Skip to main content
Log in

Social Entrepreneurship: Action Grounded in Needs, Opportunities and/or Perceived Necessities?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The interest in social and/or societal entrepreneurship has increased rapidly during the past decade. Yet, the field is still young and fragmented and its heritage includes tensions and shortcomings. The theories grounded in entrepreneurship research tend to address the entrepreneurial ventures’ ability to recognise, explore and/or exploit opportunities. Other research argues instead that social entrepreneurial ventures respond to needs in society. However, none of these lines of research extensively problematise the issues of opportunities and needs. Furthermore, the discussion in this paper is related to a third concept, perceived necessities, as a suggestion to nuance our understanding of social entrepreneurship. The analysis in this paper is based on four social entrepreneurship cases.

Résumé

L’intérêt pour l’entrepreneuriat social et/ou sociétal s’est rapidement accru au cours de la dernière décennie. Pourtant, le domaine est encore récent et fragmenté, et son héritage comporte des tensions et des carences. Les théories fondées sur la recherche en matière d’entrepreneuriat tendent à traiter de la capacité des initiatives entrepreneuriales à reconnaître, explorer et/ou exploiter les opportunités. Une autre recherche postule au contraire que les initiatives entrepreneuriales sociales répondent à des besoins dans la société. Cependant, aucune de ces lignes de recherche ne pose de problématique élargie concernant les questions d’opportunités et de besoins. En outre, la discussion dans cet article est afférente à un troisième concept, à savoir les nécessités perçues, en tant que suggestion pour apporter une nuance relativement à notre compréhension de l’entrepreneuriat social. L’analyse dans cet article se fonde sur quatre cas d’entrepreneuriat social.

Zusammenfassung

Das Interesse an sozialer bzw. gesellschaftlicher Unternehmerschaft ist im Laufe des vergangenen Jahrzents stark gewachsen. Trotzdem ist dieser Bereich noch neu und fragmentiert und zeichnet sich durch Spannungen und Mängel aus. Die Theorien aus der Forschung zur Unternehmerschaft beschäftigen sich häufig mit der Fähigkeit der Unternehmen, Gelegenheiten zu erkennen, zu erforschen und zu nutzen. Andere Studien behaupten hingegen, dass soziale Unternehmen auf gesellschaftliche Bedürfnisse eingehen. Allerdings problematisiert keine dieser Forschungen eingehend die Aspekte Gelegenheiten und Bedürfnisse. Zudem bezieht sich die Diskussion in dem vorliegenden Beitrag auf ein drittes Konzept, die wahrgenommenen Bedürfnisse, als eine Anregung, unser Verständnis von der sozialen Unternehmerschaft abzustufen. Die Analyse in diesem Beitrag beruht auf vier Beispiele sozialer Unternehmerschaft.

Resumen

El interés en el espíritu emprendedor social y/o societal ha aumentado rápidamente durante la última década. Sin embargo, el campo sigue siendo joven y se encuentra fragmentado y su herencia incluye tensiones y deficiencias. Las teorías basadas en la investigación sobre el espíritu emprendedor tienden a abordar la capacidad de las aventuras emprendedoras para reconocer, explorar y/o explotar oportunidades. Otras investigaciones argumentan, en cambio, que las aventuras emprendedoras sociales responden a las necesidades de la sociedad. Sin embargo, ninguna de estas líneas de investigación problematiza extensamente las cuestiones de las oportunidades y necesidades. Asimismo, la discusión del presente documento se refiere a un tercer concepto, las necesidades percibidas, como una sugerencia para proporcionar un matiz a nuestra comprensión del espíritu emprendedor social. El análisis del presente documento se basa en cuatro casos de espíritu emprendedor.

