This study draws on population ecology theory to explore whether the environment, social and governance (ESG) performance of commercial ventures functions as a catalyst or a competitor in the emergence of social ventures. Using a panel dataset from 31 provinces in China between 2010 and 2022, the empirical results reveal that the ESG performance of commercial ventures positively contributes to the population density of social ventures, indicating a possible catalytic effect through legitimacy spillovers. Furthermore, this study identifies three critical factors within the ecosystem that influence the interaction between commercial ESG and social ventures: government support and foundations weaken the positive spillover effect, while intermediary organizations strengthen it. This study enriches the literature on social venture emergence by clarifying the role of legitimacy spillovers from commercial ventures’ ESG activities and advances social economy ecosystem research by incorporating institutional moderators into the study of hybrid organizational populations.
AmezcuaA. S.GrimesM. G.BradleyS. W.WiklundJ. (2013). Organizational sponsorship and founding environments: A contingency view on the survival of business-incubated firms, 1994–2007. Academy of Management Journal, 56(6), 1628–1654. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0652
2.
BallyF.DaudigeosT.CalamelL.TallecJ. (2025). Where and how do social entrepreneurs access resources in the early stages of their ventures? A relational chain typology of French social ventures. Journal of Business Research, 201, 115732. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2025.115732
3.
BaumJ. A. C.OliverC. (1996). Toward an institutional ecology of organizational founding. Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1378–1427. https://doi.org/10.2307/257003
4.
BhattB.QureshiI.RiazS. (2019). Social entrepreneurship in non-munificent institutional environments and implications for institutional work: Insights from China. Journal of Business Ethics, 154(3), 605–630. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3451-4
5.
BhaweN.JhaS. K. (2024). Context-driven diversification in social enterprises. Business & Society. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00076503241286321
6.
BiggeriM.BortolottiL. (2020). Towards a “harmonious society”? Multidimensional development and the convergence of Chinese provinces. Regional Studies, 54(12), 1655–1667. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2020.1746759
7.
BogaertS.BooneC.NegroG.Van WitteloostuijnA. (2016). Organizational form emergence: A meta-analysis of the ecological theory of legitimation. Journal of Management, 42(5), 1344–1373. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314527129
8.
BroccardoL.GiordinoD.YaqubM. Z.AlshibaniS. M. (2025). Implementing sustainability: What role do knowledge management and management accounting play? Agenda for environmentally friendly businesses. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 32(1), 383–403. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2936
9.
CaoY.ShenB.TanaS. (2025). Enhancing ESG practices in supply chain operations through information disclosure: The “ETHICS” framework. Journal of Business Research, 201, 115668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2025.115668
10.
CarrollG. R.HannanM. T. (2018). The demography of corporations and industries. Princeton University Press.
11.
CatalaB.SavallT.Chaves-AvilaR. (2023). From entrepreneurial and innovation ecosystems to the social economy ecosystem. Journal of Business Research, 163, 113932. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113932
12.
ChungH.-M.ChengL.-H. (2019). Coopetition and firm survival in a cluster: Insights from the population ecology on the Yacht industry in an emerging economy, 1957–2010. Management and Organization Review, 15(4), 837–856. https://doi.org/10.1017/mor.2018.60
13.
CuiT. S.KerlinJ. A. (2017). China: The diffusion of social enterprise innovation: Exported and imported international influence. In KerlinJ. A. (Ed.), Shaping social enterprise (pp. 79–107). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-78714-250-320171004
14.
CurtisT. (2011). “Newness” in social entrepreneurship discourses: The concept of “Danwei” in the Chinese experience. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 2(2), 198–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2011.621444
15.
De BruinA.RoyM. J.GrantS.LewisK. V. (2023). Advancing a contextualized, community-centric understanding of social entrepreneurial ecosystems. Business & Society, 62(5), 1069–1102. https://doi.org/10.1177/00076503221121820
16.
DevarakondaR.LiuA. (2024). A legitimacy-based view of the impact of government venture capital on startup innovation: Evidence from a transition economy. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 18(1), 55–90. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1485
17.
