Social Entrepreneurs: Volume 18

This chapter discusses the origins of social entrepreneurship and the history. It sets this within our understanding of the current world, postmodern breaks with the norms of the market and definitions and redefinitions of community within society. It discusses a number of features and theories which may explain the way such enterprises have become more significant with society and have permeated the globe. In doing so, this chapter acts as an introduction to this volume and sets the scene for the extended discussions which comprise the remaining chapters in this volume.

Social enterprise and social entrepreneurship are concepts that have a real effect on social change. The strategies associated with social enterprise and social entrepreneurship have become popular in public policy circles, as they have a real aptitude for solving many societal problems. This popularity has led to the rapid development of social innovation and a rethinking of the interconnecting relationships of social entrepreneurship. The authors of this chapter present a model for social enterprise and innovation approaches, and critically explore these aspects and the ways in which they can be conceptualized within corporate social responsibility.

Social entrepreneurs in both the developed and the developing countries have established social enterprises with the intent of solving social problems leveraging social innovations that create sustainable social impact goals. The research gap that calls for this research is the question: ‘Are social problems, social objectives, social activities, social outputs, social outcomes and social impact goals of social enterprises the same in the developed and the developing countries?’ Against the above backdrop, this chapter presents a comparative discourse of cases of social enterprises in the developed and developing countries using the Theory of Change framework to provide answers to the above research question. The chapter adopts a qualitative research method to generate rich findings from diverse cases, reports, articles, and other secondary sources from the developed and developing economies. To ensure academic rigour and objectivity, a sample of 50 scholarly works on social enterprises were reviewed, which produced in-depth insights on the subject. Additionally, 16 cases on social enterprises from the developed and developing countries were purposively selected and meticulously analysed using the content analysis (CA) and the thematic analysis (TA). The first finding revealed that the social enterprises in the developed countries focused on ‘the secondary-level social issues’ such as education, health, environmental issues, psycho-social disabilities, wealth inequality, integration enterprises, work-integration services, financial exclusion, and gender balance. This is the focus of Ashoka, Children Commissioner, Allen Carr Easyway, Angaza Design Inc., Bridge International Academies, and others. The second finding indicated that the social enterprises in the developing countries focused on ‘the primary level social issues’ such as illiteracy, poor school enrollment, unemployment, poverty, social exclusion, gender imbalance, weak healthcare system including hygiene and sanitation. This is the focus of VisionSpring, Danone Clover – Daniladies and Danimama, Unjani Clinic NPC, Indego Africa, and others. The implication of the findings is that irrespective of continental contexts, social enterprises are established to bridge critical social problems, hence their philosophy transcends geographical contexts. The chapter concludes with a summary of insightful information and suggestions, which could trigger more empirical research on the subject.

Nation-states, researchers, and organizations realized the pivotal role of social entrepreneurship in economic development in the recent two decades. The body of knowledge in this domain witnessed consistent research growth but it still lacks a critical review to guide future researchers. This chapter contributes to the body of knowledge by presenting the first bibliometric analysis (using software such as HistCite, VOSviewer, and Biblioshiny). The relevant articles were searched in the Web of Science (WOS) database to ensure the inclusion of high-quality research. Among 910 initially retrieved publications 86 most relevant publications were included in the final dataset. The analysis included various bibliometrics and visualization maps such as the publication trends, most influential articles and journals, most productive countries and organizations, co-citation analysis, and thematic clustering of the research. The findings showed an overall consistent growth in research publications during the last 16 years (2005–2020) with Social entrepreneurship and enterprise: international and innovation perspectives' as the most influential article, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development as the most influential journal, and the United States and the United Kingdom as the most productive countries. The keyword co-occurrence analysis exposed five thematic clusters within the selected dataset indicating a relatively less focus on economic development aspects. Thus, future research should explore how social entrepreneurship, while solving social, cultural, environmental, and community issues, contributes to economic development. The research implications and limitations are discussed in the end.

Across the world, the concept of social entrepreneurship is taking off. It is globally called as unconventional economic institutions in the era of neoliberalism. But, as everyone celebrates the advent of social entrepreneurship, there's an important question that must be answered: why the sudden spotlight upon it? Over the last two decades, there has been growing focus on social entrepreneurship. Social entrepreneurship is an attempt to re-embed social and ethical dimensions within the neoliberal paradigm. As a neoliberal actor par excellence, the social entrepreneur is reoriented to confidently mediate in society, to do good for those at the bottom of pyramid. The term ‘entrepreneurship’, in the capitalist model, signifies the capacity for wealth creation, the ability to maximize profit for the self and, for shareholders, an extremely competitive market. However, the prefix ‘social’ indicates responsibility towards the collective, and values of solidarity and cooperation. Social entrepreneurs invariably carry the weight of the economic and political predicaments of the modern world; they are the descendants of neoliberal entrepreneurship, yet at the same time they confront some of its foundational pillars. In this chapter, the authors attempt to understand how a social entrepreneur mobilizes a series of values that articulate an alternate imagining of the neoliberal global order.

