Search results

There is still no universal definition of the third sector in Europe, but it can be seen as including all types of non-governmental not-for-profit entities such as non-profit organizations, mutuals, cooperatives, social enterprises and foundations. This article attempts to make sense of the current shifting conceptualization of the third sector in Europe. It is based on short country summaries of the images and concepts of the third sector in 13 European countries by EMES Network’s members, first presented in 2008 (Defourny and Pestoff, 2008; nine of them were recently revised and are found in the appendix to this article.). The perception and development of the third sector in Europe is closely related to the other major social governance institutions/mechanisms, like the market, state and community and through the third sector’s interaction with them. Moreover, many third sector organizations (TSOs) overlap with these other social institutions, resulting in varying degrees of hybridity and internal tensions experienced by them. TSOs can generate resources from their activities on the market, by providing services in partnership with the state and/or by promoting the interests of a given community or group. The country overviews document a growing professionalization of TSOs in most countries and a growing dependency of public funds to provide services. This has important theoretical and practical implications for orienting the articles included in this book. Thus, it can provide a key for better understanding the discussion and analysis in the remainder of this volume.

To study some of the difficulties involved in defining the nature of social enterprises and the environments in which they operate in order to provide a framework to show how and where social enterprises fit in the overall social economy.

The complexity of organizations involved in the spectrum of the social economy is discussed in terms of the literature to show how many social enterprises in the UK and worldwide can be categorized as small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). Discusses the ambiguity prevalent in the social economy concerning the terms and concepts of “not for profit”, “non‐profit”, social enterprise and social entrepreneur and illustrates the successes, failures and difficulties of the social enterprise sector.

The four key issues which the definitional debate needs to address, comprise: voluntary participation; independence from the state; the concept of profit (profit making, appropriateness of profit making from certain activities, profit maximization, profit distribution); and ownership and corporate governance. Illustrates the points made in the article with particular reference to three case studies involving: Edinburgh Lothian Council On Alcohol (ELCA) (company limited by guarantee with charitable status); First Scottish University Credit Union Ltd (FSUCUL) (credit union); and Forth Sector (social firm).

Sorts out some of the difficulties and complexities in the definition and classification of social enterprises.

Considering in one side, the differences between the non-profits and profits entities and, in other side, given the importance of governance to monitoring the protection of the interests of the different stakeholders, this literature review aims to identify the special features of the social economy entities and its effects in the principles and guidelines of an adequate governance model for these entities.

An important conclusion after the analysis of several frameworks is that the latest approaches place less importance on formal aspects such as the governing body roles or composition. Nowadays the concerns are increasingly focused in the best ways to adopt viable strategies and business models that will ensure survival and growth of non-profit entities.

In Portugal we identified the specificities of the Portuguese third sector that is limited to the fulfilment of the legally imposed requirements to these organizations. Regarding governance aspects, Portuguese organizations are not subject to codes of good practice or if they follow them, they are designed for the for-profit sector and do not address the main concerns of the non-profit sector.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the process of green community entrepreneurship in the social economy by studying creative responses among environmental non‐profit organizations to an external fiscal shock.

A total of 12 managers of environmental non‐profit organizations were interviewed to identify and classify their responses to a single external fiscal shock. These organizations are connected by a social capital network, their national association, Green Communities Canada. The social economy and ecological economics literatures are reviewed to construct a definition of green community entrepreneurship. Interview respondents identified factors which facilitate this process.

The need for green community entrepreneurship was driven by two interrelated issues (a loss of external government funding, and an associated market collapse for residential energy audits), and facilitated by three main factors (external social capital network flows, internal human capital stocks, and strategic partnerships).

Future research should examine other social economy organizations to determine if the dynamics discovered here are unique to green community organizations delivering climate change programs or apply more generally. Policy implications include the potential for joint project creation and investment utilizing green community entrepreneurship to integrate social and ecological economy objectives.

A new conceptual framework for green community entrepreneurship is developed.

