theories of entrepreneurship, which usually assume stable environments, individual opportunity recognition, and personal profit. For this reason, policymakers, NGOs, and investors should not treat wartime entrepreneurship as business-as-usual. Instead, it should be recognized as a crucial part of a country's resilience and recovery. Resources such as funding, supply chain access, and mentorship should be directed to these ventures, because they are functioning as critical infrastructure for both society and the economy. War time entrepreneurs will not wait for academic theories to adapt. Entrepreneurs are already emerging in conflict zones. The task now is twofold: first, to build better theories that capture this phenomenon and improve support systems in the longer perspective, and second, at the same time to urgently create systems of support that allow wartime entrepreneurs to survive and succeed, even under extreme conditions, right now.

Since the mid-2010s, there has been a burgeoning scholarly interest towards the realm of refugee entrepreneurship. However, despite the insights contributed by scholars in the past, this dynamic domain faces numerous challenges. Earlier studies tended to delineate static facets, categorizing external factors and individual competences, contemporary research acknowledges the imperative to understand refugee entrepreneurship as a dynamic journey for forcibly displaces individuals. In gap response to this gap, our study delves into the intricate reconstruction process of entrepreneurial identity after the disruptive event. Employing an explorative qualitative approach, we conducted 30 semi-structured interviews with Ukrainian female refugees who fled Ukraine following the Russian invasion and subsequently initiated businesses in their host countries. Through our analysis, we identified drivers and impediments in the loss and reconstruction of refugee entrepreneurs' identities, unveiling two distinct mechanisms: the decoupling and recombination of identity components. Grounded in these findings, we present a comprehensive framework detailing the mechanisms governing the identity reconstruction of refugee entrepreneurship.

Using positioning analysis we examine how women entrepreneurs construct their entrepreneurial identities in conversations with journalists. The data consists of every interview with women entrepreneurs in every Latvian monthly women’s magazine over a 30-year period. Eleven countries in Eastern Europe, including Latvia, broke away from the communist regime in the 1990s and embraced neoliberal and entrepreneurial values that rely on the use of agency in a free market and where individuals were considered autonomous agents, no longer constrained by gender inequalities and power imbalances. However, an analysis shows that identity constructions by women entrepreneurs have been built on neo-conservative assumptions regarding gender. The default option expressed in the magazines reveals that entrepreneurship is normatively masculine, and the entrepreneurial identity that is on offer for women is either as a ‘secondary entrepreneur’ or a ‘failed woman’. The post-feminist conception of a woman who can have it all, i.e. both a successful business career and a traditional feminine identity with a happy family life, is absent in the interviews. When neoliberalism entered Latvia and merged with neo-conservative gender roles, a specific Eastern European postfeminist regime emerged where neither entrepreneurship nor structural change can be seen as challenging the prevailing patriarchal gender order.