Social entrepreneurship

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Under social entrepreneurship and social entrepreneurship or social entrepreneurship is defined as a business activity that is innovative, pragmatic and long term for the solution of social problems, or more generally of a substantial, positive transformation of society (for so-called. Meta-economic objectives Upper wants to use). An entrepreneur who leads such an activity is called a social entrepreneur . Areas in which a social entrepreneur is involved are, for example, education, environmental protection, job creation for people with disabilities, fighting poverty or human rights. The idea of ​​profit stands in the background for social entrepreneurs, which is why many of these entrepreneurs are organized in non-profit organizations , manage or support other legal forms.

Occasionally, the term social economy is used as a generic term for third sector organizations and market economy activities with social goals. It includes social entrepreneurship.

In some countries, social enterprises or social entrepreneurs can be registered and thus acquire a special status. Your tax treatment is very inconsistent internationally.

A generic term coined around 2000 for both social entrepreneurship and eco-entrepreneurship is Sustainable Entrepreneurship or Sustainability Entrepreneurship , or Sustainopreneurship for short . Typical of this is the interweaving of several corporate goals that are not primarily aimed at profit, e.g. B. of employment promotion, education, innovation and / or environmental protection. In recent years, the Cultural Heritage activities have been added, which are dedicated to the preservation and care of cultural monuments and traditions. The increasingly heterogeneous fields of activity such as sports, art or recycling projects in heterogeneous legal forms have recently been referred to more frequently by the concept of the social economy , which has also been in existence for a long time .

The attempts to evaluate the effectiveness of the social enterprise in the form of determining a social return or social impact have not yet been methodologically standardized.

Features and shapes

A social entrepreneur is defined in literature as an entrepreneur who (ideally)

  • seeks to cope with a social task that has not yet been solved or has only been insufficiently solved in an innovative way by producing social added value (striving for so-called "meta-economic overarching goals"),
  • does not place profit making at the center of its activities and does not distribute a large part of the profit to investors,
  • earns a performance-based income (e.g. does not live on subsidies),
  • not only uses the profits from any business to achieve the meta-economic overarching goals,
  • builds a suitable organization for the fulfillment of the self-imposed task, which strives for sustainable development for society,
  • respects democratic values ​​and human dignity,
  • seeks to motivate other interested people to participate, to learn and improve continuously and
  • can acquire the necessary financial and material resources without becoming dependent on individual large donors and not be discouraged by limited resources.

As part of its Social Business Initiative, the European Commission has defined social enterprises as follows: “Companies for which the social or societal charitable goal represents the meaning and purpose of their business activity, which is often expressed in a high degree of social innovation, the profits of which are largely reinvested in order to achieve this social goal and whose organizational structure or ownership structure reflects this goal, as they are based on principles of codetermination or employee participation or are geared towards social justice. "

According to the definition of the Social Entrepreneurship Network Germany , the “primary goal of social entrepreneurship is to solve societal challenges. This is achieved through the continuous use of entrepreneurial resources and results in new and innovative solutions. Steering and controlling mechanisms ensure that the social goals are lived internally and externally. "

It is characteristic of social enterprises that factual goals (i.e. aspects of performance production such as target direction and target group) formal goals such as B. Cost recovery or liquidity security dominate. While some social entrepreneurs aim to make a profit by offering special social services - e.g. B. the employment of unemployed - seek to achieve, the profit represents a means for others to realize social purposes beyond that. Other social enterprises are more in the tradition of cooperatives and emphasize the solidarity or self-help aspect.

Due to the special economic situation of social enterprises, their financing is often a particular challenge. On the one hand, the return opportunities for investors are often limited due to the income models of social enterprises, on the other hand, the “social return” creates a special investment incentive for some types of investors. Since around 2003 there have been venture capitalists for social enterprises in Germany ( social venturing ). In addition to private foundations, KfW is also involved in this area. Social venture capitalists expect no (or only little) financial, but a social return.

A special variant of social entrepreneurship is social franchising . The most important differentiation from traditional franchises concerns the purpose of social franchising. Although social franchising is also about spreading a business concept, the latter does not focus on the uniform market presence to generate a high level of brand awareness and build a recurring customer base, but rather the highest possible non-profit return and the best possible satisfaction of social needs. One example is the CAP chain .

