English – Page 39 – Canadian CED Network

In September, Community Enterprise in Scotland hosted a group of Canadians for a week-long immersion in Scottish social enterprise programming, policy and practice. Canadians from four provinces, federal and provincial governments, social enterprise practitioners and network leaders travelled and learned together from Scotland’s thriving social enterprise sector.

And why Scotland? In 2015, Scotland had over 5000 social enterprises with over 200 new ones forming each year. With an estimated $5.8 billion (CDN $) in income employing an estimated 112,000 people, the Scottish social enterprise sector plays a key role in their economy and communities.

Comparing these numbers on a per capita basis to Manitoba is hardly a perfect science. Disparities in definition, identification and depth of sector survey means a direct comparison is disingenuous, but for a sake of a thought exercise:

Scottish Per Capita Social Enterprise Stats Applied to Canada & Manitoba
	Canada	Manitoba
Social Enterprises	33,000	1,200
Annual Revenues	$38.5 B	$1.4 B
Persons Employed	743,000	27,500

A key focus of the tour was how the Scottish government supports social enterprise by delivering programmes through partner agencies. Intermediaries, networks and consortiums are used extensively to deliver the Scottish government’s policy goals.

The week had too much to take away, which is an alright problem. Here are four pieces that will inform our work in Manitoba moving forward:

Scaling & Surviving

Programming and development supports for social enterprises, whether from governments or foundations, regularly focuses on scaling successful social enterprises — take something that is working at a local level, and expand it to a broader region or duplicate it somewhere else. However, this may not be to the benefit of the social enterprises impact.

Pursuing scale should not be forced, or necessarily expected. The majority of social enterprises in Scotland’s vast network are small and locally-focused. This supports the notion that it is often localized, highly contextualized solutions that are best at addressing communities’ complex challenges. This should be understood for business development supports as well, as George McConnachie of SENScot commented at the CEIS conference: business development is about sustainability, not necessarily about growth.

As for the sustainability and revenue possibilities for social enterprise, we must make sure our expectations are in check. While Scotland has laudable, strong networks of social enterprises, the majority of them are operating at a break-even margin. Policy makers, practitioners and funders working in the social enterprise field should not overestimate the potential for self-sufficiency through market revenues.

While social enterprises can be a powerful tool in certain circumstances for non-profit organizations to further their organizational mission, it is hardly a panacea for the funding challenges our work faces. Expectations for social enterprise to replace other funding models should not be overstated.

The Value of the Network

We heard it loud and clear, from government officials and social enterprise practitioners alike: The strength of Scotland’s social enterprises is rooted in over 10 years of trustful relationships. As Yvonne Strachan, the Deputy Director from the Scottish Government who is leading their work on the social enterprise describes, relationships have been key to the strength of their ongoing strategies: “Trust is deeper than policy.” Reacting to this means ensuring we provide more networking opportunities and relationship building events for social enterprises and sector partners, whether government, academia, private business or the larger community development sector.

Just how much does Scotland value and have confidence in its social enterprise sector? One of the policy goals of Internationalising Social Enterprise: A Strategy for Scotland (which was released the week of our visit), is to use social enterprise as a means of accomplishing other international relations goals, whether international development, education, or general influence through good global citizenship. The Scottish government has enough faith in the strength of their social enterprise sector to make it a forefront piece of its international relations strategy.

Social Procurement

Across Canada, social enterprise leader are targeting public sector purchasing as an untapped, powerful tool for development and impact. While this is primarily being driven by the social enterprise community (for instance the Manitoba Social Enterprise Strategy, Buy Social Canada and the Social Purchasing Portal), governments are also recognizing the value of social purchasing, such as Ontario’s Social Enterprise Strategy, Metrolinx and the BC Ministry of Social Development & Social Innovation’s Social Impact Purchasing Guidelines.

As we’ve written about before, not only do social enterprises and their employees benefit from access to public sector procurement, but governments are keen as well to unlock the benefits of social purchasing, such as savings to justice, healthcare and social assistance.

Scotland is a global leader in public purchasing through social enterprise. In 2014, Scotland passed the Procurement Reform (Scotland) Act, which requires all broader public sector purchasers to consider the social outcomes of their purchasing, and if any contract above £20,000 does not account for community benefits, its exclusion must be justified.

