The multiple faces of social entrepreneurship: A review of definitional issues based on geographical and thematic criteria

Bacq, Sophie; Janssen, Frank

doi:10.1080/08985626.2011.577242

Cited by 761 publications

(642 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

553

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Bacq and Janssen (2011) observe a transatlantic divide in the way social entrepreneurship is approached, due to different conceptions of capitalism, the government's role and in particular geographic and sociological criteria, such as the concept of 'community'. In a recent review, Nick Bailey (2012) asserts that British CEs need to learn from the successes of American CDCs since they are basically similar: "… whilst the UK political economy is moving towards less state intervention and more community self-help [as is also the case in the US], the community development corporations in the USA provide an indication of the future direction community enterprises might take in the UK as part of a broad trend towards civic capacity building" (Bailey, 2012, p. 1).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The potential of community entrepreneurship for neighbourhood revitalization in the United Kingdom and the United States

Varady¹,

Kleinhans²,

Ham³

2017

Entrepreneurial Neighbourhoods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -The global economic crisis has had a major impact on government spending for urban regeneration. In the context of these austerity regimes, in many European countries, community entrepreneurship and active citizenship are increasingly considered as a means to continue small-scale urban revitalisation. This paper investigates recent literature on both British community enterprises (CEs) and American community development corporations (CDCs). The aim is to assess the current potential of community entrepreneurship in neighbourhood revitalization in the United States and the United Kingdom. Design/methodology/approach -Starting from a seminal article, this paper reviews literature focusing on the role of CEs and CDCs in neighbourhood revitalization. Differences and similarities are analysed, taking into account national context differences. Findings -While CDCs have a relatively successful record in affordable housing production in distressed areas, CDCs are fundamentally limited in terms of reversing processes of community decline. CEs in the UK have focused on non-housing issues. Research limitations/implications -This paper asks the question what CEs can learn fromCDCs in terms of scope, aims, strategies, accountability, assets and partnerships with public and private actors. However, a systematic literature review has not been conducted. Originality/value -Our comparison reveals similarities but also differences with regard to aims, organizational characteristics, co-operation on multiple scales, and community participation. Apart from lessons that can be learned, we provide recommendations for further research that should cover the lack of empirical evidence in this field.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The potential of community entrepreneurship for neighbourhood revitalization in the United Kingdom and the United States

Varady¹,

Kleinhans²,

Ham³

2017

Entrepreneurial Neighbourhoods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this sense, the EMES approach does not entirely subscribe to the idea of increasingly "blurred frontiers" among organisational forms, as suggested by other perspectives on social enterprise and social entrepreneurship (Dacin et al 2010;Bacq and Janssen 2011;Nicholls and Murdock 2012).…”

Section: Social Enterprise and Social Innovationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alternative Economies and Spaces : New Perspectives for a Sustainable Economy

Zademach¹,

Hillebrand²

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.Cover concept: Kordula Röckenhaus, Bielefeld Cover illustration: Alexandra Kaiser, Eichstätt, 2011 Printed by Majuskel Medienproduktion GmbH, Wetzlar ISBN 978-3-8376-2498-4 Content AcknowledgementsThe volume in hand contains a collection of contributions that are concerned with alternative modes of economic and social exchange, among them alternative currency schemes, fair trade, and social enterprises. Earlier versions of these papers have been presented in the context of the study program 'Space -Society -Economy' at the Catholic University Eichstätt-Ingolstadt during the winter term 2011/12. This new program was established on the initiative of the Geography Department as a platform that aims to introduce, discuss and advance new concepts and debates at the intersections between geography, the social sciences and economics. For this purpose, each term addresses a specific topic in usually five public lectures of international guest speakers and additional work in an accompanying seminar.It is worth noting that this study program is fully financed by tuition fees of local students; thus, first of all, we wish to thank our students for making these events possible. In this vein, we also want to thank our student assistants Julia De Gregorio and Julian Rochlitz for their excellent support in organising the series as well as valuable comments on earlier drafts of the introductory chapter. A special thanks is also due to Alexandra Kaiser for her assistance with the figures in this book and for designing the web page and further announcement materials for the study program that not least influenced the design of the cover of the book. Our team assistant Theresia | ALTERNATIVE ECONOMIES AND SPACESNeubauer deserves special appreciation for her great care and patience in processing all administrative tasks.Our utmost gratitude goes, of course, to the distinguished colleagues that accepted our invitation to present and discuss selected parts of their contemporary work in course of the series; they were not deterred by the efforts to travel to wintery snowy Eichstätt, in some cases (such as in the case of Roger Lee who did the whole trip from London by train) indeed a weary journey. By dint of their insightful reflections and rich illustrations of how alternatives are performed at various scales and spaces, they offered all participants in the program, students and colleagues, a great opportunity to delve deeper into the highly relevant, challenging and exciting project to interrogate and practice alternatives in relation to and beyond economic mainstream. We hope that this volume contributes to carrying this project a little further. Hans-Martin Zademach and Sebastian Hillebrand Eichstätt, March 201...

show abstract

“…Recent attempts to reconcile the literature and provide theoretical frameworks that may advance scholarship are provided by Dacin et al (2010), Nicholls (2010) and Santos (2012). Most scholars who research the topic argue that social entrepreneurship is distinct from 'traditional' or 'commercial' entrepreneurship because social entrepreneurs prioritize social goals before financial goals (Dees 1998;Mair and Marti 2006;Dacin et al 2010;Bacq and Janssen 2011). This priority does not prohibit profits from being made; however, the profits tend to be reinvested consistent with the social goals that are established by the entrepreneur and his/her venture.…”

Section: The Concept Of Social Entrepreneurshipmentioning

confidence: 99%