Participação, Inclusão e Desenvolvimento Local: A Institucionalização das Empresas Sociais a partir de uma Perspectiva Comparativa - Giulia Galera
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Participação, Inclusão e Desenvolvimento Local: A Institucionalização das Empresas Sociais a partir de uma Perspectiva Comparativa - Giulia Galera






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



1 Embed 43 43


Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Participação, Inclusão e Desenvolvimento Local: A Institucionalização das Empresas Sociais a partir de uma Perspectiva Comparativa - Giulia Galera Participação, Inclusão e Desenvolvimento Local: A Institucionalização das Empresas Sociais a partir de uma Perspectiva Comparativa - Giulia Galera Presentation Transcript

  • Participation, inclusion and local development: the institutionalization of social enterprises from a comparative perspective Giulia Galera, Euricse First International Forum for Economic Democracy Lisbon, 16th and 17th November 2013
  • Main contents • • • • • • Background What are social enterprises? What is the impact of social enterprises? Social enterprise development Social enterprises in Italy: key facts and data Success factors for social enterprises
  • Background • At the end of XIX century significant contribution of civil society organizations (coops, mutuals, and voluntary organizations) to socio-economic development o Social Economy developed especially in French-speaking countries (e.g. France and Belgium) o Widespread diffusion of charities and voluntary organizations in the provision of health and social services • Role of civil society organizations downsized as part of the process of constructing European welfare states
  • Background • In the bi-polar model based on Market&State, civil society organizations confined to play a minor role • From the 1970s crisis of the Market&State model and failure of reforms • Revival of civil society organizations as a bottom-up reaction to new needs arising in society o associations and charities strengthened their entrepreneurial stance o cooperatives strengthened their commitment towards the community
  • Background • Social enterprises developed to grasp a new dynamic characterizing civil society • Social enterprises evolved both: o from old Social Economy organizational forms following their commitment in new activities addressed also to non members o as new types of enterprises explicitly aimed at pursuing social goals • In Europe, a gradual convergence towars a common definition of social enterprise has taken place over the last years
  • What are social enterprises? Main dim ension Ent repreneurial/ econom ic dimension General definit ion Social enterprises (SEs) are engaged in the carrying out of stable and continuous economic activities, and hence show the t ypical charact erist ics t hat are shared by all ent erprises. Social dimension The social dimension is defined by the aim and/or products delivered. Aim : SEs pursue the explicit social aim of serving the community or a specific group of people that shares a specific need. By promoting the general-interest, SEs overcome the traditional owner-orientation that typically distinguishes traditional cooperatives. Pr oduct : when not specifically aimed at integrating disadvantaged people to work, SEs must deliver goods/services that generate a beneficial societal impact. I nclusive governanceow nership dim ension ( social m eans) To identify needs and involve the stakeholders concerned in designing adequate solutions, SEs require peculiar ownership structures and governance models that are meant to enhance at various extents the participation of stakeholders affected by the enterprise. SEs often lim it t he dist r ibut ion of profit s. The non-profit distribution constraint is meant to ensure that the general-interest is safeguarded. The non-profit distribution constraint can be operationalized in different ways.
  • What is the impact of social enterprises? Social enterprises: o complement the supply of general-interest services (eg social services, elecricity, gas, safe drinking water, etc. ) that public agencies and for-profit enterprises fail to deliver o Italian social enterprises account for 5,000,000 users (Rapporto IRIS, 2012)
  • What is the impact of social enterprises? Social enterprises o generate new jobs in their fields of activity • Create new employment in the sectors in which they are engaged • employ unoccupied workers (women with children) o some social enterprises are specifically aimed to integrate into work disadvantaged workers • In Italy more than 30,000 disadvantaged workers are integrated by social coops (Unioncamere, 2009) o develop new forms of work organization
