research topics on social entrepreneurship

• Browse All Articles
• Newsletter Sign-Up

SocialEntrepreneurship →

No results found in working knowledge.

• Were any results found in one of the other content buckets on the left?
• Try removing some search filters.
• Use different search filters.

Advertisement

A systematic literature review of women in social entrepreneurship

• Review article
• Published: 29 October 2022
• Volume 16 , pages 935–970, ( 2022 )

Cite this article

• EuiBeom Jeong 1 &
• Hanna Yoo   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4139-9420 2  

4594 Accesses

6 Citations

Explore all metrics

A recent increase in research on social entrepreneurship (SEship) has been characterized by more focus on gender-based topics, especially women. To address the status of women in SEship, we conduct a rigorous systematic literature review of 1142 papers on SEship and 59 articles on the sub-domain of women. Based on the findings, the article presents several suggestions for future research: (i) reinterpretation of theoretical concepts, (ii) social integration and overcoming gender discrimination, (iii) expansion of sectors and regions, and (iv) operation strategy and performance factors. This study contributes to the development of SEship by providing an overview of women in SEship.

Similar content being viewed by others

The impact of entrepreneurship on economic, social and environmental welfare and its determinants: a systematic review

Thomas Neumann

Women’s entrepreneurship and culture: gender role expectations and identities, societal culture, and the entrepreneurial environment

Amanda Bullough, Ulrike Guelich, … Leon Schjoedt

Economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on entrepreneurship and small businesses

Maksim Belitski, Christina Guenther, … Roy Thurik

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Social entrepreneurship (hereafter, SEship) is defined as an “entrepreneurial activity with an embedded social purpose” (Austin et al. 2006 ). In recent decades, it has evolved as a significant research domain for firms and academics (Kannampuzha and Hockerts 2019 ; Kim 2022 ; Rey-Martí et al. 2016 ), and the number of studies and publications on this topic have steadily increased (Hota et al. 2020 ; McQuilten 2017 ; Short et al. 2009 ; Zahra et al. 2014 ). The growth in research covers topics such as the social impact of SEship (Nguyen et al. 2015 ), social innovation and SEship (Phillips et al. 2015 ), SEship business strategies and business models (George and Reed 2016 ; Roy and Karna 2015 ), comparisons with business-oriented entrepreneurship (Simón-Moya et al. 2012 ), and value creation and dissemination by SEship (Brandsen and Karré 2011 ; Nega and Schneider 2014 ; Sulphey and Alkahtani 2017 ).

Women, representing the fastest-growing category of entrepreneurship, are receiving attention from scholars as important organizational members and beneficiaries (Anggadwita et al. 2021 ; Gupta et al. 2019 ; Hechavarría et al. 2017 ; Lee and Jung 2015 ; Tripathy et al. 2022 ; Yang et al. 2020 ). This phenomenon provides the opportunity to review and reflect on how the field of SEship will progress. Since discussions on women in SEship can contribute to expanding the entrepreneurship field and the diversity of gender studies (Calás et al. 2009 ; Rosca et al. 2020 ), it is important to synthesize these discussions collectively. Thus, the existing literature must be collated and reflected upon to identify new directions and future challenges. However, to the best of our knowledge, there has been no thorough literature review study on women in SEship compared to overall SEship using a rigorous systematic literature review method.

As for conducting such a literature review, the researchers took two perspectives: the popularity-based approach and the network-based approach (Choi et al. 2011 ; Fahimnia et al. 2015 ; Xu et al. 2018 ; Park and Jeong 2019 ; Gupta et al. 2020 ; Hota et al. 2020 ; Tan et al. 2020 ). However, the popularity-based approach, also known as bibliometric analysis, is recognized as unsuitable for identifying shared topical issues within a given research field despite offering significant insight into a given field by examining the usage frequency in published papers (Choi et al. 2011 ; Park and Jeong 2019 ). In contrast, the network-based approach, which includes citation and co-citation analysis, explores the significant and commonly shared topical issues among published papers in a given field. However, the network-based approach does not create a further specified knowledge network within a given research area (Choi et al. 2011 ; Park and Jeong 2019 ).

To address the perceived drawbacks in the extant literature and achieve a more comprehensive research evaluation on this topic, this study conducted a systematic literature review by combining the traditional systematic literature review approach (bibliometric, citation, and co-citation analysis) with keyword network analysis. Keyword network analysis is an effective method for examining the research trends of specific issues in a given field by constructing a keyword network based on nodes (author’s keywords) and links (the occurrence of the author’s keywords in other papers). However, in SEship, few literature review studies have adopted keyword network analysis to discover overall trends and issues. Thus, we attempt to achieve the following three objectives in this study by applying a keyword network analysis to achieve a more rigorous systematic literature review:

Identify influential issues and topics that significantly contribute to the study of women in SEship field;

Understand the evolution of women in SEship by identifying linkages among core papers and the evolution of these linkages over time;

Identify the status of women in SEship research and discover future directions and challenges by comparing this to overall SEship research.

By addressing the above-stated research objectives, we mainly contribute to the development of women in SEship field in three ways. First, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first research of its type to comprehensively examine the literature on women in SEship within overall SEship by combining traditional systematic approaches with keyword network analysis. Second, we contribute to understanding an overview of women in SEship within the overall SEship field by identifying main issues, emerging issues, and key topics. Third, we suggest research gaps and outline important research directions and considerations for future women in SEship field.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section  2 describes the research background by reviewing systematic literature on women in SEship. Section  3 describes the applied methodologies (bibliometric and network analysis) for a rigorous systematic literature review on women in SEship. Then, we exhibit the results of the bibliometric and network analyses using Netminer, as a network analysis software tool, in Sects.  4 and 5 , respectively. In Sect.  6 , we discuss research gaps and future research opportunities. Lastly, in Sect.  7 , we conclude our research by providing the implications and contributions along with the limitations.

2 Previous systematic literature reviews of women in SEship

According to emerging literature, women are making significant contributions to entrepreneurial activities (Noguera et al. 2013 ) and economic development (Hechavarría et al. 2019 ; Kelley et al. 2017 ) in terms of creating new jobs and increasing gross domestic product (GDP) (Ayogu and Agu 2015 ; Bahmani-Oskooee et al. 2012 ). Women also positively impact reducing poverty and social exclusion (Langowitz and Minniti 2007 ; Rae 2015 ). Furthermore, women, as important accelerators, have an important role in gender in promoting social entrepreneurial intentions (Cardella et al. 2021 ). There are an ever-growing number of articles related to women in SEship (Lortie et al. 2017 ; Rosca et al. 2020 ; Sahrakorpi and Bandi 2021 ), providing opportunities to reflect on how to advance the field. However, despite the growing number of studies on women in SEship, there are a lack of sufficient research regarding female social entrepreneurs as strategy adopters to solve social problems (Rosca et al. 2020 ). Thus, the existing literature must be synthesized and analyzed to identify new directions and challenges.

Despite the growing importance of women in SEship, the status of women’s research within SEship remains unclear. Although existing studies on women in SEship have contributed significantly to our understanding of it, little is known about how the field of research is evolving, which management areas are being addressed, which issues have influenced these given areas, and what the relationships are among the main topics. Therefore, to identify potential research gaps and develop new ideas and theories that serve as a basis for future research, we must map and evaluate the current body of research on women in SEship.

Researchers have adopted two perspectives in conducting literature reviews on women in SEship. One perspective is the popularity-based approach, which uses bibliometric analysis (Choi et al. 2011 ). The popularity-based approach’s bibliometric analysis offers insights not captured or evaluated by other reviews using authors, their affiliation, popular words used in titles and abstracts, and author keywords (Choi et al. 2011 ; Fahimnia et al. 2015 ; Gupta et al. 2020 ; Tan et al. 2020 ; Xu et al. 2018 ). The popularity-based approach indicates the significance of words or keywords in a given discipline by examining their frequency of use in published papers. However, this method is unsuitable for associating shared topical issues within a given research field because it is unable to identify relationships among published articles (Choi et al. 2011 ; Park and Jeong 2019 ).

Another approach is the network-based approach, which conducts network analyses such as citation and co-citation analysis using citations generated from papers (Choi et al. 2011 ; Fahimnia et al. 2015 ; Hota et al. 2020 ; Xu et al. 2018 ). Citation analysis is implemented to explore influential issues by counting how frequently an article is cited by other articles (Fahimnia et al. 2015 ; Park and Jeong 2019 ; Hota et al. 2020 ; Xu et al. 2018 ). Co-citation analysis identifies commonly shared topical issues within a given field through a co-citation network comprising a set of papers as nodes and their co-occurrences in other papers as links (Hota et al. 2020 ; Leydesdorff 2011 ; Radicchi et al. 2004 ). However, these network analyses have mainly focused on published articles rather than specified author keywords (Park and Jeong 2019 ). Therefore, from a comprehensive perspective, a network commonly adopted for citations or co-citation analyses does not directly derive a further specified knowledge network within a given research area (Choi et al. 2011 ; Park and Jeong 2019 ). To comprehensively identify topics on women in SEship, we must include specific keywords not involved in the citation and co-citation network (Park and Jeong 2019 ). Therefore, to address this, we implement a rigorous systematic literature review that includes specified author keywords through traditional systematic literature review approaches (bibliometric, citation, and co-citation analysis).

Furthermore, as no literature review has been conducted on this topic, it is not known how research on women in SEship has developed and is being implemented.

3 Research methodology

We conducted a systematic literature review on women in SEship by combining traditional systematic approaches with keyword network analysis. First, we selected social entrepreneurship-related journals from the SCOPUS database. We used “social entrepre*,” “social enterpri*,” “social venture,” and “social business” as the primary search keywords based on previous studies on SEship (Hota et al. 2020 ; Saebi et al. 2019 ; Gupta et al. 2020 ). Only articles written in journals with a 1.0 impact factor or greater were used to select the most influential papers. Despite the importance of providing valuable and insightful managerial guidance to women social entrepreneurs in the business environment (Rosca et al. 2020 ), it remains unclear how women entrepreneurs navigate. Thus, we used only business administration journal articles written in English and excluded conference papers, book series, commercial publications, and magazine articles. Therefore, the initial search attempts resulted in 1142 papers published from 1972 to 2021 (searched in December 2021). As this study is explicitly addressing the status of women in SEship field, we further collected 59 papers on this topic from the 1142 articles using search keywords, such as “female,” “woman,” and “women.”

This study attempts to achieve the following objectives. First, what is the current status of research on women in SEship? Second, what is the most influential paper among studies on women in SEship? Third, how does research on women in SEship change over time? To identify those questions, first, we adopted bibliometric analysis to provide insights on items, such as author, journal, and publication statistics. Second, we conducted a citation analysis to identify the most influential papers to analyze the status of overall SEship and women in SEship. Third, we performed a co-citation analysis to identify commonly shared topics through the co-occurrence of two given articles in other papers. A dynamic co-citation analysis was conducted to understand the evolution of overall SEship and women in SEship over time. Finally, to address the perceived drawbacks of a systematic literature review that uses only traditional approaches (bibliometric, citation, and co-citation analysis), we performed a keyword network analysis to represent the complete “intellectual structure” or “knowledge base” of the SEship field. Additionally, we addressed the specific changes in critical keywords over time using NetMiner as a network analysis tool. NetMiner has excellent functionality for network analysis (Huisman et al. 2005 ). Thus, for a more rigorous network analysis, we selected NetMiner to conduct our research. Figure  1 shows the process of the systematic literature review analysis.

Process of the systematic literature review analysis

4 Bibliometric analysis

A bibliometric analysis examines data statistics, including authors, affiliations, titles, abstracts, and author keywords (Fahimnia et al. 2015 ; Xu et al. 2018 ). Thus, a bibliometric analysis can provide insight into new perspectives for future direction by identifying the existing state of a given discipline (Hashemi et al. 2022 ). This paper conducted a bibliometric analysis to identify the current status of research on SEship and women in SEship by mainly focusing on authors, journals, and publication year.

4.1 Influential authors of SEship and women in SEship

To understand the status of SEship and women in SEship, scholars interested in conducting SEship research must identify influential researchers. Therefore, we extracted the top contributing authors by the number of papers they authored or co-authored. Table 1 represents the top contributing authors based on the number of published papers.

4.2 Publication statistics

We investigated publication statistics to identify the trend of SEship in the number of papers published. As shown in Fig.  2 , the field of overall SEship is still in its growth and expansion period, while the area of women in SEship is in relatively early stages. The number of published papers on overall SEship increased from 15 in 2009 to 134 in 2021, representing geometric growth in publications. These findings emphasize that researchers and practitioners recognize the importance of SEship as a vital knowledge discipline in business management. In contrast, the number of publications on women in SEship has remained the same yearly from 2009 to 2021; thus, there has been no noticeable growth in publications on women in SEship.

Publication trend

Furthermore, 187 journals have contributed to the publication of 1142 papers on overall SEship, but only 33 of the 187 journals have contributed to the publication of 59 papers on women in SEship. Papers on women in SEship comprise only 5% of all articles published on SEship. Also, it is the top ten journals that have published these articles, representing approximately 41% of all papers published on overall SEship and 54% of women in SEship, respectively. Tables 2 and 3 show the journal in which these papers appeared. It was noticeable that “ Journal of Business Ethics ” covered a wide variety of topics, ranging from overall SEship to women in SEship. On the other hand, “Journal of Business Research,” “Journal of Cleaner Production,” “Technological Forecasting and Social Change,” “Journal of Management Decision,” and “International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal,” among the top journals that contain overall SEship studies, does not cover the subject of women.

5 Network analysis

5.1 citation analysis.

Citation analysis can objectively identify prominent academic articles through their popularity and significance by establishing how frequently they have been cited in other articles (Fahimnia et al. 2015 ; Hota et al. 2020 ; Xu et al. 2018 ). For a rigorous citation analysis, we first constructed a local citation network that determined the citation frequency of a published paper in any of the selected 1121 other published articles. Then, PageRank, which measures “prestige” using the number of times a document has been cited, was used on papers that discuss the main issues (Brin and Page 1998 ; Fahimnia et al. 2015 ; Xu et al. 2018 ). Table 4 presents the top ten papers on overall SEship and women in SEship by PageRank measures.

The PageRank score of a paper in a local citation network comprised N papers, where N papers (i.e., \({T}_{1}\) , …, \({T}_{n}\) ) cite paper A and parameter d is a damping factor describing the fraction of random walks that continue to spread along with the citations. Following the original Google PageRank of Brin and Page ( 1998 ), we set the parameter d to be 0.85, and consider paper A (that other papers have cited, namely, \({T}_{1}\) , …, \({T}_{n}\) ) where paper \({T}_{i}\) has citations C( \({T}_{i}\) ). Here, the PageRank of paper A (denoted by PR(A)) in a local network of N papers can be measured as follows:

As shown in Table 4 , the top ten papers on overall SEship show that the topics mainly addressed are the definitions and concepts of SEship and social enterprise from various perspectives. For example, to establish the definition of SEship, Peredo and McLean ( 2006 ) distinguished between “social” and “entrepreneurship,” and Austin et al. ( 2006 ) conducted a comparative analysis between SEship and “commercial entrepreneurship.” Among the top ten papers on women in SEship, the issues primarily addressed were empowerment through SEship and the advantages of gender differences in women’s social inclusion. For example, Datta and Gailey ( 2012 ) represented that SEship enhances women’s competence through empowerment. Haugh and Talwar ( 2016 ) indicated SEship as a process of empowering women to change social norms. Comparing the trends of both streams, we determined that the study of overall SEship has evolved around conceptual papers discussing the definition and components of SEship and social enterprise. In contrast, on this conceptual basis, phenomena such as the social integration of women and the pursuit of the social purpose of female entrepreneurs have been empirically identified.

5.2 Co-citation analysis

A co-citation network consists of a set of nodes (papers) and links (the co-occurrence of the papers in other papers) (Leydesdorff 2011 ; Radicchi et al. 2004 ). This method implies that the more often two articles are cited together, the closer their relationship is. Hence, frequently cited papers are more likely to present similar subject areas (Hjørland 2013 ) and be considered part of the same research field (Culnan and Markus 1987 ). Thus, a co-citation analysis was conducted to identify prevalent topics in each field (Fahimnia et al. 2015 ; Hota et al. 2020 ; Xu et al. 2018 ).

In the co-citation analysis, we divided a local citation network of papers into “clusters” where the density of links is greater between the identical cluster articles than in other clusters (Clauset et al. 2004 ; Leydesdorff 2011 ; Radicchi et al. 2004 ). Xu et al. ( 2018 ) state that “The modularity index of a partition is a scalar value between − 1 and + 1 that measures the density of links inside communities versus the links between communities” ( 2018 , p.164). According to Blondel et al. ( 2008 ), the modularity index \(Q\) can be calculated for a weighted network as follows:

where \({A}_{ij}\) represents the weight of the link between nodes i and j , \({k}_{i}\) is the sum of the weights of the links attached to node i ( \({k}_{i}=\sum_{j}{A}_{ij}\) ), \({c}_{i}\) is the community to which node i is assigned, \(\delta\) ( \(u, \nu\) ) equals 1 if \(u\) = \(\nu\) and equals 0, otherwise, and finally \(m= \frac{1}{2}\sum_{ij}{A}_{ij}\) .

In Table 5 , the research on overall SEship is divided into six topical clusters by applying co-citation analysis. In Table 6 , the study on women in SEship is categorized into three clusters by co-citation analysis. Furthermore, to identify the significant topical issues of each cluster, we conducted content analysis on core papers selected using PageRank measures.