DobrevS. D.OzdemirS. Z.TeoA. C. (2006). The ecological interdependence of emergent and established organizational populations: Legitimacy transfer, violation by comparison, and unstable identities. Organization Science, 17(5), 577–597. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1060.0209
18.
DrempeticS.KleinC.ZwergelB. (2020). The influence of firm size on the ESG score: Corporate sustainability ratings under review. Journal of Business Ethics, 167(2), 333–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04164-1
19.
EtxezarretaE.Villalba-EguiluzU.ArrillagaP.MendietaR. (2026). How to grow without getting bigger: Inter-cooperation as a scaling strategy for social and solidarity economy organizations. Business & Society, 65, 1249-1281. https://doi.org/10.1177/00076503251315466
20.
FengY.NishideY. (2024). Public trust in Chinese elder-care social enterprises: Common awareness and diverse perspectives from key stakeholders. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 1337. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03865-x
21.
FuJ. S. (2024). Social-market hybridity in social ventures: Scale development and validation. Business & Society, 63(2), 452–486. https://doi.org/10.1177/00076503231167569
22.
FuJ. S.YanS. (2024). How do new forms of organizations manage institutional voids? Social enterprises’ quest for sociopolitical legitimacy. Business & Society. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00076503241274029
23.
FuJ. S.YanS. (2025). Institutional complexity and social innovation: The case of Chinese social enterprises. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 36(1), 85–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-024-00696-x
24.
GuptaP.ChauhanS.PaulJ.JaiswalM. P. (2020). Social entrepreneurship research: A review and future research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 113, 209–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.03.032
25.
HannanM. T.FreemanJ. (1977). The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82(5), 929–964. https://doi.org/10.1086/226424
26.
HannanM. T.FreemanJ. (1988). The ecology of organizational mortality: American Labor Unions, 1836–1985. American Journal of Sociology, 94(1), 25–52. https://doi.org/10.1086/228950
HaughH.RobsonP.HagedoornJ.SugarK. (2022). The nascent ecology of social enterprise. Small Business Economics, 58(3), 1223–1242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-020-00442-9
29.
HeF.DuH.YuB. (2022). Corporate ESG performance and manager misconduct: Evidence from China. International Review of Financial Analysis, 82, 102201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2022.102201
30.
HervieuxC.VoltanA. (2018). Framing social problems in social entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Ethics, 151(2), 279–293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3252-1
31.
HouB.YuY.FangK.WangS.JinP.HongJ. (2025). Social entrepreneurship and employee-related corporate social responsibility: Evidence from Chinese privately owned firms. Chinese Management Studies. https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS-09-2023-0498
32.
HuaR. (2021). Referee, sponsor or coach: How does the government harness the development of social enterprises? A case study of Chengdu, China. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 32(5), 1054–1065. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-021-00379-x
33.
HuangY.YinX. (2025). Hybrid legitimacy-seeking strategies of social enterprises in developing countries: A comparative case study of two microfinance institutions. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 35(4), 719–733. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21639
34.
HungC.WangL. (2021). Institutional constraints, market competition, and revenue strategies: Evidence from Canadian social enterprises. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 32(1), 165–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-020-00300-y
35.
JakobE. A.SundermeierJ. (2025). A taxonomy of hybrid value logics—How social enterprises combine institutional logics differently. Business & Society, 65(5), 1282–1321. https://doi.org/10.1177/00076503251350441
36.
JiC.KonrathS. (2024). Penalty or reward? The role of hybrid identities in social enterprises’ resource acquisition. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 35(3), 464–478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-023-00610-x
37.
JiangP.-C.FengG.-F.WangH.-J.ChangC.-P. (2024). CSR from different perspectives: The global ESG indexes updated. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 31(5), 4694–4714. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2814
38.
KachlamiH. (2017). Regional dynamism between social and commercial ventures: An empirical study based on Swedish data. International Journal of Social Economics, 44(9), 1122–1138. (world). https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSE-11-2015-0293
39.
KannothraC. G.ManningS.Cotterlaz-RannardG.KunduS. K. (2024). The interplay of market choices and social mission: Learning from B2B social enterprises in emerging economies. Business & Society. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00076503241277675
40.
