1. Introduction

Youth-driven social enterprises are emerging as transformative actors in sustainable development, uniquely positioned to address pressing global challenges such as climate change, inequality and youth unemployment. Blending innovation with social purpose, these ventures empower young people to co-create community-rooted solutions through mission-driven, hybrid business models. Research affirms that such enterprises strengthen local economic resilience, promote inclusive growth and meaningfully advance the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (Czyżewska et al., 2025; de Villiers Scheepers et al., 2021). Their success is often linked to enabling ecosystems that include financial access, mentorship and entrepreneurial education (Ramasamy et al., 2024; Gali et al., 2020). Moreover, youth-led social innovation has been found to outperform traditional institutions in responsiveness and adaptability, often catalysing grass-roots empowerment and systems change (Littlewood and Holt, 2018). These ventures are increasingly recognized as embedded within broader social innovation ecosystems, where youth entrepreneurship drives inclusive, sustainable development (Sampaio and Dias, 2024; Enaifoghe et al., 2024; OECD, 2022).

Nowhere is this potential more urgent and promising than in the Asia-Pacific region. As home to the world’s largest youth population, the region carries a powerful demographic dividend. Yet high rates of youth unemployment, informality and socio-economic inequality persist, constraining the full realization of this potential (Halid et al., 2023; Zahid et al., 2025). These challenges are exacerbated by environmental degradation and macroeconomic volatility, while traditional economic models centred on wage-based employment or public-sector expansion have struggled to accommodate the creativity and aspirations of young people. In response, youth entrepreneurship and social innovation have gained momentum as a strategic pathway towards inclusive, sustainable development. Studies from emerging economies show that when financial viability, environmental awareness and innovation are integrated, youth-led enterprises can become key drivers of sustainable growth (Aguirre Benalcázar et al., 2025).

Youth-led social enterprises typically adopt hybrid business models that merge commercial viability with social and environmental objectives (Martin and Osberg, 2007; Raimi and Khudoykulov, 2025). In this context, hybrid refers to business models that combine revenue-generating commercial activities while simultaneously advancing social and environmental objectives, enabling enterprises to pursue financial sustainability while delivering societal impact. In settings where public service delivery is weak or markets fail to meet essential needs, such hybridity becomes critical (London and Hart, 2004). The global SDG framework introduced in 2015 further validated this model, aligning the goals of social enterprises with five interlinked pillars — People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace and Partnerships (United Nations, 2015; Sachs, 2015). These enterprises seek to create multidimensional value and systemic change, rather than simply maximizing profits.

Although the literature recognizes the contribution of social entrepreneurship to sustainable development, it provides limited insight into the specific business-model mechanisms through which youth-led enterprises generate measurable SDG outcomes (Roundy et al., 2018; Díaz-Sarachaga and Ariza-Montes, 2022). The present study addresses this knowledge gap by examining how youth-led social enterprises in the Asia-Pacific region operationalize sustainable development in practice, through business-model design, strategic partnerships and context-specific impact pathways.

The inquiry is structured around four guiding research questions: (i) How do youth-led social enterprises integrate SDG objectives into their business models? (ii) What strategic patterns emerge in how these enterprises balance mission and market? (iii) What are the contributions across the 5Ps among these social enterprises? (iv) What are the constraints and practical limitations of these social enterprises?

This research contributes to the literature in three ways. First, it shows how youth-led enterprises act as problem-solvers, inclusive employers and sustainable innovators, delivering impact across the 5Ps. Second, through case-based analysis, it demonstrates how innovative business models translate into tangible outcomes, including poverty reduction, environmental protection and skills development. Third, it identifies the structural barriers — such as financing gaps, fragmented regulation and weak support ecosystems — that must be addressed to scale these initiatives effectively. In doing so, the paper enhances both the theoretical and the practical understanding of youth-led entrepreneurship as a lever for sustainable development in the Asia-Pacific.

2. Methodology

This study adopts an integrative literature review methodology, enabling the structured synthesis of theoretical, empirical and policy-oriented insights within a single analytical framework (Adams et al., 2017; Raimi and Khudoykulov, 2025). This approach is well suited to interdisciplinary research on social entrepreneurship and sustainable development, where evidence spans fields such as management, development studies and public policy. Alongside the literature synthesis, the study incorporates case-based analysis of five youth-led social enterprises in the Asia-Pacific region — Hapinoy (Philippines), Green Monday (China, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region), Siam Organic (Thailand), ECO Bali Recycling (Indonesia), and Know One, Teach One (KOTO) (Viet Nam) — to ground conceptual insights in practice. The selection of five cases reflects a purposive, theory-building design rather than statistical generalization. In multiple-case research, analytical sufficiency is achieved through theoretical replication and variation across cases rather than sample size. Each enterprise represents a distinct sustainable business model and institutional context, providing a diverse yet comparable set of examples. This allows cross-case comparison and analytical generalization, consistent with established case-study methodology (Eisenhardt, 1989; Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007; Yin, 2018).

