Аннотации:
The purpose of the scientific article is to analyze the essence of social entrepreneurship and its role in
building a social state.
The results of the study refute the thesis that any state is socially in its essence. Although social policy can
be implemented by different methods, and the existence of different models of the social state is a recognized
fact, however, different methods and ways may form the essence of the state, which generally corresponds
to its social direction.
The conducted research allows to state the multidimensional role of social entrepreneurship: 1) as a tool
for increasing entrepreneurial activity; 2) as an institution of civil society and a means of self-organization of
individuals to solve pressing social problems; 3) as a basis for building a social state.
Attention is focused on the fact that the institution of social entrepreneurship can be recognized as inter sectoral and located on the border of economic, social and legal systems. As an institution of the economic
system, social entrepreneurship is a type of entrepreneurship as such, contributes to increasing economic
potential and implementing entrepreneurial initiative. As an institution of the social system, social entre preneurship is aimed at self-organizing individuals to jointly solve the problems of a particular community,
since on the ground the problems and needs of the community are much more obvious. At the same time,
in the legal system, social entrepreneurship can be considered: 1) in the aspect of civil society, as one of the
many means for building a social state governed by the rule of Law; 2) as a component of the subject of legal
regulation in economic law.
It is noted that now the legislation of Ukraine does not provide a legal definition of Social Entrepreneur ship, its features are not highlighted and the procedure for carrying out such activities is not regulated. Regu lation of social entrepreneurship is carried out within the framework of general regulation of entrepreneurial
activity, which does not contribute to its effectiveness, since its purpose and the procedure for using income
differ significantly.
It is concluded that in order to activate social entrepreneurship in wartime and during the country’s recov ery from military aggression, the state needs to minimize the use of coercive mechanisms in the economic
sphere, expanding the use of legal incentives as much as possibl