Helga Hackenberg and Stefan Empter, in an anthology published by them in 2011 ( Social Entrepreneurship - Social Business: To undertake for society ), describe the phenomenon as “nothing new” (“the strategies of the booming social entrepreneurship sector are”) and social entrepreneurship as one Conceptually and conceptually not yet defined “phenomenon in the field of tension between economy, state and civil society”. Social entrepreneurs fill gaps that neither the market nor the less dynamic state activities can cover.

history

There are already numerous socially committed entrepreneurs in history who financed their projects out of their own pockets or with donations raised, for example:

Also Friedrich Wilhelm Raiffeisen , Hermann Schulze-Delitzsch or Adolph Kolping negotiated social enterprising in the 19th century according to current understanding.

The idea of social sustainability is also anchored in the tradition of Confucian entrepreneurship in China. The Chinese term of the Confucian entrepreneur (rushang 儒商) is made up of the characters ru 儒 (for rujiao 儒教 “Confucianism”) and shang 商 (for shangren 商人 “traders, merchants, businessmen, entrepreneurs”). It describes entrepreneurs who take care to act ethically in their business.

Since many developing and emerging countries and in the Anglo-Saxon industrialized countries social security systems are based on the often inadequate or largely private provision of social services, the idea of ​​social entrepreneurship has spread faster there than in Germany, where it has previously encountered a pronounced welfare state, its subsidized institutions often compete with social entrepreneurs. Nevertheless, the development in Germany takes place to a large extent within the service areas covered by the welfare state. Around 2012, around a third of the German social enterprises were working in the areas of education, childcare and sport or social services and health. However, their actions are no longer limited to the typical logic of action and resources of the respective sectors, but instead use a combination of market-based incomes, volunteer engagement or political lobbying. More and more classic welfare organizations are working in this “hybrid” mode with the help of spin-offs.

The term social entrepreneur was first used in the English-language literature on social change in the 1960s and 1970s. In the 1980s and 1990s, the term found widespread use in English-speaking countries. This is partly due to the work of Bill Drayton , the founder of the Ashoka organization to promote non-profit entrepreneurs, but also to the use of the term by the British trend researcher Charles Leadbeater in his book The Rise of the Social Entrepreneur from 1997. From the The British sociologist and politician Michael Young was one of the leading promoters and supporters of social business enterprises from the 1950s to the 1990s . That is why, in the 1980s, Professor Daniel Bell at Harvard University named him the world's most successful social enterprise entrepreneur because of his role in founding over 60 organizations worldwide - including a number of schools for social entrepreneurs . Young died in 2002 and the Young Foundation , founded in 2005, was named after him . Its focus is on stimulating social innovation in communities.

Since around 1998 the idea of ​​social entrepreneurship has also been popularized in Germany, v. a. through the establishment of the Schwab Foundation by the World Economic Forum this year .

Since around 2005, associations of social enterprises have been established in many countries. In Switzerland, the Association of Swiss Social Firms (ASSOF) represents companies that create work for people with disabilities or disadvantages on the labor market (at least 30% share of employment) and at least 50% of their costs from the proceeds of products and services Services cover. In March 2013, however, the general assembly resolved to dissolve the association by June 2013. Since 2017, the Social Entrepreneurship Network Germany (SEND eV) has existed in cooperation with the Federal Association of German Startups as the political representative of currently (2019) around 350 social enterprises in Germany.

Demarcation

The demarcation between social entrepreneurship and social business (often referred to as social economy or third sector in German) is not always clear. Occasionally this is understood as a special form of social entrepreneurship. Most of the time, however, the social business lies in the hands of traditional charities and charities, who generate income by billing social services that they or their subsidiaries generate. The term entrepreneurship does not apply to these third-sector agencies and their spin-offs in the legal form of (partly non-profit) corporations , as they operate with constant benefits or performance-based income from the social insurance agencies or social welfare agencies and therefore bear a low risk. This should also apply to many of the companies that work relatively risk-free in the fields of labor market integration, education and social services, i.e. the areas in which German social enterprises are by far the most active.

In Germany, a non-profit legal form can best serve as a pragmatic indicator, in which a profit distribution is excluded ( profit distribution constraint ) and which is purely oriented towards the common good. However, even organizations without non-profit status can (partially) pursue social and ecological goals that cannot be traced through this approach. Socially motivated companies that mainly distribute their profits to investors are generally not referred to as social entrepreneurship.

