ERPN: Governance (Social Enterprise) (Sub-Topic)最新文献

{"title":"Social Enterprise in Italy: Typology, Diffusion and Characteristics","authors":"C. Borzaga, Simone Poledrini, G. Galera","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3036384","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3036384","url":null,"abstract":"Italian social enterprises are not a new topic in literature. Several aspects e.g. theoretical frameworks, quality of work and job satisfaction, networking strategies, and the impact of the recent financial crisis, have been studied from many different perspectives in the last twenty years. Most of these contributions focus in particular on social cooperatives, as the most representative legal form of social enterprise in Italy. Therefore, the idea that has been spreading in literature and among scholars is that social cooperatives are the only example of social enterprise existing in Italy. Conversely, in recent years, new forms of non-profit organizations, that were traditionally based on volunteer and donor support, have started to operate as social enterprises, employing people and running commercial activities. This article, which is one of a very few works that explore this topic, is intended to answer the following research questions: i?½How many different types of SEs are there in Italy?i?½; i?½How many SEs of each type are there?i?½; i?½In what ways and to what extent do they differ from each other?i?½.","PeriodicalId":253694,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Governance (Social Enterprise) (Sub-Topic)","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127411692","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Essential Policy and Practice Considerations for Facilitating Social Enterprise: Commitment, Connections, Harm, and Accountability","authors":"J. Tyler","doi":"10.1017/9781316890714.004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316890714.004","url":null,"abstract":"There are numerous opportunities for policy interventions to clarify, enable, or perhaps even inhibit social entrepreneurship. As one example, consider the emergence and expansive growth of available social business forms, particularly of the benefit corporation, which substantially modified traditional conceptions of fiduciary duties perhaps to the point of elimination. Other policy efforts or possibilities include financing mechanisms involving public money, tax favored treatment, exemptions from securities requirements, and affording bid procurement preferences on government contracts. \u0000As an essential precursor to material policy concessions to social entrepreneurship, especially to the extent it or its enterprises compete with or seek to distinguish themselves from other market participants, several determinations must be made. These determinations have two key roles: (a) shaping whether to provide the relevant incentives or make the applicable concessions and, if so, (b) how far to go to ensure a reasonably commensurate relationship between benefits and burdens for enterprises, movements, and society. \u0000Four essential sets of questions should shape, or in some cases even dictate, how those roles are defined. Beyond policy, these sets of questions have practical implications for those who invest in, operate, and interact with social ventures. Lack of mutual clarity about any or all of these risks longer term problems for the enterprises and those involved with them but more importantly for the social benefits being sought. \u0000• What should the underlying commitment be to pursuing social results: devotion or does mere tolerance suffice? \u0000• What should the relationship be between the effort dedicated to social returns and the actually realized result? \u0000• What attention should be given to or require about social harms that might be associated with, connected to, or caused by actions taken in the pursuit of social good? \u0000• What form(s) should accountability take and what consequences, if any, should be expected for failure – not just non-compliance but less than optimal outcomes? \u0000Clarity on these matters can also help regulators and enforcement personnel as they evaluate whether/how to proceed with guidance or actions. Resolving ambiguities that exist could facilitate more and faster adoption of social business forms and other efforts to achieve worthy objectives of the social entrepreneurship movement. \u0000In some ways, this analysis also involves bringing clarity and discipline to whether “impact” and “intent to have impact” are the same or even similar.","PeriodicalId":253694,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Governance (Social Enterprise) (Sub-Topic)","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127237969","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Case for and Against Social Entrepreneurship","authors":"Dr. Rohan Bedi","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2538456","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2538456","url":null,"abstract":"This working paper highlights the case for and against Social Entrepreneurship as an alternate development model to conventional development economic models. The arguments in favour of social entrepreneurship highlight why the sector has attracted significant global interest including the tremendous potential impact through “Impact investing”. The paper also discusses some shortcomings, including the challenge of initial funding and of ‘mission drift’. In discussing the disadvantages, it evidences arguments that are often unpopular and hidden in the popular discourse on the sector. It concludes that Social entrepreneurship offers a valuable opportunity to meet the needs of marginalised groups that would otherwise be neglected by conventional economic planners. However, its biggest challenge is to have leaders with a solid social mission who also bring business acumen to the table.","PeriodicalId":253694,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Governance (Social Enterprise) (Sub-Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115916061","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Psychological Implications of Stakeholder Involvement in Social Enterprise Governance","authors":"J. Larner","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2149475","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2149475","url":null,"abstract":"Social enterprises are a unique form of organisation, located where the public, private and voluntary sectors intersect, typically founded by dynamic individuals who deal with social injustice by finding resources in the community. As these organisations develop, isomorphic pressures from stakeholders such as funders and regulatory bodies lead to a formalisation of previously informal relations with vulnerable beneficiaries. This could cause harm or distress