PurposeThe paper refers to the drivers of social entrepreneurship and critically explores the notion that it is prompted by a personal mission to enable some social or ideologically motivated altruism. It refers to Shapero's Entrepreneurial Event Theory and the adaptation of it for social entrepreneurship in Mair and Noboa (2006) and develops these so that both agency and context may be considered.Design/methodology/approachFieldwork comprised a qualitative sample of 12 life-story narratives of social entrepreneurs in Central Scotland. The location was chosen because of its reputation for support of social entrepreneurship, and the qualitative methodology allowed for a depth of inspection and analysis of complex and situational experiences.FindingsFindings include observation of altruism but there are other drivers, including the appeal of the social entrepreneurship business model. Context emerges as a critical feature of social entrepreneurship too, including spurs for altruism and the human, financial and social capitals, skills and experiences of social entrepreneurs.Originality/valueThe paper finds that the social entrepreneurship process involves both agency and context and is complex, and for some, reflects a strategic approach similar to commercial entrepreneurship. The paper also proposes further adaptation to Entrepreneurial Event Theory to capture this complexity of the social entrepreneurship process.

According to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), every child has a right to practise sports in a healthy, safe environment (art. 19). However, research indicates that child athletes experience various forms of violence in sports. Violence is particularly harmful to children, as the effects may be significant and long lasting. In addition, children often have difficulty identifying and reacting to violence. In this article, we first aim to shed light on the prevalence and implications of violence towards child athletes in sports. By child athletes, we mean athletes under the age of 18 (CRC art. 1). Thereafter, we discuss the following questions: (1) How does the CRC protect children in sports? (2) Can children’s rights be effectively protected through sports self-regulation of sports bodies and legal remedies? (3) Who is responsible for safeguarding children’s rights in sports? To answer these questions, we employ a multidisciplinary perspective that combines jurisprudence and sport psychology. In summary, we conclude that the CRC unequivocally prohibits all violence against children in all sectors of society, including sports. The responsibility for enforcing this prohibition lies with both member states and sports bodies. It is always the responsibility of adults. The full realisation of children’s rights requires action on multiple fronts, including legislation, information, education and resources.

A child’s right to participate is one of the general principles of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (crc). It is an integral part of a child’s right to have his/her best interest taken into account as a primary consideration. Therefore, it is indispensable in the decision-making connected with child welfare removals, the effects of which on the child’s life are long lasting and profound. In this article we examine the perceptions and practices of child-welfare professionals in the context of children’s rights, especially participation rights, in two neighbouring countries: Finland and Estonia. The findings are based on a survey and suggest that in the context of children’s rights, legislation also has its role in making children’s rights a reality, both as a prerequisite for reform as well as in shaping attitudes. However, legal regulation is not enough – full realisation also reguires more information, education and resources.