Social entrepreneurship has played a significant role in reducing unemployment and poverty, fixing other social issues and environmental concerns. Although there is an increasing concern on social entrepreneurship by the public sector, practitioner and scholars, there are still limited studies on predicting the intention to become a social entrepreneur. Thus, investigating social entrepreneurship intention using a systematic literature review (SLR) approach is crucial due to the lack of systematisation and categorisation in this field. Therefore, this study aims to conduct a SLR to identify the antecedents of social entrepreneurial intention (SEI) used by the previous research. In this sense, this chapter carries out a systematic review of the literature on social entrepreneurship intentions. The review is guided by the PRISMA Statement (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses). After the identification and screening process, only 56 articles were qualified for further analysis. This SLR focused on articles that are using quantitative research and in the English language published in Scopus. Although there is no limitation in the timeline, the search string results found that the related articles were published between 2010 and 2020. From the thematic analysis, nine main themes were found. The themes are categorised based on the antecedents of SEI used by previous research. There are nine antecedents found: (1) perceived desirability and feasibility, (2) attitude, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control, (3) prior experience, (4) emotional factors, (5) self-efficacy, (6) personality, (7) support systems, (8) skills and competencies and (9) motivational factors. Further analysis of the themes has resulted in ten sub-themes. This chapter's contribution includes offering a clearer picture of the antecedents of social entrepreneurial intention that is still at its infancy stage. Additionally, this chapter managed to identify the research gaps and proposed future research agenda.

Social entrepreneurship is a multidimensional construct, with social value creation lying at its core. Innovativeness and venturesomeness are the prominent decision-making characteristics that facilitate value creation by social enterprises (SEs). Sustainability goals can be attained better with synergistic operations of the two entities. Both SEs and SDGs aim at creating values for overall well-being, however discrepancies in interpreting and measuring the values created, leads to problems in achieving operational integration between the two.

This chapter comprehends the nature of values created by SEs. It further examines the scope and benefit of integration between SEs and SDGs for creating better value propositions. Methodology of the research included extant review of literature and relevant frameworks to comprehend concepts of SEs and SDGs. To examine practical aspects of value creation, in-depth interviews were conducted with social entrepreneurs. The chapter concludes that SDGs resonate strongly with work of many SEs due to the basic nature of their mission and objectives. However, there is ambiguity regarding how integration between the two entities can be effectively operationalized. The way forward for value creation through SEs-SDGs integration in post-COVID times is discussed. For sustenance and growth in complex times, along with emphasis on traditional values, SEs and SDGs will have to focus on creating strategic values through active collaboration and synergy. Impact reporting is critical, but additionally, core managerial and operational activities of SEs and SDGs must also orient cohesively. The chapter proposes an integrated framework for systematic alignment of SEs and SDGs missions, objectives, resource management, mobilization, networking etc. for purposeful collaborations.

Social enterprises are increasingly recognized as a new form of organization (combining social and business goals) providing innovative and scalable solutions to widespread and complex socioenvironmental problems. Yet, they often struggle to keep themselves afloat due to the difficulty in accessing required resources. Networking approaches provide social enterprises with cost-effective ways to fulfill these resource requirements. Such approaches, although useful, give rise to dilemmas while building ties with both financial and non-financial actors. Although much research has been conducted on social enterprise networking or partnerships, little is known about how social enterprises address such dilemmas. This chapter explores how do social entrepreneurs address moral dilemmas while networking with key stakeholders? To answer this question, we analyze the existing literature to understand the networking strategies adopted and the moral dilemmas experienced by the social entrepreneurs. Based on our review of literature, we present four kinds of social enterprises in terms of their networking situations and choices: (1) secluded saints (less known and less connected; high on moral values); (2) secluded devils (less known and less connected; low on moral values); (3) saints waving at the devils (well known and well connected; low on moral values); (4) saints in the pack of devils (well known and well connected; high on moral values). These categories are used to explain how social enterprises with different values, interact with and use their networks for different purposes. We discuss the possible consequences of each strategy and keep the question, how to reach the state of “successful saints,” open for future research. By presenting these different networking situations, our matrix sheds new lights on different social entrepreneurial networking options and their possible outcomes. This can act as a guide and a cautionary note, not only for the social enterprises but also for any hybrid organizations dealing with conflicting networking choices.

Social organisations and their entrepreneurial approaches are quite challenging to avail a robust and sustainable platform. Yet it is more difficult when the venture is aimed to serve an uncommon service that the target group are not aware of. Leveraging morale boosts and power of the mind through yoga and transcendental meditation practices could be an approach of a social enterprise that are outlined in this chapter. How tranquility and mental peace in the midst a huge number of people can be achieved by some innovative steps, that is also conferred here.

Young entrepreneurs' involvement in social entrepreneurship is gaining momentum, and the impact of their active participation in social enterprises is tremendous. As younger generation creates and leads social enterprises, self-identity that entails their leadership can bring benefits to various stakeholders. In particular, the engagement of younger generation in social entrepreneurship lead to positive identity development that brings impact not only to the founders but also to the employees, volunteers and recipients of the product and services offered by the social enterprise. In this context, the chapter explains the importance of social entrepreneurship in society-building, looking into how it creates values to its participants in regard to personal growth and development. The objective of this chapter is to elucidate the role of social enterprises in developing the personal identity of the younger generation. The chapter maps the characteristics of social entrepreneurs to the characteristics of young people with focus on the development of personal, social and role identities. The chapter also explains the significance of young social entrepreneurs' participation in social activities for the identity formation and how it directly and indirectly contributes to a balanced societal development.