The innovation content of the business idea is often given as a further differentiation criterion. The innovation can refer to the products and services as well as to business models and organizational forms. It shows that innovative products and services in the social sector often have a preventive character, extend across different thematic areas or rely on volunteer work in order to reduce long-term costs for the public sector or social security systems and to increase the quality of care. Approaches that can be assigned to a market logic, on the other hand, often rely on helping people to help themselves through the provision of capital and knowledge, or apply particularly high ethical or ecological criteria to the manufacturing process (fair trade, alternative energies, etc.).

The third delimitation criterion is the achievement of a performance-based income ( earned income ). Exclusively donation or subsidy-based projects therefore fall outside the definition of social entrepreneurship. Many projects in the social sector create a benefit for third parties and thus a value that the respective organizations cannot skim off themselves ( value capturing problem ). The target group often lacks the ability to pay and savings through reduced social benefits are incurred by the public sector, but not by the companies themselves. In fact, outside of organic production in Germany, social enterprises are hardly able to directly overcome this structural market failure. Nonetheless, the definition suggests that performance-based income must play a central role alongside donations, subsidies or volunteering. In Germany, this also includes the case that, as in the health or care sector, fixed rates are agreed for certain services.

Finally, democratic-participatory structures are often mentioned as a delimitation criterion.

Occasionally, highly innovative organizations without an income model are also counted as part of social entrepreneurship (e.g. innovative school models). However, when it comes to scaling, such approaches tend to focus more on adoption in public structures and are therefore less interesting for financing that follows an investment logic.

Success measurement and impact monitoring

The results staircase illustrates how outputs, outcomes and impact are differentiated from one another

Social entrepreneurs are often expected to use an impact analysis to demonstrate their success or their social impact , ie the (positive) effects on their subject area, to investors and other stakeholders .

Relevant in this context is the difference between output (e.g. the number of unemployed young people who are trained) and outcome (number of young people who actually get a job). The main problem in determining the outcome or the social impact in the context of an impact value chain is attribution, ie the question of whether the output really contributed to the achievement of the goal and which other factors had a beneficial or hindering effect on the achievement of the goal. In addition, the question arises whether the effect would have occurred without the measure or the involvement of the entrepreneur. B. a young person would have found a job without attending a further training measure. This can often only be answered with control group studies .

The widespread assumption that the methods and standards of the private sector can be used to measure the impact of social entrepreneurship is erroneous. A social impact often only occurs after a very long time. In addition, an impact is always subject to several influences and not to the work of a single actor.

As a substitute, the Capacity Assessment Grid is often used to identify the performance of an organization based on structural features, skills and other resources, as is the Social Enterprise Scorecard , an adaptation of the Balanced Score Card that also takes long-term social goals into account.

Impact reporting

There are still no mandatory, uniform reporting standards for reporting social impact . However, the Ashoka organization , in collaboration with other partners, has developed the Social Reporting Standard (SRS), which proposes a framework for reporting. The method helps the functional chain to communicate programs, projects and organizations to document and. In addition, the SRS systematically records other essential elements of reporting such as organizational structure and finances.

Maximum dissemination of benefits and scalability

CAP market in Berlin-Köpenick : scaling through franchising

An important aspect of the assessment of business models of social entrepreneurship is the question of their scalability . Here it is not primarily important for the founders to maintain their competitive edge over others and thus achieve a permanent return. Rather, it is desirable that positive social effects that have been successfully demonstrated by the individual social enterprise are disseminated in society within a short period of time. Many social enterprises strive to reach a critical mass of users and imitators as quickly as possible so that the desired effects can spread further through the “cloning” of the business model and other learning processes (so-called scaling efficiency ). An essential difference to exclusively commercially oriented companies is that a successful scaling of social enterprises does not have to be done only through the organization's own growth. By focusing on the social and ecological impact, successful scaling can also be achieved indirectly ( impact investment ). Such scaling processes are u. a. through open source policy or through a high level of replicability of the model z. B. made possible by franchising : imitators can adopt the approach for a training or license fee. In this way the own infrastructure of the originator of the idea or the franchisor is kept low. Cooperation with established actors in the welfare sector also appears to be promising from this point of view. However, scaling can also be achieved simply through knowledge diffusion and scaling of ideas ; the founders' powers of persuasion play an important role. Further factors of successful scaling are management competence, the ability to mobilize financial resources, reputation, control of partners and the costs of transferring the business model.

