Social Entrepreneurship among Youth as a Factor of Sustainable

Development of Regions: Main Motives and Visible Barriers

Irina V. Shavyrina

, Inna A. Demenenko

and Oleg I. Divichenko

Regional State Autonomous Educational Institution of Supplementary Professional Education «Belgorod Institute

of Education Development», 14 Studencheskaya St., Belgorod, Russia

Belgorod State Technological University named after V. G. Shukhov, 46 Kostyukova St., Belgorod, Russia

Keywords: Social Entrepreneurship, Youth, Motives for Entrepreneurial Activity, Barriers to Entrepreneurial Activity,

Social Mission.

Abstract: This article, based on the results of the research "Sociological diagnostics of youth involvement in social

entrepreneurship" conducted by the authors in the Belgorod region, attempts to substantiate possible motives,

as well as perceived barriers to engaging in entrepreneurial activities in the social sphere. The starting point

for identifying motives for the possible realization of oneself as a social entrepreneur was a combination of

three types of motivation sources: fulfillment of the social mission, economic (business) motivation, and

innovativeness. The authors conclude that the readiness to engage in entrepreneurship in the social sphere is

caused not so much by external motives associated with the lack of decent offers in the labor market as by the

desire for independence, independence from external actors' economic activity. The reluctance to engage in

social entrepreneurship is mainly based on internal motives related to the perceived lack of necessary qualities

for an entrepreneur. This suggests that both readiness to entrepreneurship and rejection of relevant practices

are based not primarily on external factors but the existing attitudes, predisposition, and proactive strategies

ingrained in mind.

1 INTRODUCTION

The presence of a social problem in society is the

starting point of the social entrepreneur's activities.

Where public sector institutions are ineffective and do

not contribute to solving or mitigating social

problems, the most fertile environment is created for

the emergence and active development of social

entrepreneurship.

At present, several sustainable projects are

operating in Russia, mainly in the areas of farming,

processing of some types of household waste, support

for the disabled, older adults and graduates of

orphanages, revival of crafts and folk crafts, local

tourism, but even they cannot boast the absolute

success, the scale of activities, and even less the

replicability of their experience.

To increase the share of social entrepreneurship,

it is necessary to create conditions for the

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0956-9992

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6306-2618

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9327-3416

development of entrepreneurship in the social sphere,

creating new production technologies and new jobs.

2 RESEARCH METHODS

As part of the study of youth involvement in social

entrepreneurship, the authors conducted a

sociological research, "Sociological diagnostics of

youth involvement in social entrepreneurship," in the

Belgorod region by questionnaire survey. The

research aimed to identify the degree of involvement

of the younger generation in social entrepreneurship.

The implementation of the research objectives was

achieved based on empirical measurement of youth

readiness for entrepreneurial activity in the social

sphere, conducted by the authors in January-February

2020. The research included methods of system

analysis, sociological survey, method of quantitative

522

Shavyrina, I., Demenenko, I. and Divichenko, O.

Social Entrepreneurship among Youth as a Factor of Sustainable Development of Regions: Main Motives and Visible Barriers.

DOI: 10.5220/0010593305220526

In Proceedings of the International Scientiﬁc and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure (ISSDRI 2021), pages 522-526

ISBN: 978-989-758-519-7

and qualitative data processing. The sample size was

800 respondents between the ages of 16 and 35.

3 FINDINGS

In modern conditions of development of the Russian

society, social entrepreneurship is a link between the

state, business, and society in solving social problems

of different population categories. Orientation

towards the complex solutions of acute social

problems, networking principle of dissemination,

ability to actively integrate into existing projects

makes social entrepreneurship a powerful source of

civic initiatives.

The revision of the role of social entrepreneurship

as one of the key factors in the country's socio-

economic development has led to a reassessment of

the importance of entrepreneurial activity and

entrepreneurial intentions. This determines the

relevance of youth social entrepreneurship research

as a new phenomenon in the youth environment,

identifying the factors contributing to its development

and the limitations on the path of formation of

domestic social entrepreneurs.

The concept of "social entrepreneurship" began to

be used in the 60s and 70s. In the 20th century, but

only 20 years later, the term was widely

acknowledged in the foreign management literature.

Thus, at the present stage, foreign economic literature

presents many definitions of the concept of "social

entrepreneurship", but there are no clearly defined

boundaries of this term. The difficulty of forming the

concept of social entrepreneurship is related to

creating a theoretical basis on practical knowledge

and analysis of existing cases. The lack of a generally

accepted interpretation of the term and its boundaries

leads to a blurring of the boundaries between social

entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship in the social

sector.