摘要

过去十年,社会创业及/或社会性创业发展迅速,但仍然处于零星萌芽阶段,并先天具有诸多不稳定性和缺陷。基于创业研究的理论更多注重创业实体识别、探索及/或利用机遇的能力;其它研究则强调社会性创业实体应当响应社会的需求。但无论哪种研究,都没有深入探讨机遇和需求的问题。因此,本文另辟蹊径,提出了“感知问题”的概念,为社会创业的研究添砖加瓦。本文在四个社会创业案例的基础上展开了探讨。

ملخص

لقد زاد الاهتمام بسرعة بالمشاريع الإجتماعية و/أو المجتمعية خلال العقد الماضي. حتى الآن، المجال لا يزال حديث العهد ومجزأ وتراثه يشمل التوترات والعيوب. النظريات في بحث روح المبادرة تميل لمعالجة قدرة المشاريع التجارية للإعتراف، إستكشاف و/أوإستغلال الفرص. أبحاث أخرى تجادل بدلا˝ من ذلك أن مشاريع الأعمال الإجتماعية تستجيب لإحتياجات المجتمع. ومع ذلك، فإن لا يوجد من هذه الخطوط للبحث ما يظهر على نطاق واسع مشاكل الفرص والاحتياجات. علاوة على ذلك، ترتبط المناقشة في هذا البحث إلى مفهوم ثالث، ينظر إلى الضروريات، كإقتراح لتقديم فارق بسيط لفهمنا لروح المبادرة التي تشمل المشاريع الإجتماعية. يستند هذا التحليل في هذا البحث على أربع حالات مشاريع إجتماعية.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abrahamsson, H. (2001). Det gyllene tillfället att göra globaliseringen global. In J. Egon (Ed.), En annan värld är möjlig. Stockholm: Manifest kulturproduktion.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abrahamsson, H. (2002). Moblisering för global rättvisa—konfrontativ dialog och politiskt manöverutrymme. In K. Talltorp & O. Unsgaard (Eds.), Globalisering. Hur då? Nya vägar för den globala rättviserörelsen. Stockholm: Leopard förlag.

  • Abrahamsson, H. (2003). Det gyllene tillfället. Stockholm: Leopard förlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson, M., & Sköldberg, K. (2009). Reflexive methodology. New vistas for qualitative research. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amnå, E. (2005). Scenöppning, scenvridning, scenförändring. In E. Amnå (Ed.), Civilsamhället. Några forskningsfrågor. Stockholm: Riksbankens Jubileumsforn in collaboration with Gidlunds förlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Annheier, H. (2005). Nonprofit organizations. Theory, management, policy. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjerke, B. (2005). Förklara eller förstå Entreprenörskap. Lund: Studentlitteratur.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borzaga, C. And., & Defourny, J. (Eds.). (2001). The emergence of social enterprise. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borzaga, C., Galera, G., & Nogales, R. (Eds.). (2008). Social enterprise: A new model for poverty reduction and employment generation. An examination of the concept and practice in Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States. Bratislava: UNDP Regional Centre for Euorpe and the CIS.

  • Bruner, J. (1990). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Czarniawska, B. (1998). A Narrative Approach to Organization Studies. Qualitative Research Methods Series 43, , Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Czarniawska, B. (2004). Narratives in social science research. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dees, G. (2001, first published 1998). The meaning of’social entrepreneurship. FEDF Partners. www.redf.org.

  • Della Porta, D. (2007). The global justice movement. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Della Porta, D., & Diani, M. (1999). Social movements. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eco, U. (1990). The limits of interpretation. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenberg, J. (1999). Civil society. The critical history of an idea. New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gartner, W., Carter, N., & Hill, G. (2003). The language of opportunity. In C. Steyaert & D. Hjorth (Eds.), New movements in entrepreneurship. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gawell, M. (2006). Activist entrepreneurship. Attac’ing norms and articulating disclosive stories. Stockholm: Stockholm University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gawell, M. (2008). Social engagement and entrepreneurial action. Soci(et)al entrepreneurship and different forms of social enterprises. EMES selected conference paper series. www.emes.net.

  • Gawell, M. (2011). Inte vilket entreprenrskap som helst. Stockholm: Tillväxtverket.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gawell, M., Johannisson, B., & Lundqvist, M. (Eds.). (2009). Entrepreneurship in the name of Societ. A reader’s digest of a Swedish Research Anthology. Stockholm: KK-foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hernadi, P. (1987). Literary Interpretation and the Rhetoric of the Human Sciences. In J. Nelson, et al. (Eds.), The rhetoric of the human sciences. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hisrich, R., Freeman, E., Stanley, A., Yankey, J., & Young, D. (1997). Entrepreneurship in the not-for-profit sector: The state of the art. In D. Sexton & R. Smilor (Eds.), Entrepreneurship 2000. Chicago: Upstart Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hjorth, D., Johannisson, B., & Styeyaert, C. (2003). Entrepreneurship as discourse and life style. In B. Czarniawska & G. Sevon (Eds.), The northern lights. Organization theory in Scandinavia. Malmö: Liber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirzner, I. (1973). Competition and entrepreneurship. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leadbeater, C. (1997). The rise of the social entrepreneur. London: Demos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mair, J. (2006). Introduction to part II—Exploring the intentions and opportunities behind social entrepreneurship. In J. Mair, J. Robinson, & K. Hockerts (Eds.), Social entrepreneurship. New York: Palgrave.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mair, J., Robinson, J., & Hockerts, K. (2006). Social entrepreneurship. New York: Palgrave.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Melucci, A. (1991, first published in Italian 1989), Nomader i nuet. Sociala rörelser och individuella behov i dagens samhälle. Daidalos, Göteborg.

