PurposeSocial entrepreneurs engage in action because social entrepreneurs want to solve social problems. Consequently, to see more social entrepreneurship in contexts with the most severe social problems is expected. This paper argues that this is an oversimplification of the problem-action nexus in social entrepreneurship and that action does not necessarily correspond to the observed scale of social problems. Drawing on the theoretical framing of crescive conditions, this relationship is affected by forms of public investment as institutions that distinctively promote engagement and public interest amongst social entrepreneurs. Thus, this paper assesses the relationship between varying levels of social problems and social entrepreneurship action (SEA) and how and to what extent public investment types – as more and less locally anchored crescive conditions – affect this relationship.Design/methodology/approachThe hypotheses are tested with a series of random-effects regression models. The data stem from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor's (GEM) 2015 social entrepreneurship survey and Chile's 2015 National Socioeconomic Characterisation Survey (CASEN). The authors combined both data sets and cross-matched individual-level data (action and investment) with commune-level data (social problem scale) resulting in unique contextualised observations for 1,124 social entrepreneurs.FindingsContrary to current understanding, this study finds that SEA is positively associated with low-social problem scale. This means that high levels of deprivation do not immediately lead to action. The study also finds that locally anchored forms of investment positively moderate this relationship, stimulating action in the most deprived contexts. On the contrary, centralised public investment leads to increased social entrepreneurial action in wealthier communities where it is arguably less needed.Originality/valueThe findings contribute to the literature on SEA in deprived contexts, social and public investment as well as policy-level discussion and broader issues of entrepreneurship and social problems.

中文翻译：

---

社会问题规模、公共投资和社会创业行动

目的社会企业家参与行动，因为社会企业家想要解决社会问题。因此，预计在社会问题最严重的情况下会看到更多的社会企业家精神。本文认为，这是对社会企业家精神中问题-行动关系的过度简化，并且行动不一定与观察到的社会问题规模相对应。借鉴 crescive 条件的理论框架，这种关系受到公共投资形式的影响，这些公共投资是特别促进社会企业家参与和公共利益的机构。因此，本文评估了不同程度的社会问题与社会创业行动 (SEA) 之间的关系，以及公共投资类型（随着越来越少的本地锚定条件）如何影响这种关系。一系列随机效应回归模型。数据来源于全球创业监测 (GEM) 2015 年社会创业调查和智利 2015 年国家社会经济特征调查 (CASEN)。作者将数据集和交叉匹配的个人层面数据（行动和投资）与社区层面的数据（社会问题量表）相结合，对 1,124 名社会企业家进行了独特的情境化观察。结果与目前的理解相反，本研究发现 SEA 与低社会问题量表呈正相关。这意味着高度剥夺不会立即导致行动。该研究还发现，当地锚定的投资形式积极缓和了这种关系，刺激了最贫困地区的行动。相反，集中的公共投资会导致在较富裕的社区中增加社会创业行动，而这些社区可能不需要它。原创性/价值研究结果有助于研究贫困背景下的 SEA、社会和公共投资以及政策层面的讨论和更广泛的讨论创业问题和社会问题。该研究还发现，当地锚定的投资形式积极缓和了这种关系，刺激了最贫困地区的行动。相反，集中的公共投资会导致在较富裕的社区中增加社会创业行动，而这些社区可能不需要它。原创性/价值研究结果有助于研究贫困背景下的 SEA、社会和公共投资以及政策层面的讨论和更广泛的讨论创业问题和社会问题。该研究还发现，当地锚定的投资形式积极缓和了这种关系，刺激了最贫困地区的行动。相反，集中的公共投资会导致在较富裕的社区中增加社会创业行动，而这些社区可能不需要它。原创性/价值研究结果有助于研究贫困背景下的 SEA、社会和公共投资以及政策层面的讨论和更广泛的讨论创业问题和社会问题。