Showing posts with label social enterprise. Show all posts
Showing posts with label social enterprise. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 7, 2015

Elizabeth Boggs Davidsen — Social Entrepreneurship Enters the Mainstream

Once a niche concept at the intersection of business and development, “social entrepreneurship” is now mainstream. A social entrepreneur, according to Ashoka founder Bill Draper, who coined the term in 1980, is a person with system-changing solutions for the world’s most urgent social problems. A social enterprise is one that deliberately expands access to goods, services, income, and employment opportunities for vulnerable populations as part of its core business while seeking return on investment. Social entrepreneurship is increasingly appealing to people, and the idea of using a MBA degree to do good while doing well has grown in popularity on campuses and in businesses around the glob….
"Find a need and fill it" versus "manufacture a want and supply it."

EconoMonitor
Social Entrepreneurship Enters the Mainstream
Elizabeth Boggs Davidsen

Sunday, July 28, 2013

David Colander — Solving Society’s Problems from the Bottom Up: For-Benefit Enterprises

Few people knew that when Milton Friedman claimed that a corporation's only responsibility is profits, it would become conventional wisdom. David Colander, the always original and often iconoclastic economist, makes the refreshing case in support of for-benefit enterprises.
Solving Society’s Problems from the Bottom Up: For-Benefit Enterprises
David Colander | Christian A. Johnson Distinguished Professor of Economics at Middlebury College
(h/t John Hobgood at FB)

Tuesday, March 5, 2013

Daan Bauwens — Japan accentuates the social side

After two decades of economic stagnation and serial natural disasters, a growing number of young Japanese believe social entrepreneurship is the best way to rebuild their society....
"After the financial crisis we have seen a return to traditional values," says Japan's leading business analyst Kumi Fujisawa. "People aren't looking for short-term gain but concentrating on long-term perspectives. There's a return to idealism, people want to contribute to society again." 
According to polls organized by the Japanese government, the value of work is being reconsidered in Japan since the start of the financial crisis. The number of people that answered that they wanted to work "to contribute to society" rose sharply after the burst of the asset bubble, from 46% to 64% in 1991. That number is above 65% at present.
Asia Times Online
Japan accentuates the social side
Daan Bauwens


Monday, March 4, 2013

Marjorie Kelly — The Economy: Under New Ownership

Here’s the problem: The very aim of maximum financial extraction is built into the foundational social architecture of our capitalist economy—that is, the concept of ownership.
If the root of government is sovereignty (the question of who controls the state), the root construct of every economy is property (the question of who controls the infrastructure of wealth creation).
Many of the great social struggles in history have come down to the issue of who will control land, water, and the essentials of life.
Ownership has been at the center of the most profound changes in civilization—from ending slavery to patenting the genome of life.
Throughout the Industrial Age, the global economy has increasingly come to be dominated by a single form of ownership: the publicly traded corporation, where shares are bought and sold in stock markets. The systemic crises we face today are deeply entwined with this design, which forms the foundation of what we might call the extractive economy, intent on maximum physical and financial extraction.
The concept of extractive ownership traces its lineage to Anglo-Saxon legal tradition. The 18th century British legal theorist William Blackstone described ownership as the right to “sole and despotic dominion.” This view—the right to control one’s world in order to extract maximum benefit for oneself—is a core legitimating concept for a civilization in which white, property-owning males have claimed dominion over women, other races, laborers, and the earth itself. 
In the 20th century, we were schooled to believe there were essentially two economic systems: capitalism (private ownership) and socialism/communism (public ownership). Yet both tended, in practice, to support the concentration of economic power in the hands of the few.
Emerging in our time—in largely disconnected experiments across the globe—are the seeds of a different kind of economy. It, too, is built on a foundation of ownership, but of a unique type. The cooperative economy is a large piece of it. But this economy doesn’t rely on a monoculture of design, the way capitalism does. It’s as rich in diversity as a rainforest is in its plethora of species—with commons ownership, municipal ownership, employee ownership, and others. You could even include open-source models like Wikipedia, owned by no one and managed collectively.
These varieties of alternative ownership have yet to be recognized as a single family, in part because they’ve yet to unite under a common name. We might call them generative, for their aim is to generate conditions where our common life can flourish. Generative design isn’t about dominion. It’s about belonging—a sense of belonging to a common whole.
AlterNet
The Economy: Under New Ownership
Marjorie Kelly | YES! Magazine | fellow with the Tellus Institute and is director of ownership strategy with Cutting Edge Capital consulting firm. She is author of the new book, Owning Our Future: The Emerging Ownership Revolution. She was co-founder and for 20 years president of Ethics magazine.
The cooperative economy—and the broader family of generative ownership models—is helping to reawaken an ancient wisdom about living together in community, something largely lost in the spread of capitalism. Economic historian Karl Polanyi describes this in his 1944 work, The Great Transformation, tracing the crises of capitalism to the fact that it “disembedded” economic activity from community. Throughout history, he noted, economic activity had been part of a larger social order that included religion, government, families, and the natural world. The Industrial Revolution upended this. It turned labor and land into commodities to be “bought and sold, used and destroyed, as if they were simply merchandise,” Polanyi wrote. But these were fictitious commodities. They were none other than human beings and the earth itself.
Generative design decommodifies land and labor, putting them again under the control of the community....
The generative economy finds fertile soil for its growth within the human heart. The ownership revolution is part of the “metaphysical reconstruction” that E.F. Schumacher said would be needed to transform our economy. When economic relations are designed in a generative way, they’re no longer about sole and despotic dominion. Economic activity is no longer about squeezing every penny from something we imagine that we own. It’s about being interwoven with the world around us. It’s about a shift from dominion to community. 
This is really the crux of it.