Search results

The purpose of this paper is to provide the first large data-set regression analysis to test Kerlin’s (2013) macro-institutional social enterprise framework in relation to the country social enterprise models that flow from it. Kerlin (2013) offers a conceptual framework for country social enterprise models that allows countries to retain their unique understanding of social enterprise and better understand the factors influencing its development.

This paper draws on the theory of historical institutionalism and multiple global datasets to test formal hypotheses on the relationship between macro-institutional factors and the size of the social enterprise sector across countries. Social enterprise data were obtained from the 2009 Global Entrepreneurship Monitor dataset. Hypotheses were tested using logistic hierarchical linear modeling.

Results provide support for the framework at a significant level. Nearly half of the variance in the size of the social enterprise sector can be attributed to countries-level factors. We also find that the size of the social enterprise sector varies by economic competitiveness rank, size of the welfare state and collectivist cultural orientation.

The countries included in this study are not representative of the global landscape. Researchers are encouraged to test the framework with a more representative sample of countries, including those in the Global South.

The paper includes implications for policy makers and researchers seeking to facilitate cross-regional dialogue, the transfer and support of social enterprises and research.

This paper fulfills an identified need to advance the field of social enterprise by quantitatively testing established frameworks.

This paper aims to provide a qualitative country case study of The Netherlands, adopting the macro-institutional social enterprise (MISE) framework as developed by Kerlin (2009, 2013, 2017). The research question is twofold: How does the institutional context shape the social enterprise country model in The Netherlands, and To what extent can the MISE framework be a useful tool in explaining this dynamic between the institutional context and social enterprise country model?

This research applies the MISE framework developed by Kerlin (2017), which is founded upon the historical institutionalist approach.

The analysis of the institutional context in The Netherlands shows that the country context shares most traits with the autonomous diverse model. Its institutional environment should however be more enabling for the development of social enterprises. This discrepancy is explained through the notion of political will, resulting in the suggestion that the historical institutionalist approach of the MISE framework could be expanded by a greater focus on political will.

To investigate the Dutch social enterprise country model, this paper principally relies on external sources, including surveys (McKinsey, 2016; PwC, 2016; Social Enterprise NL, 2015; 2016; 2018). This is problematic due to its subjective nature, small population size used and potential conceptual misfit with the definitions used in this research.

For academia, this paper enhances the understanding of the relations between the institutional environment and social enterprise by adding a case study of The Netherlands to the body of research around the MISE framework. Furthermore, the paper suggests to enhance the historical institutionalist approach of the MISE framework with a greater focus on political will. For advocates of social enterprises in The Netherlands, including policymakers, this paper may add to their understanding of the current developments around social enterprise in The Netherlands and possibly enhance their effectiveness of advocating for policies that are conducive to the development of social enterprises.

This research is the first in applying a universally applicable theoretical framework to the context of The Netherlands. For scholars of social enterprise in The Netherlands, it provides a comprehensive overview of developments of social enterprise in the country over recent years, as well as a thorough analysis of the current state of affairs. For international scholars of social enterprise, this research provides a case of comparison with other countries, taking into account all main institutions that shape a country and social enterprise in that country. For scholars of the MISE framework, this research offers an additional country case study that further helps improve the framework.

This paper aims to improve upon the initial quantitative assessment of Kerlin’s macro-institutional social enterprise (MISE) framework (Monroe-White et al., 2015) to test for the effect of country-level institutions on the social enterprise sector. Major improvements are the inclusion of the civil society variable and expansion of the culture component in the analysis.

By following Kerlin’s (2013) original work that draws on the theory of historical institutionalism, this paper employs multi-level regression analysis to test the effect of country-level institutional factors on organizational-level social enterprise across countries. This analysis uses new macro-level data specifically for civil society and culture components.

The initial assessment of the framework found that several country-level factors had a significant effect on the variance in the size of the social enterprise sector across countries. The analysis provided here additionally shows a significant positive influence of civil society on the size of the social enterprise sector and shows that formal institutions capture the effect of informal cultural institutions when included in the model together.

This analysis provides policymakers, development actors and researchers with a better understanding of the influence of civil society on social enterprises and the interaction between formal and informal institutional underlying factors.

This paper’s significant contribution is the addition of civil society in the MISE analysis, which was not possible before owing to lack of data, and additional cultural analysis.

The paper examines the key driving factors behind the rapid and uneven growth of social enterprises in China based on Kerlin’s Macro-Institutional Social Enterprise (MISE) model of social enterprise development, with an emphasis on testing key local institutional factors.

The study adopts the quantitative method approach. The hypotheses have been tested based on a cross-regional empirical analysis with two national datasets on China.

This study shows that among the state, market and civil society, local government support in terms of favorable policies is the sole determinant factor driving China’s social enterprise growth. On the other hand, the market is irrelevant and local civil society impedes social enterprise growth. This demonstrates that the current growth model is the result of government intervention.

The datasets have a limited sample size. We suggest that future studies may collect a larger sample size with more comprehensive information. We think this study will encourage more comparative qualitative studies at the local level to reveal the underlying mechanisms of growth.

Since government policy is the determinant factor, the quality and quantity of government-backed incubation programs and platforms would matter the most for social enterprise growth. Our study also helps social entrepreneurs understand what factors matter when they try to develop social enterprises in China. They are advised to work on aspects of gaining legal legitimacy and political support in order to grow the sector.

This conclusion suggests that professionals and practitioners should review the implications of the current growth of social enterprises in China, in terms of their sustainability, given their institutional isolation from other sectors.

Current studies have yet to thoroughly explore the role of meso- and micro-institutional factors in social enterprise development, especially in different contexts. With reference to Kerlin’s framework and the tri-sector model, this paper advances the understanding of social enterprise growth in China.

This study aims to examine the geographic, historical and institutional influences on social enterprise in a small Pacific island country.

Drawing on theoretical literature and factual materials published by reputable sources and based on local knowledge of the authors, the study considers how Fiji’s location; history; and social, economic, political and cultural institutions affect social enterprise.

Social enterprise is influenced by Fiji’s remote location and small economy, which reduces access to external information and suggests that the nation is slow to embrace new ideas. Fiji’s demographics, ethnic divisions and cultural arrangements create economic and political tensions that affect how support services and economic policies are delivered. Indians were brought to Fiji under the British colonial administration, and Fijians with Indian heritage now make up almost 40% of the population. Informal separation and growing tensions between these Fijian Indian citizens and indigenous Fijians have contributed to political instability. The resulting outmigration of skilled nonindigenous people has reduced levels of human capital and expertise. This limits Fiji’s capacity to innovate, including developing a robust social enterprise sector. Although social enterprise could be a very effective way to address social and economic problems in Fiji, it seems unlikely that the government will embrace the concept without support and encouragement from external sources, especially international aid and UN agencies.

Generalisability is not assumed with this study, as it examines only one Pacific island country; however, it is likely that the findings will apply in other small Pacific island countries having similar cultural arrangements.

This paper offers information that will assist practitioners, researchers and policymakers in understanding and negotiating complexities of the institutional environment in remote locations, especially in small Pacific island countries.

As one of the first studies of a small Pacific island country, this paper extends scholarship in this region and adds to the current understandings of social enterprise. In particular, the paper adds valuable, new knowledge of the effects of geographic location, political instability and cultural and ethnic divisions. This study is likely to be relevant for other small countries in isolated locations, especially those in the Pacific region with similar cultural environments.