Social entrepreneurship research: A review and future research agenda

Abstract

Social Entrepreneurship (SE) is a popular area of research and practice. An analysis of the existing literature reviews on SE reveals a dearth of studies classifying the existing SE literature into multiple research themes and further presenting popular and less popular research themes. With the aim of bridging this gap, this study presents a systematic review of 188 peer reviewed SSCI journal articles published in last decade. It presents an overview of recent SE research, classifying it in five main themes while identifying the thrust areas of research in each. Based on identified research gaps, we provide future research directions, contexts and methodology.

Introduction

Social entrepreneurship (SE) has evolved as a research domain of great significance for firms and researchers (Kannampuzha and Hockerts, 2019, Rey-Martí et al., 2016). Several issues such as poverty and human welfare have motivated various firms to conduct business with an embedded social drive (Huda et al., 2019, Doherty et al., 2014). SE acts as a catalyst for social change, and social entrepreneurs do not expect direct monetary benefit from their social ventures (Barberá-Tomás, Castelló, de Bakker, & Zietsma, 2019). Bygrave and Minniti (2000) found that every entrepreneurship has a social function; however, SE differs from traditional entrepreneurship in its primary mission of creating social value rather than generating private economic gains (Bedi and Yadav, 2019, Pless, 2012, Santos, 2012, Mair et al., 2012). Schramm (2010) opined that the economic value created by an entrepreneurial venture cannot be easily separated from the social benefits, as social and commercial activities unite and become intertwined in the “real typical” center of the continuum. Moreover, as defined within the larger system, entrepreneurship, opportunity, and philanthropy generate a sustainable cycle for social as well as economic, institutional development. Social enterprises merge the pursuit of public social goods with the market-aligned tools and techniques of for-profit organisations (Urbano, Toledano, & Soriano, 2010). Thus, social enterprises essentially function at the boundaries of the traditional philosophies of those organisations (Mamabolo and Myres, 2019, Defourny and Nyssens, 2010, Dees, 2012). Overall, SE may be considered a novel activity that intends to create producer surplus by reducing negative externalities and/or creating positive externalities via the integration of the essence of social as well as entrepreneurship constructs (Newbert & Hill, 2014). Extant literature provides enough evidence that researchers have attempted to understand SE phenomena from the point of view of social entrepreneurs, social enterprises and social ventures (e.g. Hota et al., 2019, Bacq and Alt, 2018, André and Pache, 2016, Bacq et al., 2016). Therefore, it is essential to integrate these perspectives to develop a complete and fair understanding of SE phenomena.

Several researchers have defined SE, social entrepreneurs, and social enterprises from an extensive range of perspectives (Kannampuzha and Hockerts, 2019, Short et al., 2009, Peredo and McLean, 2006). Lasprogata and Cotton (2003) described SE as a non-profit organisation (e.g. Tamarack–An Institute for Community Engagement, and Meal Exchange, Canadian non-profit Social organisations funded by J. W. McConnell Family Foundation), while Wallace (1999) viewed social enterprises as for-profit companies managed by non-profit organisations. Furthermore, Mair and Marti (2006) defined a social enterprise as an organisation engaged in business activities for achieving social goals (e.g. Narayana Hrudayalaya Ltd., an Indian public limited company offering affordable and highly-subsidised medical services to poor people). Certo and Miller (2008) articulated that SE relates to individuals and business entities engaged in entrepreneurial activities specifically for a social purpose (e.g. Janani Foods Private Limited, a SE venture of a marketing professional offering end-to-end agri-services to poor Indian farmers).

The literature provides enough evidence that the number of SE researchers and publications has been increasing over the last two decades (Hota et al., 2019, Zahra et al., 2014, Short et al., 2009, McQuilten, 2017). A review of the extant literature on SE confirmed the existence of a variety of already-explored research themes. Recently, there has been a substantial increase in research articles on the social impact of SE (Nguyen, Szkudlarek, & Seymour, 2015), innovations by social entrepreneurs, SE business strategies and business models (George and Reed, 2016, Roy and Karna, 2015), as well as value creation and value dissemination by SE (Sulphey and Alkahtani, 2017, Nega and Schneider, 2014, Brandsen and Karré, 2011). Thus, SE is a mature field of research that has been thoroughly examined by scholars. An ever-growing number of articles published on SE in the last decade constitutes a large set of studies for review, offering opportunities to look back and reflect on how to move the field forward. It has been observed that while several articles cover specific SE research themes, other themes have not grabbed much of the SE researchers’ attention. Thus, a rigorous and systematic review of the scattered SE domain will not only provide an overview of the existing state of recent research but will also draw SE researcher’s attention to those less popular themes.

Moreover, classification of recent SE research into research themes can bring the loose ends together. It will also provide a theoretical background of the SE research domain for future researchers, outline the breadth of research on a particular topic of interest, and provide answers to practical questions by understanding the existing research on a particular matter.

Table 1 provides a summary of prior literature review studies on SE conducted in last decade. A careful examination of these studies reveals that existing review studies either focus on specific aspects of SE (Phillips et al., 2015, Dufays and Huybrechts, 2014, Kraus et al., 2014, Lee et al., 2014) or provide a broad overview of the SE research as an academic topic of research (Choi and Majumdar, 2014, Hota et al., 2019, Sassmannshausen & Volkmann, 2018.). We have found a dearth of literature review studies classifying recent SE research into themes based on research subjects that would provide future research directions in light of the detailed analysis of each theme.

In this context, we conduct a review of articles on SE published during 2007–2018 by examining those focused on social entrepreneurial activities, clustering these articles to filter major themes and sub-themes while identifying the popular and less popular research themes. This study goes a step further by exploring the research methods used and providing an overview of research studies conducted in different geographic locations and the journals publishing them.

The remainder of this paper is structured as follows: Section two deals with the methodology of the Review Process. Findings and Discussion are reported in section three. Section four is dedicated for providing future research directions, followed by implications for policy makers and limitations of the study in section five.