According to the research on overall SEship in Table 5 , Cluster 1 corresponded to the topic of identifying the unique characteristics of SEship through comparison. For example, Austin et al. ( 2006 ) compared social and commercial entrepreneurship. Dacin et al. ( 2010 ) contrasted SEship with other forms of entrepreneurship and explored its unique features.

Cluster 2 focused primarily on the regional characteristics of social purpose organizations. For example, Kerlin ( 2006 ) compared American and European social enterprises and conducted discussions with social enterprise scholars on both sides of the Atlantic. Thomas ( 2004 ) studied how a new social enterprise model—the social cooperative—has become instrumental in expanding the social economy in the Italian context. Kerlin ( 2010 ) compared the different factors shaping social enterprise across seven regions and countries.

Cluster 3 included theorization and conceptualization of SEship. For example, Mair and Martí ( 2006 ) identified and elaborated on the essential components of SEship. Dacin et al. ( 2011 ) also examined the conceptual definition of SEship and future research questions. Bacq and Janssen ( 2011 ) reviewed definitional issues associated with SEship based on geographical and thematic criteria.

Cluster 4 mainly contained papers corresponding to the emergence and evolution of SEship and social purpose organizations. For example, Dees ( 1998 ) presented a social enterprise spectrum to help nonprofit leaders understand and assess the potential and risks of commercialization. Meanwhile, Dart ( 2004 ) explained the emergence and evolution of social enterprise using institutional theories of organization. Chell ( 2007 ) discussed social enterprise and whether it might be interpreted as a form of entrepreneurship.

Cluster 5 corresponded to the development and growth of SEship. For example, Nicholls ( 2010 ) explained the development of SEship in terms of its key actors, discourses, and narrative logic. Prabhu ( 1999 ) examined social entrepreneurial leadership behavior and organizations’ growth and survival compared to mainstream entrepreneurship research. Tracey and Jarvis ( 2007 ) studied how the different types of SEship and their varying degrees of embeddedness influence the measurement and scaling of social value in an organization.

Lastly, Cluster 6 is related to the element of promoting SEship. For example, Korosec and Berman ( 2006 ) examined how cities help promote SEship in their communities, focusing on individuals and organizations. Herman and Rendina (2001) identified compassion as the motivation for promoting SEship and built a model of three mechanisms that transform compassion into SEship.

As shown in Table 6 , Cluster 1 corresponded to the relationship between gender and the entrepreneurial pursuit of social purpose. For example, Hechavarría et al. ( 2017 ) studied how gender and national cultural values shape entrepreneurs’ goals of creating ventures that provide economic, social, or environmental value to the market. Brieger et al. ( 2019 ) analyzed the impact of human empowerment on an entrepreneur’s prosocial motivation and that of gender on prosociality in business. Hechavarría and Brieger ( 2020 ) identified the cultural practices best suited for engaging the SEship of female entrepreneurs in 33 countries.

Cluster 2 represented the social integration of women and overcoming barriers through SEship. For example, Datta and Gailey ( 2012 ) explored female entrepreneurship that empowers women by studying a women’s cooperative in the strongly patriarchal society of India. Meanwhile, Kimbu and Ngoasong ( 2016 ) explored the role of female owner-managers in small tourism firms as social entrepreneurs and how they overcome existing barriers to female participation.

Cluster 3 is related to the gender role congruence of entrepreneurs in social purpose organizations. For example, Grimes et al. ( 2018 ) developed a gender identity-based framework for explaining heterogeneity in adopting sustainability certification for social enterprises. Moreover, Yang et al. ( 2020 ) examined how gender role congruity affects social impact accelerator selection decisions.

As a result of comparing the two fields (overall SEship and women in SEship), it was noted that overall SEship research was differentiated into detailed topic clusters. In contrast, the scope of the issues covered in research on women in SEship is still limited. Specifically, compared to overall SEship, women in SEship research mainly focus on more individual-level topics, including entrepreneurial pursuit behavior, overcoming barriers, and gender role congruence. Table 7 summarizes the research focus of each cluster in the two fields. Table 7 summarizes the research focus of each cluster in the two fields.

5.2.1 Co-citation analysis—dynamic clustering analysis

To further understand the difference in the evolution of women in SEship from overall SEship, we performed a dynamic co-citation analysis. Table 8 shows the number of papers published in each cluster since 1998.

Research on women in SEship grew at the same rate in 2016 and 2017, whereas, since 2016, studies on overall SEship did not have high publications. Moreover, the number of articles falling into clusters 1 and 3 on women in SEship has steadily increased, but studies on overall SEship, divided into six commonly shared topics, were mainly distributed from 2004 to 2015. For overall SEship, many studies have been conducted in Clusters 3 and 4 and relatively few were performed in Clusters 2 and 6. Meanwhile, the first study on women in SEship appeared in 2012, and the level of interest in the subject across the three clusters was equal. In summary, the development and maturity of overall SEship research naturally shifted researchers’ attention toward specifically studying women in SEship.

5.3 Keyword network analysis

We collected author keywords to conduct a keyword network analysis. However, 144 papers that did not include author keywords were excluded from the total. Therefore, the final number of papers analyzing the keyword network of overall SEship and women in SEship was 998 and 50, respectively.

To construct a rigorous keyword network analysis, we applied the keyword network analysis process in Table 9 . Thus, our study aimed to (1) generate two keyword networks (overall SEship and women in SEship) extracted from premier international business journals, (2) examine the characteristics of the two keyword network structures to identify the status of the field, (3) investigate the specific issues of overall SEship and women in SEship, and (4) examine the changes in the more influential issues over time.

Before constructing the keyword network, we refined author keywords extracted from selected papers by standardizing all keywords with the same meaning. Then, we performed a component analysis to construct networks consisting of commonly preferred keywords using the NetMiner tool.

5.3.1 Keyword network structure analysis

After constructing keyword networks consisting of commonly used author keywords, several well-defined and widely used network-related measures were applied to understand the keyword networks’ structural characteristics. First, our study adopted a “density” measure to examine the degree of dense networks by dividing the number of links by the number of possible links in the network—the more comprehensive the network, the sparser the links (Choi et al. 2011 ). Second, the “clustering coefficient,” which implies the degree of connectivity of the neighboring nodes (keywords) in a network, was adopted. A high clustering coefficient results in the tendency of nodes (keywords) to be grouped densely (Choi et al. 2011 ). Third, we applied the “average distance,” which reveals the average number of steps along the shortest arcs for all node pairs. In other words, the “average distance” implies the degree of efficiency in terms of information on a network (Choi et al. 2011 ).

The results of our study indicated that the overall network of SEship and the sub-network regarding women in SEship are highly clustered local networks interconnected by hub nodes (keywords) of the entire network (Table 10 ). The overall network of SEship is relatively sparse (density = 0.004), whereas the sub-network of women in SEship is highly dense (density = 0.033). The density results of the overall network of SEship indicated that out of 1000 potential links, only approximately four links exist in the keyword network. Although there is no established ideal density cut-off point to advise (Raisi et al. 2020 ), the current density of research on overall SEship is extremely low. In contrast, the sub-network of women in SEship has relatively denser connectivity.

To further identify the structural characteristics of the overall network and sub-network for SEship, our study constructed a cumulative degree distribution where the X -axis represents the degree’s log scale and the Y -axis indicates the keyword proportion. The cumulative degree of the overall network and sub-keyword networks for SEship followed a transparent power-law distribution, as shown in Fig.  3 . The two networks are highly centralized around a few nodes (keywords), and the centralization has a hierarchal pattern. According to cohesion theory (Coleman 1988 ), higher density enables network nodes to have more opportunities to connect to other nodes, overcome impediments, and ease knowledge transfer (Reagans and McEvily 2003 ). Furthermore, a network’s hierarchal pattern provides easy access to many other nodes in the network, thereby improving the diffusion of knowledge. However, high centralization can impede access to diverse and new sources of knowledge as the knowledge sources are limited to a few hubs. Accordingly, although the current research on women in SEship indicates a suitable structure for a quick transfer, diffusion, and a combination of issues, it might be challenging to access diverse and new emerging issues.

Cumulative degree distributions

5.3.2 Important keywords—network centrality analysis

Our analysis results show the top ten keywords according to three centrality measures (degree, betweenness, and closeness centrality). As shown in Table 11 , the top-ranked keywords by the three centrality measures imply specific issues in each area. A keyword with a high degree centrality has many connections with other keywords, indicating their representativeness of major-specific research issues. Furthermore, because the top keywords in terms of betweenness centrality lie between two distinct research topics, it may imply that they play an essential role in bridging separate groups of research topics. A keyword with high closeness centrality is in the center of the keyword network; thus, keywords with high closeness centrality were used with nearly all other keywords.

Comparing the results of the analysis, we determined that the study of overall SEship centered on related concepts, such as “entrepreneurship,” “social innovation,” “corporate social responsibility,” and “sustainability,” by linking organizational characteristics, such as “hybrid organization” and “social business.” The study of women in SEship centered on gender identity concepts, such as “gender,” “women entrepreneur,” and “female entrepreneurship,” by linking concepts of regional activities, such as “community development.” However, in this field, the generalization is limited because of the specific data source (e.g., the global representative monitor) used in a study or the limited market area (e.g., bottom of the pyramid), which is the subject of a study, and appears as the top keyword. To sum up, overall SEship is connected by various comparisons and contrasts that use similar concepts, but the study of women in SEship is not characterized by a broad conceptual relationship.

5.3.3 Important keywords—changes in important keywords over time

To address changes in influential issues over time, we compared the important keywords from the first ten years (2010–2019) with those from the two most recent years (2020–2021) (Table 12 ). Furthermore, in recent years (2010–2021), we observed highly ranked new emerging keywords, identifying significant issues for overall SEship and women in SEship (Table 13 ). As the links between keywords have accumulated over the years, examining the keyword networks’ evolution is difficult as keyword association information from a certain period may be excluded based on the focus of the keyword network in that period. Thus, to identify the influential issues that have resulted in recent changes in impactful keywords, we compared the keyword network constructed from much earlier papers with that of more recent ones.

Our comparison reveals some notable findings. In overall SEship, “social entrepreneurship,” “social enterprise,” “social innovation,” “entrepreneurship,” “hybrid organization,” “sustainability,” and “social business” are concepts that are consistently studied, although some changes in centrality exist. Additionally, keywords that have previously received significant attention (e.g., “social entrepreneur,” “corporate social responsibility,” and “social value”) have shifted away from recent research interests, and new keywords (e.g., “legitimacy,” “gender”) have drawn attention. In the study of women in SEship, “social entrepreneurship,” “social enterprise,” “entrepreneurship,” and “female entrepreneurship” are continuously studied in conjunction with “gender” and “women.” However, existing keywords (e.g., “global entrepreneurship monitor,” “community”) have disappeared, and other keywords (e.g., “bottom of the pyramid,” “social innovation,” “culture”) replaced them. The study-analyzing GEM (Global Entrepreneurship Monitor), consisting of representative entrepreneurship survey data, was useful in identifying gender differences in activities that pursue social values in overall entrepreneurship (Brieger et al. 2019 ; Hechavaría et al. 2017 ). These empirical results served as the basis for exploring gender differences in the specific contexts of emerging markets (Rosca et al. 2020 ) and innovation areas (Sun and Im 2015 ).

Table 13 represents the important issues or concepts concerning recent changes in impactful keywords. In the study of overall SEship, cooperative management methods (“cross-sector collaboration,” “co-creation,” “collaboration,” “crowdsourcing,” and “value co-creation”) and measurement of created value (“measurement,” “social impact measurement,” and “financial performance”) have been continuously researched from the beginning.

Meanwhile, in the study of women in SEship, the types of keywords that stand out are the characteristics of the area (“community development,” “developing country,” “community enterprise,” “community,” “least developed country,” and “bottom of the pyramid”), gender characteristics (“gender self-schema,” “social identity theory,” and “gender role congruity theory”), and ways to overcome resource constraints (“social bricolage,” “philanthropy,” “crowdfunding,” “sustainable finance,” “microfinance,” and “charity”). The definition and explanation of the concept of SEship gradually became a concrete subject of practical management methods and performance measurement. However, the study of women in SEship focuses only on overcoming resource-constrained environments (regional, cultural). In other words, this indicates that gender-based research on SEship has not yet fully addressed the complexity of entrepreneurship research.

6 Research gaps and future research opportunities

Our rigorous systematic literature review has identified gaps in current research and potential future research opportunities in the field of women in SEship, which may be beneficial for scholars to capture emerging research topics in their studies. This study has several notable findings.

6.1 Reinterpretation of theoretical concepts in SEship

Recent research on women in SEship has focused on women’s role in addressing gender discrimination within the field of SEship rather than the theoretical definition and concept of SEship. This can be seen from the fact that women in SEship had minimal keywords associated with the theoretical definition and concept of SEship, based on the cluster analysis results (Table 7 ) and the top keyword by centrality (Table 11 ). In recent decades, researchers have identified unique phenomena and behavioral meanings in the field of SEship. However, most research on women in SEship is based on existing entrepreneurship and women’s research rather than on discussions of SEship. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct theoretical research on SEship from a woman’s perspective. We suggest more studies with a focus on reinterpreting the existing theoretical concepts in SEship, such as “social innovation,” “hybrid organization,” and “sustainability” from the perspective of women.

6.2 Social integration and overcoming gender discrimination

The main current themes, which underline the importance of women in the fight against discrimination and promote social integration, are expected to continue to grow (Table 8 ). According to the characteristics of the network structure, the structural characteristics of the knowledge network regarding women in SEship have high centrality and clustering coefficients (Table 10 ), which enables the transfer and diffusion of extant knowledge (topics) within the given field. In addition, the knowledge network of women in SEship has shown preferential attachment as a well-known feature of the power-law distribution (Fig.  3 ). Thus, the more the existing issues with high centrality regarding “gender,” “women entrepreneur,” and “female entrepreneurship” represent a focus on the importance of women in SEship, the more often the issues will be selected by researchers (Barabási 2009 ). Therefore, we suggest ways for female social entrepreneurs to overcome gender discrimination and create sustainable value may be a potential area for fruitful research in future of women in SEship.

6.3 Expansion of sectors and regions

In the existing study, some issues such as “hybrid organization” and “corporate social responsibility” remain unclear in the study of women in SEship. According to the keyword network analysis (Tables 11 , 12 ), “hybrid organization” is an issue that is strongly linked to other research themes but has rarely been addressed from a woman’s perspective. Moreover, “corporate social responsibility” is a field that is often studied in overall SEship research, but the study of women in SEship has rarely focused on this topic. These findings raise the need to comprehensively study various sectors in which female social entrepreneurs operate. Therefore, there is a need for research into sectors other than the social economy (e.g., for-profit, nonprofit, and public sector). Furthermore, the area and geographical scope of female entrepreneurs’ activities are somewhat limited (e.g., “community development,” “developing country”, and “bottom of the pyramid”). Hence, further expanding the geographical ranges and contexts of women in SEship field is necessary for future research (Kerlin 2010 ; Hechavaría and Brieger 2020 ).

6.4 Operation strategy and performance factors

It is necessary to pay attention to “collaboration” and “performance measurement” in the field of women in SEship. Based on the new emerging keyword network result in the study of overall SEship, it is noteworthy that the topics related to “collaboration” (such as “cross-sector collaboration,” “co-creation,” “collaboration,” “crowdsourcing,” and “value co-creation”), “performance measurement” (such as “measurement,” “social impact measurement,” and “financial performance”) have recently emerged. Women cooperate at various levels as entrepreneurs, organizational members, and residents in the field of overall SEship (Maas et al. 2014 ; Anglin et al. 2021 ; Bento et al. 2019 ). Therefore, this study recommends more studies focusing on identifying traits of women’s collaboration and creating values through women’s cooperation.

7 Conclusion

The study of SEship and the research on women in SEship has increased in popularity in recent years. Hence, synthesizing and reflecting on the existing literature regarding women in SEship field are essential in identifying new directions and future challenges. Therefore, we conducted a systematic literature review to gain a more comprehensive evaluation of research on women in SEship by combining a bibliometric analysis and network analysis (citation analysis, co-citation analysis) with a keyword network analysis.

7.1 Implications of this study

The implications of this study are as follows. First, an overview of women in SEship is presented to help researchers identify research opportunities and develop new perspectives. Existing systematic review papers have examined overall SEship (Hota et al. 2020 ; Sassmannshausen and Volkmann 2018 ), but most did not compare and address topics on women. Thus, our goal was to identify the current status and capture research gaps on women in SEship within the overall study of SEship. Our notable findings provide meaningful guidelines for experienced and new scholars in the field of women in SEship. For example, our results provide detailed answers to practical questions about which journals are being studied, which keywords are important, which researchers are conducting unique research, and the latest trends.

Second, we conducted a rigorous systematic literature review to comprehensively evaluate research on women in SEship by combining the traditional systematic literature review approach (citation and co-citation analysis) with a keyword network analysis. The keyword network analysis can complement the perceived drawbacks of the extant systematic literature review with a more specific knowledge network (Choi et al. 2011 ; Park and Jeong 2019 ).

Third, our notable findings provide meaningful guidelines for experienced and new scholars in the field of women in SEship. For example, our results provide detailed answers to practical questions about which journals are being studied, which keywords are important, which researchers are conducting unique research, and the latest trends.

