MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134239527 · doi:10.5430/ijfr.v12n3p421

The Impact of Social Enterprises: A Bibliometric Analysis From 1991 to 2020

2021· article· en· W3134239527 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Faraudello Alessandra, Barreca Manuela, Daniel Iannaci, Federica Lanzara

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCentralityCitationSustainabilityWork (physics)Thematic analysisRegional scienceSocial network analysisSociologyPolitical scienceSocial scienceComputer scienceEngineeringLibrary scienceQualitative researchSocial capital

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this work is to provide, through a bibliometric analysis of the last 30 years of thematic literature, an overview on the contribution of social enterprises to the achievement of global goals.A bibliometric method has been used to analyze the characteristics, citation patterns and content of 3318 documents published in international academic journals, books review and chapters, editorial material and proceedings papers.Considering our findings, the bibliometric analysis has shown that there are journals that have had a greater production on the topic with an impact on research. Thanks to the work of the most impactful authors, it emerges that the case study is the most used method to demonstrate the centrality of social enterprises in social innovation. The analysis also shows that the centrality of the themes is linked to innovation, impact, management and performance, demonstrating the assumption that the driver of innovation in terms of social impact is given by these types of companies. The research also shows the keyword evolution through the years.Through the coding activity, it has also been possible to demonstrate that by transposing the global sustainability objectives to the local that the more in-depth ones are addressed on the issues of sustainable economy and fair, responsible and sustainable innovation, while there is much shortcoming regarding the achievement of gender equality, sustainable water management but even more on the reduction of inequality between nations. The latter is probably conditioned by the more global target and therefore not easily approachable to social enterprises.Research limitations/implications – The study shows a limitation, related to the adoption of the bibliometric method. However, it considers books review, chapters, papers published in international and academic journals, editorial materials, reviews and proceedings papers.Originality/value – This research shows that the interest on SDG and social enterprises has grown continuously in the last 30 years, especially in the last 5. The literature puts social enterprises at the center of social innovation by focusing on performance and management issues. Therefore, with the intention of mapping the studies that have been done in this regard, the study analyzed how research on local development coherence for global development has been addressed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0890.121
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.353 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Financial ResearchSame topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207