Purpose Social entrepreneurship has gained global attention as a mechanism for inclusive growth and sustainable development, particularly in emerging economies. This study aims to offer a systematic and comparative systematic literature review (SLR) of research at the intersection of social entrepreneurship and public policy, with a focus on BRICS, ASEAN, MINT and N-11 contexts. This study seeks to synthesize and expand the current understanding of (1) theoretical foundations and (2) empirical evidence on (a) government and institutional antecedents of social enterprise development and (b) their broader socio economic impacts. Design/methodology/approach The study adopts a SLR and bibliometric, variable science mapping (VSM) and summative content analysis, covering 267 publications from 63 scholarly journals published between 2009 to August 2025. Science mapping techniques identify key clusters, thematic trends and theoretical perspectives. Findings Based on bibliometric, VSM and summative content analysis, three insights emerge. First, most studies are descriptive and rely on single-theory or a theoretical approaches. Second, research is concentrated in India, South Africa and China, while smaller emerging economies remain underrepresented. The analysis identifies five thematic clusters, showing an evolution from foundational and theoretical discussions toward governance-, sustainability- and policy-oriented perspectives on social entrepreneurship. Third, methodological limitations persist, particularly the scarcity of cross-country, longitudinal and mixed-methods research. Government intervention emerges as both an enabler and constraint. Originality/value To date, little systematic effort has integrated social entrepreneurship and public policy scholarship across diverse emerging economies. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study provides one of the first comprehensive bibliometric foundations, highlighting key theoretical, methodological and empirical gaps and offering policy implications for designing supportive ecosystems that balance regulation with innovation.
You et al. (Mon,) studied this question.