7.2 Limitations and future research

Although this study is valuable because it overcomes limitations due to the lack of literature reviews, it is not without limits. First, a limitation exists in the selection of research papers. Although SCOPUS, used in this study, is a database favored by many researchers, some related papers may have been excluded from manual search methods. This is because confirming information is difficult because of errors, such as limitations in searching for related journals and the omission of contents. Similarly, even though we selected search keywords related to the research topic, these keywords may not be exhaustive. Thus, we suggest that future systematic literature reviews include other diverse databases (e.g., Web of Science). Moreover, for more rigorous analysis, the future systematic literature reviews must use not only the author’s keywords but also titles and abstracts.

Second, the academic field of the collected papers is limited to business administration. Although research on SEship is conducted in a multidisciplinary manner, this study examined research trends only in the field of business administration, so discussions in other academic areas were excluded. Therefore, future research must explore the differences and associations in discussions by the academic field.

Third, there are limitations to the method of analysis. For example, the citation index used in the study is a representative indicator of the influence of the study, but it has limitations as it can be cited for other reasons, such as the reputation of the author or journal (Hota et al. 2020 ). Moreover, common topics were extracted and classified based on the literature derived from cluster analysis, but the core topics of all studies are difficult to explain. This is because topics were clustered based on the relationship between the main and sub-themes of each study. Therefore, the limitations of such a citation index and cluster analysis must be recognized, and more intensified content analysis should be conducted based on this study.

Lastly, this study examined only academic literature and excluded conference papers, book series, commercial publications, and magazine articles. Therefore, the results of this study reflect only the academic discussions of researchers. To reflect future discussions of practice, researchers must include a broader range of data. The similarities and differences between practitioners’ and scholars’ interests can be compared through this.

Anggadwita G, Ramadani V, Permatasari A, Alamanda DT (2021) Key determinants of women’s entrepreneurial intentions in encouraging social empowerment. Serv Bus 15(2):309–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-021-00444-x

Article   Google Scholar  

Anglin AH, Courtney C, Allison TH (2021) Venturing for others, subject to role expectations? A role congruity theory approach to social venture crowd funding. Entrep Theory Pract 46(2):421–448. https://doi.org/10.1177/10422587211024545

Austin J, Stevenson H, Wei-Skillern J (2006) Social and commercial entrepreneurship: same, different, or both? Entrep Theory Pract 30(1):1–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2006.00107.x

Ayogu DU, Agu EO (2015) Assessment of the contribution of women entrepreneur towards entrepreneurship development in Nigeria. Int J Curr Res Acad Rev 3(10):190–207

Google Scholar  

Bacq S, Janssen F (2011) The multiple faces of social entrepreneurship: A review of definitional issues based on geographical and thematic criteria. Entrep Reg Dev 23(5-6):373–403. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2011.577242

Bahmani-Oskooee M, Galindo MÁ, Méndez MT (2012) Women’s entrepreneurship and economic policies. In: Galindo M-A, Ribeiro D (eds) Women’s entrepreneurship and economics. Springer, New York, pp 23–33

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Barabási AL (2009) Scale-free networks: a decade and beyond. Science 325(5939):412–413. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1173299

Battilana J, Lee M (2014) Advancing research on hybrid organizing–Insights from the study of social enterprises. Acad Manag Ann 8(1):397–441. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2014.893615

Bento N, Gianfrate G, Thoni MH (2019) Crowdfunding for sustainability ventures. J Clean Prod. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.117751

Blondel VD, Guillaume JL, Lambiotte R (2008) Lefebvre E (2008) Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. J Stat Mech Theory Exp 10:P10008. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2008/10/P10008

Brandsen T, Karré PM (2011) Hybrid organizations: no cause for concern? Int J Public Adm 34(13):827–836. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2011.605090

Brieger SA, Terjesen SA, Hechavarría DM, Welzel C (2019) Prosociality in business: a human empowerment framework. J Bus Ethics 159(2):361–380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-4045-5

Brin S, Page L (1998) The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual Web search engine. Comput Netw ISDN Syst 30:107–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7552(98)00110-X

Calás MB, Smircich L, Bourne KA (2009) Extending the boundaries: reframing “entrepreneurship as social change” through feminist perspectives. Acad Manag Rev 34(3):552–569. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.40633597

Cardella GM, Hernández-Sánchez BR, Monteiro AA, Sánchez-García JC (2021) Social entrepreneurship research: intellectual structures and future perspectives. Sustain 13(14):7532. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147532

Castellas EI, Stubbs W, Ambrosini V (2019) Responding to value pluralism in hybrid organizations. J Bus Ethics 159(3):635–650. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3809-2

Chell E (2007) Social enterprise and entrepreneurship: towards a convergent theory of the entrepreneurial process. Int Small Bus J 25(1):5–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242607071779

Choi J, Yi S, Lee KC (2011) Analysis of keyword networks in MIS research and implications for predicting knowledge evolution. Inf Manag 48(8):371–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2011.09.004

Clauset A, Newman ME, Moore C (2004) Finding community structure in very large networks. Phys Rev E. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2010.488396

Coleman JS (1988) Social capital in the creation of human capital. Am J Sociol 94:S95–S120. https://doi.org/10.1086/228943

Culnan MJ, Markus ML (1987) Information technologies. In: Jablin FM, Putnam LL, Roberts KH, Porter LW (eds) Handbook of organizational communication: an interdisciplinary perspective. SAGE Publications, Newbury Park, pp 420–443

Dacin PA, Dacin MT, Matear M (2010) Social entrepreneurship: why we don’t need a new theory and how we move forward from here. Acad Manag Perspect 24(3):37–57. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.24.3.37

Dacin MT, Dacin PA, Tracey P (2011) Social entrepreneurship: a critique and future directions. Organ Sci 22(5):1203–1213. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0620

Dart R (2004) The legitimacy of social enterprise. Nonprofit Manag Leadersh 14(4):411–424. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.43

Datta PB, Gailey R (2012) Empowering women through social entrepreneurship: case study of a women’s cooperative in India. Entrep Theory Pract 36(3):569–587. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2012.00505.x

Dees JG (1998) The meaning of “social entrepreneurship.” Comments and suggestions contributed from the Social Entrepreneurship Founders Working Group. Durham, NC: Center for the Advancement of Social Entrepreneurship, Fuqua School of Business, Duke University.

Di Lorenzo F, Scarlata M (2019) Social enterprises, venture philanthropy and the alleviation of income inequality. J Bus Ethics 159(2):307–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-4049-1

Dickel P, Eckardt G (2021) Who wants to be a social entrepreneur? The role of gender and sustainability orientation. J Small Bus Manag 59(1):196–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2019.1704489

Dimitriadis S, Lee M, Ramarajan L, Battilana J (2017) Blurring the boundaries: the interplay of gender and local communities in the commercialization of social ventures. Organ Sci 28(5):819–839. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2017.1144

Fahimnia B, Tang CS, Davarzani H, Sarkis J (2015) Quantitative models for managing supply chain risks: a review. Eur J Operat Res 247(1):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.04.034

George C, Reed MG (2016) Building institutional capacity for environmental governance through social entrepreneurship: lessons from Canadian biosphere reserves. Ecol Soc 21(1):18. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08229-210118

Gillett A, Loader K, Doherty B, Scott JM (2019) An examination of tensions in a hybrid collaboration: a longitudinal study of an empty homes project. J Bus Ethics 157(4):949–967. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3962-7

Grimes MG, Gehman J, Cao K (2018) Positively deviant: Identity work through B Corporation certification. J Bus Ventur 33(2):130–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2017.12.001

Gupta VK, Wieland AM, Turban DB (2019) Gender characterizations in entrepreneurship: a multi-level investigation of sex-role stereotypes about high-growth, commercial, and social entrepreneurs. J Small Bus Manag 57(1):131–153. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12495

Gupta P, Chauhan S, Paul J, Jaiswal MP (2020) Social entrepreneurship research: a review and future research agenda. J Bus Res 113:209–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.03.032

Hashemi H, Rajabi R, Brashear-Alejandro TG (2022) COVID-19 research in management: an updated bibliometric analysis. J Bus Res 149:795–810. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.05.082

Haugh HM, Talwar A (2016) Linking social entrepreneurship and social change: the mediating role of empowerment. J Bus Ethics 133(4):643–658. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2449-4

Hechavarría DM, Brieger SA (2020) Practice rather than preach: cultural practices and female social entrepreneurship. Small Bus Econ 58:1131–1151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-020-00437-6

Hechavarría DM, Terjesen SA, Ingram AE, Renko M, Justo R, Elam A (2017) Taking care of business: the impact of culture and gender on entrepreneurs’ blended value creation goals. Small Bus Econ 48(1):225–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-016-9747-4

Hechavarría D, Bullough A, Brush C, Edelman L (2019) High-growth women’s entrepreneurship: fueling social and economic development. J Small Bus Manag 57(1):5–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12503

Hjørland B (2013) Citation analysis: A social and dynamic approach to knowledge organization. Inf Process Manag 49(6):1313–1325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2013.07.001

Hota PK, Subramanian B, Narayanamurthy G (2020) Mapping the intellectual structure of social entrepreneurship research: a citation/co-citation analysis. J Bus Ethics 166(1):89–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04129-4

Huisman M, Van Duijn MAJ (2005) Software for social network analysis. In: Carrington PJ, Scott J, Wasserman S (eds) Models and methods in social network analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 270–316

Kannampuzha M, Hockerts K (2019) Organizational social entrepreneurship: scale development and validation. Soc Enterp J 15(3):290–319. https://doi.org/10.1108/SEJ-06-2018-0047

Kelley DJ, Baumer BS, Brush C, Greene PG, Mahdavi M, Majbouri M, et al (2017) Women’s entrepreneurship 2016/2017 report. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. 9(19)

Kerlin JA (2006) Social enterprise in the United States and Europe: understanding and learning from the differences. Voluntas 17(3):247–263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-006-9016-2

Kerlin JA (2010) A comparative analysis of the global emergence of social enterprise. Voluntas 21(2):162–179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-010-9126-8

Kim JR (2022) People-centered entrepreneurship: the impact of empathy and social entrepreneurial self-efficacy for social entrepreneurial intention. Glob Bus Financ Rev 27(1):108–118. https://doi.org/10.17549/gbfr.2022.27.1.108

Kimbu AN, Ngoasong MZ (2016) Women as vectors of social entrepreneurship. Ann Tour Res 60:63–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2016.06.002

Kistruck GM, Beamish PW (2010) The interplay of form, structure, and embeddedness in social intrapreneurship. Entrep Theory Pract 34(4):735–761. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00371.x

Korosec RL, Berman EM (2006) Municipal support for social entrepreneurship. Public Adm Rev 66(3):448–462. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00601.x

Langowitz N, Minniti M (2007) The entrepreneurial propensity of women. Entrep Theory Pract 31(3):341–364. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2007.00177.x

Lee M, Huang L (2018) Gender bias, social impact framing, and evaluation of entrepreneurial ventures. Organ Sci 29(1):1–16. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2017.1172

Lee SH, Jung KS (2015) The role of social support for reemployed women. Glob Bus Financ Rev 20(2):49–57. https://doi.org/10.17549/gbfr.2015.20.2.49

Leydesdorff L (2011) Bibliometrics/citation networks. In: Barnett GA (ed) Encyclopedia of social networks. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 72–74

Lindsay G, Hems L (2004) Societes cooperatives d’interet collectif: the arrival of social enterprise within the French social economy. Voluntas 15(3):265–286. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:VOLU.0000046281.99367.29

Lortie J, Castrogiovanni GJ, Cox KC (2017) Gender, social salience, and social performance: how women pursue and perform in social ventures. Entrep Reg Dev 29(1–2):155–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2016.1255433

Maas J, Seferiadis AA, Bunders JF, Zweekhorst MB (2014) Bridging the disconnect: how network creation facilitates female Bangladeshi entrepreneurship. Int Entrepreneurship Manag J 10(3):457–470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-014-0299-2

Mair J, Marti I (2006) Social entrepreneurship research: a source of explanation, prediction, and delight. J World Bus 41(1):36–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2005.09.002

Mair J, Marti I (2009) Entrepreneurship in and around institutional voids: a case study from Bangladesh. J Bus Ventur 24(5):419–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.04.006

McQuilten G (2017) The political possibilities of art and fashion based social enterprise. Continuum 31(1):69–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/10304312.2016.1262103

Meyskens M, Robb–Post C, Stamp JA, Carsrud AL, Reynolds PD (2010) Social ventures from a resource–based perspective: An exploratory study assessing global Ashoka fellows. Entrep Theory Pract 34(4):661–680. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00389.x

Nega B, Schneider G (2014) Social entrepreneurship, microfinance, and economic development in Africa. J Econ Issues 48(2):367–376. https://doi.org/10.2753/JEI0021-3624480210

Nguyen L, Szkudlarek B, Seymour RG (2015) Social impact measurement in social enterprises: an interdependence perspective. Can J Adm Sci 32(4):224–237. https://doi.org/10.1002/cjas.1359

Nicholls A (2010) The legitimacy of social entrepreneurship: Reflexive isomorphism in a pre–paradigmatic field. Entrep Theory Pract 34(4):611–633. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00397.x

Noguera M, Alvarez C, Urbano D (2013) Socio-cultural factors and female entrepreneurship. Int Entrep Manag J 9(2):183–197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-013-0251-x

Pache AC, Santos F (2013) Inside the hybrid organization: Selective coupling as a response to competing institutional logics. Acad Manage J 56(4):972–1001. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0405

Park JS, Jeong EB (2019) Service quality in tourism: a systematic literature review and keyword network analysis. Sustainability 11(13):3665. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11133665

Peredo AM, McLean M (2006) Social entrepreneurship: a critical review of the concept. J World Bus 41(1):56–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2005.10.007

Phillips W, Lee H, Ghobadian A, O’Regan N, James P (2015) Social innovation and social entrepreneurship. Group Organ Manag 40(3):428–461. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601114560063

Prabhu GN (1999) Social entrepreneurship leadership. Career Dev Int 4(3):140–145. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620439910262796

Radicchi F, Castellano C, Cecconi F, Loreto V, Parisi D (2004) Defining and identifying communities in networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci Unit States Am 101:2658–2663. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0400054101

Rae D (2015) Book review: Handbook on the entrepreneurial university. Sage publication.

Raisi H, Baggio R, Barratt-Pugh L, Willson G (2020) A network perspective of knowledge transfer in tourism. Ann Tour Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2019.102817

Reagans R, McEvily B (2003) Network structure and knowledge transfer: the effects of cohesion and range. Adm Sci Q 48(2):240–267. https://doi.org/10.2307/3556658

Rey-Martí A, Ribeiro-Soriano D, Palacios-Marqués D (2016) A bibliometric analysis of social entrepreneurship. J Bus Res 69(5):1651–1655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.033

Rosca E, Agarwal N, Brem A (2020) Women entrepreneurs as agents of change: a comparative analysis of social entrepreneurship processes in emerging markets. Technol Forecast Soc Change. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120067

Roy K, Karna A (2015) Doing social good on a sustainable basis: competitive advantage of social businesses. Manag Decis 53(6):1355–1374. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-09-2014-0561

Saebi T, Foss NJ, Linder S (2019) Social entrepreneurship research: Past achievements and future promises. J Manag 45(1):70–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318793196

Sahrakorpi T, Bandi V (2021) Empowerment or employment? Uncovering the paradoxes of social entrepreneurship for women via Husk Power Systems in rural North India. Energy Res Soc Sci. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.102153

Santos FM (2012) A positive theory of social entrepreneurship. J Bus Ethics 111(3):335–351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1413-4

Sassmannshausen SP, Volkmann C (2018) The scientometrics of social entrepreneurship and its establishment as an academic field. J Small Bus Manag 56(2):251–273. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12254

Savarese C, Huybrechts B, Hudon M (2021) The influence of interorganizational collaboration on logic conciliation and tensions within hybrid organizations: insights from social enterprise–corporate collaborations. J Bus Ethics 173(4):709–721. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04557-7

Seelos C, Mair J (2005) Social entrepreneurship: creating new business models to serve the poor. Bus Horiz 48(3):241–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2004.11.006

Short JC, Moss TW, Lumpkin GT (2009) Research in social entrepreneurship: past contributions and future opportunities. Strateg Entrep J 3(2):161–194. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.69

Simón-Moya V, Revuelto-Taboada L, Ribeiro-Soriano D (2012) Are success and survival factors the same for social and business ventures? Serv Bus 6(2):219–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-012-0133-2

Sulphey MM, Alkahtani N (2017) Economic security and sustainability through social entrepreneurship: the current Saudi scenario. J Secur Sustain 6(3):479–490

Sun SL, Im JY (2015) Cutting microfinance interest rates: an opportunity co-creation perspective. Entrep Theory Pract 39(1):101–128. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12119

Tan LP, Le ANH, Xuan LP (2020) A systematic literature review on social entrepreneurial intention. J Social Entrep 11(3):241–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2019.1640770

Thomas A (2004) The rise of social cooperatives in Italy. Voluntas 15(3):243–263. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:VOLU.0000046280.06580.d8

Thompson J, Alvy G, Lees A (2000) Social entrepreneurship–a new look at the people and the potential. Manag Decis 38(5):328–338. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740010340517

Tracey P, Jarvis O (2007) Toward a theory of social venture franchising. Entrep Theory Pract 31(5):667–685. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2007.00194.x

Tripathy KK, Paliwal M, Singh A (2022) Women’s social entrepreneurship and livelihood innovation: an exploratory study from India. Serv Bus. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-022-00493-w

Van Ryzin G, Grossman S, Di Padova-Stocks L, Bergrud E (2009) Portrait of the social entrepreneur: statistical evidence from a US panel. Volunt Int J Volunt Nonprofit Organ 20(2):129–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-009-9081-4

Xu X, Chen X, Jia F, Brown S, Gong Y, Xu Y (2018) Supply chain finance: a systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis. Int J Prod Econ 204:160–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.08.003

Yang S, Kher R, Newbert SL (2020) What signals matter for social startups? It depends: the influence of gender role congruity on social impact accelerator selection decisions. J Bus Ventur. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2019.03.001

Zahra SA, Newey LR, Li Y (2014) On the frontiers: the implications of social entrepreneurship for international entrepreneurship. Entrep Theory Pract 38(1):137–158. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12061

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Business Administration, Hanshin University, 137 Hanshindae-Gil, Osan-Si, Gyeonggi-Do, 18101, South Korea

EuiBeom Jeong

Department of Global Business, Hanshin University, 137 Hanshindae-Gil, Osan-Si, Gyeonggi-Do, 18101, South Korea

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hanna Yoo .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Jeong, E., Yoo, H. A systematic literature review of women in social entrepreneurship. Serv Bus 16 , 935–970 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-022-00512-w

Download citation

Received : 30 March 2021

Accepted : 17 October 2022

Published : 29 October 2022

Issue Date : December 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-022-00512-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Social entrepreneurship
• Systematic literature review
• Bibliometric analysis
• Network analysis
• Keyword network analysis
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Entrepreneurship Research Paper Topics

This page presents a comprehensive list of entrepreneurship research paper topics , divided into 10 categories with 10 topics in each. Additionally, it offers expert advice on how to choose from the multitude of entrepreneurship topics and how to write a successful entrepreneurship research paper. The page concludes with information on the iResearchNet writing services, which offer students the option to order a custom entrepreneurship research paper on any topic. Whether you are an experienced researcher or just beginning your journey in entrepreneurship, this page is a valuable resource for finding inspiration and guidance for your next research project.

