Assesses trends in social entrepreneurship for poverty alleviation, suggesting a need for integrated approaches and local engagement.
Globally, social entrepreneurship has been promoted as a market-based and innovation-driven approach to poverty alleviation, yet research knowledge in this domain remains conceptually fragmented and unevenly distributed. This study assessed trends and thematic evolution in social entrepreneurship for poverty alleviation, consolidating existing knowledge and identifying critical gaps. Using the Scopus database, 212 peer-reviewed publications published between 2010 and 2025 were retrieved and screened. Bibliometric analyses were conducted using Bibliometrix in R and VOSviewer to examine publication trends, geographical contributions, collaboration patterns, keyword co-occurrence, thematic mapping, thematic evolution, and factorial structures. The findings indicate that the research domain has evolved from early theory-driven perspectives toward a more integrated and system-oriented framework. Social entrepreneurship is positioned as a multidimensional, ecosystem-based approach to poverty alleviation, closely linked to social innovation, sustainability, and inclusive development. Key thematic areas include microfinance, governance, gender empowerment, and financial inclusion, demonstrating a shift toward recognising poverty as a multidimensional challenge. However, the results also reveal significant geographical disparities, with research mainly concentrated in developed and emerging economies, while contributions from regions such as Sub-Saharan Africa remain limited. The study concludes that advancing the field requires stronger integration of theoretical perspectives, greater attention to context-specific dynamics, and more inclusive participation in global research. Emphasis should be placed on ecosystem-level strategies and collaborative approaches that enhance the practical and policy relevance of social entrepreneurship in addressing poverty.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nkukpornu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: