Social Innovation

1. (1000 words) Pearce’s “three systems” framework
In this section, we look at different types of organisation and their potential as agents of social change. To help us do so, we refer to Pearces (2003) framework, in which he divides the economy into three systems:
the first system, which he characterises as profit seeking and that consists of private firms of different kinds;
the second system, which he characterises as planned provision of public goods and services and that consists of government organisations of different types;
the third system, which he characterises as an independent system of self-help, and consists of social enterprises, voluntary organisations, and family-based organisations.
We find this framework useful because it gives an indication of the main organisational forms that exist in market economies. However, while Pearce assumes that social innovation takes place largely within a segment of the ‘third system’, which he calls the social economy, our basic premise is that it can happen in any of the ‘systems’. The boundaries between these domains are not clear cut, with organisations often combining multiple goals, which may be economic, public, or social. For example, it is not clear precisely where B-Corps which post-date Pearces model would fit in this framework.
What are the strengths and weaknesses of the three systems with respect to social innovation?
Do you think there is one system that is inherently superior to the others for delivering social change?
Add an example each in India context.

2. (1000 words) Read the Telegraph article on Volkswagen and Corporate Social Responsibility:
Lynn, M. (2015) “Corporate Social Responsibility has become a racket and a dangerous one.” The Telegraph, 28 September.
What does this case tell us if anything about the limitations of the CSR concept?
Talk about it in the context of India

Last Completed Projects