This legislation is supported through the Developing Markets programme, a program funded by the Scottish Government to create cohesion between the public sector and social enterprises, including working with public sector purchasers to assist them to incorporate social value into their procurement practices. This program is funded with over $4

Prosper Canada's Financial Empowerment Champions Prosper Canada has announced their first selection of Financial Empowerment Champion organizations. Each organization will be provided with up to $150,000 in funding annually over 5 years and the training, tools and resources they need to measurably improve the financial well-being of 175,000 Canadians living on low incomes in their communities.

The following organizations were named Financial Empowerment Champions:

E4C, Edmonton AB
Family Services of Greater Vancouver, Vancouver BC
Momentum, Calgary AB
SEED Winnipeg/Community Financial Counselling Services, Winnipeg MB
Union des consommateurs, Montréal QC.

Financial Empowerment Champions will focus on a broad spectrum of initiatives to achieve this goal. Initiatives include:

Building the financial knowledge and skills of 140,000 people with low incomes
Assisting 13,100 people to file their taxes and access important income-boosting benefits
Providing financial counselling to help 5,000 people set personal financial goals and pursue action plans to achieve them
Helping families open 8,000 Registered Education Savings Plans and obtain the $2,000 Canada Learning Bond for their children’s post-secondary education
Supporting 400 people without bank accounts to open one.

Financial Empowerment Champions will also train other local service providers to deliver financial empowerment supports and work with Prosper Canada to evaluate the impact of their services and identify ways to continuously improve them.

They will also encourage and support municipal and provincial governments and other large service providers to build financial empowerment solutions into existing programs targeted to people with low incomes. Evidence shows that this can measurably improve outcomes for key services (e.g. social assistance, employment, newcomer settlement, social housing and homelessness services) while building the financial health of clients. Through this approach, our goal is to expand services to reach 1 million Canadians with low incomes.

“We chose these organizations for their proven leadership in providing quality financial empowerment programs that help people in their communities to build their financial well-being. We’re delighted to be working with them to enable more people to build their financial literacy and measurably improve their incomes, credit scores, savings and debt levels,” said Elizabeth Mulholland, Chief Executive Officer of Prosper Canada.

The Financial Empowerment Champions project is generously supported by a $5.3 million investment from the Government of Canada’s Social Development Partnerships Program and substantial matching investment from TD Bank Group and other business, philanthropic, and government supporters.

“The Government of Canada is pleased to support Prosper Canada, whose Financial Empowerment Champions project will help empower organizations to build the financial capacity of low-income Canadians,” said The Honourable Jean-Yves Duclos, Minister of Families, Children and Social Development. “We are committed to helping develop new approaches with the for-profit, not-for-profit and charitable sectors through social innovation to ensure Canadian families thrive socially and economically. This project will go a long way to providing low-income families with essential information and effective tools and community supports they can use to become self-sufficient and enjoy a more prosperous way of life.”

“TD is proud to be a core supporter of Prosper Canada’s efforts to build financial literacy of vulnerable Canadians and, through this initiative, help provide greater access to quality financial education and counselling tailored to fit their needs,” said Scott Mullin, Vice President, Community Relations, TD Bank Group.

For a complete description of the Financial Empowerment Champions Project and participating organizations, please visit: www.prospercanada.org/FEC

Communities across Canada, the United Kingdom and elsewhere around the world are taking a closer look at local health and well-being through their participation in Vital Signs – a global program designed to measure community vitality.

Thirty-four communities in Canada, 17 in the United Kingdom and others in Ireland, Brazil, United States, Bermuda, Australia and New Zealand, are all involved in this year’s Vital Signs program by gathering data, hosting conversations and publishing reports on significant social and economic trends to tell the story of how their communities are faring in key quality-of-life areas.

The community reports, many of which are being released as part of Vital Signs week from October 2-8, are used by communities around the globe to inspire civic engagement and provide focus for public dialogue.

“The power of Vital Signs is the know-how it gives us to create change in our communities,” says Cindy Lindsay, Director of Member Services with Community Foundations of Canada and international lead for its Vital Signs program. “In the age of data-driven decision making, more and more communities globally are using Vital Signs year-round to deepen their understanding of quality of life in their community and identify opportunities deeper engagement, grantmaking and collective action.”

