PROBLEMS AND DEVELOPMENT PROSPECTS OF SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN KAZAKHSTAN

Social entrepreneurship is gaining popularity throughout the world. Basically, experts have identified four features of social entrepreneurship. Firstly, it is the social impact, i.e. the activity of the company should be aimed at mitigating the existing social problems. Secondly, it must be characterized by innovation, that is, in their work the company must use new and unique methods of work. Thirdly, it must have signs of financial stability. Finally, the fourth feature is scalability, i.e. the possibility to transfer their skills to other companies, markets and even countries. The adoption of a new law in Kazakhstan Republic of Kazakhstan "On public-private partnership" provides for the removal of restrictions on the areas of public-private partnership, to create all conditions for the effective implementation of social projects, which leads to an increase in the number of social entrepreneurs. Within the framework of the idea of "Almaty - the city of social entrepreneurship" in Almaty Management University on the basis of the Centre for Social Entrepreneurship created "ecosystem of support" of social entrepreneurship.

1. Batalina M., Moskovskaja A., Taradina L. (2008). Obzor opyta i koncepcij social'nogo predprinimatel'stva s uchetom vozmozhnostej ego primenenija v sovremennoj Rossii [Review of experiences and social entrepreneurship concepts taking into account the possibities of its application in modern Russia]. Moscow: GU Graduate School of Economics.

2. Battilana, J., & Lee, M. (2014). Advancing research on hybrid organizing—Insights from the study of social enterprises. The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 397–441.

3. Defourny J., Kim S. (2011). Emerging models of social enterprise in Eastern Asia: a cross‐country analysis. Social Enterprise Journal, Vol. 7, Iss. 1, 86-111.

4. Drayton W. (2002). The Citizen Sector: Becoming as Entrepreneurial and Competitive as Business. California Management Review, Vol. 44, Iss. 3, 120-133.

5. Hartigan, P. (2006). It's about people, not profits. Business Strategy Review, Vol. 17, Iss. 4, 42-45.

6. Kalinov A. (2017). About Social Entrepreneurship - Research, Methods and Problems. Entrepreneurship, 5(2) , 16-31.

7. Korosec R., Berman E. (2006). Municipal Support for Social Entrepreneurship. Public Administration Review, Vol. 66, Issue 3, 448–462.

8. Martin R., Osberg S. (2007). Social Entrepreneurship: The Case for Definition. Stanford Social Innovation Review, Retrieved from http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/social_entrepreneurship_the_case_for_definition

9. Osborne D, Gaebler T. (1992). Reinventing the Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector. Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA.

10. Pache A., Chowdhury I. . (2012). Social entrepreneurs as institutionally embedded entrepreneurs: Toward a new model of social entrepreneurship education. Academy of management Learning & Education, 11 (3), 494-510.

11. Pritvorova T., Ayaganova M. . (2017). The Nonprofit Sector as a Basis for Social Entrepreneurship in Kazakhstan: Potential and Models. Revista ESPACIOS. Vol. 38, № 49, 10.

12. Sestrenskij O. (2008). Social'noe predprinimatel'stvo: sila novyh idej [Social Entrepreneurship: the Power of New Ideas]. Social Responsibility, №22.

13. Townsend D., Hart T. (2008). Perceived institutional ambiguity and the choice of organizational form in social entrepreneurial ventures. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, Vol. 32, Issue 4, 685-700.

14. Vidović A. (2018). Managing the development of social entrepreneurship. Economy and Market Communication Review, Vol. 8, No. 1, 86-99.

15. Zeitlow J.T. (2001). Social entrepreneurship: Managerial, finance, and marketing aspects. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, Vol. 9, 19-43.