KerlinJ. A.LallS. A.PengS.CuiT. S. (2021). Institutional intermediaries as legitimizing agents for social enterprise in China and India. Public Management Review, 23(5), 731–753. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2020.1865441
41.
KerlinJ. A.PengS.CuiT. S. (2021). Strategic responses of social enterprises to institutional pressures in China. Journal of Asian Public Policy, 14(2), 200–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/17516234.2020.1848249
42.
KhabbazL.KuranO. (2025). Storytelling for legitimacy and brand building: Insights from lebanese social enterprises. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2025.2492061
43.
KherR.YangS.NewbertS. L. (2023). Accelerating emergence: The causal (but contextual) effect of social impact accelerators on nascent for-profit social ventures. Small Business Economics, 61(1), 389–413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-022-00680-z
44.
KlarinA.SusenoY. (2023). An integrative literature review of social entrepreneurship research: Mapping the literature and future research directions. Business & Society, 62(3), 565–611. https://doi.org/10.1177/00076503221101611
45.
KostovaT.ZaheerS. (1999). Organizational legitimacy under conditions of complexity: The case of the multinational enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 24(1), 64–81. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1999.1580441
46.
KuilmanJ. G.LiJ. (2009). Grades of membership and legitimacy spillovers: Foreign Banks in Shanghai, 1847–1935. Academy of Management Journal, 52(2), 229–245. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.37308018
47.
LallS. A.ParkJ. (2022). How social ventures grow: Understanding the role of philanthropic grants in scaling social entrepreneurship. Business & Society, 61(1), 3–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650320973434
48.
LiJ.YangJ. Y.YueD. R. (2007). Identity, community, and audience: How wholly owned foreign subsidiaries gain legitimacy in China. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 175–190. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.24162209
49.
LiJ.ZhaoM.XuC. (2023). Social enterprises and benefit corporations in China. In PeterH.Vargas VasserotC.Alcalde SilvaJ. (Eds.), The international handbook of social enterprise law: Benefit corporations and other purpose-driven companies (pp. 497–534). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-14216-1_24
50.
LiX.BosmaN. (2025). Institutional theory in social entrepreneurship: A review and consideration of ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 200(3), 529–556. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-024-05882-x
51.
LiX.SarpongD. (2024). Exploring the resource mobilization process in social enterprises in China: A bricolage and social exchange perspective. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 30(10), 2674–2700. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-01-2023-0043
52.
LiX.CaiW.BosmaN. (2025). The role of cognitive legitimacy in social entrepreneurship: A multilevel analysis. Small Business Economics, 64(2), 549–573. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-024-00919-x
53.
LiuS.WuH. (2016). The ecology of organizational growth: Chinese law firms in the age of globalization. American Journal of Sociology, 122(3), 798–837. https://doi.org/10.1086/688853
54.
LuoJ.ZhuoW.XuB. (2024). The bigger, the better? Optimal NGO size of human resources and governance quality of entrepreneurship in circular economy. Management Decision, 62(8), 2472–2509. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-03-2023-0325
55.
MaoD.ChenJ.HuS. (2025). Urban-rural economic inequality: Is social entrepreneurship the solution?China Agricultural Economic Review, 17(4), 663–678. https://doi.org/10.1108/CAER-12-2023-0371
56.
Mendoza-AbarcaK. I.AnokhinS.ZamudioC. (2015). Uncovering the influence of social venture creation on commercial venture creation: A population ecology perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(6), 793–807. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2015.04.003
OmriH.OmriA.AbbassiA. (2025). Entrepreneurship and human well-being: A study of standard of living and quality of life in developing countries. Social Indicators Research, 177, 313–344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-025-03516-x
59.
PachecoJ. N.TurroA.UrbanoD. (2025). Open social innovation: A systematic literature review and future research agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 216, 124160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2025.124160
60.
PanX.ChenX.QiuS. (2025). Sink or swim in the R&D pool: The relationship between peer density and streamlining. R&D Management, 55(1), 185–202. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12691
61.
PeiferJ. L.LiuJ. (2025). Evaluations of organizational configurations: Does hybrid form or logic content matter?Business & Society, 65(3), 579–619. https://doi.org/10.1177/00076503251324062
62.