Since it was first started by Toronto Foundation in 2001, the Vital Signs program has taken off globally with a total of more than 85 communities in nine countries around the world participating in Vital Signs over the years by producing a report or acting on the findings of previous reports.

Vital Signs is growing in popularity in the UK with a record number of communities participating this year. The program is helping to identify areas of growing concern affecting both Canada and the UK, such as child poverty, job creation and income inequality.

Because of their wide reach and understanding of local priorities, community foundations are well positioned to create opportunities for donor and philanthropic engagement. “Philanthropy can play a major role in addressing many of our current challenges,” says Fabian French, Chief Executive of UK Community Foundations. “As community foundations, we make an enormous difference in local areas. But crucially, as our UK Vital Signs reports show, the need is growing – and so must we.”

Community foundations in Canada and the UK are part of a global network that includes more than 1,800 community foundations in over 50 countries internationally.

Media Contacts:

David Venn
Director of Communications
Community Foundations of Canada
Email: dvenn at communityfoundations.ca
Twitter: @CommFdnsCanada

Kiran Ramchandani
Head of External Affairs
UK Community Foundations
Email: kramchandani at ukcommunityfoundations.org
Twitter: @UKCF_tweets

SOURCE: Community Foundations of Canada

Photo Credit: Bart Gamber, author of Milton Keynes Vital Signs

The Toronto Enterprise Fund (TEF), a unique funding partnership of United Way Toronto & York Region, the City of Toronto, the Ontario Ministry of Community & Social Services, and the Homelessness Partnering Strategy, has added a new fund to its program of supports for social enterprises in the city.

The Mixed Capital Opportunities Fund (Mixed Cap) will support the expansion of early stage, high growth non-profit social enterprises by providing a hybrid form of capital, comprised of a combined loan (50%) and grant (50%). This innovative collaboration between TEF and Alterna Savings will make debt financing more accessible to social enterprises. Mixed Cap is funded by the Province of Ontario and United Way Toronto (through a gift from the Polar Foundation), with all loan financing coming from Alterna Savings.

Are you an established Social Enterprise with a new business opportunity or plans for expansion?

TEF has a great financing option to fund your idea. The Mixed Cap aims to support Social Enterprises that are using innovative approaches to address social, environmental, economic or cultural changes.

Features:

Enterprises will be able to apply for between $10,000 and $30,000 in total investment (split equally between a loan and a grant).
In exceptional cases, up to $50,000 may be approved; security/collateral may be required in these instances.
The loan portion will be in the form of Term Loans and or Lines of Credit (LOC must be secured) and competitive interest rates will be set according to Alterna’s lending policies.

Selection Criteria:

The identification of a solid business opportunity. If the ask is for staffing up, stocking up or purchasing capital equipment, then it has to be directly related to the business opportunity.
Be owned and operated by incorporated non-profit organizations.
Located and operating in the Greater Toronto-Hamilton area.
Demonstrate job creation potential, particularly for minorities & disadvantaged groups.

Application Process:

Attend a training/information workshop. The workshops are mandatory and they will be held once every two months. See below for upcoming dates and link to registration.
Read through the checklist and submit all necessary documents. A complete application should include:
- Checklist
- Mixed Capital Opportunities fund application form (please attach as the first 2 pages of your business plan)
- Business plan
- Alterna business loan application
- Board resolution letter
- Consent form
- 24 month cash flow
- Other Documents (refer to checklist)
A review committee will first approve the application and it will then proceed through Alterna’s standard loan approval process.
Once an application is submitted, the final decision will be given in 4 weeks from the due date (assuming all necessary documents are provided and no further clarifications are required from the applicant)

Application due dates are quarterly; the next one will be in November/December. Please check back soon for the exact date.

Workshop Dates:

Tuesday, November 15, 2016, 4:00-6:00 pm at 26 Wellington Street East, Toronto.
Tuesday, January 17, 2017, 2:00-4:00 pm location tbd, likely outside the downtown core

For further information, please contact Alexis at alexis at kanespeer.com.

SOURCE: Toronto Enterprise Fund

Nonprofits and the Social Economy: From Far and Wide

The Association for Nonprofit and Social Economy Research (ANSER) is a dynamic growing association that is organizing its tenth annual conference as part of the Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences.