Scaling barriers can be strong local roots (e.g. the interdependence with local politics), a shortage of skilled workers, strong competitive thinking and a lack of willingness to cooperate in the social sector, fear of loss of autonomy, problems of legitimacy and authenticity in the case of strong growth, or quality problems with franchisees. The financing of growth from own resources is also difficult when using public funds, since social enterprises that can permanently pay a return to an investor can find it difficult to explain to the cost bearer. Non-profit organizations also have difficulty building reserves.

Promotion and training

Almost all social enterprises in Europe have a public share of funding; in the USA, foundations play a dominant role, at least in start-up financing. In Germany, some foundations support social entrepreneurs with no repayment obligation, such as the Siemens Stiftung , the Vodafone Stiftung and the Robert Bosch Stiftung . Around one percent of all professionally managed investments worldwide flow into social entrepreneurship.

The Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship supports social entrepreneurs primarily in Germany and Switzerland. As the first investment company in German-speaking countries, the BonVenture Group has been promoting social entrepreneurs since 2003, providing them with advice and network contacts in addition to socially responsible risk capital.

The Social Venture Fund finances social enterprises and invests in the areas of education, integration, living in old age, combating long-term unemployment, and health. In order to equip social enterprises with the necessary equity capital, loan gift associations can also come together. Each member undertakes to donate a certain amount per month over a certain period of time (e.g. five years). The donors sign a contract with the GLS Bank , which collects the donations. She makes the total amount available to the social enterprise immediately (without a profit margin). The GLS-Bank donates the total amount to the lending donation community.

The Entrepreneurship - Entrepreneurial Impact International Summer School under the motto Billion Euro Projects to Foster Societal Change of the Technical University of Munich , which has been held annually since 2008, aims to stimulate entrepreneurial thinking with the aim of finding solutions to global social problems. The specific goal is to develop sustainable business ideas in small international and interdisciplinary teams that generate, save or cost one billion euros. In 2011 the founding of the Social Entrepreneurship Academy was announced, a cooperation project between the four Munich universities.

In autumn 2010 the German federal government approved the promotion of social entrepreneurship as part of the national engagement strategy. Since January 1, 2012, the Federal Ministry of Family Affairs and KfW Bankengruppe have jointly launched a financing program for social entrepreneurship.

Since 2011, the Social Entrepreneurship Initiative & Foundation ( seif ) in Switzerland has been offering professionalization programs in the form of seminars especially for social entrepreneurs. They receive mentoring, contact to funding sources and the opportunity to participate in the Seif Awards business plan competition.

In addition, the Social Entrepreneurship Network Germany as a network association, as well as the Ashoka Foundation , ProjectTogether and Social Impact offer practical help through various funding programs.

Countries with extensive activities and special training and advisory institutions in the field of social entrepreneurship are among others. a. India , Italy , Brazil or Mexico , but also the Nordic countries. Groundbreaking in the training of social entrepreneurs is u. a. Tiimiakatemia (Team Academy) founded in 1993 at Jyväskylä University of Applied Sciences in southern central Finland.

In many countries there are special legal forms of non-profit companies that do not necessarily have to be used by social enterprises, but are widespread in this area. In Germany these are the non-profit GmbH . the cooperative or the registered association with non-profit status, the latter usually generating only a small amount of performance-based income. In England, the legal forms of the Community Interest Company (CIC; since 2004) and the Charitable Incorporated Organization (CIO, 2006) were founded explicitly for social enterprises.

Awards

The Social Entrepreneurship Initiative Foundation from Switzerland has been awarding the Seif Awards, each endowed with CHF 10,000, in different categories in German-speaking countries since 2011 . The Social Entrepreneurship Academy annually awards the winners with prize money of 48,000 euros through the Act for Impact funding program . The Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship awards the international Social Entrepreneur of the Year prize . The Startsocial competition under the patronage of Angela Merkel honors 100 social organizations for their commitment every year.

