An epistemological critique of social entrepreneurship definitions

Abstract

If entrepreneurship is amid jungle of theories and has many theorists, its social orientation or what is known as social entrepreneurship (SE) is amid arid land of theories and suffers under-theorizing which could be inherently stemmed from its diversely proposed definitions. To be situated in an embryonic pre-paradigmatic phase, getting to a more unanimous definition in this realm is the first step in laying a solid foundation for SE theorizing. As a pioneering study, the paper aims to investigate the epistemological foundations of SE definitions critically to propose a more convergent definition for SE. To fulfill this goal epistemological justifications for the definitional components of SE are presented. Therefore, it was necessary to rely on the relevant philosophical schools of thought in Epistemology (e.g. Empiricism, Internalism, Externalism, Verificationism and Falsificationism); first to discuss the controversies and oppositions to some components of the definitions for their exclusion and then to justify some other definitional components which are mostly accepted by the scholars for their inclusion in a final SE definition. Critical approach has helped us in specifying the maneuvering of thoughts in this field and determining the epistemological and definitional boundaries of SE. Finally, a more epistemologically-supported and justified definition was presented at the end of the paper. Moreover, one of the potential contributions of this paper could be its consensusmaking impact among SE scholars in defining SE phenomenon, which could also pave the way for future theorizing in SE. The originality of the paper lies in the application of Internalism, Externalism, Verificationism and Falsificationism concepts to SE definitions.

Crowdfunding and Social Entrepreneurship: Spotlight on Intermediaries

“…The study of social entrepreneurship has yielded numerous research contributions in recent years [34][35][36][37]. However, there is no consensus on the definition of social entrepreneurship [35][36][37][38][39][40]. Social entrepreneurship can, therefore, be considered an "umbrella construct" that covers a wide array of phenomena [41].…”

Social entrepreneurship innovation: A study from Mexico

“…In this sense, Forouharfar, Rowshan, and Salarzehi (2018) reviewed definitions of SE by more than 20 authors to conclude the main features that define this term are 1) social innovation that seeks to improve the conditions of those who are in a situation of vulnerability, 2) the social transformation of those involved in entrepreneurship, 3) the acknowledgement of chances that create social value, 4) a social mission, 5) initiatives not restricted to a single sector of society -as they can be for-profit or non-profit and may be in the public or private sector -and 6) creativity as the basis for the development and prosperity of entrepreneurship.…”

Practices of Defining the Notion of Social Entrepreneurship

“…The terminological polysemy and contextual variation, multiple and diverse approaches in studies concerning the phenomenon of social entrepreneurship indicate a preparadigmatic stage of scholarly knowledge of social entrepreneurship, according to A. Forouharfar, S. Rowshan and H. Salarzehi [8]. The vague contours of the notion of social entrepreneurship and the related term used in the context of nearly any type of socially useful activities causes the fragmentation of the subject domain of social entrepreneurship and hinders the institutionalisation of social entrepreneurship as a phenomenon, as O.B.…”

“…Zhokhova [11], M.K. Baymuhasheva and R.K. Sabirova [12], A. Chepurenko [10], A. Forouharfar, S. Rowshan and H. Salarzehi [8,13], D.Kelly [14].…”