Abstract

The aim of the article. Its purpose is to analyse the main parameters of social entrepreneurship development in Columbia and Russia and identify the trends prevailing in this area. Results. A certain combination of the following methods was used: historical-comparative, empiric generalization, analysis, synthesis, comparison, clustering. The results obtained show that over a decade of existence of social entrepreneurship in Russia, stable projects of support of the disabled and elderly, revival of people’s crafts and trades, local tourism have been established. Experience of replicable social projects has been accumulated. Review of social entrepreneurship conducted by the authors has allowed concluding that as of today, social enterprises operate many areas in countries in question. Concentration of social enterprises is uneven across the country; almost half of them are concentrated in a few key regions. Social entrepreneurship is practiced by socially oriented non-profit organizations (15.3%); a large proportion of social entrepreneurs are engaged in education (11.5%). The authors have concluded that women prevail among social entrepreneurs (64%). As of now, infrastructure has been created to support and fund social projects. Still, the problem of social entrepreneurship recognition and perception in the original sense of the phenomenon remains. Due to low prevalence of educational programs in social entrepreneurship, there is a tangible lack of competent experts in social entrepreneurship. Concusions. The analysis of the obtaining financing possibilities by social entrepreneurs shows that there are more than 10 sources in Russia supporting of the social projects implementation. At the same time, along with the revealed positive tendencies in the social entrepreneurship development, the authors noted the low intensity of this sphere spread, due to the lack of understanding of the social entrepreneurship phenomenon among the general public and, as a result, the lack of interested and active participation in such activities. The solution to this problem we see in the active coverage of the experience of social entrepreneurship in the media, as well as in expanding the training of specialists with higher education, competent in the field of social entrepreneurship.

Keywords: social enterprises, mission, social entrepreneurship, crowdfunding, Russia, Columbia

JEL Classification: D64, O35.

Cite as: Kiseleva, L., Niño-Amézquita, J., Veynbender T. & Dubrovsky, V. (2017). Social entrepreneurship as an economic phenomenon: innovations and indicators of development. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 4, 250-259. https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2017.4-22

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

References

1. Batalina, M. (2008). Obzor opyta i koncepcij social’nogo predprinimatel’stva s uchetom vozmozhnostej ego primeneniya v sovremennoj Rossii [Review of experience and concepts of social entrepreneurship, taking into account the possibilities of its application in modern Russia]. Moscow. High School of Economics Publisher [in Russian].
2. Abrhám, J., Bilan, Y., Krauchenia, A., & Strielkowski, W. (2015). Planning horizon in labour supply of Belarusian small entrepreneurs. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 28(1), 773-787. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2015.1084238.
3. Simionescu, M., Ciuiu, D., Bilan, Y., & Strielkowski, W. (2016). GDP and Net Migration in Some Eastern and South-Eastern Countries of Europe. A Panel Data and Bayesian Approach. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, 12 (2), 161-175. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14254/1800-5845.2016/12-1/10.
4. Jankelová, N., Jankurová, A., & Masár, D. (2017). Effective management and self-government: current trends. Czech Journal of Social Sciences, Business and Economics, 6(2), 21-31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24984/cjssbe.2017.6.2.3.
5. Niño-Amézquita, J., Dubrovsky, V., & Jankurová, A. (2017). Innovations and competitiveness in regional development: a comparison of Latin America, Europe, and China. Czech Journal of Social Sciences, Business and Economics, 6(1), 28-36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24984/cjssbe.2017.6.1.4.
6. Janda, K., Rausser, G., & Strielkowski, W. (2013). Determinants of Profitability of Polish Rural Micro-Enterprises at the Time of EU Accession. Eastern European Countryside, 19, 177-217. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/eec-2013-0009.
7. Sabic-Lipovaca, A., Strielkowski, W., & Bilan, Y. (2016). Intertemporal substitution and labour supply of Bosnian SME’s. Amfiteatru Economic, 18(43), 634-653.
8. Streimikiene, D., Strielkowski, W., Bilan, Y., & Mikalauskas, I. (2016). Energy dependency and sustainable regional development in the Baltic States – a review. Geographica Pannonica, 20(2), 79-87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5937/GeoPan1602079S.
9. Varanavicius, V., Navikaite, A., Bilan, Y., & Strielkowski, W. (2017). Analysis of Consumer Behaviour in Regional Energy Consumption. Economy of Region, 13(1), 147-156. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17059/2017-1-14.
10. Chvátalová, I. (2016). Social policy in the European Union. Czech Journal of Social Sciences, Business and Economics, 5(1), 37-41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24984/cjssbe.2016.5.1.4.
11. Moyseyenko, I., & Ryvak, N. (2016). Indirect taxes in the mechanism of state regulation. International Economics Letters, 5(2), 63-71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24984/iel.2016.5.2.4.    
12. Strielkowski, W., Šperková, L., & Jacek, B. (2017). Migration and Remittances Nexus: Economic Implications and Analysis.  Amfiteatru Economic, 19(46), 772-772.
13. Strielkowski, W., Bilan, Y., & Demkiv, O. (2016). Religion and International Migration: A Case Study of Ukraine. Religions, 7(6). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/rel7060064. 
14. Jiroudkova, A., Rovna, L. A., Strielkowski, W., & Slosarcik, I. (2015). EU Accession, Transition and Further Integration for the Countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Economics & Sociology, 8(2), 11-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-789x.2015/8-2/1. 
15. Defourny, J., & Nyssens, M. (2011). Approches europeennes et americaines de l’entreprise social: une perspective comparative. Revue international de l’economie sociale, 319, 18-35. DOI: https://doi.org/10/7202/1020805ar. 
16. Mair, J., & Marti, I. (2006). Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 36-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10/1016/j.jwb.2005.09.002. 
17. Martin R.L., & Osberg S. (2007). Social Entrepreneurship: The Case for Definition. Stanford Social Innovation Review, Spring.
18. Machnacek, V., Strielkowski, W., Shishkin, A., & Bilan, Y. (2015). Determinants of Innovations and Competitiveness in the European Union. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 4, 224-232.
19. Peredo, A.M., & McLean, M.  (2006). Social entrepreneurship: A critical review of the concept. Journal of World Business. 41 (1), 56-65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2005.10.007.  
20. Seelos C., & Mair J. (2005). Social enrepreneurship: Creating new business models to serve the poor. Business Horizons, 48 (3), 241-246. DOI: https://doi.org/10/1016/j.bushor.2004.11.006. 
21. Koudelková, P., & Svobodová, P. (2014). Knowledge creation & sharing as essential determinants of SMEs innovation. International Economics Letters, 3(1), 12-20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24984/iel.2014.3.1.3.