The conference, to be held at Ryerson University in Toronto, is an opportunity to welcome and explore the power of ideas to connect people and communities, encourage discussions and debates and to create knowledge and change. Within this context, nonprofits and other social economy organizations are well poised to lead these discussions.

ANSER invites you to submit proposals for individual papers, panels, or roundtable discussions on topics related to nonprofits, co-operatives, social enterprises, community economic development, and the social economy in Canadian, comparative, or international contexts. Proposals are particularly encouraged that fit into any of the following areas, broadly defined:

Nonprofits and the Social Economy: From Far and Wide
Co-operatives
Social Enterprises, Social Entrepreneurship, & Social Innovation
Community Economic Development & Community Organizing
Volunteering & Citizen Engagement
Collaborations, Partnerships & Mergers
Communication, Networking & Social Media
Finance, Governance & Management
Research Methodologies & Community-University Research Partnerships
Public Policy & Government Relations
Theoretical Perspectives
From Research to Practice

Proposals of wider relevance are also accepted, which may not fit the categories listed above. ANSER is particularly interested in papers, panels and roundtables involving collaboration between academics and practitioners.

1) Paper Proposals

Paper proposals normally present research findings with some link to or reflection on theory, but they could also be “think pieces,” discussions of research-in-progress, including graduate theses or dissertations, or reflections on practice. The proposal abstract for a paper should include:

a title;
the conference theme being addressed;
a 100-word abstract of the presentation; and
a 250-word summary of the argument of the paper, how the issue fits within a wider literature (as appropriate), and its relevance to research and/or practice in the areas of interest to ANSER.

You will also be asked to provide very brief biographical information on the author(s).

2) Panel Proposals

Panels are collections of three or four papers on a related theme. Ideally, these papers build upon each other, thereby adding to the coherence of the panel. Panel organizers are responsible for preparing an abstract of the panel as a whole. For panels comprising 3 presenters, each individual will be expected to speak for no longer than 20 minutes; for panels of 4 presenters, each participant will be expected to speak for no longer than 15 minutes. To allow adequate time for questions and discussion, the panel chair should ensure that presenters do not exceed the time limit.

The abstract for a panel should include:

a title;
the conference theme being addressed;
100-word overview of each paper and of the focus of the panel, including the coherence of the individual papers around this focus, and the relevance of the panel to research and/or practice in the areas of interest to ANSER; and
for each paper, a 250-word summary of the argument of the paper, how the issue fits within a wider literature (as appropriate), and its relevance to research and/or practice in the areas of interest to ANSER.

You will also be asked to provide brief biographical information on each of the authors.

3) Roundtables

Roundtables are well suited to: the discussion of the implications of an issue for practice; the discussion of research needs or research in progress around specific topics; or the presentation of contrasting perspectives on an issue with a designated facilitator. Roundtable presenters are not expected to provide written papers. It is expected that a roundtable will have 3 or more participants.

The abstract for a roundtable should include:

a title;
the conference theme being addressed;
a 100-word overview of the topic to be discussed, indication of the relationship of the individual presentations to the topic, and the relevance of the roundtable to research and/or practice in the areas of interest to ANSER; and
a 250-word summary of the key points of each presenter.

You will also be asked to provide brief biographical information on each participant.

Submission and Decision of Proposals

Proposal abstracts, in either official language, must be submitted online by January 11, 2017.

Submit a proposal abstract for the ANSER 2017 Conference

A link to the online system is also available at www.anser-ares.ca. Any questions can be directed to siemensl at uvic.ca.

All proposals will be subject to peer review and notification of acceptance will be provided by February 17, 2017. Presenters will be required to confirm their participation by submitting their conference registration fee no later than April 15, 2017.

Learn more about the ANSER 2017 Conference

Coop Business Research Institute You can argue that the economy has largely bounced back from the state it was in seven years ago, but it’s no secret that traditional community economic development models have stalled and often fail.

But one approach to community economic development is rapidly gaining attention: cooperative business development.

Historically, many co-ops in energy, telecommunications, finance and agriculture have exhibited greater resilience than investor-owned firms and provided enhanced development returns to their local communities. Public entrepreneurs and government officials need to be made aware that co-ops can spur job growth, boost local economies and bring about greater resilience due to their community-service orientation.