For the first time, the problem of social

entrepreneurship was addressed by G. Dees. The

researcher pointed out that "the phenomenon of social

entrepreneurship has always existed, but earlier

scholars simply did not address this issue" (Dees,

Emerson, 2002). In 1963. B. Drayton described the

social entrepreneur as "an innovator for society",

defined him as an individual who combines the

practical and result-oriented methods of a business

entrepreneur with a social reformer's goals (Alvord,

Brown, 2004). Before 1990, social entrepreneurship

was considered to research social movements and

certain values (Reutov, Reutova, 2017).

Interest in social entrepreneurship grew most

strongly in the 1990s. At this time, the first attempts

to define the term and the first studies appear. Social

entrepreneurs have been defined as "change agents in

the social sector who discover and allocate

undervalued resources or change the allocation of

scarce public resources" (Bacq, Hartog, 2016). At the

beginning of the second millennium, scholarly works

emerged that sought to fully justify the issues and

problems of social entrepreneurship. These works

already use measurement tools - quantitative and

qualitative research methods. Social entrepreneurs

are defined here as "leaders who use an

entrepreneurial approach to solving social problems,

search for innovations". (Epifanova, Romanenko,

2015). Particular attention is paid to social

partnership between the public, social, and business

sectors guiding the economy to address social issues.

Attempts to create a "general concept of social

entrepreneurship and summarize previous

experiences have led to an understanding of social

entrepreneurs as organizations or individuals who

take risks, use innovation, refuse to accept limitations

in existing resources and try to solve pressing social

problems" (Mukhin, 2011). Since 2007 there has been

a period of social entrepreneurship abroad. Civil

society is seeking state support for this issue, and the

legal status of social entrepreneurship is being

consolidated.

The Russian research community has also not

ignored the current trend in the development of the

phenomenon of social entrepreneurship. The most

profound analysis of this phenomenon belongs to the

authors' team from the Center for Social

Entrepreneurship and Social Innovation of the Higher

School of Economics, headed by A.A. Moskovskaya.

According to the Center's findings, social

entrepreneurship is much more active and diverse in

the western, advanced industrialized world than in the

third world. Moreover, the researchers in their work

suggested that "social entrepreneurship projects in

developing countries that have become globally

renowned have largely become successful thanks to

entrepreneurial models, values, culture, economic

education created in the developed industrialized

countries of the West, as well as the recently emerged

practices of advisory, financial assistance from

various foundations and non-profit organizations"

(Moskovskaya, 2011). (Moskovskaya, 2011).

The most quoted definition of the term "social

entrepreneurship" belongs to Gregory Dees, Director

of the Center for Social Entrepreneurship

Development at Duke University (USA). The

researcher sees the reason for the emergence of social

Social Entrepreneurship among Youth as a Factor of Sustainable Development of Regions: Main Motives and Visible Barriers

523

entrepreneurship in the "inefficiency of individual

social institutions. The activities of the social

entrepreneur will then contribute to higher demands

for social justice in this society by striking a balance

between economic efficiency and social justice"

(Dees, 2008). The social entrepreneur theorist

identified five main factors that characterize the

social entrepreneur: 1) presence of a social mission

that ensures the creation and maintenance of social

effect; 2) searching for and using all-new resources to

implement his social mission; 3) constant

involvement in the process of innovation, adaptation,

and learning; 4) determination to act regardless of

available resources at the moment; 5) responsibility

of an entrepreneur for the results of his activities not

only to clients but also to society" (Dees, Anderson,

2006). The presence of these characteristics defines

the entrepreneur as a social entrepreneur. However,

as noted by G. Dees, the absence of any of the

characteristics does not necessarily indicate

otherwise.

The classical definition of social entrepreneurship

uses the following three criteria for categorizing an

enterprise as social:

1) Orientation towards the social mission, i.e. the

priority of solving or mitigating a social problem,

meeting a social need rather than making a

commercial profit;

2) Economic sustainability. Social enterprises

may receive subsidies, but the main source of income

is the activity of the enterprise itself;

3) The innovative approach implies a

qualitatively new product (service) provision or a

completely new product.

In this approach, "each of the elements points to a

combination of three types of sources of motivation

for the social entrepreneur: fulfilling the 'social

mission', economic (business) motivation - material

success, and 'innovativeness' - the desire to

implement their knowledge and innovative ideas in

modern technologies, approaches and business

solutions" (Shavyrina, Demenenko, 2020).

These postulates served as a starting point for

identifying motives for the possible realization of

oneself as a social entrepreneur.

