Ecosystems in support of social entrepreneurs: a literature review

Abstract

Purpose Social entrepreneurs (SEs) often face various challenges whereby they rely on the support of others to realize their objectives. In this context, ecosystem thinking is very helpful to understand how various stakeholders can assist SEs. The purpose of this paper is to develop a classification of the different types of support that third parties can provide to SEs. Design/methodology/approach The authors have developed the arguments in this paper based on a literature review of 258 articles on ecosystem thinking and social entrepreneurship. Articles have been retrieved from the Web of Science database, using as search parameters on the one hand publications in top journals, and on the other articles with more than 60 citations. In addition, the authors have received recommendations for relevant good-quality articles following a snowball procedure. Findings This paper contributes by distinguishing three support categories for SEs – fuel, hardware and DNA – based on what we know from ecosystem thinking. This paper elaborates on the building blocks of each support category, points at the relevant actors and discusses the interrelatedness across support categories. Research limitations/implications The three support categories are developed by building on predominantly ecosystem literature. This study implies that the scalability of SEs’ social impact does not only depend on their strengths but also on how well they are supported. Practical implications The three support categories are complementary to the strengths of individual SEs. SEs can therefore start with what they have, and then gradually expand their support structure by surrounding themselves with stakeholders that can assist them with fuel, infrastructure and DNA. Originality/value Social enterprise theories have elaborated on the various challenges that SEs face. Lack of resources, lack of staff, lack of professional management, underdeveloped networks and mission drift are seen as the most pressing. Although the relevant literature does rightly point out the indispensable support of others, it does so without differentiating between the kinds of support that can help SEs increase their social impact. This paper offers to remedy this by creating three separate support categories: fuel, hardware and DNA.

Social innovation in South Africa: building inclusive economies?

“…The availability of specialised knowledge and services (legal, accounting, IT), access to infrastructure (rooms, laboratories, co-working spaces) and different contacts (networking opportunities, events, conferences) further strengthen the business development and impact of SI. Yet, taking a closer look at the phenomena of SI, as it unfolds in the two social enterprise case studies, it has become evident that addressing issues of social exclusion in the absence of an enabling environment is challenging (Gonzalez and Dentchev 2021).…”

“…Firstly, by recognising that long-term economic and social challenges such as inequality, poverty, and unemployment, have resulted in widespread financial exclusion in South Africa (Ramaphosa 2020), with a relatively resource-poor and financially vulnerable non-profit sector attempting to meet societal disparities (Moboya 2017). Gonzalez and Dentchev (2021) argues that governments may promote social innovation by enhancing political willingness 3 , as well as develop and promote economic advantages for the marginalised and poor, through the creation of policies and legal frameworks for economic growth.…”

Social entrepreneurship in obesity prevention: A scoping review

“…Like any other kind of business venture, social ventures need a supportive ecosystem with elements such as funding, accelerators, access to advice and social networks, links with private sector companies, and even government support. 24,25 As obesity is a challenge faced by many developed countries, it is unsurprising that the majority of social ventures in obesity (93%) originated and operated in high-income, developed countries. However, the low representation among developing countries is a cause for concern.…”

“…Like any other kind of business venture, social ventures need a supportive ecosystem with elements such as funding, accelerators, access to advice and social networks, links with private sector companies, and even government support. 24 , 25 …”

A resource‐based view on the role of universities in supportive ecosystems for social entrepreneurs

“…Collaboration between universities and other ecosystem actors facilitates the exchange of specific resources but also in the support that universities can offer to industry and society, for example in the process of transferring knowledge to society (Good et al, 2019; O'Kane et al, 2020). Therefore, universities play a key role in the entrepreneurial ecosystem, due to their privileged position at the intersection between education, research, and the transfer of knowledge (Audretsch et al, 2019: Diaz Gonzalez & Dentchev, 2020).…”