See also

literature

  • Rafael Ziegler, Lena Partzsch, Jana Gebauer, Marianne Henkel, Justus Lodemann, Franziska Mohaupt (2014), Social Entrepreneurship In The Water Sector. Getting Things Done Sustainably. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, ISBN 978-1-78347-130-0 | Ebook ISBN 978-1-78347-131-7
  • Gidron, B., Y. Hasenfeld (Eds.), Social Enterprises: An Organizational Perspective. New York: Palgrave Macmillan 2012.
  • Thomas Scheuerle, Gunnar Glänzel, Rüdiger Knust, Volker Then (CSI of the University of Heidelberg), Social Entrepreneurship in Germany: Potentials and Growth Problems . On behalf of KfW Bankengruppe Research, Frankfurt 2013 (PDF file 4 MB).
  • Boris Franssen, Peter Scholten (2009), Handbook for Social Entrepreneurship , ISBN 978-90-232-4463-9
  • Barbara Roder (2011), Reporting in Social Entrepreneurship. Conception of external corporate reporting for social entrepreneurs , Entrepreneurial and Financial Studies, Wiesbaden / Munich: Gabler / Springer
  • Weber, M. (2007), Towards Sustainable Entrepreneurship: A Value Creating Perspective on Corporate Societal Strategies . Discussion paper. Lüneburg: Center for Sustainability Management CSM Lüneburg (PDF file; 381 kB)
  • Marianne Henkel, Jana Gebauer, Justus Lodemann, Franziska Mohaupt, Lena Partzsch, Eva Wascher, Rafael Ziegler (eds.), Social Entrepreneurship - Status Quo 2009: (Self) image, impact and responsibility for the future , conference proceedings. Berlin HUB, June 16 and 17, 2009. Geozon Science Media, ISBN 978-3-941971-02-8 , doi: 10.3285 / g.00003 , PDF (1.69 MB)
  • Jana Gebauer, Franziska Mohaupt, Rafael Ziegler (eds.), Special Issue: Social Entrepreneurship . English Edition, December 2009. First published in German in: Ökologisches Wirtschaften 2/2009 (Munich, Ökom Verlag), PDF (1 MB)
  • Wolf Rainer Wendt, Social Economic Services: Supply Structure and Productivity , Augsburg 2011
  • Lorenz, T., Social Entrepreneurs at the Base of the Pyramid , Metropolis Verlag 2012