According to the data obtained, the respondents'

greatest importance is the desire for independence

and autonomy. This was indicated by 63.9% of

respondents. Also, quite significant is the motive of

self-realization and personal growth. This was

indicated by 48.2% of respondents. Economic

motivation (material success) was noted as a motive

by 32.6% of respondents.

The next block of motives includes: solving

personal problems and helping other people with

similar problems (29.1%), innovativeness - the desire

to implement their knowledge and innovative ideas

(24.5%) and achieving success in society, the desire

to improve their credibility in the eyes of others

(18.9%).

Such motive as the fulfillment of "social mission",

desire to be useful to the society is marked only by

8.2% of respondents.

Based on the data obtained, we can conclude that

the main motives for the possible realization of

himself as a social entrepreneur are the desire for

independence, independence from external actors of

economic activity, as well as self-realization and

personal growth.

The comparative analysis of the data obtained is,

to a certain extent, supported by the data conducted

by the ZIRCON research team in 2018. The

conducted research data confirm the initial

assumption about the complex structure of motivation

to start their own enterprise and engage in social

entrepreneurship.

The strongest motives in the All-Russian survey

were the desire "to realize a certain idea" and "striving

for independence and autonomy" - both options were

chosen by 70% of respondents (Research group

"Zircon". Social entrepreneur-2018).

The data we obtained do not reflect

innovativeness (aspiration to realize one's knowledge

and innovative ideas) as the main motive. However,

it should be understood that the All-Russian research

involved already established social entrepreneurs and

the author's research - only young people without

regard to the type of their activity.

According to the All-Russian research, it is quite

relevant to create one's own enterprise if one cannot

receive any necessary services or goods of proper

quality from existing business entities or state

institutions. Thus, more than half of the respondents

(54%) indicated that one of the motives was the desire

to solve a particular problem, important for the family

or themselves personally. According to the results of

our research, this motive was noted by 29.1% of

respondents. And here, it should be understood that

this motive may not yet be fully actualized in young

people's minds by the absence of a pressing need.

The results regarding the priority of business

motivation are similar. Thus, according to the results

of the All-Russian research, the desire to improve

their own material well-being is noted by 52% of

respondents and the desire to meet certain social

needs through maximizing their profits (47%)

ISSDRI 2021 - International Scientiﬁc and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure

524

(Research group "Zircon". Social entrepreneur-

2018).

According to the authors' results, economic

motivation (material success) is noted as a motive by

32.6% of respondents, and this motive takes the third

position.

The most ambivalent, ambiguous was the motive

of recognition - achievement of success in society, the

desire to increase one's authority in others' eyes. This

aspiration was considered important by 39% of

respondents, and approximately the same number -

37% - considered it unimportant for themselves in the

All-Russian poll, and 18.9% in the author's poll.

Thus, it is easy to see that the priority of the choice

of the main motives for creating a social enterprise,

despite the difference in the survey methodology, is

approximately the same for the two samples. At the

same time, we note that two "hybrid" motives -

"solving personal problems and helping other

people..." and "satisfying social needs by maximizing

one's own profit" - caused increased difficulties in

answering due to this very hybridity (i.e., mixing

motives of different types). Besides, it is important

that the motif of "making a difference in society"

gained an order of magnitude more votes in 2018,

which may indicate the growing reputation of social

entrepreneurship itself, which some actors can now

see as a good source of symbolic capital and social

credibility.

In general, the survey data analysis shows that the

motives of personal growth and self-actualization

(including professional) remain the unconditional

leaders. The group of motives in which business

motivation is a priority turns out to be weaker; they

are significant for about half of respondents. And it is

also worth paying attention to the desire to solve their

own problems by creating a social enterprise: this

motive, in our view, may indicate that the family turns

out to be an important factor in the creation of the

business and - possibly - one of its participants.

According to the data received on the possible

sphere of social entrepreneurship, the sphere of

education is the most demanded among young

people. Thus, the direction of additional education

was noted by 43.5% of respondents, and preschool

education - 39.1%.

Then, by the degree of demand, young people

mentioned tourist services (36.9%), the organization

of accessible sports leisure (29.3%), as well as

improving the quality and availability of medical

services (26.4%).

The next block of possible areas for self-

actualization as social entrepreneurs includes: the

development of agriculture (21.3%), ecology

(19.2%), geriatric services to the population

(organization of assistance to elderly and older adults

in terms of maintaining and strengthening their

health) (18.2%), and manufacturing of socially

important products (17.5%).

Young people are least interested in such areas as

improving the quality of life of vulnerable people

(14.2%), employment (8.9%), and the preservation

and revival of Russia's cultural and historical heritage

(2.6%).

For research purposes, it was important for us to

find out what young people thought might be a barrier

to realizing themselves as social entrepreneurs.