2.1 Data sources

The study draws on peer-reviewed journal articles indexed in Scopus and Web of Science, complemented by authoritative policy and institutional reports from organizations such as the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the International Labour Organization (ILO), the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP). In line with the case-oriented focus, additional data were obtained from credible case documentation, including enterprise reports, development bank case notes and reputable practitioner-oriented publications. Sources were selected based on their relevance to social enterprise business models, SDG implementation and 5Ps impacts (People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace, Partnerships) within the Asia-Pacific region.

2.2 Case selection and analytical framework

The five cases were selected using purposive sampling, based on three criteria: (i) clear identification as social enterprises operating in the Asia-Pacific region; (ii) documented contributions to one or more SDGs; and (iii) demonstrable business-model innovation addressing social or environmental challenges. Two complementary frameworks guide the analysis. The Business Model Canvas is used to examine how each enterprise structures its value proposition, key activities, resources, partnerships and revenue mechanisms (Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010). The Theory of Change framework is then applied to trace causal pathways linking enterprise activities to outputs, outcomes and longer-term development impacts across the 5Ps (Mayne, 2017, 2023). Together, these frameworks clarify how Asia-Pacific social enterprises operationalize sustainability within their business models and translate entrepreneurial action into measurable SDG-related outcomes.

3. Conceptual and theoretical foundations

Social enterprises operate as hybrid organizations that combine commercial strategies with explicit social objectives (Defourny and Nyssens, 2010; Battilana and Lee, 2014). This hybridity allows them to scale innovative solutions while remaining mission-driven, but it also brings governance and legitimacy challenges (Ebrahim et al., 2014). From the perspective of institutional theory, social enterprises adapt to their environments by responding to normative, regulatory and cultural pressures (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983). In many Asia-Pacific contexts, where institutions are often fragmented or underdeveloped, youth-led social enterprises rely on informal norms, community trust and partnerships to sustain operations (Desa, 2012; Raimi and Khudoykulov, 2025).

Sustainable business models further develop this logic by embedding social and environmental goals into value-creation, delivery and capture processes (Bocken et al., 2014; Schaltegger et al., 2016). Tools such as the triple-layered business model canvas highlight how economic, social and ecological value can reinforce one another, reducing trade-offs (Joyce and Paquin, 2016). The cases chosen from the Asia-Pacific region clearly demonstrate this integration through inclusive employment, ethical supply chains, circular systems and skills-building.

The SDGs offer a complementary policy framework that aligns well with these models. By emphasizing interconnected development outcomes, the SDGs promote integrated and systemic solutions (Le Blanc, 2015; Sachs et al., 2019). Youth-led social enterprises embody this logic, addressing unemployment, inequality and environmental degradation simultaneously. Their capacity to generate impact across multiple SDG targets underscores the role of sustainable business models as practical vehicles for translating global goals into actionable, context-sensitive outcomes on the ground.

3.1 Youth-led Asia-Pacific social enterprise cases

Across the Asia-Pacific, youth-led social enterprises exemplify how innovative models align with the SDGs and the 5Ps framework. Emerging as responses to local socio-economic and environmental pressures, these ventures often adopt hybrid or “serve-and-survive” structures to balance financial viability with mission-driven impact (Littlewood and Holt, 2018). Informed by social entrepreneurship theory, these enterprises leverage innovation and community engagement to deliver context-specific, scalable solutions (Dees, 1998; Zahra et al., 2009). Regional evidence indicates that youth-led experimentation in inclusive employment, circular models and skills development transforms social entrepreneurship from a mere development tool into a dynamic, locally grounded strategy for long-term sustainability (Díaz-Sarachaga and Ariza-Montes, 2022). By integrating economic and social objectives, these young entrepreneurs demonstrate that profitability and purpose can be mutually reinforcing rather than contradictory.

