"recently composed songs which don't always follow traditional forms but which are not "pop"
Happy to accept that fully Howard but how can they be "widely accepted" by a dwindling 'folk scene' that only has a claimed 180 clubs - who are the 'widely'
That some folkies do accept them as such doesn't mean a damned thing in the grand order of things   
Acceptability to whom ?
The future of folk music lies in it being recognised as such in all its aspects - once that has been established you can begin to rebuild what was once a very healthy movement based on the real thing
I'm at a bit of a loss here - can you specify what songs you mean and why they resemble folk
I have no problem with songs made using folk structures and having the same objective - storytelling, communication of experiences and emotions using narratively structured words -
For research purposes, they will never be folk songs until they go through a process, but that's beside the point
In the main, newly composed songs using such techniques have always been accepted
People began turning away in their thousands when they attended clubs which were dominated by songs that bore no resemblance to those they thought they would hear - the homogeneity had disappeared their choice of what they wished to listen to had been removed, the magazines, shops and labels disappeared
That continues to be the case
You can hardly claim that the shift has been a success and our chance of passing on what gave some of us a lifetime to pleasure and stimulation to the next generation was severely damaged
Try applying this attitude to any other musical form - well it "sounds a bit like" jazz, classical music, blues, pop..... and see how ridiculous it sounds
What's so different about folk song ?
Jim Carroll