The Thread of Inchoate Demand in Social Entrepreneurship

There is an emerging belief amongst non-profit, environmental and business leaders that social entrepreneurship may present an alternative solution to many of the issues we face. Whether the problem is homelessness (Hibbert et al., 2002), funding for non-profit art organizations (Hughes and Luksetich, 2004), or environmental degradation (Cohen and Winn, 2007), one can find active new ventures led by those labelling themselves as ‘social entrepreneurs’. As with the broader field of entrepreneurship, there has been a struggle to define social entrepreneurship and its contribution as a field of study (Venkataraman, 1997). Some scholars have focused on outlining key differences with and similarities to ‘traditional’ entrepreneurship (Austin et al., 2006; Dees, 1998) and others have focused on the prioritization of a social mission in these organizations (Dees, 1998; Mair and Marti, 2006). Attempts to create a taxonomy delineating non-profit, for profit, and complementary profit models have been advanced (Fowler, 2000). While some have chosen to squarely place social entrepreneurship within the realm of non-profit organizations utilizing traditional business techniques (Zietlow, 2001), others describe social entrepreneurship as crossing nonprofit, business and government boundaries (Austin et al., 2006). On the whole, it appears as though the focus of attention is on the ‘social’ in social entrepreneurship rather than the ‘entrepreneurship’ that goes into addressing social issues of interest.