  • Neuendorf, K. (2002). Content analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls, A. (2006). Social entrepreneurship. New models of sustainable social change. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls, A. (2010). The legitimacy of social entrepreneurship: Reflexive isomorphism in a pre-paradigmatic field. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(4), 611–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmås, K. (2000). Den barmhärtiga entreprenören. Från privatisering till socialt företagande. Stockholm: Agora.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peredo, A. M., & McLean, M. (2006). Social entrepreneurship: A critical review of the concept. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 56–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrini, F. (2006). The new social entrepreneurship. What awaits social entrepreneurial ventures?. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramonet, I. (1997). Editorial article in Le Monde Diplomatique 1/12/1997, France.

  • Robinson, J. (2006). Navigating social and institutional barriers to markets: How social entrepreneurs identify and evaluate opportunities. In J. Mair, J. Robinson, & K. Hockert (Eds.), Social entrepreneurship. Hampshire: Palgrave MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salamon, L. (1996). Defining the nonprofit sector: The United States. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarasvathy, S. (2001). Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 243–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarasvathy, S., Dew, N., Velamuri, R., & Venkataraman, S. (2003). Three views of entrepreneurship opportunity. In Z. Acs & D. Audretsch (Eds.), Handbook of entrepreneurship research. An interdisciplinary survey. Boston: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sexton, D., & Landström, H. (Eds.). (2000). The Blackwell handbook of entrepreneurship. Oxford: Blackwell Publisher.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S. (2003). A general theory of entrepreneurship. The individual-opportunity nexus. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steyaert, C., & Bouwen, R. (1997). Telling stories of entrepreneurship. Towards a narrative—Contextual epistemology for entrepreneurial studies. In R. Donckels & A. Miettinen (Eds.), Entrepreneurship and SME research: On its way to the next millennium. Aldershot: Ashgate Publiching.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steyaert, C., & Hjorth, D. (2006). Entrepreneurship as social change. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Swedberg, R. (2000). Entrepreneurship. The social science view. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tillväxtverket. (2012). Sociala företag i Sverige. www.sofisam.se.

  • Venkataraman, S. (1997). The distinctive domain of entrepreneurship research: An editor’s perspective. In J. Katz & R. Brockhaus (Eds.), Advances in entrepreneurship, firm emergence, and growth. Greenwich, CT: Jai Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. (1979, first published in 1969). The social psychology of organizing. New York: McGraw-Hill Inc.

  • Weick, K. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wijkström, F., & Lundström, T. (2002). Den ideella sektorn. Organisationerna i det civila samhället. Stockholm: Sober Förlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wijkström, F., & Zimmer, A. (Eds.). (2011). Nordic civil society at a cross-roads. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thörn, H. (2002). Globaliseringens dimensioner. Nationalstat, världssamhälle, demokrati och sociala rörelser. Stockholm: Bokförlaget Atlas.

    Google Scholar 

  • www.attac.org (Attac International). Accessed 18 April 2005.

  • www.attac.se (Attac Sweden). Accessed 24 September 2003.

  • www.fryshuset.se (Fryshuset). Accessed 9 March 2011.

  • www.kris.a.se (CRIS). Accessed 10 April 2012.

  • www.vagenut.coop (Vägen ut! Kooperativen). Accessed 19 April 2012.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Malin Gawell.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gawell, M. Social Entrepreneurship: Action Grounded in Needs, Opportunities and/or Perceived Necessities?. Voluntas 24, 1071–1090 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-012-9301-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-012-9301-1

Keywords

Navigation