Entrepreneurship Research and Writing

Entrepreneurship is a dynamic and exciting field that involves developing, organizing, and managing a business venture to make a profit. As a result, it has become a popular area of study for students looking to develop their business acumen and pursue careers as entrepreneurs or business leaders. To succeed in this field, students must not only have a solid understanding of business fundamentals, but also stay up-to-date with the latest trends and best practices in entrepreneurship.

Academic Writing, Editing, Proofreading, And Problem Solving Services

Get 10% off with 24start discount code.

Whether you’re looking to explore the impact of technology on entrepreneurship, examine the role of government policies in supporting entrepreneurship, or analyze the psychology of successful entrepreneurs, there’s a topic on this list that will spark your interest. In addition to the topic categories, we also offer expert advice on how to choose a research topic, as well as tips for writing a successful entrepreneurship research paper. And for those who need additional assistance, we provide custom writing services to help students get the highest quality research papers on any topic.

With this page, we hope to inspire and equip entrepreneurship students with the tools and resources they need to succeed in their studies and future careers as entrepreneurs and business leaders.

100 Entrepreneurship Research Paper Topics

Entrepreneurship is a vast and complex field of study, encompassing various aspects of business creation, management, and growth. Here are ten categories of entrepreneurship research paper topics that can help students explore this multifaceted field:

Entrepreneurial mindset

• The role of creativity and innovation in developing an entrepreneurial mindset
• The psychological factors that influence entrepreneurial decision-making and risk-taking behavior
• The impact of failure on the development of an entrepreneurial mindset
• The influence of family background and upbringing on the development of an entrepreneurial mindset
• The relationship between an entrepreneurial mindset and opportunity recognition
• The impact of social and cultural factors on the development of an entrepreneurial mindset
• The role of education and training in fostering an entrepreneurial mindset
• The relationship between an entrepreneurial mindset and entrepreneurial success
• The impact of personal values and beliefs on the development of an entrepreneurial mindset
• The influence of age and gender on the development of an entrepreneurial mindset.

Entrepreneurial finance

• The role of venture capitalists in financing startups
• The impact of crowdfunding on small business financing
• The effectiveness of bootstrapping as a financing strategy for startups
• The role of angel investors in entrepreneurial finance
• The effects of government funding on small business growth
• The pros and cons of debt financing for startups
• The benefits and risks of equity financing for entrepreneurs
• The impact of tax incentives on small business financing
• The role of corporate venture capital in financing startups
• The impact of cryptocurrency on small business finance

Entrepreneurial marketing

• The role of social media in the marketing strategies of successful startups.
• Marketing strategies for new businesses targeting the millennial market.
• The use of guerrilla marketing tactics by startups and their effectiveness in driving customer acquisition.
• How to identify and reach niche markets as a new business.
• The importance of customer relationship management in early-stage startups.
• The role of influencer marketing in the promotion of new products and services.
• Brand building strategies for startups on a limited budget.
• The effectiveness of content marketing for startups and how to measure ROI.
• The use of experiential marketing techniques to create buzz and build brand awareness.
• Strategies for leveraging user-generated content as a low-cost marketing tool for new businesses.

Social entrepreneurship

• Social entrepreneurship in developing countries: opportunities and challenges
• Examining the role of government policy in promoting social entrepreneurship
• Crowdfunding for social enterprises: a study of its impact and effectiveness
• Social entrepreneurship and environmental sustainability: exploring the intersection
• Social entrepreneurship and corporate social responsibility: a comparative study
• Measuring the social impact of social entrepreneurship ventures: current approaches and future directions
• Social entrepreneurship and innovation: exploring the relationship and its implications
• Non-profit organizations as social entrepreneurship ventures: a case study analysis
• The role of social entrepreneurship in addressing societal inequalities
• The impact of social entrepreneurship on economic development in rural areas

Women entrepreneurship

• The role of networking in women entrepreneurship
• Women entrepreneurship in emerging markets
• Gender differences in entrepreneurial intentions and actions
• How to overcome gender-related obstacles in accessing capital for women entrepreneurs
• The impact of gender stereotypes on women entrepreneurs
• Women entrepreneurs and work-life balance
• The role of mentorship in supporting women entrepreneurs
• The challenges and opportunities for women entrepreneurs in male-dominated industries
• The importance of family support in women entrepreneurship
• The impact of gender diversity in the leadership team on firm performance in women-led ventures

Family business entrepreneurship

• The role of family culture in shaping entrepreneurial ventures in family businesses
• Succession planning in family businesses: key factors for a smooth transition
• Balancing family and business: challenges and strategies for family-owned enterprises
• Family business governance: best practices for effective decision-making
• How the dynamics of family relationships affect entrepreneurial performance in family businesses
• The impact of family members’ entrepreneurial motivations on business strategy in family firms
• Exploring the role of family ties in entrepreneurial team formation in family businesses
• The challenges of implementing innovation in family businesses: a study of successful family entrepreneurs
• Family business entrepreneurs and corporate social responsibility: a comparative study of family and non-family firms
• Female successors in family businesses: opportunities and challenges for women entrepreneurs in a male-dominated field

Innovation and technology entrepreneurship

• The impact of artificial intelligence on entrepreneurship
• The role of intellectual property in technology entrepreneurship
• Crowdfunding and technology entrepreneurship
• The challenges and opportunities of blockchain technology for entrepreneurs
• The impact of big data on entrepreneurial decision-making
• The relationship between technology entrepreneurship and sustainability
• Technology entrepreneurship in emerging markets
• The role of open innovation in technology entrepreneurship
• The intersection of entrepreneurship and cybersecurity
• Technology entrepreneurship in the healthcare industry

Global entrepreneurship

• The role of culture in international entrepreneurship
• The impact of global trade policies on entrepreneurial activity
• The effects of foreign direct investment on entrepreneurship in developing countries
• The influence of political instability on cross-border entrepreneurship
• The role of international networks in facilitating entrepreneurship
• The impact of global economic trends on small business growth
• The challenges and opportunities of exporting for small and medium-sized enterprises
• The role of technology in enabling global entrepreneurship
• The impact of language barriers on international entrepreneurial activity
• The importance of cross-cultural communication in global entrepreneurial ventures

Small business management and entrepreneurship

• The role of small businesses in local economic development
• Factors contributing to the success or failure of small businesses
• Effective leadership strategies for small business owners
• Small business marketing strategies in the digital age
• Challenges and opportunities for minority-owned small businesses
• Financing options for small businesses: pros and cons
• Balancing entrepreneurship with work-life balance in small business management
• Addressing ethical dilemmas in small business management and entrepreneurship
• Navigating legal and regulatory compliance for small businesses
• Innovation and growth strategies for small businesses in competitive markets

Corporate entrepreneurship

• The role of corporate culture in fostering entrepreneurial activity within established firms
• The impact of corporate entrepreneurship on firm performance and long-term sustainability
• Strategies for identifying and pursuing entrepreneurial opportunities within a large organization
• Challenges and opportunities for corporate entrepreneurship in highly regulated industries
• Balancing innovation and risk management in corporate entrepreneurship initiatives
• Best practices for building and managing cross-functional teams to drive innovation within large organizations
• The relationship between corporate entrepreneurship and corporate social responsibility
• The impact of corporate entrepreneurship on employee engagement and retention
• The role of leadership in supporting and promoting a culture of entrepreneurship within a corporation
• Examining successful case studies of corporate entrepreneurship, including both internal and external ventures

These categories provide a broad overview of the various areas of entrepreneurship research. Within each category, there are numerous research paper topics that students can explore in depth.

Choosing Entrepreneurship Research Paper Topics

Choosing the right topic is crucial when writing an entrepreneurship research paper. It should be something that interests you and aligns with your academic and career goals. Here are some expert tips to help you choose the perfect entrepreneurship research paper topic:

• Consider your interests and passions : Start by brainstorming topics that you are passionate about or that interest you. This can help you to stay motivated throughout the research and writing process.
• Review current trends : Stay up-to-date with current trends in entrepreneurship by reading industry publications, attending conferences, and following social media accounts of influential entrepreneurs. This can help you to identify gaps in research and potential topics to explore.
• Consider the audience : Consider the target audience of your research paper and choose a topic that is relevant and interesting to them. For example, if your audience is investors, consider topics related to startup valuation or funding sources.
• Look for gaps in existing research : Read existing literature on entrepreneurship to identify gaps in research. This can help you to identify potential research topics that have not been extensively explored.
• Consider the scope of the research : Consider the scope of the research you are willing to undertake. Ensure that the topic you choose is not too broad or too narrow for the scope of your paper.
• Focus on a specific aspect of entrepreneurship : Narrow down your topic to a specific aspect of entrepreneurship, such as social entrepreneurship or corporate entrepreneurship. This can help you to provide a more in-depth analysis of your topic.
• Consider the resources available : Consider the resources you have available for your research. Choose a topic that you can adequately research with the resources you have.
• Consider the potential impact : Consider the potential impact of your research topic on the field of entrepreneurship. Choose a topic that has the potential to make a significant contribution to the field.
• Consult with your instructor or advisor : Consult with your instructor or advisor for guidance on choosing a research topic. They can provide valuable feedback and help you to narrow down your options.
• Brainstorm with peers : Brainstorm with peers to identify potential research topics. They may provide insights and perspectives that you had not considered.

In conclusion, choosing the right entrepreneurship research paper topic is crucial to your success in academic and professional settings. By following these expert tips and considering your interests, strengths, and goals, you can choose a suitable topic that is engaging, specific, and feasible.

How to Write an Entrepreneurship Research Paper

Writing an entrepreneurship research paper can be an exciting and rewarding experience. However, it can also be a daunting task, especially if you are new to the field of entrepreneurship research. Here are some tips and guidelines to help you write a successful entrepreneurship research paper:

• Choose a narrow and specific topic : The first step in writing an entrepreneurship research paper is to choose a narrow and specific topic that is relevant to the field. Avoid broad topics that are difficult to cover in a single research paper. Instead, choose a topic that is focused and specific, and that allows you to conduct in-depth research.
• Conduct extensive research : Once you have chosen your topic, it’s time to conduct extensive research. This involves gathering information from a variety of sources, such as academic journals, books, and online resources. Make sure to keep track of your sources and take detailed notes.
• Develop a strong thesis statement : Your thesis statement is the main argument of your research paper. It should be clear, concise, and specific. Make sure to provide a clear and concise overview of your research topic and the main arguments you will be making in your paper.
• Use relevant and reliable sources : When conducting research for your entrepreneurship research paper, it’s important to use relevant and reliable sources. This includes academic journals, books, and reputable online sources. Make sure to cite all sources correctly using the appropriate citation style.
• Organize your paper : Once you have gathered all of your research and developed your thesis statement, it’s time to organize your paper. Make sure to create an outline that includes an introduction, body paragraphs, and a conclusion. This will help you stay on track and ensure that your paper flows logically.
• Use clear and concise language : When writing your entrepreneurship research paper, it’s important to use clear and concise language. Avoid using jargon or technical terms that may be difficult for your audience to understand. Instead, use plain language and explain any complex concepts or terms.
• Edit and revise your paper : Once you have finished writing your entrepreneurship research paper, it’s important to edit and revise it. This involves checking for spelling and grammatical errors, as well as making sure that your paper flows smoothly and logically. Consider having a peer or mentor review your paper before submitting it.
• Follow the appropriate citation style : When citing sources in your entrepreneurship research paper, it’s important to follow the appropriate citation style. This includes APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, or Harvard style. Make sure to follow the guidelines for your specific citation style to ensure that your citations are correct.
• Use visuals to enhance your paper : Visuals, such as graphs, charts, and tables, can be a great way to enhance your entrepreneurship research paper. They can help to illustrate complex concepts and data in a clear and concise way. Make sure to use visuals sparingly and only when they add value to your paper.
• Seek feedback and revision : Finally, it’s important to seek feedback on your entrepreneurship research paper and be open to revision. Consider having a peer or mentor review your paper and provide feedback. Use this feedback to revise and improve your paper before submitting it.

By following these tips and guidelines, you can write a successful entrepreneurship research paper that is well-researched, well-organized, and effectively communicates your ideas and arguments.

iResearchNet Writing Services for Entrepreneurship Research Papers

In today’s fast-paced academic world, students often struggle to find the time and resources to write a high-quality entrepreneurship research paper. This is where iResearchNet comes in – we are a professional writing service that specializes in helping students write exceptional research papers on entrepreneurship. Our team of experienced writers is well-versed in entrepreneurship and can provide students with custom-written papers that meet their specific needs. Here are the key features of our entrepreneurship research paper writing service:

• Expert degree-holding writers : We only hire writers with advanced degrees in entrepreneurship or related fields. This ensures that our writers have the necessary knowledge and expertise to produce high-quality papers that meet the highest academic standards.
• Custom written works : We provide custom-written papers that are tailored to the specific needs and requirements of each student. Our writers work closely with students to ensure that their papers meet their exact specifications.
• In-depth research : Our writers conduct extensive research on each topic to ensure that the papers we provide are well-researched, accurate, and up-to-date.
• Custom formatting : We can provide papers in any format that students require, including APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard, and others.
• Top quality : We are committed to providing the highest quality papers possible. Our writers take pride in their work and strive to deliver papers that exceed students’ expectations.
• Customized solutions : We provide customized solutions that meet the specific needs of each student. Whether students need help with research, writing, editing, or formatting, we can provide the assistance they need.
• Flexible pricing : We offer flexible pricing options that are designed to fit the budget of any student. Our prices are competitive, and we offer discounts and special offers to make our services even more affordable.
• Short deadlines : We can provide papers on even the tightest deadlines. Our writers are experienced in working under pressure and can deliver high-quality papers in as little as three hours.
• Timely delivery : We understand the importance of meeting deadlines, and we guarantee that all papers will be delivered on time.
• 24/7 support : We provide 24/7 support to ensure that students can get the help they need when they need it. Our support team is available around the clock to answer questions, provide assistance, and address any concerns.

In conclusion, iResearchNet is a professional writing service that specializes in providing high-quality entrepreneurship research papers to students. We have a team of expert writers with advanced degrees in entrepreneurship who are committed to delivering papers that meet the highest academic standards. With our customized solutions, competitive pricing, and 24/7 support, we are the perfect choice for students who need help with their entrepreneurship research papers.

Order Custom Entrepreneurship Research Paper  from iResearchNet

In conclusion, entrepreneurship research paper topics cover a wide range of subjects that are essential for understanding the dynamics of the business world. Students who wish to excel in their academic careers and become successful entrepreneurs in the future must pay attention to the topics they choose for their research papers.

At iResearchNet, we understand the importance of entrepreneurship research and its role in the development of the business world. Our writing services are tailored to provide students with custom research papers that meet their unique requirements. With our team of expert degree-holding writers, in-depth research, and customized solutions, we guarantee top-quality papers that are delivered on time.

In addition to our writing services, we offer flexible pricing, short deadlines up to 3 hours, and 24/7 support to ensure that our clients receive the best possible experience. We also offer custom formatting in all major citation styles, including APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, and Harvard.

At iResearchNet, we value our clients’ privacy and offer absolute confidentiality in all transactions. Our easy order tracking system and money-back guarantee ensure that our clients are satisfied with the services they receive.

In summary, choosing iResearchNet as your partner in entrepreneurship research paper writing will guarantee success in your academic career and future entrepreneurial pursuits. Contact us today and experience the best writing services available in the industry.

ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER

Entrepreneurship

• Entrepreneurship - Home

Social Entrepreneurship

Related usc libguides, books and ebooks, find more books, public websites and organizations, social entrepreneurship and roi, trade journals.