Thus, to the greatest extent, respondents mention

the lack of necessary information (59.3%). The

second most important barrier is the lack of financial

resources for the organization of business, the

unavailability of credit resources (48.6%). And

39.2% of respondents indicated a lack of knowledge

regarding the basics of entrepreneurship.

A rather significant barrier in the assessment of

youth is a lack of ideas. This is indicated by 26.9% of

respondents. In our opinion, this barrier is quite

strongly related to the apparent lack of necessary

information about social entrepreneurship as a type of

entrepreneurial activity. We have noted this before.

As the author's research and comparative analysis of

the All-Russian monitoring data have shown, there is

a huge gap of both informativeness and knowledge

and awareness regarding social entrepreneurship and

social entrepreneurs in modern Russian reality.

4 CONCLUSIONS

The starting point for identifying motives for the

possible realization of oneself as a social entrepreneur

was a combination of three types of sources of

motivation of a social entrepreneur: fulfillment of

"social mission", economic (business) motivation -

material success, and "innovativeness" - the desire to

realize their knowledge and innovative ideas in

modern technologies, approaches and business

solutions.

Thus, the readiness to engage in entrepreneurship

in the social sphere is caused not so much by external

motives associated with the lack of decent offers in

the labor market, as by the desire for independence

from external actors' economic activity. The group of

motives in which business motivation is a priority

turns out to be weaker; they are significant for about

half of respondents. The data we obtained do not

reflect innovativeness (aspiration to realize one's

knowledge and innovative ideas) as the main motive.

Social Entrepreneurship among Youth as a Factor of Sustainable Development of Regions: Main Motives and Visible Barriers

525

The reluctance to engage in social

entrepreneurship is mainly based on internal motives

related to the perceived lack of necessary qualities for

an entrepreneur. This suggests that both readiness to

entrepreneurship and rejection of relevant practices

are based not primarily on external factors but the

existing attitudes, predisposition, and proactive

strategies ingrained in mind.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The reported research was funded by RFBR, project

number 20-011-00350 «Technology for the

development of the social entrepreneurship in the

youth environment (regional dimension)».

REFERENCES

Alvord, S.H., Brown, D.L. and Letts, C.W. (2004). Social

entrepreneurship and societal transformation: An

exploratory study. J. of Appl. Behavioral Sci., 40(3):

260–282.

Bacq, S., Hartog, C., Hoogendoorn, B. (2016). Beyond the

moral portrayal of social entrepreneurs: An empirical

approach to who they are and what drives them. J. of

Busin. Ethics, 133(4):703–718.

Dees, J.G., Emerson, J. and Economy, P. (2002). Strategic

Tools for Social Entrepreneurs: Enhancing the

Performance of Your Enterprising Nonprofit. Wiley

Nonprofit Law. Finance and Manag. Ser., 159: 36.

Dees, J.G., Anderson, B.B. (2006). Building on Two

Schools of Practice and Thought Research on Social

Entrepreneurship: Understanding and Contributing to

an Emerging Field. Washington, DC: Aspen Instit.

Dees, G. (2008). Developing the field of social

entrepreneurship. Report from the Center for the

Advancement of Social Entrepreneurship. Durham,

NC: Duke Univer.

Epifanova, T., Romanenko, N., Mosienko, T., Skvortsova,

T. and Kupchinskiy, A. (2015). Modernization of

Institutional Environment of Entrepreneurship in

Russia for Development of Innovation Initiative in

Small Business Structures. Europ. Res. Studies. Special

Issue on “The Role of Clustering in Provision of

Economic Growth”, 18(3):137–148.

Moskovskaya, A.A. (2011). Social entrepreneurship in

Russia and in the world: practice and research.

Moscow: HSE, 288 p.

Mukhin, A.V. (2011). The evolution of the concept of

social entrepreneurship. The main functions of social

entrepreneurship. New technol., 2:103–106.

Research group "Zircon". Social entrepreneur-2018. June

19. Selfportrait. Retrieved from http://www.zircon.ru.

Reutov, E.V., Reutova, M.N., Shavyrina, I.V., Turyansky,

A.A. (2017). Self-organization in local communities:

practices and mechanisms. Monitor. of Public Opinion:

Econ. and Soci. Changes, 4:145–164.

Shavyrina I.V., Demenenko I.A., Divichenko O.I.,

Podvigaylo A.A. (2020). Genesis of social

entrepreneurship in the socio-economic activities

contex. European Proceedings of Social and

Behavioural Sciences EpSBS, 102:888-895.

ISSDRI 2021 - International Scientiﬁc and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure

526