IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/sprchp/978-3-030-72535-8_17.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Who Should Fund Social Innovation?

In: Innovations in Social Finance

Author

Listed:
  • Molly Sinderbrand

    (University of Pennsylvania)

Abstract

Economic innovation is at once unique to its particular sector—for-profit, social, or government—and interconnected to creative processes in the world of finance more broadly. In this chapter, I discuss innovation in two of the three sectors: the social economy and government. I argue that social economy enterprises are better-positioned than governments to innovate within the sphere of social services for both ethical and practical reasons. I argue that social enterprises should engage in social innovation, and that government should not, for three reasons. First, social enterprises are more efficient at innovation than government because they are responsive to economic conditions in a way that governments are not. Second, social enterprises are more effective at innovation than government because they are mission-driven and thus have fewer competing priorities to weigh. Third, non-voluntary democratic institutions and other government structures are not in an ethical position to innovate in the social sector because innovation necessarily implies high risk. In practice, these arguments call for a division of labor between government and social enterprise in which social enterprises incubate and governments scale. This is an argument in normative ethics, using distinctly analytical and humanist methodologies, but applied to the analysis of social-scientific research.

Suggested Citation

  • Molly Sinderbrand, 2021. "Who Should Fund Social Innovation?," Springer Books, in: Thomas Walker & Jane McGaughey & Sherif Goubran & Nadra Wagdy (ed.), Innovations in Social Finance, edition 1, pages 375-389, Springer.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:sprchp:978-3-030-72535-8_17
    DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-72535-8_17
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:sprchp:978-3-030-72535-8_17. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.