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ For the various definitions cf. Salamon, LM, Anheier, HK: In Search of the Non-Profit Sector I: The Question of Definitions. In: Voluntas. International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Sector Organizations (1992), pp. 267-309.
  2. ↑ For example in Finland, if they employ a certain number of people with disabilities or the unemployed.
  3. ↑ Hockerts, K. (2003): Sustainability Innovations. Ecological and Social Entrepreneurship and the Management of Antagonistic Assets. University of St. Gallen, dissertation; Gerlach, A. (2003): Sustainable entrepreneurship and innovation. Conference Proceedings of Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Leeds
  4. ↑ Scheuerle, Glänzel, Knust, Then 2013, p. 9.
  5. ↑ See u. a. J. Gregory Dees: What is Social Entrepreneurship? Berlin, Heidelberg, New York 2002, p. 94 ff., T. Scheurle a. a. 2013, p. 7 ff.
  6. ↑ European Commission: A New EU Strategy (2011-14) for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). COM (2011) 682 final, Brussels, 25 October 20122, pp. 2-3.
  7. ↑ Naomi Ryland: The New Definition for Social Entrepreneurship. In: www.tbd.community. October 9, 2019, accessed October 13, 2019 .
  8. ↑ Katharina Osbelt: Social Entrepreneurship - Origin and Meaning. (PDF) Social Entrepreneurship Network Germany , September 2019, accessed on October 13, 2019 .
  9. ↑ For the typology cf. http://www.samfundsansvar.dk/graphics/Samfundsansvar.dk/csrinnovation/Dokumenter/csr-di-report_final.pdf  ( page no longer available , search in web archives )  Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. CSR-Driven Innovation - Study on Northern European Social Enterprises@1@ 2Template: Dead Link / www.samfundsansvar.dk  
  10. ↑ T. Scheuerle et al. a. 2013, p. 65 ff.
  11. ↑ For a better world: How to become a social entrepreneur. Retrieved March 24, 2020 .
  12. ^ Valerie Hackl , Social Franchising - Social Entrepreneurship. Multiply activities. Dissertation, St. Gallen 2009, http://www1.unisg.ch/www/edis.nsf/wwwDisplayIdentifier/3674/$FILE/dis3674.pdf
  13. ↑ Social franchising offers new opportunities , WDG 1/2012, http://www.cap-markt.de/fileadmin/ext/hgcapmarkt1/dat_Berichte/CAP-Maerkte_erobern_Europa_aus_WDG_1.2012.pdf, accessed April 5, 2012
  14. ↑ [1]
  15. ↑ Scheuerle, Glänzel, Knust, Then 2013, p. 7.
  16. ↑ Scheuerle, Glänzel, Knust, Then 2013, p. 23.
  17. ↑ http://youngfoundation.org/about-us/history/
  18. ↑ http://www.assof.ch/ website of the association
  19. ↑ Federal Association of German Startups: Social Entrepreneurship Network Germany founded. June 29, 2017. Retrieved January 18, 2019 .
  20. ^ Lorenz, T .: Social Entrepreneurs at the Base of the Pyramid . Diss., Metropolis Verlag. 2012.
  21. ↑ Scheuerle u. a. 2013, p. 21.
  22. ↑ Ann-Kristin Achleitner u. a .: Social Entrepreneurship: An overview . Stuttgart 2007, p. 7.
  23. ↑ Scheuerle u. a. 2013, p. 10.
  24. ↑ Scheuerle u. a. 2013, p. 11.
  25. ↑ What is effect? www.ffekt-lernen.de, accessed on September 18, 2017.
  26. ↑ Schmitz, Björn; Then, Volker, Legitimation through Narration , in: Hackenberg, Helga; Empter, Stefan (Ed.), Social Entrepreneurship - Social Business. For society on the move , Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag 2011, pp. 339-350
  27. ↑ Roder 2011, p. 101
  28. ↑ Impacts that are difficult to assess www.ffekt-lernen.de, accessed on October 20, 2017.
  29. ↑ See Roder 2011 and Wendt 2011
  30. ↑ http://social-reporting-standard.de/
  31. ↑ T. Scheuerle et al. a. 2013, p. 57 ff.
  32. ↑ Christiana Weber u. a., Scaling Social Impact , Ed. Bertelsmann Stiftung 2013, esp.p. 19
  33. ↑ Spread and scale impact: think big! www.ffekt-lernen.de, accessed on October 19, 2017.
  34. ↑ T. Scheuerle et al. a. 2013, p. 61 ff.
  35. ↑ Scheuerl u. a. 2013, p. 51.
  36. ↑ Federal Association of German Private Equity Companies ( Memento from January 3, 2014 in the Internet Archive )
  37. ↑ Archived copy ( memento of March 5, 2016 in the Internet Archive ), accessed February 10, 2013
  38. ↑ https://heldenrat.wordpress.com/2011/02/28/social-entrepreneurship-forschung-bildung/ accessed February 10, 2013
  39. ↑ Friemel, Thomas; Winkelmann, Marc: We are at the beginning. The federal government wants to promote social entrepreneurs , in: enormous. Economy for people. Edition: 01/2011, p. 56.
  40. ↑ Federal Ministry of Family Affairs and KfW present new instrument for the growth financing of social enterprises Federal Ministry for Family, Seniors, Women and Youth of October 25, 2011
  41. ^ Foundation website
  42. ↑ Business start-ups in the social sector . In: Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy (Ed.): GründerZeiten . No. 22 . Berlin May 2020, p. 12 ( existenzgruender.de [PDF; accessed on July 19, 2020]).
  43. ↑ http://www.tiimiakatemia.fi/en/ Website of the Team Academy
  44. ↑ a b c Anna Gauto: Social Startups: These are the 16 most important competitions for social entrepreneurs. In: Wirtschaftswoche . September 19, 2014, accessed June 8, 2020 .
  45. ↑ a b c Michael Wunsch: 15 competitions for social projects. In: tbd.community. July 12, 2017, accessed June 8, 2020 .
  46. ↑ Seif Awards website , accessed on June 8, 2020 (English)
  47. ^ Act for Impact website , Retrieved June 8, 2020
  48. ↑ Manuela Kasper-Claridge: The Schwab Foundation: 20 years of inspiring entrepreneurs. In: Deutsche Welle . September 24, 2018, accessed June 8, 2020 .
  49. ↑ Schwab Foundation website , accessed on June 8, 2020 (English)
  50. ↑ founding ? Absolutely! - The social start-up guide. In: relaio.de. Hans Sauer Foundation , March 8, 2019, accessed June 8, 2020 .