Search results

For sociological perspectives on globalization to do justice to its many facets, they must be informed by an understanding of modern societies as simultaneously complex, contingent, and contradictory – as modern capitalist societies. As is becoming ever more apparent, such an understanding of modern societies is the necessary precondition for identifying the defining features of globalization. Yet, for the most part, the history of the social sciences did not produce research agendas, theories, and methods designed to grasp complexity, contingency, and contradiction as core dimensions of modern social life that continually reinforce each other. The social sciences did not evolve as ongoing efforts to grasp the gravity each dimension exerts on concrete forms of political, economic and cultural life, and how the force of each depends on the constant exchange of energy with the other two. To the extent that scrutinizing the impact of globalization on the future – and possible futures – of human civilization is the primary challenge for social scientists to confront today, the current condition presents a unique, and perhaps most unusual opportunity to conceive anew the promise of each and all the social sciences, as elucidating how the complex, contingent, and contradictory nature of modern societies, in the name of advancing social justice, has engendered a regime of managing “social problems.”

What I refer to as a “monological” tendency is clearly seen in Spector and Kitsuse’s definition of their central term: …we define social problems as the actions of individuals or groups making assertions of grievances and claims with respect to some putative conditions (2001, p. 75).There is no mention here of audiences who hear such claims and grievances. The definition suggests that social problems are spoken into existence unilaterally by those who are especially aggrieved by perceived conditions of group life. Speakers are thus of primary importance, while listeners are not. There is likewise no reference to interactions between speakers and their audiences.

For perspectives on globalization to do justice to its many facets, they must be informed by an understanding of modern societies as simultaneously complex, contingent, and contradictory – as modern capitalist societies. As is becoming ever more apparent, such an understanding of modern societies is the necessary precondition for identifying the defining features of globalization. Yet, for the most part, the history of the social sciences did not produce research agendas, theories, and methods designed to grasp complexity, contingency, and contradiction as core dimensions of modern social life that continually reinforce each other. The social sciences did not evolve as ongoing efforts to grasp the gravity each dimension exerts on concrete forms of political, economic, and cultural life, and how the force of each depends on the constant exchange of energy with the other two. To the extent that scrutinizing the impact of globalization on the future – find possible futures – of human civilization is the primary challenge for social scientists to confront today, the current condition presents a unique, and perhaps most unusual opportunity to conceive anew the promise of each and all the social sciences, as elucidating how the complex, contingent, and contradictory nature of modern societies, in the name of advancing social justice, has engendered a regime of managing “social problems.”

Social entrepreneurs who use market mechanisms to solve wicked problems (Rittel & Webber, 1973) may benefit from practices based on design thinking. Design thinking offers approaches to work iteratively on both problem and solution spaces collaboratively with multiple diverse stakeholders, which is characteristic of innovating for social change. This research conceptualizes designing as a construct formed by three practices: making improvements, generating creative leaps, and problem-solving. Using Boland and Collopy’s (2004) conception of a sense-making manager, it proposes “how” nascent social entrepreneurs take actions and also proposes “what” specific activities they undertake for the development of the venture. A conceptual model proposing “what” it is that social entrepreneurs do and “how” they go about their activities affecting new venture development is tested using structural equation modeling. Preliminary support for the predictive capability of the model is encouraging, suggesting that practices based on design thinking may be further developed in order to advance theoretical understanding of the application of design thinking for social entrepreneurship.

Social enterprises have long been considered ideal settings for studying hybrid organizing due to their combination of social and economic goals and activities. In this chapter, the authors argue that the current research focus on hybrid organizing foregrounds the paradox, conflicting logics, and multiple identities associated with the pursuit of multiple goals but underappreciates the relationship between hybrid organizing and its institutional context. Recognizing that the primary objective of social enterprises is to tackle social problems, the authors introduce the social problem domain as an analytically useful and theoretically interesting meso-level to examine the role of context for hybrid organizing and to advance conversations on hybridity in organizational theory. Social problem domains offer insights into the political, cultural, and material differences in how various societies deal with social problems, which in turn affects hybrid organizing. The authors provide empirical insights derived from an analysis of social enterprises across three countries and social problem domains. The authors show how the institutional arrangements of social enterprises differ considerably across contexts, and how these arrangements affect how social enterprises become more or less similar compared to traditional ways of organizing in these problem domains. Based on these findings, the authors outline a research agenda on social enterprises that focuses on examining the nature, antecedents, and outcomes of hybrid organizing around social problems across multiple levels of analysis. With this chapter, the authors move the focus of social enterprise research in organizational theory from studying how these organizations cope with multiple logics and goals toward studying how they engage in markets for public purpose.