Cooperatives have historically arisen when people refuse to wait on big business or government to meet the pressing needs of local communities and their residents. Electric co-ops best exemplify this can-do spirit of public entrepreneurship. Rural folks all across the U.S. organized to plan, finance, build and operate what now numbers 900 electric co-ops, covering over 70 percent of the country, owned by 42 million Americans.

Think about this. The electric grid is often called one of the most complex socio-technical systems in the world. Everyday people — who we are told are subject to the whims of market and political forces — came together to build, operate, govern and own a significant share of our energy economy.

These folks then paid it forward, developing other utility co-ops in telecom and water, agricultural co-ops, child care and grocery co-ops. Consider that even your local credit union (one of over 6,000 in the U.S.) represents your share of ownership in the consumer-finance market.

For those of us growing up in central Illinois, we used to have options if we didn’t go to college. We could count on unionized factory or government jobs or join the military. Those options are limited in today’s economy.

Co-ops must become a greater part of our community economic development toolbox. When the people are given a voice and an opportunity to share in a business’ profits, there is a level of trust and transparency through participation that comforts cooperative members and instills a certain level of shared commitment to that business.

And therein lies a key element in understanding why co-ops remain resilient, despite having fallen on hard economic times. The member-owned democratic governing principle of co-ops affords members the opportunity to shape not just the business, but the local community and global economy for shared prosperity, allowing individuals to take control of their own lives in an era of broken politics and economics.

Here is why this matters. Co-ops cannot be extracted from their host community; they are inherently interwoven with the communities they serve. Common Ground Food Co-op and the U of I Community Credit Union here in Champaign-Urbana serve over 50,000 member-owners by providing access to affordable food, accessible credit and industry-leading job opportunities.

Nonetheless, as resilient as cooperative businesses have historically been, any co-op can be overtaken and fail due to a lack of community involvement. The relationship between co-ops and communities is, by definition, a symbiotic one. They simply cannot survive without each other.

In a time of continued political impasse, co-ops represent the kind of resiliency we need as a country and that we desperately need in our communities. If you want to change your community, don’t sit out; get involved and work through your co-op and, by doing so, know that you’ll be effecting change.

Written by Keith Taylor and originally published by News Gazette on June 12, 2016

Keith Taylor is a former board member of Common Ground Food Co-op and a graduate of the University of Illinois Human and Community Development Ph.D. program. He now serves as a research associate with the Ostrom Workshop at Indiana University, a board member of the Indiana Co-op Development Center, and a member of the National Cooperative Business Association, CLUSA International.

Canadian CED Network – Manitoba Members CCEDNet-Manitoba has, in response to the City of Winnipeg’s invitation for pre-budget submissions, provided recommendations that bring a CED perspective to the 2017/2018 budget. The recommendations below are based on policy resolutions that have been endorsed by our membership. The first recommendation calls for a comprehensive Winnipeg poverty reduction strategy, and the recommendations that follow would be well situated within such a strategy.

Our recommendations are as follows:

Partner with community-based organizations and key stakeholders to create and implement a comprehensive poverty reduction strategy with targets and timelines.
Create and resource a Winnipeg Food Council that will work together to ensure a fair, sustainable, and vibrant food system for our city.
Use City planning, regulatory, and financial tools and powers to support at least 350 new units of affordable rental housing and 350 new units of social housing over the next three years.
Regulate the conversion of rental stock to condominiums when vacancy rates fall below 4%
Continue to fund the Housing Rehabilitation and Investment Reserve or subsequent relevant budget reserve and develop a regular and transparent process for reviewing and adjusting its size to ensure it successfully enables the creation of an adequate supply of affordable and subsidized housing in Winnipeg.
Adopt inclusionary zoning to increase the number of affordable housing units in all housing developments.
Establish a policy for all surplus land disposals that ensures non-profit and cooperative housing providers are prioritized for receiving surplus land for the purpose of creating affordable housing.
Contribute core funding to Winnipeg’s Neighbourhood Renewal Corporations to help achieve the goals in OurWinnipeg.
Implement a procurement strategy that takes into account the added economic, social and environmental value of purchasing.
This procurement strategy should target social enterprises that are creating jobs for people facing barriers to employment.
Partner with community stakeholders to develop and adopt a Living Wage Policy for municipal employees and contracted services.

