I agree with you and I am a great fan and friend of for example http://worldschildrensprize.org/
My point is that with the resources at hand (the Kinnevik empire) the freedom could be so much higher for social entrepreneurs to start ventures to deal with the most critical social problems of the world. Saving kids from prostitution and slavery in the third world is such a problem. Providing play to kids in the worlds best country to grow up in is of less importance. It’s not bad by any means, it is just that one of Sweden’s most wealthy corporations could do so much more good to communities in much more need of critical services with the same resources. Kinnevik has the resources to inspire entrepreneurs that could give life to children that otherwise would die, but they choose play instead and I think that was a strange and bad decision.

In a way I must say that I don’t agree with you. If you approach a child that is sick, starving or illiterate you can’t say “let’s play first ’cause this company in Sweden made up the rules. Then you’ll get treatment, food or a education. (If you are still alive after playing.)” It’s against common sense. But I agree with you 100% that play is a right of the child!

The worlds leading social entrepreneurs working with children have also picked up on this. For example Somaly Mam, herself a slave to prostitution as a child, now fighting to free and help children who have been forced into prostitution in her homeland of Cambodia. She rescues children, gives them food and shelter, provide schooling – and time for both free play and play therapy to help cope with the violations they have been subjected to.

So giving a child everything she or he needs can start with play as well as with food, medical care or education. As long as it doesn’t end with the one thing.