This webpage is designed to help anyone interested in social Social Entrepreneurship including participants in the USC Marshall Master of Science in Social Social Entrepreneurship  degree program.

Also look for resources, contacts and other information provided by Marshall's Brittingham Social Enterprise Lab .

• Business Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility
• Sustainable or "Green" Business

Here is one definition:

Social entrepreneurship describes the discovery and sustainable exploitation of opportunities to create social and environmental benefits. This is usually done through the generation of disequilibria in market and non-market environments. The social entrepreneurship process can in some cases lead to the creation of social enterprises. These social ventures are hybrid organisations exhibiting characteristics of both the for-profit and not-for-profit sector. Individuals engaging in social entrepreneurship are usually referred to as social entrepreneurs, a term that describes resourceful individuals working to create social innovation. They do not only have to identify (or create) opportunities for social change (that so far have been unexploited), they must also muster the resources necessary to turn these opportunities into reality. A typical example is Muhammad Yunus, founder of the Grameen Bank (Bangladesh) and recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of his contribution to poverty alleviation through the invention and popularisation of microfinance .

Today many foundation s aim to identify and promote social entrepreneurs. Two prominent examples are Ashoka and the Skoll Foundation. These so-called venture philanthropists adopt methods from the domain of venture capital, for example, encouraging social entrepreneurs to provide detailed business plans and to measure and report systematically on their social performance. Social return on investment (S-ROI) analysis is an example of an emerging tool aimed at describing the social impact of social entrepreneurship in dollar terms, relative to the philanthropic investment made.

Source:   Credo Reference

Hockerts, K. (2007). Social entrepreneurship . In The A to Z of corporate social responsibility . Retrieved from https://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/wileyazcsr/social_entrepreneurship/0

• Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship - Resources Various reports and articles on social entrepreneurship, plus the Foundation's annual report
• The Rise of the Social Enterprise Deloitte's 2018 Global Human Capital Trends report
• Assessing the Role of International Organizations in the Development of the Social Enterprise Sector A 2018 Policy Research Working Paper from the World Bank Group
• Social Entrepreneurship Amongst Women and Men in the United States A 2017 report from the National Women's Business Council.
• Social Enterprise in a Global Context: the role of higher education institutions. Country brief: California, USA A 2016 report from the British Council.
• Reaching the Last Mile: social enterprise business models for inclusive development A 2018 report from the World Bank Group
• Results-Based Financing through Social Enterprises A 2020 World Bank Group white paper "in response to the Covid-19 pandemic"
• Social Enterprises: community economic development toolkit A 2018 how-to guide from Action Partnership
• Supporting Social Entrepreneurship A 2016 "roadmap" from the Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors

Click on the links below to view the USC Libraries Catalog  records.  To access e-books, click on the link for "Electronic access" in the USC Libraries Catalog record.

Click her to find more books and ebooks on " Social Entrepreneurship ".

• Ashoka "Ashoka is the largest network of social entrepreneurs worldwide, with nearly 3,000 Ashoka Fellows in 70 countries putting their system changing ideas into practice on a global scale."
• Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship "The Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship provides unparalleled platforms at the regional and global level to highlight and advance leading models of sustainable social innovation. It identifies a select community of social entrepreneurs and engages it in shaping global, regional and industry agendas that improve the state of the world in close collaboration with the other stakeholders of the World Economic Forum."
• Skoll Foundation "...our mission is to drive large scale change by investing in, connecting and celebrating social entrepreneurs and the innovators who help them solve the world’s most pressing problems."
• Social Enterprise Alliance "Our aim is for social enterprise to reach its full potential as a force for positive social change, in service to the common good. To achieve this purpose, we provide social enterprises with the tools and resources they need to succeed, and work on building an optimal environment in which they can thrive."
• Social Innovation Forum
• Impact Garden - Social Innovation & Social Entrepreneurship "A knowledge and resource sharing platform, providing a window to the inspirational world of sustainability and impact."
• Lloyd Greif Center for Entrepreneurial Studies - Student Organizations

Public websites that work with standards and performance metrics to measure the social, environmental and financial return on investments:

• IRIS Metrics "IRIS is the catalog of generally-accepted performance metrics that leading impact investors use to measure the social, environmental, and financial performance of their investments. IRIS metrics align with a number of 3rd party standards, and proprietary metric sets."
• Social Value UK "Social Value UK is the national network for anyone interested in social value and social impact. We work with our members to increase the accounting, measuring and maximising of social value from the perspective of those affected by an organisation’s activities, through our Social Value Principles. We believe in a world where a broader definition of value will change decision making and ultimately decrease inequality and environmental degradation."
• Social Value International "At Social Value International, we believe that social value has a huge potential to help us change the way we understand the world around us, and make decisions about where to invest resources. By changing the way we account for value, we believe that we will end up with a world with more equality and a more sustainable environment. "
• Social Value - Standards & Guidance
• Social Value - Accredited Tools & Software Lists "products (that) have been created by members of Social Value International and our Global Networks. They have been reviewed by Social Value International and accredited as showing alignment with the Social Value Principles."
• Social Enterprise Journal Online access from 2006 to last year
• Journal of Social Entrepreneurship Online access from 2010 to present
• Stanford Social Innovation Review Online access from 2003 to present
• Inc. magazine - Social Entrepreneurship
• Pioneers Post
• Rank and File
• See Change: the magazine of social entrepreneurship
• The Collider Published by the Centre for Social Innovation
• << Previous: Entrepreneurship - Home
• Last Updated: Mar 28, 2024 1:22 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/entrepreneur

Upcoming Summer 2024 Application Deadline is April 14, 2024.  

Click here to apply.

Featured Posts

10 Tips to Help You Win the PicoCTF Competition in 2024

Georgia Tech's Pre-College Program - Is it Worth It?

25+ Best Science Research Ideas for High School Students

Broadcom MASTERS - 8 Reasons to Participate

9 Architecture Summer Camps for High School Students

10 Awesome Hackathons For Beginners

8 High School Pitch Competitions that You Should Check Out

10 Best College Search Tools for Independent Education Consultants (IECs)

How to Make Money in High School - 10 Amazing Ideas

10 Venture Capital Programs for High School Students

30 Great Entrepreneurship Research Topics

Pursuing independent research builds critical thinking skills, problem identification and solving skills, academic writing ability, and a solid grounding in innovative thinking. If you’re able to identify a relevant problem and pursue research into an original, feasible solution, then you can add tremendous value to both your profile and the world of research overall , while at the same time demonstrating your intellectual curiosity and methodical approach.

If you’re interested in pursuing research specifically in the world of entrepreneurship, taking a different tack from the myriad of pre-college programs and summer courses available, then we’ve compiled a list of 25+ research topics for you in this blog post .

Topic 1: Technological Innovations in Entrepreneurship

Entrepreneurs stand at the forefront of technological advancements reshaping the business landscape. If you’re keen on the cutting edge of innovation, dive deep into the realms of AI, Virtual Reality, and Blockchain technology. By exploring these avenues, you can uncover groundbreaking business applications, from enhancing customer experiences to securing financial transactions. Some great topics to consider include:

1. AI and Machine Learning Applications in Business: Explore how businesses are utilizing AI and machine learning to enhance operations, customer experiences, and innovation.

2. Virtual Reality (VR) in Marketing: Investigate the potential of VR in creating immersive marketing experiences and their impact on consumer behavior.

3. Blockchain Technology in Financial Transactions: Research the role of blockchain technology in securing financial transactions and its implications for the banking sector.

Topic 2: Sustainable Entrepreneurship

As the world takes climate change and dwindling resources more seriously, you have the opportunity to foster business models that prioritize environmental sustainability, much like the economic research topics focusing on the climate crisis and environmental policies. Delve into green business initiatives, waste management solutions, and renewable energy ventures, fostering a harmonious relationship between entrepreneurship and the environment . Your research could potentially spearhead a generation of entrepreneurs who are environmentally conscious and responsible. Some topics you could consider include:

4. Green Business Models: Analyze the effectiveness of green business models in promoting environmental sustainability.

5. Waste Management Startups: Study the emergence of startups focusing on innovative waste management solutions.

6. Renewable Energy Ventures: Explore the potential of renewable energy ventures in mitigating climate change and their economic viability.

Ideas contributed by a Lumiere Mentor from the University of Michigan.

Topic 3: Social Entrepreneurship

If social justice is a subject important to you, then you can consider researching business models that address pressing social issues and foster community development. Drawing inspiration from inclusive and community-centric approaches seen in economics research topics, you can explore social impact startups, inclusive business models, and community-based entrepreneurship. Here are some ideas to get you started:

7. Social Impact Startups: Investigate the role of startups in addressing social issues and their impact on communities.

8. Inclusive Business Models: Research the effectiveness of inclusive business models in promoting social equality and economic development.

9. Community-Based Entrepreneurship: Study the role of community-based entrepreneurship in fostering local development and social cohesion.

Ideas contributed by Lumiere Mentors from UPenn, University of Washington, and Princeton University.

Topic 4: Entrepreneurial Leadership and Management

Adept leadership is often the crucial difference between soaring success and abject failure in the cutthroat world of entrepreneurship. You can explore diverse leadership styles, agile management practices, and crisis management strategies of different leaders across firms and sectors . Some possible topics include:

10. Leadership Styles in Startups: Analyze different leadership styles and their effectiveness in the startup environment.

11. Agile Management in Entrepreneurship: Investigate the adoption of agile management practices in entrepreneurship and its impact on business agility.

12. Crisis Management in Small Businesses: Study the strategies adopted by small businesses to manage crises and ensure business continuity.

Ideas contributed by Lumiere Mentors from Cornell and the University of Michigan.

Topic 5: Entrepreneurial Finance

If you want to explore the financial backbones of the startup world, you can investigate crowdfunding platforms, venture capital investments, and overall financial literacy . Your research can help foster a generation of entrepreneurs who are financially savvy and adept at securing funding for their ventures. Here are some ideas to get you started:

13. Crowdfunding in Startups: Explore the role of crowdfunding platforms in supporting startups and the factors influencing crowdfunding success.

14. Venture Capital and Startup Growth: Investigate the relationship between venture capital investment and startup growth.

15. Financial Literacy among Entrepreneurs: Study the level of financial literacy among entrepreneurs and its impact on business success.

Topic 6: Innovation and Creativity in Entrepreneurship

Resonating with the exploratory nature of physics and computer science research, y ou can explore innovation ecosystems, design thinking approaches, and creative problem-solving techniques. While innovation and creativity are important for all businesses, they are particularly critical for entrepreneurial efforts. You can start with topics like these:

16. Innovation Ecosystems in Business: Analyze the role of innovation ecosystems in fostering creativity and innovation in businesses.

17. Design Thinking in Entrepreneurship: Investigate the adoption of design thinking approaches in entrepreneurship and its impact on product development.

18. Creative Problem-Solving in Business: Study the role of creative problem-solving techniques in addressing business challenges and fostering innovation.

Topic 7: Global Entrepreneurship

As you step into the expansive world of global entrepreneurship, you are invited to explore the opportunities and challenges associated with international business ventures. You can investigate cross-border entrepreneurship, global supply chain management, and cultural intelligence. Your research can help identify and solve the challenges affecting international business operations and the cultural mores required to keep global businesses running. Here are some ideas for you to explore:

19. Diplomacy and Entrepreneurship: Research the impact of geopolitics and diplomatic relations on international businesses and how businesses can mitigate the impact of trade wars on their operations.

20. Global Supply Chain Management: Investigate the strategies adopted by businesses to manage global supply chains effectively.

21. Cultural Intelligence in International Business: Study the role of cultural intelligence in facilitating successful international business operations.

Topic 8: Entrepreneurial Education

Entrepreneurship is by and large a skill that can be taught, and you have the opportunity to delve into the effectiveness of entrepreneurship education programs, experiential learning approaches, and entrepreneurial skill development. Here are some initial ideas:

22. Entrepreneurship Education in High Schools: Analyze the effectiveness of entrepreneurship education programs in high schools in fostering an entrepreneurial mindset.

23. Experiential Learning in Entrepreneurship: Investigate the role of experiential learning approaches in entrepreneurship education.

24. Entrepreneurial Skill Development: Study the strategies adopted by educational institutions to foster entrepreneurial skill development among students.

Topic 9: Women in Entrepreneurship

Echoing the gender studies perspective seen in economics research, you can delve into success factors for women entrepreneurs, challenges faced by women in business, and initiatives promoting women's participation in the tech sector. Some topics you can start exploring are:

25. Challenges Faced by Women Entrepreneurs: Investigate the challenges faced by women entrepreneurs and the strategies adopted to overcome them.

26. Women Entrepreneurs in Developing Nations: Research how women build and lead businesses in developing nations and their unique perspectives and contributions to their respective fields.

27. Contributions by Women in Entrepreneurial Leadership: Study the role of women specifically in leadership roles in startups and the resultant impact on firm performance and growth.

Topic 10: Youth Entrepreneurship

To research something that might be close to your own journey, you can explore the role of youth entrepreneurship in economic development, support systems for young entrepreneurs, and the relationship between youth entrepreneurship and innovation . A few topics to help get you started:

28. Youth Entrepreneurship and Economic Development: Analyze the role of youth entrepreneurship in promoting economic development.

29. Support Systems for Young Entrepreneurs: Investigate the support systems available for young entrepreneurs and their effectiveness in fostering youth entrepreneurship.

30. Youth Entrepreneurship and Innovation: Study the relationship between youth entrepreneurship and innovation, and the factors influencing young entrepreneurs' propensity to innovate.

If you’re looking for an incubator program that helps you establish a developed startup in high school, consider the Young Founders Lab! 

The   Young Founder’s Lab   is a real-world start-up bootcamp founded and run by Harvard entrepreneurs. In this program, you will work towards building a revenue-generating start-up that addresses a real-world problem.   You will also have the opportunity to be mentored by established entrepreneurs and professionals from Google, Microsoft, and X. 

You can access the application link   here !

One more option - Lumiere Research Scholar Program

If you’re looking for the opportunity to do in-depth research on the above topics and more, you could also consider applying to one of the Lumiere Research Scholar Programs , selective online high school programs for students I founded with researchers at Harvard and Oxford. Last year, we had over 4000 students apply for 500 spots in the program! You can find the application form here.

Stephen is one of the founders of Lumiere and a Harvard College graduate. He founded Lumiere as a PhD student at Harvard Business School. Lumiere is a selective research program where students work 1-1 with a research mentor to develop an independent research paper.

Image Source: Lumiere logo

A systematic literature review of women in social entrepreneurship

Euibeom jeong.

1 Department of Business Administration, Hanshin University, 137 Hanshindae-Gil, Osan-Si, Gyeonggi-Do 18101 South Korea

2 Department of Global Business, Hanshin University, 137 Hanshindae-Gil, Osan-Si, Gyeonggi-Do 18101 South Korea

A recent increase in research on social entrepreneurship (SEship) has been characterized by more focus on gender-based topics, especially women. To address the status of women in SEship, we conduct a rigorous systematic literature review of 1142 papers on SEship and 59 articles on the sub-domain of women. Based on the findings, the article presents several suggestions for future research: (i) reinterpretation of theoretical concepts, (ii) social integration and overcoming gender discrimination, (iii) expansion of sectors and regions, and (iv) operation strategy and performance factors. This study contributes to the development of SEship by providing an overview of women in SEship.

Introduction

Social entrepreneurship (hereafter, SEship) is defined as an “entrepreneurial activity with an embedded social purpose” (Austin et al. 2006 ). In recent decades, it has evolved as a significant research domain for firms and academics (Kannampuzha and Hockerts 2019 ; Kim 2022 ; Rey-Martí et al. 2016 ), and the number of studies and publications on this topic have steadily increased (Hota et al. 2020 ; McQuilten 2017 ; Short et al. 2009 ; Zahra et al. 2014 ). The growth in research covers topics such as the social impact of SEship (Nguyen et al. 2015 ), social innovation and SEship (Phillips et al. 2015 ), SEship business strategies and business models (George and Reed 2016 ; Roy and Karna 2015 ), comparisons with business-oriented entrepreneurship (Simón-Moya et al. 2012 ), and value creation and dissemination by SEship (Brandsen and Karré 2011 ; Nega and Schneider 2014 ; Sulphey and Alkahtani 2017 ).

Women, representing the fastest-growing category of entrepreneurship, are receiving attention from scholars as important organizational members and beneficiaries (Anggadwita et al. 2021 ; Gupta et al. 2019 ; Hechavarría et al. 2017 ; Lee and Jung 2015 ; Tripathy et al. 2022 ; Yang et al. 2020 ). This phenomenon provides the opportunity to review and reflect on how the field of SEship will progress. Since discussions on women in SEship can contribute to expanding the entrepreneurship field and the diversity of gender studies (Calás et al. 2009 ; Rosca et al. 2020 ), it is important to synthesize these discussions collectively. Thus, the existing literature must be collated and reflected upon to identify new directions and future challenges. However, to the best of our knowledge, there has been no thorough literature review study on women in SEship compared to overall SEship using a rigorous systematic literature review method.

As for conducting such a literature review, the researchers took two perspectives: the popularity-based approach and the network-based approach (Choi et al. 2011 ; Fahimnia et al. 2015 ; Xu et al. 2018 ; Park and Jeong 2019 ; Gupta et al. 2020 ; Hota et al. 2020 ; Tan et al. 2020 ). However, the popularity-based approach, also known as bibliometric analysis, is recognized as unsuitable for identifying shared topical issues within a given research field despite offering significant insight into a given field by examining the usage frequency in published papers (Choi et al. 2011 ; Park and Jeong 2019 ). In contrast, the network-based approach, which includes citation and co-citation analysis, explores the significant and commonly shared topical issues among published papers in a given field. However, the network-based approach does not create a further specified knowledge network within a given research area (Choi et al. 2011 ; Park and Jeong 2019 ).

