Fundamental economic theory dictates that the processes the yield creativity, and further, innovation, are driven solely by the pursuit of profits. However, practical experience fails to corroborate that basic human assumption. Indeed, as Martin and Osberg perceptively note, “the truth is that entrepreneurs are rarely motivated by the prospect of financial gain… Instead, both the entrepreneur and the social entrepreneur are strongly motivated by the opportunity they identify.” The entrepreneur identifies what Martin and Osberg refer to as a “suboptimal equilibrium,” or more simply, a problem that society is working around, rather than eliminating. Then, the entrepreneur strives to institute a dynamic solution to the problem, and through the innovative solution, benefit society as a whole. The potential financial compensation for proposing said solution is usually a secondary objective.

How does this aspect of entrepreneurship, central as it may be, relate to the United Nations? “Promoting social progress, better living standards and human rights,” is not the sole objective of the U.N. Indeed, its primary function is to ensure international cooperation and peace. Even in its role as an agent of social change, it traditionally operates within the social paradigm, however unjust rather than revolutionizing it. Even if it was “fully funded,” the United Nations would continue to implement Band-Aid solutions, working around an unsatisfactory equilibrium, breaking out of it. The U.N. solution may alleviate societal pains in the short-term, but what about the future? Further, within the current system, recipients of aid aren’t permitted to champion their own social change.

In the long term, the social entrepreneur is a far more effective instrument of change than the United Nations. Rooted in local culture, with an intimate knowledge of key issues, t
he social entrepreneur utilizes creativity and innovation to “forg[e] a new, stable equilibrium,” that ensures an improvement in quality of life. Rather than continuing to throw funds at a problem until it disappears for a short time, a social entrepreneur will identify the key issue and propose a solution. Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus (pictured right) perhaps best exemplifies the social entrepreneur. The impoverished in his community weren’t debilitated by a lack of effort or desire, they simply lacked a minuscule amount, an amount so small the western world might take it for granted, of financial capital to provide for themselves. Yunus simply provided the opportunity for small, unsecured loans, through said loans, enabled his community to take control of their lives. The Arc Initiative has seen similar results; by facilitating business solutions, it takes existing ideas, gives them economic viability, and allows them, and their owners, to flourish.

Martin, Roger L., and Sally Osberg. “Social Entrepreneurship: The Case for Definition (SSIR).” Social Entrepreneurship: The Case for Definition. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2014. <http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/social_entrepreneurship_the_case_for_definition/>.

“UN at a Glance.” UN News Center. UN, n.d. Web. 07 Nov. 2014. <http://www.un.org/en/aboutun/index.shtml>.

Kroekker, Jeff. “Can Fair Trade Boutique Expand without Alienating Customers?” The Globe and Mail. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2014. <http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/small-business/sb-growth/day-to-day/can-fair-trade-boutique-expand-without-alienating-customers/article4405520/>