Social entrepreneurs in both the developed and the developing countries have established social enterprises with the intent of solving social problems leveraging social innovations that create sustainable social impact goals. The research gap that calls for this research is the question: ‘Are social problems, social objectives, social activities, social outputs, social outcomes and social impact goals of social enterprises the same in the developed and the developing countries?’ Against the above backdrop, this chapter presents a comparative discourse of cases of social enterprises in the developed and developing countries using the Theory of Change framework to provide answers to the above research question. The chapter adopts a qualitative research method to generate rich findings from diverse cases, reports, articles, and other secondary sources from the developed and developing economies. To ensure academic rigour and objectivity, a sample of 50 scholarly works on social enterprises were reviewed, which produced in-depth insights on the subject. Additionally, 16 cases on social enterprises from the developed and developing countries were purposively selected and meticulously analysed using the content analysis (CA) and the thematic analysis (TA). The first finding revealed that the social enterprises in the developed countries focused on ‘the secondary-level social issues’ such as education, health, environmental issues, psycho-social disabilities, wealth inequality, integration enterprises, work-integration services, financial exclusion, and gender balance. This is the focus of Ashoka, Children Commissioner, Allen Carr Easyway, Angaza Design Inc., Bridge International Academies, and others. The second finding indicated that the social enterprises in the developing countries focused on ‘the primary level social issues’ such as illiteracy, poor school enrollment, unemployment, poverty, social exclusion, gender imbalance, weak healthcare system including hygiene and sanitation. This is the focus of VisionSpring, Danone Clover – Daniladies and Danimama, Unjani Clinic NPC, Indego Africa, and others. The implication of the findings is that irrespective of continental contexts, social enterprises are established to bridge critical social problems, hence their philosophy transcends geographical contexts. The chapter concludes with a summary of insightful information and suggestions, which could trigger more empirical research on the subject.

This chapter analyses the recovery of the Danish economy from the crisis of the 1980s, its elevation to a bit of an ‘economic miracle’ or at least an ‘employment miracle’ from 1995 to 2005 and its subsequent decline during the financial crisis, which revealed more long-standing problems that precluded a quick recovery. The solution of Denmark's structural balance of payment problems in the early 1990s paved the way for long-term prosperity, and Denmark managed the challenges of globalisation and deindustrialisation almost without social costs. However, an accumulation of short-term policy failures and credit liberalisation facilitated a credit and housing bubble, a consumption-driven boom and declining competitiveness. In broad terms, the explanation is political; this includes not only vote- and office-seeking strategies of the incumbent government but also ideational factors such as agenda setting of economic policy. Somewhat unnoticed – partly because of preoccupation with long-term challenges of ageing and shortage of labour – productivity and economic growth rates had slowed down over several years. The Danish decline in GDP 2008–2009 was larger than in the 1930s, and after the bubble burst, there were few drivers of economic growth. Households consolidated and were reluctant to consume; public consumption had to be cut as well; exports increased rather slowly; and in this climate, there was little room for private investments. Financially, the Danish economy remained healthy, though. Current accounts revealed record-high surpluses after the financial crisis; state debt remained moderate, and if one were to include the enormous retained taxes in private pension funds, net state debt would de facto be positive. Still, around 2010–2011 there were few short-term drivers of economic growth, and rather unexpectedly, it turned out that unemployment problems were likely to prevail for several years.

This study is a comparison of male and female delinquent behaviors utilizing a large sample in a test of social control theory.

A sample of 8,363 adolescent 10th graders was drawn from the U.S. National Educational Longitudinal Study (NELS). The sample consisted of 3,774 males and 4,589 females. This work utilized logistic regression and ordinary least squares to determine whether adolescent behaviors such as smoking cigarettes, drinking alcohol, using marijuana, and other delinquent behaviors are linked to weak social bonds.

The findings of this study provide limited substantiation of social control theory for both sexes. Females who were found to have strong social bonds were less likely to engage in delinquent behaviors than males. For both sexes, the strongest element of the social bond was the element of belief.

These results may be specific to the United States.

Understanding contributing factors to adolescent substance use and delinquency will assist in developing social policy that will support families.

This study provides insight into the differentiated nature of the social bond for males and females. Knowing that belief is an integral component in determining the strength of the social bond will aid in the development of social policies.

Published below are the course reading list and student notes taken by F. Taylor Ostrander in Frank H. Knight’s course, Current Tendencies, Economics 303, at the University of Chicago during Winter term of the 1933–1934 academic year. The reading list is surprisingly casual and uneven in detail among items. The notes are assumed, as usual in these volumes, to be a reasonably accurate summary account of what Knight said.