To address the perceived drawbacks in the extant literature and achieve a more comprehensive research evaluation on this topic, this study conducted a systematic literature review by combining the traditional systematic literature review approach (bibliometric, citation, and co-citation analysis) with keyword network analysis. Keyword network analysis is an effective method for examining the research trends of specific issues in a given field by constructing a keyword network based on nodes (author’s keywords) and links (the occurrence of the author’s keywords in other papers). However, in SEship, few literature review studies have adopted keyword network analysis to discover overall trends and issues. Thus, we attempt to achieve the following three objectives in this study by applying a keyword network analysis to achieve a more rigorous systematic literature review:

• Identify influential issues and topics that significantly contribute to the study of women in SEship field;
• Understand the evolution of women in SEship by identifying linkages among core papers and the evolution of these linkages over time;
• Identify the status of women in SEship research and discover future directions and challenges by comparing this to overall SEship research.

By addressing the above-stated research objectives, we mainly contribute to the development of women in SEship field in three ways. First, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first research of its type to comprehensively examine the literature on women in SEship within overall SEship by combining traditional systematic approaches with keyword network analysis. Second, we contribute to understanding an overview of women in SEship within the overall SEship field by identifying main issues, emerging issues, and key topics. Third, we suggest research gaps and outline important research directions and considerations for future women in SEship field.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section  2 describes the research background by reviewing systematic literature on women in SEship. Section  3 describes the applied methodologies (bibliometric and network analysis) for a rigorous systematic literature review on women in SEship. Then, we exhibit the results of the bibliometric and network analyses using Netminer, as a network analysis software tool, in Sects.  4 and 5 , respectively. In Sect.  6 , we discuss research gaps and future research opportunities. Lastly, in Sect.  7 , we conclude our research by providing the implications and contributions along with the limitations.

Previous systematic literature reviews of women in SEship

According to emerging literature, women are making significant contributions to entrepreneurial activities (Noguera et al. 2013 ) and economic development (Hechavarría et al. 2019 ; Kelley et al. 2017 ) in terms of creating new jobs and increasing gross domestic product (GDP) (Ayogu and Agu 2015 ; Bahmani-Oskooee et al. 2012 ). Women also positively impact reducing poverty and social exclusion (Langowitz and Minniti 2007 ; Rae 2015 ). Furthermore, women, as important accelerators, have an important role in gender in promoting social entrepreneurial intentions (Cardella et al. 2021 ). There are an ever-growing number of articles related to women in SEship (Lortie et al. 2017 ; Rosca et al. 2020 ; Sahrakorpi and Bandi 2021 ), providing opportunities to reflect on how to advance the field. However, despite the growing number of studies on women in SEship, there are a lack of sufficient research regarding female social entrepreneurs as strategy adopters to solve social problems (Rosca et al. 2020 ). Thus, the existing literature must be synthesized and analyzed to identify new directions and challenges.

Despite the growing importance of women in SEship, the status of women’s research within SEship remains unclear. Although existing studies on women in SEship have contributed significantly to our understanding of it, little is known about how the field of research is evolving, which management areas are being addressed, which issues have influenced these given areas, and what the relationships are among the main topics. Therefore, to identify potential research gaps and develop new ideas and theories that serve as a basis for future research, we must map and evaluate the current body of research on women in SEship.

Researchers have adopted two perspectives in conducting literature reviews on women in SEship. One perspective is the popularity-based approach, which uses bibliometric analysis (Choi et al. 2011 ). The popularity-based approach’s bibliometric analysis offers insights not captured or evaluated by other reviews using authors, their affiliation, popular words used in titles and abstracts, and author keywords (Choi et al. 2011 ; Fahimnia et al. 2015 ; Gupta et al. 2020 ; Tan et al. 2020 ; Xu et al. 2018 ). The popularity-based approach indicates the significance of words or keywords in a given discipline by examining their frequency of use in published papers. However, this method is unsuitable for associating shared topical issues within a given research field because it is unable to identify relationships among published articles (Choi et al. 2011 ; Park and Jeong 2019 ).

Another approach is the network-based approach, which conducts network analyses such as citation and co-citation analysis using citations generated from papers (Choi et al. 2011 ; Fahimnia et al. 2015 ; Hota et al. 2020 ; Xu et al. 2018 ). Citation analysis is implemented to explore influential issues by counting how frequently an article is cited by other articles (Fahimnia et al. 2015 ; Park and Jeong 2019 ; Hota et al. 2020 ; Xu et al. 2018 ). Co-citation analysis identifies commonly shared topical issues within a given field through a co-citation network comprising a set of papers as nodes and their co-occurrences in other papers as links (Hota et al. 2020 ; Leydesdorff 2011 ; Radicchi et al. 2004 ). However, these network analyses have mainly focused on published articles rather than specified author keywords (Park and Jeong 2019 ). Therefore, from a comprehensive perspective, a network commonly adopted for citations or co-citation analyses does not directly derive a further specified knowledge network within a given research area (Choi et al. 2011 ; Park and Jeong 2019 ). To comprehensively identify topics on women in SEship, we must include specific keywords not involved in the citation and co-citation network (Park and Jeong 2019 ). Therefore, to address this, we implement a rigorous systematic literature review that includes specified author keywords through traditional systematic literature review approaches (bibliometric, citation, and co-citation analysis).

Furthermore, as no literature review has been conducted on this topic, it is not known how research on women in SEship has developed and is being implemented.

Research methodology

We conducted a systematic literature review on women in SEship by combining traditional systematic approaches with keyword network analysis. First, we selected social entrepreneurship-related journals from the SCOPUS database. We used “social entrepre*,” “social enterpri*,” “social venture,” and “social business” as the primary search keywords based on previous studies on SEship (Hota et al. 2020 ; Saebi et al. 2019 ; Gupta et al. 2020 ). Only articles written in journals with a 1.0 impact factor or greater were used to select the most influential papers. Despite the importance of providing valuable and insightful managerial guidance to women social entrepreneurs in the business environment (Rosca et al. 2020 ), it remains unclear how women entrepreneurs navigate. Thus, we used only business administration journal articles written in English and excluded conference papers, book series, commercial publications, and magazine articles. Therefore, the initial search attempts resulted in 1142 papers published from 1972 to 2021 (searched in December 2021). As this study is explicitly addressing the status of women in SEship field, we further collected 59 papers on this topic from the 1142 articles using search keywords, such as “female,” “woman,” and “women.”

This study attempts to achieve the following objectives. First, what is the current status of research on women in SEship? Second, what is the most influential paper among studies on women in SEship? Third, how does research on women in SEship change over time? To identify those questions, first, we adopted bibliometric analysis to provide insights on items, such as author, journal, and publication statistics. Second, we conducted a citation analysis to identify the most influential papers to analyze the status of overall SEship and women in SEship. Third, we performed a co-citation analysis to identify commonly shared topics through the co-occurrence of two given articles in other papers. A dynamic co-citation analysis was conducted to understand the evolution of overall SEship and women in SEship over time. Finally, to address the perceived drawbacks of a systematic literature review that uses only traditional approaches (bibliometric, citation, and co-citation analysis), we performed a keyword network analysis to represent the complete “intellectual structure” or “knowledge base” of the SEship field. Additionally, we addressed the specific changes in critical keywords over time using NetMiner as a network analysis tool. NetMiner has excellent functionality for network analysis (Huisman et al. 2005 ). Thus, for a more rigorous network analysis, we selected NetMiner to conduct our research. Figure  1 shows the process of the systematic literature review analysis.

Process of the systematic literature review analysis

Bibliometric analysis

A bibliometric analysis examines data statistics, including authors, affiliations, titles, abstracts, and author keywords (Fahimnia et al. 2015 ; Xu et al. 2018 ). Thus, a bibliometric analysis can provide insight into new perspectives for future direction by identifying the existing state of a given discipline (Hashemi et al. 2022 ). This paper conducted a bibliometric analysis to identify the current status of research on SEship and women in SEship by mainly focusing on authors, journals, and publication year.

Influential authors of SEship and women in SEship

To understand the status of SEship and women in SEship, scholars interested in conducting SEship research must identify influential researchers. Therefore, we extracted the top contributing authors by the number of papers they authored or co-authored. Table ​ Table1 1 represents the top contributing authors based on the number of published papers.

Top contributing authors

Publication statistics

We investigated publication statistics to identify the trend of SEship in the number of papers published. As shown in Fig.  2 , the field of overall SEship is still in its growth and expansion period, while the area of women in SEship is in relatively early stages. The number of published papers on overall SEship increased from 15 in 2009 to 134 in 2021, representing geometric growth in publications. These findings emphasize that researchers and practitioners recognize the importance of SEship as a vital knowledge discipline in business management. In contrast, the number of publications on women in SEship has remained the same yearly from 2009 to 2021; thus, there has been no noticeable growth in publications on women in SEship.

Publication trend

Furthermore, 187 journals have contributed to the publication of 1142 papers on overall SEship, but only 33 of the 187 journals have contributed to the publication of 59 papers on women in SEship. Papers on women in SEship comprise only 5% of all articles published on SEship. Also, it is the top ten journals that have published these articles, representing approximately 41% of all papers published on overall SEship and 54% of women in SEship, respectively. Tables ​ Tables2 2 and ​ and3 3 show the journal in which these papers appeared. It was noticeable that “ Journal of Business Ethics ” covered a wide variety of topics, ranging from overall SEship to women in SEship. On the other hand, “Journal of Business Research,” “Journal of Cleaner Production,” “Technological Forecasting and Social Change,” “Journal of Management Decision,” and “International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal,” among the top journals that contain overall SEship studies, does not cover the subject of women.

Top journals contributing to research on overall SEship

Top journals contributing to the research on women in SEship

Network analysis

Citation analysis.

Citation analysis can objectively identify prominent academic articles through their popularity and significance by establishing how frequently they have been cited in other articles (Fahimnia et al. 2015 ; Hota et al. 2020 ; Xu et al. 2018 ). For a rigorous citation analysis, we first constructed a local citation network that determined the citation frequency of a published paper in any of the selected 1121 other published articles. Then, PageRank, which measures “prestige” using the number of times a document has been cited, was used on papers that discuss the main issues (Brin and Page 1998 ; Fahimnia et al. 2015 ; Xu et al. 2018 ). Table ​ Table4 4 presents the top ten papers on overall SEship and women in SEship by PageRank measures.

Top 10 papers using the PageRank measure

The PageRank score of a paper in a local citation network comprised N papers, where N papers (i.e., T 1 , …, T n ) cite paper A and parameter d is a damping factor describing the fraction of random walks that continue to spread along with the citations. Following the original Google PageRank of Brin and Page ( 1998 ), we set the parameter d to be 0.85, and consider paper A (that other papers have cited, namely, T 1 , …, T n ) where paper T i has citations C( T i ). Here, the PageRank of paper A (denoted by PR(A)) in a local network of N papers can be measured as follows:

As shown in Table ​ Table4, 4 , the top ten papers on overall SEship show that the topics mainly addressed are the definitions and concepts of SEship and social enterprise from various perspectives. For example, to establish the definition of SEship, Peredo and McLean ( 2006 ) distinguished between “social” and “entrepreneurship,” and Austin et al. ( 2006 ) conducted a comparative analysis between SEship and “commercial entrepreneurship.” Among the top ten papers on women in SEship, the issues primarily addressed were empowerment through SEship and the advantages of gender differences in women’s social inclusion. For example, Datta and Gailey ( 2012 ) represented that SEship enhances women’s competence through empowerment. Haugh and Talwar ( 2016 ) indicated SEship as a process of empowering women to change social norms. Comparing the trends of both streams, we determined that the study of overall SEship has evolved around conceptual papers discussing the definition and components of SEship and social enterprise. In contrast, on this conceptual basis, phenomena such as the social integration of women and the pursuit of the social purpose of female entrepreneurs have been empirically identified.

Co-citation analysis

A co-citation network consists of a set of nodes (papers) and links (the co-occurrence of the papers in other papers) (Leydesdorff 2011 ; Radicchi et al. 2004 ). This method implies that the more often two articles are cited together, the closer their relationship is. Hence, frequently cited papers are more likely to present similar subject areas (Hjørland 2013 ) and be considered part of the same research field (Culnan and Markus 1987 ). Thus, a co-citation analysis was conducted to identify prevalent topics in each field (Fahimnia et al. 2015 ; Hota et al. 2020 ; Xu et al. 2018 ).

In the co-citation analysis, we divided a local citation network of papers into “clusters” where the density of links is greater between the identical cluster articles than in other clusters (Clauset et al. 2004 ; Leydesdorff 2011 ; Radicchi et al. 2004 ). Xu et al. ( 2018 ) state that “The modularity index of a partition is a scalar value between − 1 and + 1 that measures the density of links inside communities versus the links between communities” ( 2018 , p.164). According to Blondel et al. ( 2008 ), the modularity index Q can be calculated for a weighted network as follows:

where A ij represents the weight of the link between nodes i and j , k i is the sum of the weights of the links attached to node i ( k i = ∑ j A ij ), c i is the community to which node i is assigned, δ ( u , ν ) equals 1 if u = ν and equals 0, otherwise, and finally m = 1 2 ∑ ij A ij .

In Table ​ Table5, 5 , the research on overall SEship is divided into six topical clusters by applying co-citation analysis. In Table ​ Table6, 6 , the study on women in SEship is categorized into three clusters by co-citation analysis. Furthermore, to identify the significant topical issues of each cluster, we conducted content analysis on core papers selected using PageRank measures.

Core papers per cluster according to PageRank (Overall SEship)

Core papers per cluster according to PageRank (Women in SEship)

According to the research on overall SEship in Table ​ Table5, 5 , Cluster 1 corresponded to the topic of identifying the unique characteristics of SEship through comparison. For example, Austin et al. ( 2006 ) compared social and commercial entrepreneurship. Dacin et al. ( 2010 ) contrasted SEship with other forms of entrepreneurship and explored its unique features.

Cluster 2 focused primarily on the regional characteristics of social purpose organizations. For example, Kerlin ( 2006 ) compared American and European social enterprises and conducted discussions with social enterprise scholars on both sides of the Atlantic. Thomas ( 2004 ) studied how a new social enterprise model—the social cooperative—has become instrumental in expanding the social economy in the Italian context. Kerlin ( 2010 ) compared the different factors shaping social enterprise across seven regions and countries.

Cluster 3 included theorization and conceptualization of SEship. For example, Mair and Martí ( 2006 ) identified and elaborated on the essential components of SEship. Dacin et al. ( 2011 ) also examined the conceptual definition of SEship and future research questions. Bacq and Janssen ( 2011 ) reviewed definitional issues associated with SEship based on geographical and thematic criteria.

Cluster 4 mainly contained papers corresponding to the emergence and evolution of SEship and social purpose organizations. For example, Dees ( 1998 ) presented a social enterprise spectrum to help nonprofit leaders understand and assess the potential and risks of commercialization. Meanwhile, Dart ( 2004 ) explained the emergence and evolution of social enterprise using institutional theories of organization. Chell ( 2007 ) discussed social enterprise and whether it might be interpreted as a form of entrepreneurship.

Cluster 5 corresponded to the development and growth of SEship. For example, Nicholls ( 2010 ) explained the development of SEship in terms of its key actors, discourses, and narrative logic. Prabhu ( 1999 ) examined social entrepreneurial leadership behavior and organizations’ growth and survival compared to mainstream entrepreneurship research. Tracey and Jarvis ( 2007 ) studied how the different types of SEship and their varying degrees of embeddedness influence the measurement and scaling of social value in an organization.

Lastly, Cluster 6 is related to the element of promoting SEship. For example, Korosec and Berman ( 2006 ) examined how cities help promote SEship in their communities, focusing on individuals and organizations. Herman and Rendina (2001) identified compassion as the motivation for promoting SEship and built a model of three mechanisms that transform compassion into SEship.

As shown in Table ​ Table6, 6 , Cluster 1 corresponded to the relationship between gender and the entrepreneurial pursuit of social purpose. For example, Hechavarría et al. ( 2017 ) studied how gender and national cultural values shape entrepreneurs’ goals of creating ventures that provide economic, social, or environmental value to the market. Brieger et al. ( 2019 ) analyzed the impact of human empowerment on an entrepreneur’s prosocial motivation and that of gender on prosociality in business. Hechavarría and Brieger ( 2020 ) identified the cultural practices best suited for engaging the SEship of female entrepreneurs in 33 countries.

Cluster 2 represented the social integration of women and overcoming barriers through SEship. For example, Datta and Gailey ( 2012 ) explored female entrepreneurship that empowers women by studying a women’s cooperative in the strongly patriarchal society of India. Meanwhile, Kimbu and Ngoasong ( 2016 ) explored the role of female owner-managers in small tourism firms as social entrepreneurs and how they overcome existing barriers to female participation.

Cluster 3 is related to the gender role congruence of entrepreneurs in social purpose organizations. For example, Grimes et al. ( 2018 ) developed a gender identity-based framework for explaining heterogeneity in adopting sustainability certification for social enterprises. Moreover, Yang et al. ( 2020 ) examined how gender role congruity affects social impact accelerator selection decisions.