Hapinoy (Philippines) empowers women micro-retailers by enhancing the traditional sari-sari store model with microfinance, digital tools and business training. Rather than displacing informal systems, it integrates social impact into its revenue model through multi-sector partnerships (ADB, 2016; London and Hart, 2004). This approach advances SDGs 1, 5 and 8 by bolstering income stability and gender empowerment (Dacanay, 2019). Guided by Theory of Change, its inputs, retail aggregation and collaboration foster resilient livelihoods, as evidenced by case studies. Hapinoy exemplifies how inclusive, youth-driven enterprises leverage local networks to align People, Prosperity and Partnerships within the 5Ps framework, demonstrating that grass-roots economic empowerment is a sophisticated, locally grounded strategy for achieving long-term sustainable development.

Green Monday (China, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region) illustrates how social enterprises influence environmental outcomes by shifting consumption habits. By integrating plant-based innovation, retail and advocacy, it renders sustainable diets accessible and socially acceptable (Poore and Nemecek, 2018; Willett et al., 2019). The model advances SDGs 12, 13 and 3 by prioritizing behavioural change over production reform (Green Monday, 2021). Through institutional partnerships and consumer engagement, the enterprise reduces ecological footprints, though specific emissions data lack independent verification. Within the 5Ps framework, Green Monday’s impact is most pronounced across Planet and People, driven by strategic partnerships with schools and businesses. This demonstrates that multi-sector collaboration can operationalize climate action by embedding sustainability into everyday choices.

Siam Organic (Thailand) demonstrates how sustainable agriculture drives poverty alleviation and environmental progress. Equipping smallholders with organic skills and exporting premium “Jasberry” rice raises incomes while reducing chemical dependency (ADB, 2017). This model advances SDGs 1, 2 and 12 by integrating livelihood security with responsible production (Schaltegger et al., 2016). Its innovation stems from reorganizing traditional value chains through ethical sourcing and market coordination. Guided by Theory of Change, Siam Organic leverages knowledge-sharing and partnerships to foster resilient farming systems, though formal impact assessments remain limited. Within the 5Ps framework, the enterprise bridges Planet and Prosperity via robust partnerships, proving that reconfiguring market access can operationalize sustainability for marginalized producers.

ECO Bali (Indonesia) demonstrates how community-rooted circular models address environmental degradation and unemployment. By integrating waste collection, recycling and education, it reduces reliance on landfills while generating local jobs (Geissdoerfer et al., 2018; OECD, 2022). The enterprise advances SDGs 11, 12 and 13, with secondary benefits for SDGs 8 and 14 through marine waste reduction (Eco Bali, 2023). ECO Bali’s innovation lies in adapting service delivery to regions with weak municipal infrastructure, linking grass-roots participation to sustainable livelihoods. While its environmental logic is robust, the absence of third-party verification for waste outcomes limits measurable impact claims. Within the 5Ps framework, the model effectively integrates Planet and People, underpinned by active partnerships that bridge the gap between waste management and social inclusion.

KOTO — “Know One, Teach One” (Viet Nam) exemplifies how vocational training creates pathways out of poverty for marginalized youth. Integrating hospitality training with income-generating operations provides practical skills, mentorship and job placements to foster social inclusion (OECD, 2022; Sen, 1999). The model advances SDGs 4, 8 and 10, while promoting Peace through social cohesion (Dredge, 2016). Guided by Theory of Change, KOTO links structured training and employer networks to job readiness and societal integration. While programme outcomes are well-documented, long-term data on generational income mobility remain limited. Within the 5Ps framework, KOTO’s impact is most pronounced across People and Peace, underpinned by sustained partnerships with the hospitality industry, demonstrating that inclusive education can operationalize long-term economic and social stability.

4. Findings and discussion

4.1 RQ1. How do youth-led social enterprises integrate SDG objectives into their business models?

Youth-led social enterprises in the Asia-Pacific embed SDG objectives directly into their core business models, ensuring that social and environmental goals shape operations rather than serve as superficial commitments. Across cases, impact is integrated into how value is created and captured. For instance, Green Monday promotes plant-based consumption to address climate and health challenges (SDGs 3, 12 and 13), while Hapinoy bolsters micro-retailers through financial services and training (SDGs 1, 5 and 8). By using revenue-generating models instead of relying on donors, these ventures pursue poverty reduction and climate action through sustainable business frameworks and Theory of Change analysis. This alignment of mission and market logic enables the integration of SDG objectives across all operational facets, from partnerships to customer engagement, demonstrating that sustainability is commercially viable when grounded in purposeful, inclusive enterprise strategies.