to the beneficiaries, which can then impact on front-line workers who are providing day-to-day services to them. In healthcare organisations, it has been shown that workers can form psychological defences to deal with the stress of working with people in pain or distress, which can account for otherwise inexplicable behaviour in teams and organisations. Since social enterprises also deal with people who are vulnerable and needy, they too could evolve similar defences, complicated by the involvement of these individuals in the roles of both client and as stakeholder that can influence the organisation's governance. This exploratory paper first considers social enterprise as a unique form of organisation, then how stakeholder involvement in governance contributes to legitimacy. After outlining how individual and group psychological defences can affect healthcare organisations, the paper then considers the implications for social enterprise governance, concluding with recommendations for further research.","PeriodicalId":253694,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Governance (Social Enterprise) (Sub-Topic)","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115542034","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Project Finance as a Driver of Economic Growth in Low-Income Countries","authors":"S. Kleimeier, R. J. Versteeg","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1340903","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1340903","url":null,"abstract":"This study investigates the role of project finance as a driver of economic growth. We hypothesize that project finance is beneficial to the least developed economies as it compensates for any lack of domestic financial development. The contractual structure unique to project finance should lead to better investment management and governance. Investigating 90 countries from 1991 to 2005, we find support for our hypothesis. Project finance indeed fosters economic growth and this effect is strongest in low-income countries, where financial development and governance is weak.","PeriodicalId":253694,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Governance (Social Enterprise) (Sub-Topic)","volume":"51 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128217088","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Governance Arrangements and Public Service Performance: Reviewing and Reformulating the Research Agenda","authors":"C. Skelcher, N. Mathur","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1306953","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1306953","url":null,"abstract":"Changing the nature of governance arrangements comprises one element in the public service reform programme. New governance forms include arm's-length agencies, multi-organisational partnerships, hybrids and company structures. In theory, changed governance arrangements offer benefits in terms of public service performance. Public service performance is typically defined in terms of organisational outputs and outcomes. However alongside this needs to be considered democratic performance, the relationship between the entity and the polity. Several detailed studies of the impact of governance change on public service performance are reviewed. These offer some empirical data against which to assess theory, but are limited and sometimes inconclusive. An alternative post-positivist research strategy is outlined. This engages with the underlying discursive settlement and its expression in the institutional structure of governance and the meanings held by actors. This approach is illustrated through a study of the relationship between partnership governance and public service performance.","PeriodicalId":253694,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Governance (Social Enterprise) (Sub-Topic)","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2004-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132381873","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The European Rapid Reaction Force: Implications for Democratic Accountability","authors":"Isabelle Ioannides","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1398915","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1398915","url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to provide an overview of democratic accountability aspects of the European Rapid Reaction Force (ERRF), taking into account that the development of an operational European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) and the further fine tuning of the ERRF are part of a dynamic process. In this context, this study examines aspects of the ERRF where a growing gap in democratic accountability is identified and recommends measures of bridging this gap. Given that the ERRF is still at its initial stages and has not been officially utilized in any international crisis, the author borrows a narrow definition of democratic accountability developed by Robert Behn. According to this definition, a governing body is accountable when it explains and justifies its specific actions or inactions. In this framework, the author addresses the questions of how the European Union (EU) acts; what it has set to accomplish on issues relating to the ERRF; and, who it answers to.Accordingly, this study looks at the divergent and vague definitions of the Petersberg Tasks that have prevailed among the EU member states as well as within the European Union. The paper concentrates primarily on the role of France and the UK, the leading states in ESDP issues, without which an EU military operation could not take place. It proposes prescribing precise limits to the Petersberg Tasks, both in terms of geographical reach and the intensity of the operations. Another aspect of democratic accountability of the ERRF is assessing EU decision-making processes and coordination mechanisms. In this context, we address such questions as, how do the European Parliament (EP), European Commission and Council of the European Union work together on defense issues? What are relations like between the EP and the newly (trans)formed Interim European Security and Defense Assembly? More importantly, how do EU citizens feel about efforts at militarizing the EU? The last section explores the transparency of the ERRF from an international perspective. It therefore assesses EU-NATO relations; considers the possibility of creating an autonomous EU planning apparatus; looks at relations between the EU and non-EU 'partners'; deals with American concerns regarding EU military capabilities; and, addresses the relevance of a UN mandate in EU military operations.","PeriodicalId":253694,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Governance (Social Enterprise) (Sub-Topic)","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131760896","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}