As a result of comparing the two fields (overall SEship and women in SEship), it was noted that overall SEship research was differentiated into detailed topic clusters. In contrast, the scope of the issues covered in research on women in SEship is still limited. Specifically, compared to overall SEship, women in SEship research mainly focus on more individual-level topics, including entrepreneurial pursuit behavior, overcoming barriers, and gender role congruence. Table ​ Table7 7 summarizes the research focus of each cluster in the two fields. Table ​ Table7 7 summarizes the research focus of each cluster in the two fields.

The research focus of each cluster

Co-citation analysis—dynamic clustering analysis

To further understand the difference in the evolution of women in SEship from overall SEship, we performed a dynamic co-citation analysis. Table ​ Table8 8 shows the number of papers published in each cluster since 1998.

The number of papers published in each cluster (1998–2021)

Research on women in SEship grew at the same rate in 2016 and 2017, whereas, since 2016, studies on overall SEship did not have high publications. Moreover, the number of articles falling into clusters 1 and 3 on women in SEship has steadily increased, but studies on overall SEship, divided into six commonly shared topics, were mainly distributed from 2004 to 2015. For overall SEship, many studies have been conducted in Clusters 3 and 4 and relatively few were performed in Clusters 2 and 6. Meanwhile, the first study on women in SEship appeared in 2012, and the level of interest in the subject across the three clusters was equal. In summary, the development and maturity of overall SEship research naturally shifted researchers’ attention toward specifically studying women in SEship.

Keyword network analysis

We collected author keywords to conduct a keyword network analysis. However, 144 papers that did not include author keywords were excluded from the total. Therefore, the final number of papers analyzing the keyword network of overall SEship and women in SEship was 998 and 50, respectively.

To construct a rigorous keyword network analysis, we applied the keyword network analysis process in Table ​ Table9. 9 . Thus, our study aimed to (1) generate two keyword networks (overall SEship and women in SEship) extracted from premier international business journals, (2) examine the characteristics of the two keyword network structures to identify the status of the field, (3) investigate the specific issues of overall SEship and women in SEship, and (4) examine the changes in the more influential issues over time.

Keyword network analysis process

Park and Jeong ( 2019 )

Before constructing the keyword network, we refined author keywords extracted from selected papers by standardizing all keywords with the same meaning. Then, we performed a component analysis to construct networks consisting of commonly preferred keywords using the NetMiner tool.

Keyword network structure analysis

After constructing keyword networks consisting of commonly used author keywords, several well-defined and widely used network-related measures were applied to understand the keyword networks’ structural characteristics. First, our study adopted a “density” measure to examine the degree of dense networks by dividing the number of links by the number of possible links in the network—the more comprehensive the network, the sparser the links (Choi et al. 2011 ). Second, the “clustering coefficient,” which implies the degree of connectivity of the neighboring nodes (keywords) in a network, was adopted. A high clustering coefficient results in the tendency of nodes (keywords) to be grouped densely (Choi et al. 2011 ). Third, we applied the “average distance,” which reveals the average number of steps along the shortest arcs for all node pairs. In other words, the “average distance” implies the degree of efficiency in terms of information on a network (Choi et al. 2011 ).

The results of our study indicated that the overall network of SEship and the sub-network regarding women in SEship are highly clustered local networks interconnected by hub nodes (keywords) of the entire network (Table ​ (Table10). 10 ). The overall network of SEship is relatively sparse (density = 0.004), whereas the sub-network of women in SEship is highly dense (density = 0.033). The density results of the overall network of SEship indicated that out of 1000 potential links, only approximately four links exist in the keyword network. Although there is no established ideal density cut-off point to advise (Raisi et al. 2020 ), the current density of research on overall SEship is extremely low. In contrast, the sub-network of women in SEship has relatively denser connectivity.

Network measures of the overall network and the sub-network for SEship

To further identify the structural characteristics of the overall network and sub-network for SEship, our study constructed a cumulative degree distribution where the X -axis represents the degree’s log scale and the Y -axis indicates the keyword proportion. The cumulative degree of the overall network and sub-keyword networks for SEship followed a transparent power-law distribution, as shown in Fig.  3 . The two networks are highly centralized around a few nodes (keywords), and the centralization has a hierarchal pattern. According to cohesion theory (Coleman 1988 ), higher density enables network nodes to have more opportunities to connect to other nodes, overcome impediments, and ease knowledge transfer (Reagans and McEvily 2003 ). Furthermore, a network’s hierarchal pattern provides easy access to many other nodes in the network, thereby improving the diffusion of knowledge. However, high centralization can impede access to diverse and new sources of knowledge as the knowledge sources are limited to a few hubs. Accordingly, although the current research on women in SEship indicates a suitable structure for a quick transfer, diffusion, and a combination of issues, it might be challenging to access diverse and new emerging issues.

Cumulative degree distributions

Important keywords—network centrality analysis

Our analysis results show the top ten keywords according to three centrality measures (degree, betweenness, and closeness centrality). As shown in Table ​ Table11, 11 , the top-ranked keywords by the three centrality measures imply specific issues in each area. A keyword with a high degree centrality has many connections with other keywords, indicating their representativeness of major-specific research issues. Furthermore, because the top keywords in terms of betweenness centrality lie between two distinct research topics, it may imply that they play an essential role in bridging separate groups of research topics. A keyword with high closeness centrality is in the center of the keyword network; thus, keywords with high closeness centrality were used with nearly all other keywords.

Top 10 keywords by centrality analysis (overall SEship vs. women in SEship)

Comparing the results of the analysis, we determined that the study of overall SEship centered on related concepts, such as “entrepreneurship,” “social innovation,” “corporate social responsibility,” and “sustainability,” by linking organizational characteristics, such as “hybrid organization” and “social business.” The study of women in SEship centered on gender identity concepts, such as “gender,” “women entrepreneur,” and “female entrepreneurship,” by linking concepts of regional activities, such as “community development.” However, in this field, the generalization is limited because of the specific data source (e.g., the global representative monitor) used in a study or the limited market area (e.g., bottom of the pyramid), which is the subject of a study, and appears as the top keyword. To sum up, overall SEship is connected by various comparisons and contrasts that use similar concepts, but the study of women in SEship is not characterized by a broad conceptual relationship.

Important keywords—changes in important keywords over time

To address changes in influential issues over time, we compared the important keywords from the first ten years (2010–2019) with those from the two most recent years (2020–2021) (Table ​ (Table12). 12 ). Furthermore, in recent years (2010–2021), we observed highly ranked new emerging keywords, identifying significant issues for overall SEship and women in SEship (Table ​ (Table13). 13 ). As the links between keywords have accumulated over the years, examining the keyword networks’ evolution is difficult as keyword association information from a certain period may be excluded based on the focus of the keyword network in that period. Thus, to identify the influential issues that have resulted in recent changes in impactful keywords, we compared the keyword network constructed from much earlier papers with that of more recent ones.

Comparison of the top 10 keywords across three network measurements

New emerging keywords over 12 years (2010–2021)

Our comparison reveals some notable findings. In overall SEship, “social entrepreneurship,” “social enterprise,” “social innovation,” “entrepreneurship,” “hybrid organization,” “sustainability,” and “social business” are concepts that are consistently studied, although some changes in centrality exist. Additionally, keywords that have previously received significant attention (e.g., “social entrepreneur,” “corporate social responsibility,” and “social value”) have shifted away from recent research interests, and new keywords (e.g., “legitimacy,” “gender”) have drawn attention. In the study of women in SEship, “social entrepreneurship,” “social enterprise,” “entrepreneurship,” and “female entrepreneurship” are continuously studied in conjunction with “gender” and “women.” However, existing keywords (e.g., “global entrepreneurship monitor,” “community”) have disappeared, and other keywords (e.g., “bottom of the pyramid,” “social innovation,” “culture”) replaced them. The study-analyzing GEM (Global Entrepreneurship Monitor), consisting of representative entrepreneurship survey data, was useful in identifying gender differences in activities that pursue social values in overall entrepreneurship (Brieger et al. 2019 ; Hechavaría et al. 2017 ). These empirical results served as the basis for exploring gender differences in the specific contexts of emerging markets (Rosca et al. 2020 ) and innovation areas (Sun and Im 2015 ).

Table ​ Table13 13 represents the important issues or concepts concerning recent changes in impactful keywords. In the study of overall SEship, cooperative management methods (“cross-sector collaboration,” “co-creation,” “collaboration,” “crowdsourcing,” and “value co-creation”) and measurement of created value (“measurement,” “social impact measurement,” and “financial performance”) have been continuously researched from the beginning.

Meanwhile, in the study of women in SEship, the types of keywords that stand out are the characteristics of the area (“community development,” “developing country,” “community enterprise,” “community,” “least developed country,” and “bottom of the pyramid”), gender characteristics (“gender self-schema,” “social identity theory,” and “gender role congruity theory”), and ways to overcome resource constraints (“social bricolage,” “philanthropy,” “crowdfunding,” “sustainable finance,” “microfinance,” and “charity”). The definition and explanation of the concept of SEship gradually became a concrete subject of practical management methods and performance measurement. However, the study of women in SEship focuses only on overcoming resource-constrained environments (regional, cultural). In other words, this indicates that gender-based research on SEship has not yet fully addressed the complexity of entrepreneurship research.

Research gaps and future research opportunities

Our rigorous systematic literature review has identified gaps in current research and potential future research opportunities in the field of women in SEship, which may be beneficial for scholars to capture emerging research topics in their studies. This study has several notable findings.

Reinterpretation of theoretical concepts in SEship

Recent research on women in SEship has focused on women’s role in addressing gender discrimination within the field of SEship rather than the theoretical definition and concept of SEship. This can be seen from the fact that women in SEship had minimal keywords associated with the theoretical definition and concept of SEship, based on the cluster analysis results (Table ​ (Table7) 7 ) and the top keyword by centrality (Table ​ (Table11). 11 ). In recent decades, researchers have identified unique phenomena and behavioral meanings in the field of SEship. However, most research on women in SEship is based on existing entrepreneurship and women’s research rather than on discussions of SEship. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct theoretical research on SEship from a woman’s perspective. We suggest more studies with a focus on reinterpreting the existing theoretical concepts in SEship, such as “social innovation,” “hybrid organization,” and “sustainability” from the perspective of women.

Social integration and overcoming gender discrimination

The main current themes, which underline the importance of women in the fight against discrimination and promote social integration, are expected to continue to grow (Table ​ (Table8). 8 ). According to the characteristics of the network structure, the structural characteristics of the knowledge network regarding women in SEship have high centrality and clustering coefficients (Table ​ (Table10), 10 ), which enables the transfer and diffusion of extant knowledge (topics) within the given field. In addition, the knowledge network of women in SEship has shown preferential attachment as a well-known feature of the power-law distribution (Fig.  3 ). Thus, the more the existing issues with high centrality regarding “gender,” “women entrepreneur,” and “female entrepreneurship” represent a focus on the importance of women in SEship, the more often the issues will be selected by researchers (Barabási 2009 ). Therefore, we suggest ways for female social entrepreneurs to overcome gender discrimination and create sustainable value may be a potential area for fruitful research in future of women in SEship.

Expansion of sectors and regions

In the existing study, some issues such as “hybrid organization” and “corporate social responsibility” remain unclear in the study of women in SEship. According to the keyword network analysis (Tables ​ (Tables11, 11 , ​ ,12), 12 ), “hybrid organization” is an issue that is strongly linked to other research themes but has rarely been addressed from a woman’s perspective. Moreover, “corporate social responsibility” is a field that is often studied in overall SEship research, but the study of women in SEship has rarely focused on this topic. These findings raise the need to comprehensively study various sectors in which female social entrepreneurs operate. Therefore, there is a need for research into sectors other than the social economy (e.g., for-profit, nonprofit, and public sector). Furthermore, the area and geographical scope of female entrepreneurs’ activities are somewhat limited (e.g., “community development,” “developing country”, and “bottom of the pyramid”). Hence, further expanding the geographical ranges and contexts of women in SEship field is necessary for future research (Kerlin 2010 ; Hechavaría and Brieger 2020 ).

Operation strategy and performance factors

It is necessary to pay attention to “collaboration” and “performance measurement” in the field of women in SEship. Based on the new emerging keyword network result in the study of overall SEship, it is noteworthy that the topics related to “collaboration” (such as “cross-sector collaboration,” “co-creation,” “collaboration,” “crowdsourcing,” and “value co-creation”), “performance measurement” (such as “measurement,” “social impact measurement,” and “financial performance”) have recently emerged. Women cooperate at various levels as entrepreneurs, organizational members, and residents in the field of overall SEship (Maas et al. 2014 ; Anglin et al. 2021 ; Bento et al. 2019 ). Therefore, this study recommends more studies focusing on identifying traits of women’s collaboration and creating values through women’s cooperation.

The study of SEship and the research on women in SEship has increased in popularity in recent years. Hence, synthesizing and reflecting on the existing literature regarding women in SEship field are essential in identifying new directions and future challenges. Therefore, we conducted a systematic literature review to gain a more comprehensive evaluation of research on women in SEship by combining a bibliometric analysis and network analysis (citation analysis, co-citation analysis) with a keyword network analysis.

Implications of this study

The implications of this study are as follows. First, an overview of women in SEship is presented to help researchers identify research opportunities and develop new perspectives. Existing systematic review papers have examined overall SEship (Hota et al. 2020 ; Sassmannshausen and Volkmann 2018 ), but most did not compare and address topics on women. Thus, our goal was to identify the current status and capture research gaps on women in SEship within the overall study of SEship. Our notable findings provide meaningful guidelines for experienced and new scholars in the field of women in SEship. For example, our results provide detailed answers to practical questions about which journals are being studied, which keywords are important, which researchers are conducting unique research, and the latest trends.

Second, we conducted a rigorous systematic literature review to comprehensively evaluate research on women in SEship by combining the traditional systematic literature review approach (citation and co-citation analysis) with a keyword network analysis. The keyword network analysis can complement the perceived drawbacks of the extant systematic literature review with a more specific knowledge network (Choi et al. 2011 ; Park and Jeong 2019 ).

Third, our notable findings provide meaningful guidelines for experienced and new scholars in the field of women in SEship. For example, our results provide detailed answers to practical questions about which journals are being studied, which keywords are important, which researchers are conducting unique research, and the latest trends.

Limitations and future research

Although this study is valuable because it overcomes limitations due to the lack of literature reviews, it is not without limits. First, a limitation exists in the selection of research papers. Although SCOPUS, used in this study, is a database favored by many researchers, some related papers may have been excluded from manual search methods. This is because confirming information is difficult because of errors, such as limitations in searching for related journals and the omission of contents. Similarly, even though we selected search keywords related to the research topic, these keywords may not be exhaustive. Thus, we suggest that future systematic literature reviews include other diverse databases (e.g., Web of Science). Moreover, for more rigorous analysis, the future systematic literature reviews must use not only the author’s keywords but also titles and abstracts.

Second, the academic field of the collected papers is limited to business administration. Although research on SEship is conducted in a multidisciplinary manner, this study examined research trends only in the field of business administration, so discussions in other academic areas were excluded. Therefore, future research must explore the differences and associations in discussions by the academic field.

Third, there are limitations to the method of analysis. For example, the citation index used in the study is a representative indicator of the influence of the study, but it has limitations as it can be cited for other reasons, such as the reputation of the author or journal (Hota et al. 2020 ). Moreover, common topics were extracted and classified based on the literature derived from cluster analysis, but the core topics of all studies are difficult to explain. This is because topics were clustered based on the relationship between the main and sub-themes of each study. Therefore, the limitations of such a citation index and cluster analysis must be recognized, and more intensified content analysis should be conducted based on this study.