Policy actors around the world are increasingly looking to the social economy – markets explicitly oriented towards meeting social needs, usually through the third sector – to underpin livelihoods and deliver welfare services. Once considered an adjunct to markets and states, and possibly even a residual, the social economy is being seen as a legitimate player in the plural economy, able to thrive through the effort of dedicated individuals and organisations committed to ethical entrepreneurship. The assumption is that future capitalism can accommodate, perhaps even requires as recession deepens, the energies of the social economy in making new markets and meeting welfare needs. While a body of research has emerged examining the economic characteristics of social enterprises and how they succeed or not in managing the interface between market and ethical priorities, little is known about what it is like to be involved in the social economy or about what different social actors gain from the experience. However, most academic and policy thinking assumes that engagement in the social economy is both rewarding and empowering. This paper aims to fill this gap.

This paper draws on sobering case evidence from Bristol relating to the experience of social entrepreneurs, employees and volunteers.

The critical question raised by this study is whether the role of the social economy should be that of returning the socially disadvantaged back into the formal economy. The evidence in this study tends to suggest that this expectation could be misguided and overly ambitious.

The paper offers insight into the backgrounds, motivations, experiences and futures of people involved in the social economy.

This research aims to present and empirically validate a conceptual model for social economy organizations that includes organizational commitment, knowledge‐centered culture, and training as critical variables for the success of formal and informal knowledge management practices.

The research is a cross‐sectional study and involved collection of quantitative data. The sample is made up of Portuguese organizations belonging to the social economy sector. The survey consisted of 205 employees. Path analysis was applied, using maximum‐likelihood estimation procedures.

Path analysis results show that the proposed model has a good fit with the data. Training and knowledge management practices are a function of knowledge‐centered culture and organizational commitment.

The research is focused on social economy organizations, therefore generalization of results to other sectors must be cautious. Although a comprehensible model is presented, it does not cover an exhaustive list of critical factors for knowledge management. Additionally, this research is of a cross‐sectional nature, which does not capture dynamic changes.

The research contributes to the existing literature about the critical factors of knowledge management. Social economy organizations that are developing knowledge management practices should attend to the predominant type of organizational commitment and should base their training policies on a knowledge‐centered culture.

Empirical evidence obtained in this study will be of use not only to social economy organizations wanting to become knowledge management ones, but also to researchers wanting to develop a more comprehensive framework of factors that influence (positively or negatively) knowledge management, specifically within social economy organizations.

To investigate the application of the social enterprise model to the childcare sector in Scotland and develop a practical model for analysing such social enterprises.

A review of the literature of ideas on social enterprise found in official and academic literature is presented. The concept of “social enterprise” is reviewed with particular reference to features of the childcare sector that relate both generally and specifically to Scotland. Reports the results of a questionnaire survey, conducted in late 2005 and early 2006, involving 81 childcare organizations (27.0 per cent response rate).

The results indicated that about two‐thirds of the organizations operated at just one site, with playgroups tending to be local groups operating in relatively small geographical areas. Reveals that the issue of whether childcare should be free caused mixed but fairly evenly distributed responses, from strong agreement to strong disagreement, but the issue of external sources of funding and the problems involved caused the majority of respondents to agree that childcare services are unsustainable without external funding, a finding that shows that sustainability is not the same as self‐sufficiency. Concludes that childcare sector issues and social economy issues are the most significant.

Contributes to the social enterprises literature where there is a dearth of knowledge about the birth and death rates for social enterprises and where improved statistics would help in supporting sector‐related policies more effectively and understanding better the sector’s function and behaviour. Provides information that could be helpful for banks and other financial institutions that might be in a position to offer credit to these social enterprises.

Prior research has documented the importance of the state and social movements for the emergence and proliferation of alternative organizational forms. Yet, we lack a comprehensive and interactive understanding of the larger environment that sustains cooperatives and other collectivist-democratic organizations. Using the example of Brazil’s Solidarity Economy Movement, a longstanding social movement to address poverty and inequality, we describe how a multilevel ecosystem of organizations and institutions creates conditions favorable for the growth of alternative organizational forms – in this context, democratic cooperatives that the Movement calls solidarity economy enterprises (SEEs). Drawing from archival data, interviews, and a government survey of over 19,000 SEEs between 2005 and 2012, we map out the key actors at each level of the ecosystem, identifying three primary mechanisms by which these actors collectively enabled the creation and development of SEEs: (1) providing glue for action; (2) organizing for action; and (3) engaging in action. These mechanisms, in turn, allowed for greater communication and cohesion and the exchange of information and experiences among the Movement’s participants, thereby enhancing their interconnectedness and the institutionalization of their practices.