Page 47 - Social Enterprise A New Business Paradigm for Thailand

approach, which focuses on expanding human capabilities across key dimensions such as
education, health, income, and political participation.

2. Pragmatic Approach
Under this view, “for social” is determined by a societal consensus around shared goals.
Activities are considered social if they contribute to achieving these collectively accepted aims.
A prime example is the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), global
objectives such as eradicating poverty and ending hunger. Accordingly, any initiative that
advances progress toward the SDGs may be classified as a social enterprise.
3. Formal Approach
This method defines “for social” based on the value system prevailing within a particular
society. Here, a social enterprise is understood as any organization that operates with a non-

profit-maximizing goal, regardless of the specific nature of that goal. However, this approach
can lead to controversial or complex interpretations. For example, using the formal approach,
the Hamas movement in the Gaza Strip, an organization that raises funds to support the
liberation of Palestine, could theoretically be categorized as a social business, even though
much of the international community designates it as a terrorist organization.

1.6 Measuring the Success of Social Activities or Social Businesses

A key distinction between social businesses and conventional startups lies in their path to
sustainability. While most startups can become self-reliant once they gain momentum, social
businesses often face greater difficulty achieving financial independence. They typically require
seed funding or initial capital from social-purpose funds, and often even more investment to scale
operations. Since these enterprises are not structured to prioritize profit from the outset, funders
frequently require clear indicators of success and expect rigorous evaluations of their social
impact. As a result, measuring the effectiveness of social businesses is essential, not only to
ensure transparency but also to demonstrate tangible outcomes to stakeholders and supporters.

There are several approaches to this measurement. One commonly used framework is qualitative
assessment across three key dimensions: social, environmental, and financial. This integrated
framework is known as the Triple Bottom Line, a concept introduced by John Elkington in 1994
(Elkington, 2018).

Other widely adopted tools and methodologies include:

• Social Return on Investment (SROI) – Proposed by Jed Emerson and the Roberts Enterprise
Development Fund (Bornstein & Davis, 2010)
• Impact Reporting and Investment Standards (IRIS) – Developed by the Rockefeller Foundation

14