Lastly, this study examined only academic literature and excluded conference papers, book series, commercial publications, and magazine articles. Therefore, the results of this study reflect only the academic discussions of researchers. To reflect future discussions of practice, researchers must include a broader range of data. The similarities and differences between practitioners’ and scholars’ interests can be compared through this.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

• Anggadwita G, Ramadani V, Permatasari A, Alamanda DT. Key determinants of women’s entrepreneurial intentions in encouraging social empowerment. Serv Bus. 2021; 15 (2):309–334. doi: 10.1007/s11628-021-00444-x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Anglin AH, Courtney C, Allison TH. Venturing for others, subject to role expectations? A role congruity theory approach to social venture crowd funding. Entrep Theory Pract. 2021; 46 (2):421–448. doi: 10.1177/10422587211024545. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Austin J, Stevenson H, Wei-Skillern J. Social and commercial entrepreneurship: same, different, or both? Entrep Theory Pract. 2006; 30 (1):1–22. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2006.00107.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ayogu DU, Agu EO. Assessment of the contribution of women entrepreneur towards entrepreneurship development in Nigeria. Int J Curr Res Acad Rev. 2015; 3 (10):190–207. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bacq S., Janssen F. The multiple faces of social entrepreneurship: A review of definitional issues based on geographical and thematic criteria. Entrepreneurship &amp; Regional Development. 2011; 23 (5-6):373–403. doi: 10.1080/08985626.2011.577242. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bahmani-Oskooee M, Galindo MÁ, Méndez MT. Women’s entrepreneurship and economic policies. In: Galindo M-A, Ribeiro D, editors. Women’s entrepreneurship and economics. New York: Springer; 2012. pp. 23–33. [ Google Scholar ]
• Barabási AL. Scale-free networks: a decade and beyond. Science. 2009; 325 (5939):412–413. doi: 10.1126/science.1173299. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Battilana J, Lee M. Advancing research on hybrid organizing–Insights from the study of social enterprises. Acad Manag Ann. 2014; 8 (1):397–441. doi: 10.5465/19416520.2014.893615. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bento N, Gianfrate G, Thoni MH. Crowdfunding for sustainability ventures. J Clean Prod. 2019 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.117751. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Blondel VD, Guillaume JL, Lambiotte R. Lefebvre E (2008) Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. J Stat Mech Theory Exp. 2008; 10 :P10008. doi: 10.1088/1742-5468/2008/10/P10008. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brandsen T, Karré PM. Hybrid organizations: no cause for concern? Int J Public Adm. 2011; 34 (13):827–836. doi: 10.1080/01900692.2011.605090. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brieger SA, Terjesen SA, Hechavarría DM, Welzel C. Prosociality in business: a human empowerment framework. J Bus Ethics. 2019; 159 (2):361–380. doi: 10.1007/s10551-018-4045-5. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brin S, Page L. The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual Web search engine. Comput Netw ISDN Syst. 1998; 30 :107–117. doi: 10.1016/S0169-7552(98)00110-X. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Calás MB, Smircich L, Bourne KA. Extending the boundaries: reframing “entrepreneurship as social change” through feminist perspectives. Acad Manag Rev. 2009; 34 (3):552–569. doi: 10.5465/amr.2009.40633597. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cardella GM, Hernández-Sánchez BR, Monteiro AA, Sánchez-García JC. Social entrepreneurship research: intellectual structures and future perspectives. Sustain. 2021; 13 (14):7532. doi: 10.3390/su13147532. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Castellas EI, Stubbs W, Ambrosini V. Responding to value pluralism in hybrid organizations. J Bus Ethics. 2019; 159 (3):635–650. doi: 10.1007/s10551-018-3809-2. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chell E. Social enterprise and entrepreneurship: towards a convergent theory of the entrepreneurial process. Int Small Bus J. 2007; 25 (1):5–26. doi: 10.1177/0266242607071779. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Choi J, Yi S, Lee KC. Analysis of keyword networks in MIS research and implications for predicting knowledge evolution. Inf Manag. 2011; 48 (8):371–381. doi: 10.1016/j.im.2011.09.004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Clauset A, Newman ME, Moore C. Finding community structure in very large networks. Phys Rev E. 2004 doi: 10.1080/08985626.2010.488396. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Coleman JS. Social capital in the creation of human capital. Am J Sociol. 1988; 94 :S95–S120. doi: 10.1086/228943. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Culnan MJ, Markus ML. Information technologies. In: Jablin FM, Putnam LL, Roberts KH, Porter LW, editors. Handbook of organizational communication: an interdisciplinary perspective. Newbury Park: SAGE Publications; 1987. pp. 420–443. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dacin PA, Dacin MT, Matear M. Social entrepreneurship: why we don't need a new theory and how we move forward from here. Acad Manag Perspect. 2010; 24 (3):37–57. doi: 10.5465/amp.24.3.37. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dacin MT, Dacin PA, Tracey P. Social entrepreneurship: a critique and future directions. Organ Sci. 2011; 22 (5):1203–1213. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0620. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dart R. The legitimacy of social enterprise. Nonprofit Manag Leadersh. 2004; 14 (4):411–424. doi: 10.1002/nml.43. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Datta PB, Gailey R. Empowering women through social entrepreneurship: case study of a women's cooperative in India. Entrep Theory Pract. 2012; 36 (3):569–587. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2012.00505.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dees JG (1998) The meaning of “social entrepreneurship.” Comments and suggestions contributed from the Social Entrepreneurship Founders Working Group. Durham, NC: Center for the Advancement of Social Entrepreneurship, Fuqua School of Business, Duke University.
• Di Lorenzo F, Scarlata M. Social enterprises, venture philanthropy and the alleviation of income inequality. J Bus Ethics. 2019; 159 (2):307–323. doi: 10.1007/s10551-018-4049-1. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dickel P, Eckardt G. Who wants to be a social entrepreneur? The role of gender and sustainability orientation. J Small Bus Manag. 2021; 59 (1):196–218. doi: 10.1080/00472778.2019.1704489. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dimitriadis S, Lee M, Ramarajan L, Battilana J. Blurring the boundaries: the interplay of gender and local communities in the commercialization of social ventures. Organ Sci. 2017; 28 (5):819–839. doi: 10.1287/orsc.2017.1144. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fahimnia B, Tang CS, Davarzani H, Sarkis J. Quantitative models for managing supply chain risks: a review. Eur J Operat Res. 2015; 247 (1):1–15. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2015.04.034. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• George C, Reed MG. Building institutional capacity for environmental governance through social entrepreneurship: lessons from Canadian biosphere reserves. Ecol Soc. 2016; 21 (1):18. doi: 10.5751/ES-08229-210118. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gillett A, Loader K, Doherty B, Scott JM. An examination of tensions in a hybrid collaboration: a longitudinal study of an empty homes project. J Bus Ethics. 2019; 157 (4):949–967. doi: 10.1007/s10551-018-3962-7. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Grimes MG, Gehman J, Cao K. Positively deviant: Identity work through B Corporation certification. J Bus Ventur. 2018; 33 (2):130–148. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2017.12.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gupta VK, Wieland AM, Turban DB. Gender characterizations in entrepreneurship: a multi-level investigation of sex-role stereotypes about high-growth, commercial, and social entrepreneurs. J Small Bus Manag. 2019; 57 (1):131–153. doi: 10.1111/jsbm.12495. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gupta P, Chauhan S, Paul J, Jaiswal MP. Social entrepreneurship research: a review and future research agenda. J Bus Res. 2020; 113 :209–229. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.03.032. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hashemi H, Rajabi R, Brashear-Alejandro TG. COVID-19 research in management: an updated bibliometric analysis. J Bus Res. 2022; 149 :795–810. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.05.082. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Haugh HM, Talwar A. Linking social entrepreneurship and social change: the mediating role of empowerment. J Bus Ethics. 2016; 133 (4):643–658. doi: 10.1007/s10551-014-2449-4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hechavarría DM, Brieger SA. Practice rather than preach: cultural practices and female social entrepreneurship. Small Bus Econ. 2020; 58 :1131–1151. doi: 10.1007/s11187-020-00437-6. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hechavarría DM, Terjesen SA, Ingram AE, Renko M, Justo R, Elam A. Taking care of business: the impact of culture and gender on entrepreneurs’ blended value creation goals. Small Bus Econ. 2017; 48 (1):225–257. doi: 10.1007/s11187-016-9747-4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hechavarría D, Bullough A, Brush C, Edelman L. High-growth women’s entrepreneurship: fueling social and economic development. J Small Bus Manag. 2019; 57 (1):5–13. doi: 10.1111/jsbm.12503. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hjørland B. Citation analysis: A social and dynamic approach to knowledge organization. Inf Process Manag. 2013; 49 (6):1313–1325. doi: 10.1016/j.ipm.2013.07.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hota PK, Subramanian B, Narayanamurthy G. Mapping the intellectual structure of social entrepreneurship research: a citation/co-citation analysis. J Bus Ethics. 2020; 166 (1):89–114. doi: 10.1007/s10551-019-04129-4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Huisma M, Van Duijin MAJ. Models and methods in social network analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kannampuzha M, Hockerts K. Organizational social entrepreneurship: scale development and validation. Soc Enterp J. 2019; 15 (3):290–319. doi: 10.1108/SEJ-06-2018-0047. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kelley DJ, Baumer BS, Brush C, Greene PG, Mahdavi M, Majbouri M, et al (2017) Women’s entrepreneurship 2016/2017 report. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. 9(19)
• Kerlin JA. Social enterprise in the United States and Europe: understanding and learning from the differences. Voluntas. 2006; 17 (3):247–263. doi: 10.1007/s11266-006-9016-2. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kerlin JA. A comparative analysis of the global emergence of social enterprise. Voluntas. 2010; 21 (2):162–179. doi: 10.1007/s11266-010-9126-8. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kim JR. People-centered entrepreneurship: the impact of empathy and social entrepreneurial self-efficacy for social entrepreneurial intention. Glob Bus Financ Rev. 2022; 27 (1):108–118. doi: 10.17549/gbfr.2022.27.1.108. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kimbu AN, Ngoasong MZ. Women as vectors of social entrepreneurship. Ann Tour Res. 2016; 60 :63–79. doi: 10.1016/j.annals.2016.06.002. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kistruck Geoffrey M., Beamish Paul W. The Interplay of Form, Structure, and Embeddedness in Social Intrapreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. 2010; 34 (4):735–761. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00371.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Korosec Ronnie L., Berman Evan M. Municipal Support for Social Entrepreneurship. Public Administration Review. 2006; 66 (3):448–462. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00601.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Langowitz N, Minniti M. The entrepreneurial propensity of women. Entrep Theory Pract. 2007; 31 (3):341–364. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2007.00177.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee M, Huang L. Gender bias, social impact framing, and evaluation of entrepreneurial ventures. Organ Sci. 2018; 29 (1):1–16. doi: 10.1287/orsc.2017.1172. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee SH, Jung KS. The role of social support for reemployed women. Glob Bus Financ Rev. 2015; 20 (2):49–57. doi: 10.17549/gbfr.2015.20.2.49. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Leydesdorff L. Bibliometrics/citation networks. In: Barnett GA, editor. Encyclopedia of social networks. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2011. pp. 72–74. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lindsay G, Hems L. Societes cooperatives d'interet collectif: the arrival of social enterprise within the French social economy. Voluntas. 2004; 15 (3):265–286. doi: 10.1023/B:VOLU.0000046281.99367.29. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lortie J, Castrogiovanni GJ, Cox KC. Gender, social salience, and social performance: how women pursue and perform in social ventures. Entrep Reg Dev. 2017; 29 (1–2):155–173. doi: 10.1080/08985626.2016.1255433. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Maas J, Seferiadis AA, Bunders JF, Zweekhorst MB. Bridging the disconnect: how network creation facilitates female Bangladeshi entrepreneurship. Int Entrepreneurship Manag J. 2014; 10 (3):457–470. doi: 10.1007/s11365-014-0299-2. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mair J, Marti I. Social entrepreneurship research: a source of explanation, prediction, and delight. J World Bus. 2006; 41 (1):36–44. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2005.09.002. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mair J, Marti I. Entrepreneurship in and around institutional voids: a case study from Bangladesh. J Bus Ventur. 2009; 24 (5):419–435. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.04.006. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McQuilten G. The political possibilities of art and fashion based social enterprise. Continuum. 2017; 31 (1):69–83. doi: 10.1080/10304312.2016.1262103. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Meyskens Moriah, Robb–Post Colleen, Stamp Jeffrey A., Carsrud Alan L., Reynolds Paul D. Social Ventures from a Resource–Based Perspective: An Exploratory Study Assessing Global Ashoka Fellows. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. 2010; 34 (4):661–680. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00389.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nega B, Schneider G. Social entrepreneurship, microfinance, and economic development in Africa. J Econ Issues. 2014; 48 (2):367–376. doi: 10.2753/JEI0021-3624480210. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nguyen L, Szkudlarek B, Seymour RG. Social impact measurement in social enterprises: an interdependence perspective. Can J Adm Sci. 2015; 32 (4):224–237. doi: 10.1002/cjas.1359. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nicholls Alex. The Legitimacy of Social Entrepreneurship: Reflexive Isomorphism in a Pre–Paradigmatic Field. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. 2010; 34 (4):611–633. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00397.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Noguera M, Alvarez C, Urbano D. Socio-cultural factors and female entrepreneurship. Int Entrep Manag J. 2013; 9 (2):183–197. doi: 10.1007/s11365-013-0251-x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pache Anne-Claire, Santos Filipe. Inside the Hybrid Organization: Selective Coupling as a Response to Competing Institutional Logics. Academy of Management Journal. 2013; 56 (4):972–1001. doi: 10.5465/amj.2011.0405. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Park JS, Jeong EB. Service quality in tourism: a systematic literature review and keyword network analysis. Sustainability. 2019; 11 (13):3665. doi: 10.3390/su11133665. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Peredo AM, McLean M. Social entrepreneurship: a critical review of the concept. J World Bus. 2006; 41 (1):56–65. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2005.10.007. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Phillips W, Lee H, Ghobadian A, O’Regan N, James P. Social innovation and social entrepreneurship. Group Organ Manag. 2015; 40 (3):428–461. doi: 10.1177/1059601114560063. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Prabhu Ganesh N. Social entrepreneurial leadership. Career Development International. 1999; 4 (3):140–145. doi: 10.1108/13620439910262796. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Radicchi F, Castellano C, Cecconi F, Loreto V, Parisi D. Defining and identifying communities in networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci Unit States Am. 2004; 101 :2658–2663. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0400054101. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rae D (2015) Book review: Handbook on the entrepreneurial university. Sage publication.
• Raisi H, Baggio R, Barratt-Pugh L, Willson G. A network perspective of knowledge transfer in tourism. Ann Tour Res. 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.annals.2019.102817. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reagans R, McEvily B. Network structure and knowledge transfer: the effects of cohesion and range. Adm Sci Q. 2003; 48 (2):240–267. doi: 10.2307/3556658. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rey-Martí A, Ribeiro-Soriano D, Palacios-Marqués D. A bibliometric analysis of social entrepreneurship. J Bus Res. 2016; 69 (5):1651–1655. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.033. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rosca E, Agarwal N, Brem A. Women entrepreneurs as agents of change: a comparative analysis of social entrepreneurship processes in emerging markets. Technol Forecast Soc Change. 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120067. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Roy K, Karna A. Doing social good on a sustainable basis: competitive advantage of social businesses. Manag Decis. 2015; 53 (6):1355–1374. doi: 10.1108/MD-09-2014-0561. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Saebi Tina, Foss Nicolai J., Linder Stefan. Social Entrepreneurship Research: Past Achievements and Future Promises. Journal of Management. 2019; 45 (1):70–95. doi: 10.1177/0149206318793196. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sahrakorpi T, Bandi V. Empowerment or employment? Uncovering the paradoxes of social entrepreneurship for women via Husk Power Systems in rural North India. Energy Res Soc Sci. 2021 doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2021.102153. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Santos FM. A positive theory of social entrepreneurship. J Bus Ethics. 2012; 111 (3):335–351. doi: 10.1007/s10551-012-1413-4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sassmannshausen SP, Volkmann C. The scientometrics of social entrepreneurship and its establishment as an academic field. J Small Bus Manag. 2018; 56 (2):251–273. doi: 10.1111/jsbm.12254. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Savarese C, Huybrechts B, Hudon M. The influence of interorganizational collaboration on logic conciliation and tensions within hybrid organizations: insights from social enterprise–corporate collaborations. J Bus Ethics. 2021; 173 (4):709–721. doi: 10.1007/s10551-020-04557-7. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Seelos C, Mair J. Social entrepreneurship: creating new business models to serve the poor. Bus Horiz. 2005; 48 (3):241–246. doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2004.11.006. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Short JC, Moss TW, Lumpkin GT. Research in social entrepreneurship: past contributions and future opportunities. Strateg Entrep J. 2009; 3 (2):161–194. doi: 10.1002/sej.69. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Simón-Moya V, Revuelto-Taboada L, Ribeiro-Soriano D. Are success and survival factors the same for social and business ventures? Serv Bus. 2012; 6 (2):219–242. doi: 10.1007/s11628-012-0133-2. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sulphey MM, Alkahtani N. Economic security and sustainability through social entrepreneurship: the current Saudi scenario. J Secur Sustain. 2017; 6 (3):479–490. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sun SL, Im JY. Cutting microfinance interest rates: an opportunity co-creation perspective. Entrep Theory Pract. 2015; 39 (1):101–128. doi: 10.1111/etap.12119. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tan LP, Le ANH, Xuan LP. A systematic literature review on social entrepreneurial intention. J Social Entrep. 2020; 11 (3):241–256. doi: 10.1080/19420676.2019.1640770. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Thomas A. The rise of social cooperatives in Italy. Voluntas. 2004; 15 (3):243–263. doi: 10.1023/B:VOLU.0000046280.06580.d8. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Thompson J, Alvy G, Lees A. Social entrepreneurship–a new look at the people and the potential. Manag Decis. 2000; 38 (5):328–338. doi: 10.1108/00251740010340517. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tracey P, Jarvis O. Toward a theory of social venture franchising. Entrep Theory Pract. 2007; 31 (5):667–685. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2007.00194.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tripathy KK, Paliwal M, Singh A. Women’s social entrepreneurship and livelihood innovation: an exploratory study from India. Serv Bus. 2022 doi: 10.1007/s11628-022-00493-w. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Van Ryzin G, Grossman S, Di Padova-Stocks L, Bergrud E. Portrait of the social entrepreneur: statistical evidence from a US panel. Volunt Int J Volunt Nonprofit Organ. 2009; 20 (2):129–140. doi: 10.1007/s11266-009-9081-4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Xu X, Chen X, Jia F, Brown S, Gong Y, Xu Y. Supply chain finance: a systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis. Int J Prod Econ. 2018; 204 :160–173. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.08.003. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yang S, Kher R, Newbert SL. What signals matter for social startups? It depends: the influence of gender role congruity on social impact accelerator selection decisions. J Bus Ventur. 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2019.03.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zahra SA, Newey LR, Li Y. On the frontiers: the implications of social entrepreneurship for international entrepreneurship. Entrep Theory Pract. 2014; 38 (1):137–158. doi: 10.1111/etap.12061. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]