Social enterprises, located between non-profit organisations and for-profit firms, often struggle to acquire external funding. An increasing amount of research on the external financing of social enterprises stems from a fragmented body of the literature anchored in a variety of subject areas (e.g. entrepreneurship, public sector management, general management and strategy). We systematically review 204 academic articles published between 1998 and 2021 to bridge the knowledge gaps in these subject areas by: (1) mapping the field of the external financing of social enterprises at the individual, organisational and institutional levels; (2) synthesising the findings to develop an overarching framework; and (3) discussing theoretically sound future research avenues. We find that research at the individual level focuses primarily on investors' perspective of the ideal characteristics of a social entrepreneur. Research at the organisational level often addresses the dual logics of social enterprises and their impact on the successful financing of these businesses and the role of investor-investee collaboration.Research at the institutional level can be clustered into cultural, economic, political and legal factors. Overall, we stress the need for research that adopts an overarching view by considering all three levels of analysis simultaneously and using organisational and economic theories.

Impact investing (II) aims to achieve intentional social impact in addition to financial return. Our systematic literature review of 104 articles finds that the growing academic literature on II is scattered across a variety of disciplines and topics, with inconsistencies in terminology and concepts and a paucity of theoretical explanations and frameworks. To provide an overview of common research areas and findings, we integrate the articles on II in nine emerging topics and shed light on inconsistencies in the literature. The analysis reveals one major shortcoming in II research: Despite the fact that II aims to create a measurable societal impact, this impact of II, its raison d’être, is not scrutinized in the literature. We argue that investigating the impact of II requires a holistic lens, for which we propose systems theory. We suggest prospective future research avenues which combine socio‐economic research approaches (esp. longitudinal qualitative studies and experimental methods) with socio‐technical methods (esp. life cycle analysis) to enable a holistic systems perspective of II.