Access Journal

Access to Science, Business, Innovation in the Digital Economy

How independent science can contribute to the field of social entrepreneurship in Scandinavia

Views: 114
Downloads: 4
Download PDF

Abstract:
The purpose of the article is to suggest an analytical framework that shows how science can stimulate social entrepreneurship in the Scandinavian welfare states, and the difference between science and practice. The article relies on secondary source material, and is a work of synthesis and comparative science. The procedure has been to present thoughts and theories from outstanding scientists, authors and individuals who engage in topics related to entrepreneurship, innovation, social science and economic growth. The understanding of social entrepreneurship is built upon science on entrepreneurship in the European tradition. Because many different activities are called social entrepreneurship, this leads to a dilution of the concept. Innovation is free in thought and will, and it´s the social entrepreneur that drives the innovation. Creativity is necessary for a successful innovation: the creative individual, creative process, creative environment and creative product. The entrepreneur's impact on the economy as a catalyst for growth and development of the society, is significant. We need independent international science and theories for social entrepreneurs to access independent information.
Keywords:
Pages:
192-202
JEL Classification:
A13, D69, O10, O35
How to cite:
Bakos, N.H (2021). How independent science can contribute to the field of social entrepreneurship in Scandinavia. Access to science, business, innovation in digital economy, ACCESS Press, 2(2): 192-202. https://doi.org/10.46656/access.2021.2.2(6)
References:
  • Alestalo, M.; Kuhnle, S. (1987). The Scandinavian route: economic, social, and political developments in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. International Journal of sociology, 16(03-04), 3-38.
  • Andersen, T. (2004). Challenges to the Scandinavian welfare model. European Journal of political economy, 20, 743-754.
  • Baumol, W. J. (1968). Entrepreneurship in Economic Theory. American Economic Review, 58(2), 64-71.
  • Berkowitz, P. (1999). Virtue and the Making of Modern Liberalism. New Jersey, Princeton University Press.
  • Berman, S. (2006). The Primacy of Politics Social Democracy and the Making of Europe's Twentieth Century. Cambridge, Oxford University Press.
  • Briggs, A. (2001). Michael Young: Social Entrepreneur. New York, Palgrave Publishers Ltd.
  • Cantillon, R. (1755/2010). An Essay on Economic Theory. Alabama, Mises Institute.
  • Cornelius, B., Landström, H., & Persson, O. (2006). Entrepreneurial studies: The dynamic research front of a developing social science. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(3), 375–398.
  • Dees, J. G., & Anderson, B. B. (2003). For-Profit Social Ventures, International Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 2(1), 1-26.
  • Dees, J. G. (2012). A Tale of Two Cultures: Charity, Problem Solving, and the Future of Social Entrepreneurship, Journal of Business Ethics, 111(3).
  • Dees, J. G. (1998). Enterprising Nonprofits, Harvard Business Review, 76(1), 54–67.
  • Dees, J. G. (2007). Taking Social Entrepreneurship Seriously. Society, 44(3), 24-31.
  • Drayton, B. (2006). Everyone a changemaker. Social entrepreneurship’s ultimate goal. MIT Press.
  • Drucker, P. F. (2006). Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Practice and Principles. New York, Harper Paperbacks.
  • Fayol, H. (1937). The administrative theory of the state. In L. H. Gulick & L. F. Urwick (Eds.), Henri Fayol: Critical Evaluations in Business and Management, Volume 1 (101-114). Papers on the Science of Administration, Institute of Public Administration. London, Routledge.
  • Hilson, M. (2008). The Nordic Model: Scandinavia since 1945. London, Reaktion Books LTD.
  • Johannisson, B. (2004) Entrepreneurship in Scandinavia: Bridging Individualism and Collectivism. Crossroads of Entrepreneurship, 225-241.
  • Kirchhoff, B. A. (1989/1994). Entrepreneurship and Dynamic Capitalism: The Economics of Business Firm Formation and Growth. Westport, Greenwood Publishing Group.
  • Kuhnle, S., & Hort, S. E. O. (2004). The Developmental Welfare State in Scandinavia, lessons for the developing world. Social policy and development, 1020-8208(17), 1-23.
  • Lie, E. (2012). Norwegian economic policies after 1905. Oslo, Universitetsforlaget.
  • Leadbeater, C. (1997). The Rise of the Social Entrepreneur. London, Demos.
  • Lysestøl, P. (2002). The future of the welfare states. Nordic social work, (2), 102-106.
  • Mair, J., & Martí, I. (2006). Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 36-44.
  • Marglin, S. A., & Schor, J. B. (1992). The golden age of capitalism, reinterpretation of the postwar experience. The Economic Journal, 102(412), 639-641.
  • Martin, R., & Osberg, S. (2007). Social Entrepreneurship: The Case for Definition. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 5(28).
  • Petrella, F., & Richez-Battesti, N. (2014). Social entrepreneur, social entrepreneurship and social enterprise: semantics and controversies. Journal of Innovation Economics & Management, 2(14), 143-156.
  • Rosenberg, N. (2004). Innovation and economic growth. Retrieved March 28, 2016, from https://www.oecd.org/cfe/tourism/34267902.pdf.
  • Say, J.-B. (1821/1971). A treatise on political economy. New York, Augustus M. Kelley Publishers.
  • Sandal, J.-U. (2010). Development in social entrepreneurship. Roskilde, Center for Socialt Entreprenørskab.
  • Sandal, J.-U. (2008) A Nordic perspective on social entrepreneurship. CSE Årsrapport, p. 113-127.
  • Sandal, J.-U. (2003). Searching for the Entrepreneur, can Joseph A Schumpeter’s theories identify and differentiate entrepreneurs in the 20th Century? Stockholm, Almqvist and Wiksell International.
  • Sandal, J.-U. (2012). Work, innovation and the industriousness of life. Ekonomiska Samfundets Tidsskrift, 65(3), p. 157-176.
  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1934/1978). The theory of economic development. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Steyaert, C. (2000). Creating worlds: Political Agendas of Entrepreneurship. LOK Working Paper, (2).
  • Szirmai, A., Naudè, W., & Goedhuys, M. (2011). Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Economic Development. Maastricht, Oxford University Press.
  • Taylor, F. W. (1997). The principles of scientific management. New York, Dover Publications.
  • Thurik, A.R., Stam, E., & Audretsc, D.B. (2013). The rise of the entrepreneurial economy and the future of dynamic capitalism. Technovation, 33 (8–9), 302–310.
  • Thurik, A.R., & Audretsc, D.B. (2001). Linking entrepreneurship to growth. Small Business Economics, 13(1), 27-55.
  • Thurik, A.R., & Audretsc, D.B. (2001). Linking entrepreneurship to growth. Small Business Economics, 13(1), 27-55. Vike, H. (2002). The conscience of power, on political management and dilemma in The Welfare State. Oslo, Gyldendal forlag AS.
  • Weber, M. (1964). The Theory of Social and Economic Organisation. New York, Oxford University Press.
  • Young, M. (1968/1994). The Rise of the Meritocracy. Middlesex, Transaction Publishers.
Funding:
Fil. Dr. Jan-U. Sandal Institute

This scientific article was created at the Fil. Dr. Jan-U. Sandal Institute, Finstadjordet, Norway under the supervision of Prof. Fil. Dr. Jan-Urban Sandal, Executive Director and Owner at the Fil. Dr. Jan-U. Sandal Institute (Excellence in Science and Education).

Publish your science journal

If you like ACCESS journals system, you can publish your journal with us at a reasonable price