Navigating climate change: Climate change awareness and strategies in micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises in a developing economy

PLOS One | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0327165 July 2, 2025 15 / 26 Furthermore, we remark that a significant proportion of firms in the secondary and tertiary sectors believe that carbon neutrality is either not of interest to them or not feasible to achieve (Mean Secondary Sector = 0.31; Mean Tertiary Sector = 0.30) . This proportion is larger than in the primary sector (Mean Primary Sector = 0.18), suggesting that most MSMEs do not see a direct benefit in pursuing non-financial strategies like carbon neutrality. More so, results show that MSMEs from the secondary sector exhibit a lower awareness regarding strategic timing for achiev- ing carbon neutrality (Mean Secondary Sector = 0.13), in contrast to MSMEs from other economic sectors (Mean Primary Sector = 0.05; Mean Tertiary Sector = 0.11). This overall trend may suggest that ventures across different eco- nomic sectors lack specific knowledge about strategic planning on sustainability matters. To further explore our initial find- ings, we conducted a Logistic regression analysis focusing on two interrelated outcomes: (a) the perception that carbon neutrality is achievable within a five-year timeframe (Model ‘a’), and (b) the view that carbon neutrality is either unattain- able or not a current strategic priority (Model ‘b’). S1 and S2 Tables present the univariable and bivariate analyses of the variables, indicating no evidence of multicollinearity and suggesting independence between observations. These findings support the core assumptions of the model.

Table 6 presents the odds ratios (OR) and marginal effects (ME) derived from this analysis. The results in Model ‘a’ highlight key factors influencing short-term carbon neutrality perceptions. Notably, endorsing gender-balanced leadership did not have a statistically significant effect on perceiving carbon neutrality as achievable within five years (OR = 1.01; ME = 0.00; p = 0.96), suggesting that other factors might play a more decisive role in shap- ing organizational attention toward this strategy. Additionally, capital barriers exhibited a positive but non-significant effect (OR = 1.20; ME = 0.03; p = 0.15), while technology barriers showed a negative yet non-significant effect (OR = 0.88; ME = –0.03; p = 0.34). These findings suggest that ventures’ decisions to engage in long-term climate- related strategies may be driven more by managerial choices than by the availability of specific resources. Furthermore, ventures perceiving greater investor pressure to pursue carbon neutrality were significantly more likely to consider this goal feasible (OR = 1.50; ME = 0.09; p = 0.01). In contrast, the perceived support from the government (OR = 2.87; ME = 0.23; p = 0.30) and customer pressures (OR = 1.25; ME = 0.05; p = 0.17) had positive but non-significant effects. Similarly, perceived support from stakeholders, such as employees, had a neg- ative but non-significant effect (OR = 0.33; ME = –0.25; p = 0.34). Moreover, ventures with greater awareness of domestic carbon markets (OR = 1.33; ME = 0.06; p = 0.03) and those already implementing carbon management

initiatives within their operations (OR = 1.49; ME = 0.09; p = 0.00) were significantly more likely to perceive carbon neutrality as achievable in the short term. Conversely, firms in the secondary (OR = 0.40; ME = –0.21; p = 0.00) and tertiary (OR = 0.59; ME = –0.13; p = 0.03) sectors exhibited a lower likelihood of adopting short-term carbon neu- trality goals, possibly reflecting sector-specific challenges in aligning sustainability initiatives with existing operational structures. Finally, MSMEs demonstrated a higher likelihood of perceiving carbon neutrality as feasible within five years (OR = 1.55; ME = 0.10; p = 0.01), suggesting a proactive stance among these ventures in adapting to sustainability objectives. Model ‘b’ highlights several factors that reduce the likelihood of perceiving carbon neutrality as infeasible or not endors- ing this strategic goal. At the governance level, firms with gender-balanced leadership teams are less likely to dismiss carbon neutrality as an unattainable objective (OD = 0.70; ME = –0.08; p = 0.01). This aligns with existing empirical research [66], which identifies gender diversity as a significant predictor of organizational environmental initiatives. In the context of MSMEs, this suggests that a gender-balanced governance structure may contribute to reducing carbon emissions while simultaneously supporting the organization’s long-term profitability and resilience. Moreover, the results indicate that perceived capital (OD = 0.66; ME = –0.10; p = 0.00)and technology (OD = 0.91; ME = –0.02; p = 0.47)

barriers reduce the likelihood of considering carbon neutrality as infeasible or excluding it from strategic planning. This finding suggests that MSMEs may perceive environmental value creation as a potential driver of growth. It is plausible that having sufficient internal resources increases the likelihood of integrating carbon neutrality into strategic planning. Further