The global economic fallout following the unexpected onset and rapid spread of COVID-19 pandemic worldwide, in early 2020, has necessitated international and national action plans towards new normal models of realignment in enterprise bottom-line and management. In 2020, ‘Supporting Small Business through the COVID-19 Crisis’ was declared the lead theme of the MSME Day – June 27 – by the UN. A ‘COVID Response Alliance for Social Entrepreneurs’ was launched by an affiliate of the World Economic Forum (WEF). Drawing inspiration from the ‘small business’ focus of the UN MSME Day declaration and the ‘social entrepreneurship’ perspective of the WEF, the study seeks to draw few perceptions and conclusions in the post-COVID economic recovery context of India, where Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) are observed to be a key driver of development, thanks to an add-on supportive package in the wake of the COVID-19 economic crisis. It is found that the package fails to provide a direct push for promotion of social enterprises/entrepreneurship in the Indian MSME sector, as there is no focused policy approach on leveraging ‘entrepreneurship resources’. Hence, the general trend of the sector continues to be dominated by the ‘for-profit first’ concern rather than a fair blend of ‘social value creation first’, with ‘profit’. Discourse on social entrepreneurship and action-oriented rehabilitation tools proposed in the Covid context globally have failed to reorient the dominant outlook of social enterprises in India – business as a tool for achieving social impact – to social impact as a spontaneous/positive outcome from business. The study highlights the lapses on the ground, of theoretical formulations, despite their couching in Covid contexts, and the need for a more institutionalised enabling environment for social value creation, impact investment and social stock exchange in the social enterprise ecosystem.

An understanding of the social entrepreneurial behavior of key stakeholders in Participatory Irrigation Management (PIM) is of vital importance to the socioeconomic growth of a country. The term social entrepreneurship or social enterprise is relatively new to Sri Lanka just as it is with many other developing countries. Social entrepreneurs are those who solve social and environmental problems that hinder social inclusion, economic integration, and sustainable development. Though many entrepreneurs are operating across the different agricultural sectors for many years, the exact nature of social entrepreneurial behavior among them is still unknown. As an agricultural economy-based country, PIM policy encompassing many strategies has been implemented in Sri Lanka to eradicate poverty and hunger in society. Therefore, this chapter aims to focus on the socioentrepreneurship of five key stakeholders in PIM and to provide empirical evidence of their activities in the area of the Bata-atha branch canal in the Walawe irrigation scheme, Sri Lanka, where PIM has been implemented. This chapter finds that the establishment of the Bata-atha farm by the Ministry of Agricultural Development and the irrigation management of Bata-atha tail-end branch canal under the organizational efforts of the Agunukolapelessa block office of Mahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka presents a good example of an innovative and supportive farm management system that contributes to significant improvements in the socioeconomic situation of the vulnerable farming community. Moreover, this chapter shows that the collective action of active farmer organizations and successful sole proprietors in the area constitute social entrepreneurial behavior that contributes to the social transformation. This chapter concludes with a discussion of the implications this has for the irrigated agricultural sector and the need for further research to identify the potential for continued development by fostering the practices of socioentrepreneurship in the country.

This chapter describes the journey of four social entrepreneurs in the Malaysian landscape. The objectives of the case study are to provide a description of the social entrepreneurship development in Malaysia and to illustrate how social entrepreneurs start their ventures, and mobilise change within this landscape. Primary data was collected through a survey and indepth interviews. Four social entrepreneurs participated in this study. The findings show that the Malaysian social entrepreneurship landscape is thriving and supportive, giving many opportunities for individuals to establish social enterprises. The indepth interviews revealed that the social entrepreneurs were motivated to start their social enterprises after being exposed to various socio-economic problems of diverse communities. They leveraged on their strength, both technical and business to create social enterprises. Digitalisation is a major enabler for the social enterprises where ICT tools are used to create solutions to optimise socio-economic impact. Training, coaching and mentoring are also widely used to empower the target beneficiaries. All the social entrepreneurs are deeply aware of the sustainable developmental goals (SDGs) and have strategically incorporated the relevant SDGs into their business model to guide impact measurement. This case study contributes to the field by providing insights on the what drives the ‘selfless side’ of an individual to start a social enterprise, and how do social enterprises leverage on available resources to grow and sustain their ventures. It also provides insights on how to pilot and scale social enterprises.

This chapter focuses on the challenges that the Malaysian AIDS council (MAC) have been facing in creating the social awareness. Moreover, this chapter briefly discusses the HIV epidemic in Malaysian context. The harm reduction and prevention campaigns as well as the intervention programs taken by MAC are then highlighted. Finally, the challenges associated with implementing such programs are also discussed.