Abstract
Social Entrepreneurship education is in its infancy, especially compared with more general Entrepreneurship education, so it is not at all surprising that there is very little research into this area. Indeed, as far as we are aware there is very little practice of specifically tailoring social entrepreneurship education for scientists and engineers. This latter observation is, however, surprising, as some have suggested that a significant proportion of social entrepreneurs are scientists and engineers seeking to turn their skills to solve social problems. In addition, the funding and evaluation of scientific research increasingly requires discussion of social impact, a topic central to contemporary social entrepreneurship. Following a preliminary discussion of the recent emergence of “tech for good”, we explore two central issues to be addressed in educating scientists and engineers about the complex world of social entrepreneurship: the long tradition of social responsibility amongst scientists and engineers, and different approaches to the analysis of innovation. Although the popular image of scientists and engineers is that they are disinterested neutral observers there is a long tradition of scientists and engineers becoming embroiled in the role of science and technology within contemporary society. J.D. Bernal famously aroused the wrath of Karl Popper in the 1930s with his calls for greater political oversight of scientific research, and in the late 1960s the British Society for Social Responsibility in Science engaged in controversies such as university engagement in research into chemical weapons. Social responsibility, we would argue, has long been a distinctive characteristic of many, even most scientists and engineers. Teaching them about social entrepreneurship and social enterprise will need to understand, work with and develop this tendency. The concept of social innovation, dating back to the 1990s, broadly describes developing new solutions to social problems. Scientists and engineers are of course familiar with the processes of technological innovation so again we have a very good potential fit between scientists, engineers and social entrepreneurship. However, many of the most effective approaches to the socio-economic analysis of innovation are based on some form of social constructionist perspective and hence potentially clash with scientists’ and engineers’ training. This is our second key issue. These preliminary thoughts will be illustrated through discussion of the current education about social entrepreneurship with a UK-based scientist/engineer working with a project centred on a bio-waste energy plant in India.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aston University (2014) Energy harvest. Available at: http://www.energy-harvest.org/. Accessed 13 Jan 2015
Ashoka (2015) Social technopreneurs: a new generation of innovators. Virgin Unite Blogs. https://www.virgin.com/unite/entrepreneurship/social-technopreneurs-a-new-generation-of-innovators. Accessed 13 Apr 2015
Beder S (1998) The new engineer: management and professional responsibility in a changing world. Macmillan Education, Australia
Bell A (2015a) Science for the people! Online article on Mosaic: The Science of Life, London: Wellcome Trust, http://mosaicscience.com/story/science-people. Accessed 16 Apr 2015
Bell A (2015b) The scientific revolution that wasn’t: uncovering the radical science movement. Paper presented to a joint seminar of the Manchester Institute for Innovation Research and the Centre for the History of Science, Technology and Medicine, Manchester University, 11 May 2015
Bloom PN, Dees JG (2008) Cultivate your ecosystem. Stanford Soc Innov Rev Winter 2008:47–53
Coombs R, Saviotti P, Walsh V (1987) Economics and technical change. Rowman & Littlefield, NJ
Coombs R, Saviotti P, Walsh V (eds) (1992) Technological change and company strategies. Academic Press, London
Cox G (2010) What do social enterprise and chocolate have in common? Retrieved from http://geofcox.info/node/136. Accessed 10 May 2015
Curtis A, Anderson T (2014) Is social innovation simply dressed-up neo-liberalism? Pioneers Post, 2 Dec 2014. Retrieved from http://www.pioneerspost.com/news-views/20141202/social-innovation-simply-dressed-neoliberalism. Accessed 14 May 2015
David M (2005) Science in society. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke
Dickson D (1974) Alternative technology and the politics of technical change. Fontana, London
Dua R (2013) UK university, IIT Ropar make tech marvel to end stubble burning. The times of India. Available at: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chandigarh/UK-university-IIT-Ropar-make-tech-marvel-to-end-stubble-burning/articleshow/20890753.cms. Accessed 12 Jan 2015
Eurostat, European Commission (2015) Statistics explained. Retrieved from http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Patent_statistics. Accessed 14 May 2015
Freeman C (1994) Critical survey: the economics of technical change. Camb J Econ 18:463–514
Freeman C (2007) A Neo-Schumpeterian renaissance? In: Hanusch H, Pyka A (eds) Elgar companion to Neo-Schumpeterian economics. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, pp 130–141
Gibson-Graham JK, Cameron J, Healy S (2013) Take back the economy: an ethical guide for transforming our communities. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN
Green K, Hull R, McMeekin A, Walsh V (1999) The construction of the techno-economic: networks vs. paradigms. Res Policy 28:777–792
Hanusch H, Pyka A (eds) (2007) Elgar companion to neo-schumpeterian economics. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire
Heeks R (2009) The godfather of ICT4D, and ICT4D’s first computer. Retrieved from: https://ict4dblog.wordpress.com/tag/ict4d-history/. Accessed 10 May 2015
HEFCE (2012) Assessment framework and guidance on submissions Bristol: HEFCE, Retrieved from http://www.ref.ac.uk/media/ref/content/pub/assessmentframeworkandguidanceonsubmissions/GOS%20including%20addendum.pdf. Accessed 14 May 2015
Hull R, Gibbon J, Branzei O, Haugh H (2011) Cases, configurations, critiques and contributions: editorial introduction. In: Hull R, Gibbon J, Branzei O, Haugh H (eds) The third sector. Dialogues in critical management 1. Emerald, Bingley, West Yorkshire, pp xiii–xxxv
IDE (2015) Our history. Retrieved from: http://www.ideorg.org/OurStory/History.aspx. Accessed 10 May 2015
ITU (2015) Overview of ITU’s history. http://www.itu.int/en/history/Pages/ITUsHistory.aspx. Accessed 10 May 2015
Joyner A (2014) Beyond buy-one-give-one retail. New Yorker Magazine Online, 7 Apr 2014, http://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/beyond-buy-one-give-one-retail. Accessed 8 June 2015
Kalam AA, Singh SP (2011) Target 3 billion: innovative solutions towards sustainable development. Penguin India, New Delhi
Kuhn TS (1962) The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Mavi DMS (2014) Interview with Dr. Manpreet Singh Mavi, Punjab Agriculture University, 16 Dec 2014
McKee D (2012) India gaining influence in rice market. Rice Q. Available at: http://www.davidmckee.org/2012/05/01/india-gaining-infuence-in-rice-market/
Mackenzie D, Wajcman J (1985) The social shaping of technology. Open University Press, Buckingham
Miller S (2015) The rise of ‘Tech for Ungood’. Pioneers post, 6 Jan 2015, http://www.pioneerspost.com/news-views/20150106/the-rise-of-tech-ungood. Accessed 13 Apr 2015
Moulaert F, MacCallum D, Mehmood A, Hamdouch A (2013) The international handbook on social innovation. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
Mulgan G (2013) The locust and the bee: predators and creators in capitalism’s future. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Munford M (2014) The ‘tech for good’ market transformers society’s major challenges. Daily Telegraph, 14 Dec 2014
Narasimhan R (1983) The socioeconomic significance of information technology to developing countries. Inf Soc 2(1):65–79
Practical Action (2015) History: from intermediate technology to practical action. Retrieved from: http://practicalaction.org/history. Accessed 10 May 2015
Richardson M, Berelowitz D (2012) Investing in social franchising. International Centre for Social Franchising. Available at: http://www.the-icsf.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/ICSF-Social-Franchising-Complete-Report.pdf
Ridley-Duff R, Bull M (2011) Understanding social enterprise: theory and practice. Sage, London
Rittel HWJ, Webber MM (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci 4(1):155–169
Schuler D, Namioka A (1993) Participatory design: principles and practices. Erlbaum, Hillsdale
Schumpeter JA (1934) The theory of economic development. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
Sen PK (2010) Bioenergy: business solutions for sustainable development. Presentation, Retrieved from http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/RCUK-prod/assets/documents/india/ScienceBridgeBioenergy.pdf. Accessed 14 May 2015
Simanis E (2012) Reality check at the bottom of the pyramid. Harvard Bus Rev. Available at: https://hbr.org/2012/06/reality-check-at-the-bottom-of-the-pyramid. Accessed 4 Dec 2014
Sood J (2013) Not a waste until wasted. Down to Earth. Available at: http://www.downtoearth.org.in/content/not-waste-until-wasted. Accessed 4 Dec 2014
The Oglesby Charitable Trust (2015) Making a real difference to people’s lives. Available at: http://www.oglesbycharitabletrust.co.uk/
Weinbren D (2007) Supporting self-help: charity, mutuality and reciprocity in nineteenth-century Britain. In: Bridgen Paul, Bernard Harris (eds) Charity and mutual aid in Europe and North America since 1800. Routledge Studies in Modern History, Routledge, pp 67–88
Witty A (2013) Encouraging a British invention revolution. Government Department of Business, Innovation and Skills, UK. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/249720/bis-13-1241-encouraging-a-british-invention-revolution-andrew-witty-review-R1.pdf. Accessed 14 May 2015
Yunus M, Weber K (2011) Building social business: the new kind of capitalism that serves humanity’s most pressing needs. Reprint edition (originally published 2010), Public Affairs, New York
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Hull, R., Berry, R. (2016). The Social Entrepreneurship Option for Scientists and Engineers. In: Bhamidimarri, R., Liu, A. (eds) Engineering and Enterprise . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27825-4_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27825-4_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-27824-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-27825-4
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)