Social entrepreneurship through the lens of the ‘everyday’: Inquiring the rhythms of female micro-credit recipients
ISBN
978 1 78897 231 4
Type
book section
Date Issued
2019-09-07
Author(s)
Editor(s)
de Bruin, Anne
Teasdale, Simon
Abstract (De)
Recent years have witnessed an increasing interest among academics as to whether,
and to what extent, social entrepreneurship (SE) offers the requisite means for
establishing an alternative form of capitalism (e.g. Baglioni, 2017; Dey, 2014; Driver,
2012; Horn, 2013; Nicholls & Teasdale, 2017; Shaw & de Bruin, 2013). While SE
has become an integral part of a broader conversation about the need for radically
transforming the purpose and function of business in society, differing perspectives
on the subject matter do exist. On one end of the spectrum we find those
purporting that SE puts a unique opportunity in front of us to realize a more
compassionate, fair or ‘humane’ market economy (Driver, 2012). Commentators
in this tradition have conceived of SE as an antidote against common ‘sins’ of
capitalism (Baglioni, 2017), such as overly self-interested and profit-maximizing
forms of doing business (Yunus, 2009). The general thinking is that by combining
social and market logics SE precipitates not just a higher form of profit, but a higher
form of economy (Driver, 2012). On the other end of the spectrum we find critical
evaluations delineating SE as a Trojan horse of capitalist expansion. These critics
have pointed out that social enterprises, by addressing essentially political goals
with business techniques, represent an inappropriate invasion of the community
sector by capitalist ideals (Paton, 2003). A related concern is that governments’
use of social enterprise policies effectively transforms civil society into a ‘governable
terrain’ (Carmel & Harlock, 2008) by normalizing capitalist ‘virtues’ such as
enterprise, competitiveness, and innovation (Dey & Steyaert, 2012). Since social
enterprises are said to be (overly) wedded to the logics of the market (Dart, 2004),
SE is charged with causing a democratic deficit, a decline in political participation
or decision-making (Eikenberry & Kluver, 2004; Horn, 2013). Thus, SE is perhaps
less the alternative to market capitalism that many see in it.
and to what extent, social entrepreneurship (SE) offers the requisite means for
establishing an alternative form of capitalism (e.g. Baglioni, 2017; Dey, 2014; Driver,
2012; Horn, 2013; Nicholls & Teasdale, 2017; Shaw & de Bruin, 2013). While SE
has become an integral part of a broader conversation about the need for radically
transforming the purpose and function of business in society, differing perspectives
on the subject matter do exist. On one end of the spectrum we find those
purporting that SE puts a unique opportunity in front of us to realize a more
compassionate, fair or ‘humane’ market economy (Driver, 2012). Commentators
in this tradition have conceived of SE as an antidote against common ‘sins’ of
capitalism (Baglioni, 2017), such as overly self-interested and profit-maximizing
forms of doing business (Yunus, 2009). The general thinking is that by combining
social and market logics SE precipitates not just a higher form of profit, but a higher
form of economy (Driver, 2012). On the other end of the spectrum we find critical
evaluations delineating SE as a Trojan horse of capitalist expansion. These critics
have pointed out that social enterprises, by addressing essentially political goals
with business techniques, represent an inappropriate invasion of the community
sector by capitalist ideals (Paton, 2003). A related concern is that governments’
use of social enterprise policies effectively transforms civil society into a ‘governable
terrain’ (Carmel & Harlock, 2008) by normalizing capitalist ‘virtues’ such as
enterprise, competitiveness, and innovation (Dey & Steyaert, 2012). Since social
enterprises are said to be (overly) wedded to the logics of the market (Dart, 2004),
SE is charged with causing a democratic deficit, a decline in political participation
or decision-making (Eikenberry & Kluver, 2004; Horn, 2013). Thus, SE is perhaps
less the alternative to market capitalism that many see in it.
Language
English
Book title
A Research Agenda of Social Entrepreneurship
Publisher
Edward Elgar
Publisher place
Cheltenham, UK
Start page
155
End page
163
Subject(s)
Eprints ID
260761
File(s)![Thumbnail Image]()
Loading...
open.access
Name
16 Ch. 16 Social entrepreneurship through the lens of the ‘everyday’ Kopie.pdf
Size
148.04 KB
Format
Adobe PDF
Checksum (MD5)
a3b1e04d728b981fb459dfd826e2f768