Read CCEDNet-Manitoba’s full 2017-2018 pre-budget submission

To learn more, or to find out how you can use this document to draft your own pre-budget submissions, contact Kirsten Bernas at kbernas at ccednet-rcdec.ca

Congratulations to CCEDNet member PARO Centre for Women’s Enterprise who hosted the federal minister for Innovation, Science and Economic Development, the Hon. Navdeep Bains, for an announcement of $2 million in investment to help women entrepreneurs, as well as small and medium-sized companies in Northern Ontario. The funding will allow women to get the skills training they need to raise the venture capital required to expand their businesses.

The Government of Ontario is also supporting PARO’s Women’s Enterprise Initiative with a $100,000 investment through the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund Corporation.

The two projects receiving funding will focus on empowering women, strengthening the development of small businesses, enhancing innovation and increasing employment opportunities throughout the region.

“The Government of Canada recognizes that investments to help women start and grow their own businesses create job opportunities for Northern Ontarians. By providing the resources and training that entrepreneurs need, our Government can help them achieve their business goals. These initiatives will strengthen the regional economy.”
– The Honourable Navdeep Bains, Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development, and Minister responsible for FedNor

“Our government is proud to support PARO’s Women’s Enterprise Initiative through the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund Corporation. This investment will help PARO prepare female entrepreneurs across Northwestern Ontario with the resources they need to successfully develop and grow their businesses.”
– Michael Gravelle, Miniser of Northern Development and Mines, Chair of the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund Coportaion and Member of Provincial Parliament for Thunder Bay-Superior North

“I am proud of FedNor’s longstanding partnership with the PARO Centre for Women’s Enterprise, whose record of success in helping women entrepreneurs realize their business dreams is nothing short of impressive. Increasing the knowledge and skills of all women business owners, including those who are Indigenous, Francophone, new immigrants or young, will help them grow their companies and increase profitability.”
– The Honourable Patty Hajdu, Minister of Status of Women and Member of Parliament for Thunder Bay—Superior North

“The Next Level program offered through the Northwestern Ontario Innovation Centre will not only help new businesses secure market access for their innovative developments, but also assist existing businesses to undertake new marketing techniques to expand sales opportunities and grow their operations.”
– Don Rusnak, Member of Parliament for Thunder Bay—Rainy River

“We are grateful for the Government of Canada’s continued faith in our abilities and support for our programs. We look forward to building on our past successes, energized that we will exceed expectations by providing women with the confidence, skills and resources they need to succeed in today’s global economy.”
– Rosalind Lockyer, Executive Director, PARO Centre for Women’s Enterprise

SOURCE: The Government of Canada

<!–*/

/*–>*/

Social Entrepreneurship

Social entrepreneurship is increasingly popular among Canadian youth. Its popularity stems from a variety of reasons, including changes in youth’s values and career aspirations, as well as an increase in the availability of infrastructure supporting this trend. Perhaps the best example of this last point is the McConnell Foundation’s multimillion dollar strategy, under the RECODE program, to fund dozens of universities and colleges across Canada (including Carleton University) in an attempt to “redesign public institutions from the inside out; to disrupt business as usual; to found and grow new social enterprises […] in order to achieve a more just, sustainable and beautiful world.” [1]

Social entrepreneurship has multiple, sometimes conflicting, definitions, but at its core is the idea of ‘doing business for good.’ Hence, a social enterprise is different from a regular business because it does not only seek profit. Yet, it is also different from the non-profit, charity and voluntary sectors because it needs to achieve its social mission through economic activities that do generate profit. In short, as Social Enterprise Canada puts it, the goal of the social enterprise “is the simultaneous achievement of both economic and social values.” [2]

Social Economy

However, this idea of doing good through economic activities is quite similar to another concept that has been around for a while, namely social economy. Although the concept has a rich history deeply linked to the cooperative and mutual movement, it arose more prominently in Canada and especially in Quebec in the mid-1990s with the creation of the Chantier de l’économie sociale. A Quebec law passed in 2013 outlines the characteristics that social economy organizations must possess in order to qualify as such:

“They are businesses with the legal status of cooperative, non-profit organization or mutual;
Their main activity is the sale or trade of goods or services;
They pursue a social mission benefiting their members and/or the community;
They are autonomous form the state or another private business;
Their governance is democratic.” [3]

Does it Make a Difference?