4.2 RQ2. What strategic patterns emerge in how these enterprises balance mission and market?

Four strategic patterns emerge from these cases, illustrating diverse methods for balancing mission and market. First, inclusive market enablers (Hapinoy) strengthen local economies by upgrading informal retail systems. Second, system builders (Siam Organic and ECO Bali) restructure agricultural and waste value chains to embed social and environmental outcomes into commercial activity. Third, behaviour shapers (Green Monday) use retail innovation and education to shift consumer norms towards sustainability. Fourth, human capital models (KOTO) link vocational training directly to employment pathways for marginalized youth. In each instance, commercial strategies reinforce rather than dilute social missions. These enterprises achieve sustainability not through compromise but through strategic coherence, where the business model itself serves as the primary mechanism for delivering impact at scale. This alignment ensures that profitability and purpose remain mutually reinforcing.

4.3 RQ3. What are the contributions across the 5Ps among these enterprises?

The five enterprises provide varied, interconnected contributions across the 5Ps. People outcomes are central to KOTO and Hapinoy through training and livelihood support that enhance social mobility. Planet contributions are driven by Green Monday, ECO Bali and Siam Organic through plant-based innovation, circular waste management and organic agriculture. Regarding Prosperity, Hapinoy, Siam Organic and ECO Bali foster income generation for micro-retailers and farmers. Peace is supported indirectly through youth employment and reduced social exclusion in marginalized contexts. Finally, Partnerships are foundational; each venture relies on cross-sector collaboration to scale impact and ensure operational effectiveness. Together, these models demonstrate a multidimensional impact: progress in one domain, such as income, reinforces outcomes in others, including health, education and regional stability.

4.4 RQ4. What are the constraints and practical limitations of these social enterprises?

Despite their innovations, youth-led social enterprises in the Asia-Pacific region continue to face persistent structural constraints. One of the most significant challenges is limited access to patient and blended finance, which is essential for hybrid organizations that generate both financial and social returns but often operate with longer impact horizons than conventional firms. Traditional financial markets frequently undervalue social and environmental outcomes, leaving many social enterprises undercapitalized (Nicholls and Pharoah, 2008; OECD, 2022). Regulatory fragmentation also complicates operations. Because social enterprises typically operate across multiple policy domains, including labour, environmental management and trade, they often face complex compliance requirements and administrative burdens that hinder growth (Battilana and Lee, 2014; Doherty et al., 2014). Furthermore, many youth-led ventures operate with limited institutional capacity, which constrains their ability to scale operations or navigate regulatory environments effectively. As these organizations expand, they may also encounter tensions between growth and mission fidelity, particularly when maintaining inclusivity, community engagement and environmental standards becomes operationally demanding (Ebrahim et al., 2014). These constraints highlight the importance of enabling regulatory frameworks, supportive entrepreneurial ecosystems and impact-aligned financing mechanisms. Strengthening these structural supports is crucial to enabling youth-led social enterprises to move beyond successful pilot initiatives towards scalable, resilient solutions that deliver sustained progress towards the SDGs across the Asia-Pacific region.

5. Conclusion and policy implications

This study highlights how Asia-Pacific youth-led social enterprises operationalize the SDGs through business models that integrate social and environmental objectives. Across five cases, impact stems from context-specific value creation and revenue generation rather than symbolic alignment. These ventures adopt strategic approaches across the 5Ps, tailored to their specific problem domains. Evidence suggests that mission-market integration is a structural feature of effective design rather than a trade-off. Cross-sector partnerships emerge as essential enablers, bridging institutional gaps and enhancing legitimacy. Conversely, persistent barriers, such as regulatory fragmentation and limited patient finance, shape how these enterprises adapt. Ultimately, the study affirms a context-sensitive, practice-based model of youth-driven sustainable development that translates global goals into tangible, scalable regional impact.

The study suggests several critical implications for Asia-Pacific policymakers and practitioners. First, regulatory frameworks must recognize the hybrid nature of social enterprises, thereby reducing sectoral fragmentation and lowering entry barriers. Second, the scarcity of suitable capital necessitates a shift towards patient and blended finance; development banks should prioritize risk-tolerant, SDG-aligned funding over short-term returns. Third, governments should act as ecosystem conveners, facilitating multi-sector collaboration rather than relying on subsidies. Tailored support, such as market access for agri-value chains or awareness campaigns for consumption-based models, is vital. Finally, impact assessments must move beyond rigid metrics to evaluate contextual relevance across the 5Ps. For practitioners, integrating mission and revenue logic from the outset enhances credibility and scalability. Ultimately, aligning policy instruments with these operational realities will unlock the transformative potential of youth-led enterprises as drivers of regional sustainable development.