Social Entrepreneurship as a Path for Social Change and Driver of Sustainable Development: A Systematic Review and Research Agenda

Bansal, Sanchita; Garg, Isha; Sharma, Gagan Deep

doi:10.3390/su11041091

Cited by 196 publications

(149 citation statements)

References 113 publications

(110 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

142

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The methodology of the review was inspired by Denyer, Tranfield, and Smart [21], Nofal, Nicolaou, Symeonidou, and Shane [22], Talan and Sharma [23] and Bansal, Garg, and Sharma [24], involving a review protocol to enable transparency and replicability by providing an explicit description of each step taken during the entire process of review, specifying the research questions addressed, the search strategy, and the criteria of exclusion and inclusion of the studies in the review [25]. This paper is an extension of a developing paper [26] that highlights the research gaps and scope for future research.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Can I Sustain My Happiness? A Review, Critique and Research Agenda for Economics of Happiness

Jain

Sharma

Mahendru³

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human beings want to live in a state of happiness and prosperity, but happiness is important not just for the well-being of individuals but for the well-being of society. To ensure the maximization of happiness, it is necessary to consider more than just money, and rather include the right understanding of happiness at the individual level, the family level, the society level, and the environmental (nature) level. This paper contributes to the existing body of knowledge by consolidating the findings of the literature; grouping those into major themes and sub-themes; describing the mechanisms based on the empirical papers by highlighting the independent, dependent, control, and moderating variables, to study the causal relationships between variables under study; proposing an agenda for future research; and informing the policymakers about decisions influencing the human happiness level through legislative rules and regulations. Our results suggest prioritizing the conceptualization of happiness while computing the happiness level at the individual or collective levels. Furthermore, the study recommends governments to establish the conditions enabling individuals to report happiness independently from the political pressure to answer strategically for impressive happiness level figures at the macro level.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Can I Sustain My Happiness? A Review, Critique and Research Agenda for Economics of Happiness

Jain

Sharma

Mahendru³

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A. Moskvina and D. Dolzhikova [4], S. Bansal, I. Garg and G.D. Sharma [5], P. Bento, M. Jacquinet and R. Albuquerque [6], N. Ivashchenko, N. Bulygina [15], D. Littlewood, D. Holt [16], E. Muralidharan and S. Pathak [7], G.K.S. Nimeshi [17], H. Utomo, S. Priyanto, L. Suharti, G. Sasongko [35] and others approach social entrepreneurship as a crucial factor of social change focused on the challenges of sustainable development.…”

Section: Konyagina and M Krasnopevtseva [3]mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Researchers of entrepreneurial practices in different activity domains frame the definition of entrepreneurship as a type of proactive behaviour generating, as a result, ideas, goods or institutions. In the context of their research of entrepreneurship, scholars S. Bansal, I. Garg and G.D. Sharma [5], V.S. Hodgkin [21], D. Kelly [14], E. Muralidharan and S. Pathak [7] deliberate on the extremely important aptitude of an entrepreneur to identify new chances and realise them by attracting the missing resources.…”

Section: Konyagina and M Krasnopevtseva [3]mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Social entrepreneurship as a factor of social change helping to counter acute social problems, including social inequality, illiteracy, poverty, etc., becomes a crucial resource of socioeconomic development and wellbeing, as pointed out by Russian and foreign researchers, such as Baranova N.V. [1], M. Batalina, A. Moskovskaya, L. Taradina [2], M.N. Konyagina and M. Krasnopevtseva [3], A. Moskvina and D. Dolzhikova [4], S. Bansal, I. Garg and G.D. Sharma [5], P. Bento, M. Jacquinet and R. Albuquerque [6], E. Muralidharan and S. Pathak [7] and others.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Practices of Defining the Notion of Social Entrepreneurship

Shapovalov*¹,

Igropulo²,

Arutyunyan³

2019

IJITEE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper presents the results of an interdisciplinary comparative analysis of modern research practices concerning social entrepreneurship in Russian and foreign traditions in order to establish the specifics of defining the notion of social entrepreneurship in interdisciplinary discourse. The analytical basis of the study comprised the fundamental provisions and concepts of open innovation and human capital, the theory of public goods, the theoretical provisions concerning the structure and substance of social action, corporate social responsibility, the concept of uneven innovation activity, the principles of social partnership, social viability and complementarity. The research problems were solved using the methods of systems, structural and functional, institutional, comparative and content analyses. The selection of analysed papers was conducted in the databases of the analytical information platform Web of Science, the National Scientific Citation Database Russian Science Citation Index, the Scopus abstract base, the databases of academic networks ResearchGate, Academia.edu, etc. The paper indicates that Russian and foreign discourses address the problem of social entrepreneurship primarily in the context of economic, managerial, sociological, psychological and pedagogical research practices. It observes differentiation in the approaches to the conceptualisation and definition of the notion of social entrepreneurship under the applicable subject axiomatics and methodology and identifies the specifics of defining the notion of social entrepreneurship in interdisciplinary discourse. The research results make the foundation for further development of the methodology of definitions in the area of social entrepreneurship and serve to ensure consistency in the respective subject field and its relevance to the complex nature of social entrepreneurship as a phenomenon calling to be addressed from systemic and interdisciplinary positions.

show abstract

“…A consensus is emerging that it is important to understand the phenomenon of social entrepreneurship, as it has an impact on social and economic development [20,32], as it creates both social value for society and economic benefits. The analysis of the status of social entrepreneurship is still sparse [20], especially in international comparison.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Impact, Innovations, and Market Activity of Social Enterprises: Comparison of European Countries

Hojnik

Crnogaj

2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this article is to provide an insight into the specifics of social entrepreneurship in different business environments. The article, therefore, examines selected characteristics of social enterprises, namely social value, innovations, and market activities. In addition, differences in the start-up and operational phases of social enterprises were measured. Social enterprises must operate in a specific business context, which essentially hinders or promotes social entrepreneurship. As culture differs between north-western and south-eastern Europe, it is important to examine the differences in social entrepreneurship between these two groups of countries. To analyze the proposed characteristics, we used the latest data from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor special report on social entrepreneurship. The results indicate that there exist differences in social impact measurement between observed groups of countries. Additionally, we confirmed differences between the observed groups of countries in terms of innovations and market activity of social enterprises in the operational phase. Our results also suggest that social entrepreneurship is more developed in north-western European countries than in south-eastern ones, with some elements in the north-western countries being more noticeable in the operational phase compared to the start-up phase.

show abstract

Social Entrepreneurship as a Path for Social Change and Driver of Sustainable Development: A Systematic Review and Research Agenda

Cited by 196 publications

References 113 publications

Can I Sustain My Happiness? A Review, Critique and Research Agenda for Economics of Happiness

Can I Sustain My Happiness? A Review, Critique and Research Agenda for Economics of Happiness

Practices of Defining the Notion of Social Entrepreneurship

Social Impact, Innovations, and Market Activity of Social Enterprises: Comparison of European Countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About