RadoynovskaN. (2025). Expectations meet reality: Leader sensemaking and enactment of stakeholder engagement in multistakeholder social enterprises. Business & Society, 64(6), 1185–1228. https://doi.org/10.1177/00076503231221537
63.
SalimathM. S.JonesR. (2011). Population ecology theory: Implications for sustainability. Management Decision, 49(6), 874–910. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741111143595
64.
SantosF.PacheA.-C.BirkholzC. (2015). Making hybrids work: Aligning business models and organizational design for social enterprises. California Management Review, 57(3), 36–58. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2015.57.3.36
65.
SavagetP.OzcanP.PitsisT. (2025). Social entrepreneurs as ecosystem catalysts: The dynamics of forming and withdrawing from a self-sustaining ecosystem. Journal of Management Studies, 62(1), 246–278. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13055
66.
SenguptaS.SahayA.CroceF. (2018). Conceptualizing social entrepreneurship in the context of emerging economies: An integrative review of past research from BRIICS. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 14(4), 771–803. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-017-0483-2
SongC.WangE. L. (2024). Understanding regional growth of social enterprises: The art of the state. Management Decision, 62(3), 986–1007. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-01-2022-0096
69.
SpanuthA.UrbanoD. (2024). Exploring social enterprise legitimacy within ecosystems from an institutional approach: A systematic literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 26(2), 211–231. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12349
70.
TasavoriM.KwongC.PruthiS. (2018). Resource bricolage and growth of product and market scope in social enterprises. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 30(3–4), 336–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2017.1413775
WangL.MadhokA.Xiao LiS. (2014). Agglomeration and clustering over the industry life cycle: Toward a dynamic model of geographic concentration. Strategic Management Journal, 35(7), 995–1012. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2141
73.
WeerakoonC.McMurrayA. J. (2024). Fostering social enterprise innovativeness: The interplay of learning, market orientation and stakeholder engagement within a capability framework. Social Enterprise Journal, 20(5), 888–920. https://doi.org/10.1108/SEJ-11-2023-0147
74.
XiaoY.HsuA. J. C.AuK.LiuZ. (2026). Bringing the founders back in: How does prosocial motivation affect social enterprises’ organizational legitimacy?Journal of Business Research, 204, 115837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2025.115837
75.
XuD.LuJ. W.GuQ. (2014). Organizational forms and multi-population dynamics: Economic transition in China. Administrative Science Quarterly, 59(3), 517–547. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839214541866
76.
YangQ.BaiY.YangX.WeiH. (2024). How digital inclusive finance promotes social entrepreneurship: Evidence from 282 cities in China. Heliyon, 10(10), e31387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e31387
77.
YeM. (2021). Building an enabling legal environment: Laws and policies on social enterprises in China. Journal of Asian Public Policy, 14(2), 182–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/17516234.2020.1824263
78.
YinJ.ChenH. (2019). Dual-goal management in social enterprises: Evidence from China. Management Decision, 57(6), 1362–1381. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-02-2017-0170
79.
YuX. (2011). Social enterprise in China: Driving forces, development patterns and legal framework. Social Enterprise Journal, 7(1), 9–32. https://doi.org/10.1108/17508611111130130
80.
ZhangX.LuoW.XiangD. (2025). Strategic emerging industries and innovation: Evidence from China. International Review of Economics & Finance, 98, 103858. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2025.103858
81.
ZhengM.FengG.-F.JiangR.-A.ChangC.-P. (2023). Does environmental, social, and governance performance move together with corporate green innovation in China?Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(4), 1670–1679. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3211
82.
ZhengW.ChenY.DaiY.WuY. J.HuM. (2022). Why do good deeds go unnoticed? A perspective on the legitimacy Judgment of social entrepreneurship in China. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 34(9–10), 788–806. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2022.2071995
83.
ZhouT.GanJ. (2022). Institutional investors’ site visits and corporate social responsibility: Evidence from China. Economic Modelling, 115, 105965. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2022.105965
ZhuangX.WangC.LiB. (2025). Navigating mission drift in social enterprises: The interplay of social entrepreneurs’ dual “business facet” and governance structure. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 37(5–6), 714–739. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2025.2460169