  • What is the impact of social enterprises? Social enterprises o contribute to a more balanced use and allocation of resources available at local level to the advantage of the community • “Internalization” of economic growth to the advantage of the entire community • community dimension allows to adjust to local contexts and take stock of local resources
  • What is the impact of social enterprises? Social enterprises • help foster social cohesion and enhance social capital o they supply goods/services that are characterized by high social potential o adopt inclusive and participatory institutional structures which stregthen trust relations among concerned stakeholders.
  • What is the impact of social enterprises? Social enterprises: • support the institutionalization of informal activities belonging to the underground economy o several social enterprise-like initiatives arise informally o Institutionalization allows irregular workers to get out of the black market
  • Stages of development • Social enterprises are a structural and global dynamic, involving countries showing various levels of economic development and welfare systems • Pattern of development and capacity to impact upon local communities depends on the interplay of various endogenous and exogenous factors o historical, cultural, and social factors o availability of supporting legal and institutional structures • 4 main stages of development of social enterprises
  • Stages of Development • Embryonic development of social-enterprise initiatives • Progressive emergence of social enterprises • Gradual consolidation • Institutionalization
  • Embryonic development of social enterprise-initiatives: CIS countries • Unrecognized needs start being addressed by self-organized groups (e.g. mental diseases; drug-addiction) • Spontaneous development of bottom-up initiatives not legally recognized as social enterprises o mostly isolated, invisible initiatives o lack of umbrella organizations • High degree of innovation and strong reliance on voluntary work • Not enabling environment: o cultural obstacles o public policies centralized/weak welfare systems/legal&fiscal constraints
  • Progressive emergence: Romania, Bulgaria, Serbia, • Social enterprises start growing in size • Entrepreneurial activity becomes more stable • Social enterprises start relying on paid staff in addition to volunteers • Networking relations grow in importance • New needs start being recognized by public providers • Social enterprises mentioned in relevant policy documents • Still predominance of cultural and/or legal/political obstacles
  • Gradual consolidation: Greece, Hungary • Gradual change in mindset o move towards the recognition of private welfare providers • Social enterprises better structured o better organized o sometimes organized in second level organizations o lobbying activity more relevant • Interaction with public policies becomes more stable • Pioneering, but often not systematic support by public authorities (e.g. grants) • New legal forms sometimes introduced, but still not fully enabling legal environment
  • Institutionalization of social enterprises: Italy, UK • Full political/legal recognition of social enterprises o legal forms designed for SEs introduced and successfully implemented o provision of welfare services contracted out by public agencies on stable basis • Social enterprises supplying welfare services recognized as welfare providers o integrated in the welfare systems/enjoy systematic public support o But: o run the maximum risk of isomorphism o sometimes decrease in autonomy o weakening of civil society engagement
  • Social enterprise development patterns Italy UK Belgium France Institutionalization Italy Belgium France Gradual consolidation Progressive emergence Embryonic social enterprise initiatives Sweden Spain Italy Sweden Spain France Belgium Italy 1970s 1980s UK Rumania Bulgaria Hungary Slovenia Germany Greece 1990s Italy UK Spain Belgium France Sweden Sweden Greece Hungary Slovenia Germany Spain Hungary Greece Germany Rumania Bulgaria Rumania Bulgaria Slovenia Ukraine Belarus Russia Armenia 2000s Ukraine Belarus Russia Armenia 2010s
  • Key facts: social enterprises in Italy Since approval of Law 381/1991 annual growth rate from 10 to 20% • in 1993: 1,479 social coops (National Cooperative Department) • in 2003: 6,159 (ISTAT) • in 2005: 7,363 (ISTAT) – 59% A-type; 32.8% B-type; 8.2% mixed or consortia In 2011 (Unioncamere): • 12,647 social cooperatives, with • 513,000 people employed • more than 30,000 disadvantaged workers integrated • more than 4,000,000 users • more than 10 million euros turnover
  • Success Factors • Key factors contributing to social enterprise development include o Adequate legal/fiscal framework o Decentralization o Networking within and among the families of the social economy o Clear partnerships with public authorities o Research
  • Thank you very much!