With shared missions and seemingly similar economic models, it would be easy for the inattentive reader to conclude that both concepts—social entrepreneurship and social economy—describe the same reality. Yet, there is at least one obvious difference: social economy requires collective democratic governance while social entrepreneurship appears somewhat agnostic on the issue.

French sociologist Jean-Louis Laville argues that the difference is even more fundamental, because the two movements would be linked to different ideal types of solidarity. [4]

On one side, “democratic solidarity,” rooted in the values of quality and mutual assistance, would be concerned with a holistic transformation of economic models through public deliberation. This vision corresponds to the social economy movement.

On the other side, “philanthropic solidarity” would be motivated by the idea of benevolence. More individualistic, it is less reluctant to embrace market mechanisms as long as they make the achievement of social good possible. This perspective is linked to social entrepreneurship.

Finally, both visions differ on the role of a third key concept: social innovation. Although social innovation also has multiple and contested definitions, it basically refers to any “new solution to social issues.” [5] While social economy believes these solutions can only be brought about through collective action and institutional changes, social entrepreneurship usually supports the idea that great individuals—the entrepreneurs—act as the spark that can provide solutions to social issues. This perspective reminds us of the American myth of the self-made man, with legendary philantrocapitalists such as Ford and Rockefeller. Nowadays too, semi-gods from the tech industry, such as Gates or Zuckerberg, are seen as the individuals who have the required resources, willpower and ingenuity to finally find solutions and to get things done.

But neither of these perspectives is perfect. The following table, although a caricature, helps us understand how the two movements differ and attract different types of supporters, by outlining some of the possible criticisms of the other:

Social entrepreneurship on social economy	Social economy on social entrepreneurship
Collective decision-making is burdensome	Sacrifices democratic governance for the benefit of an enlightened elite and risks the social mission being hijacked by individual interest
Incapable of scaling up impact	Solidarity is reduced to markets and social inclusion is reduced to accessing markets
Too reliant on the state	Proposed solutions stems from the same ideas that caused the problems
Too much importance is given to the legal framework while the real purpose, the social mission, risks being forgotten	Does not bring about a new development model
Legal status does not guarantee a positive social impact	Social entrepreneurship pretends to put forward new ideas but doesn’t

Source: Matthieu Roy et al. 2016. Synthèse de connaissance: L’entrepreneuriat social et l’entreprise sociale, p. 38.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the momentum that the social entrepreneurship movement is currently gaining raises many questions, especially for the social economy sector in Quebec, but also for anyone who cares about tackling social issues. To mention only a few of these issues:

Who should be addressing social issues: the state, private foundations, civil society, businesses, entrepreneurs?
What is the desired social transformation? Is it at the level of the whole economic system or the margin? Is it more about how wealth is created, or distributed?
Is the involvement of workers and users in these transformations truly central? Does ownership in itself matter or is the service received at the end of the line the real priority?

References

Main reference: Roy, M. et al. 2016. Synthèse de connaissance: L’entrepreneuriat social et l’entreprise sociale. TIESS. http://www.tiess.ca/entrepreneuriat-social-et-lentreprise-sociale-une-nouvelle-publication/

[1] RECODE. 2016. About Recode. http://re-code.ca/about/

[2] Social Enterprise Canada. 2016. What is Social Enterprise?http://www.socialenterprisecanada.ca/en/learn/nav/whatisasocialenterprise.html

[3] Gouvernement du Québec. 2013. Loi sur l’économie sociale. http://www2.publicationsduquebec.gouv.qc.ca/dynamicSearch/telecharge.php?type=2&file=/E_1_1_1/E1_1_1.html

[4] Laville, J.-L. 2014. Innovation sociale, économie sociale et solidaire, entrepreneuriat social. Une mise en perspective historique. In J.-L. Klein, J.-L. Laville, & F. Moulaert (Eds.), L’innovation sociale (pp. 45-80). Toulouse: ÉRÈS.

[5] Cloutier, Julie. 2003. Qu’est-ce que l’innovation sociale ? CRISES.

Originally published on September 14, 2016 by Carleton Perspectives on Public Policy

Gabriel Salathé-Beaulieu is currently working as a project manager with Territoires innovants en économie sociale et solidaire (TIESS). Before that, he studied economics, politics and public policy in Quebec, London, Ottawa and Paris. He kept an interest for social economy all along and currently focuses on the topic of social impact measurement.