As the cold weather and the police riot shields moved in, so the bedraggled protestors gradually moved out of Zucotti Park, Trafalgar Square, and other global centres, leaving only the most hardcore (and hardline) to brave the blizzards in the name of the global 99 percent. 

In their absence, the global news cycle has shifted focus to more current issues; Republican primaries and Iranian uranium, but this does not mean that the protests, which at their peak involved over 2,000 towns and cities, were a mere flash in the pan.

While cynics suggest that Occupy Wall Street (OWS) and its global copycats are nothing more than a cacophony of disgruntled outcasts who will fall from public consciousness as quickly as they have entered it, a look at political rhetoric following the protests suggests that this is not likely. Barack Obama repeatedly used the rhetoric of the “99%” and the “1%” in a recent speech attacking rising income inequality. Ed Milliband, the leader of Britain’s Labour Party, made a speech during the height of the protests where he referred to two types of corporations, the ‘producer’ and the ‘predator’ and encouraged government incentives for the former and sanctions for the latter.

Policy looks to be following this rhetoric. The US and the UK are in the process of passing and implementing new regulation over the financial industry, and protests have emboldened public figures who want to interpret these rules more strictly (see the rise to prominence of Elizabeth Warren in the US). In Europe, a tax on financial transactions looks likely to serve both as a band-aid to the Euro debt crises and a punitive imposition on the financial services industry.

The learning is simple. Corporate myopia damages society. Society seeks revenge on corporate greed in two ways:

Firstly, individuals take their business elsewhere. Armed with new social media tools such as Good Guide and Brand Karma, consumers increasingly have the knowledge they need to buy responsibly, and judging by the recent proliferation of corporate sustainability initiatives, smart businesses are taking this development seriously. There is also growing popular scrutiny of investment practices, as groups such as the UK’s Fair Pensions give a voice to citizens who want their savings and pension funds invested in a socially beneficial way.

Secondly, society as a whole agitates for policy measures that will curtail this selfish and damaging behavior in the future. Given the valid fear which corporations have of such regulation, which is often well-meaning but poorly targeted and inconsistently implemented, they would do well to self-police and start behaving in a way that will secure them loyalty and appreciation from the public, rather than resentment and opprobrium.

Long-term responsible corporate behavior is not a selfless sacrifice either. Wells Fargo, which had virtually no investment in the toxic derivatives that brought the system to the brink in 2008, has risen to become the largest US bank by market capitalization. Berkshire Hathaway, which never splits stock or issues dividends in an effort to attract long-sighted investors, produced a 76% return in the last decade, versus a -11% return for the S&P 500.

So where does social enterprise fit in? Quite simply, it codifies and quantifies this commitment to shared value and long term growth. Success is measured not only by profit margins and dividends but by the extent to which you enrich and empower your customers, grow new markets, and protect the physical and social environments that you depend upon to do business. The OWS movement proves that it is not just social sector wonks that want corporations to be accountable for the effects of their business.

The social enterprise field (with growing support from academia) can give responsible businesses the tools to measure internally and communicate externally that their success is good news for everybody, news that will be rewarded by the customer, the investor and the regulator. Companies with less glittering records will be able to learn from the impacts of their more responsible peers, and will be punished in the marketplace if they fail to do so.

This is the only way that capitalism can continue to deliver progress and prosperity for all. The alternatives−inefficient regulations crowding out markets or unchecked and irresponsible corporations inflicting environmental and social havoc−are simply unthinkable.