Social entrepreneurship in contrasting national contexts: an exploratory analysis of Germany and Nigeria

Purpose Grounded in institutional theory, this paper investigates how contrasting institutional environments shape the strategic focus and evolution of social entrepreneurship. By comparing Germany (a mature welfare state) and Nigeria (a nation with significant institutional voids), this study aims to theoretically and empirically map how varying state capacities dictate the function of social enterprise. Design/methodology/approach To analyze these contextual differences at scale, this study uses a structural topic model on a unique corpus of 335,131 words derived from the official narratives of 196 Ashoka Fellows (83 Germany and 113 Nigeria). Topic prevalence was modeled as a function of the interaction between fellowship year and country to test for theoretically relevant diverging trends. Findings The analysis uncovers two distinct models of social innovation. In Nigeria, a substitutive model prevails, with thematic topics focused on filling gaps in foundational services like healthcare, sanitation and justice. In Germany, a complementary model is dominant, with themes centered on reforming existing systems and addressing postindustrial challenges like migrant integration and sustainable consumption. This study finds statistically significant evidence that these two ecosystems are evolving in different directions over time, particularly in the domains of political policy engagement and environmental advocacy. Practical implications The findings serve as a crucial reminder for practitioners, funders and support organizations to avoid a “one-size-fits-all” approach to social entrepreneurship. Effective support must be context-aware, tailored to the specific role (substitutive or complementary) that social entrepreneurs play within their national system. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper offers the first empirical, large-scale comparison of the thematic content and evolution of social enterprise ecosystems in the Global North and Global South. Its primary value lies in proposing and providing initial empirical grounding for a new theoretical framework – substitutive vs complementary social innovation – that enhances our understanding of contextualized social entrepreneurship.