LIST OF PANELS

ICPP 7 – CHIANG MAI, July 2025

PANEL PROPOSAL - Roles and Functions of Social Enterprises in Social Policy

Chairs:

Benoît Renevey, HES-SO//University of Applied Sciences of Western Switzerland, Fribourg

Emmanuel Fridez, HES-SO//University of Applied Sciences of Western Switzerland, Fribourg

Social enterprises (further : SE) have become key players in shaping social policy accross the globe, blending social missions with market-driven approaches. Their primary focus is on social impact rather than profit maximization. They utilize market-based strategies to achieve social objectives (Loosemore, 2015).

SEs are generally identified on the basis of nine characteristics (Draperi, 2010: 20-21):

- economic characteristics: like any enterprise, SEs have a continuous activity of producing goods and services; they have a high degree of autonomy; they assume a significant economic risk; they employ employees from the first labour market.

- and social characteristics: the civic nature of the SE's activity; broad stakeholder participation in decision-making; non-exclusive governance by shareholders; limited distribution of profits to owners; an explicit objective of service to the community.

Thus, the social enterprise represents a hybrid economic model that lies at the intersection of the traditional enterprise and the not-for-profit organisation. It aims to respond to social or environmental issues while guaranteeing its financial viability. This model has attracted growing interest, particularly for its role in implementing and supporting social policies.

Over the last few decades, humanity has faced many challenges and difficulties, even though overall well-being is tending to increase slightly. Thanks to the UN's 2030 development goals and the EU's intention to ban the sale of internal combustion engine vehicles in Europe by 2035, social and environmental concerns have gained in importance, and many public players - at least at international level - are implementing policies to improve the situation. But at the same time, the legitimacy of spending large sums of money on policies aimed at well-being and good living in developed countries has not necessarily evolved positively since it collapsed during the series of crises that followed the end of the Thirty Glorious (Ferragina, 2022). After a crisis of legitimacy, social policies have shifted towards an increase in the provision of non-monetary benefits (workfare) aimed at social reintegration, coupled with a reduction or stagnation in cash benefits (ibid.). In developing countries, the success of conditional cash transfer programs in Latin America has inspired similar initiatives in African nations, reflecting a broader shift towards social protection mechanisms. This rapid expansion of social protection programs has been characterised by Barrientos and Hulme (Kundo, 2019), who describe it as a transformative movement in social policy aimed at addressing the needs of the poor. However, most developing countries - and even nations such as the United States and European countries (knowing that universal social coverage is constitutionally guaranteed in these countries) - are unable to provide universal social protection coverage. Moreover, international interdependencies further complicate the evolution of welfare states in developing countries. Nullmeier et al (2022) argue that the development of social policies is increasingly influenced by transnational factors, moving beyond the traditional focus on the nation-state.

In this context, SE are led to offer services aimed at improving the well-being of individuals or populations in difficulty or lacking means of subsistence. In itself, their objective is similar to that of social policies, which are generally deployed on a large scale, whereas SE propose solutions aimed at local beneficiaries and medium-sized communities. As with social policy, the aim is to promote positive social change and have a positive impact on people's lives. Researching the roles and functions of SE in social policies is of significant scientific relevance due to their potential to address complex social issues, foster innovation, and contribute to sustainable development. SE operate at the intersection of economic viability and social mission, making them unique agents of change within the broader socio-economic landscape. Their dual focus allows them to tackle pressing social problems while also generating economic value, which is crucial in the context of diminishing public sector resources and increasing social needs (Muñoz, 2010; Jackson et al., 2018).

One of the primary contributions of SE to social policy is their ability to implement innovative solutions to "wicked" problems – issues that are complex and resistant to straightforward solutions. Research indicates that social enterprises often employ radical or transformative innovations to address these challenges effectively (Ranabahu, 2020). For instance, SE can leverage cutting-edge technologies and novel business models to create social value, thereby enhancing their role in public service delivery (Phillips et al., 2017). This innovative capacity is essential for developing sustainable social policies that can adapt to changing societal needs and conditions (Wang et al., 2021).

Moreover, SE play a critical role in fostering social cohesion and addressing inequalities. They are often positioned to serve marginalized communities, providing services and opportunities that traditional businesses may overlook (Finlayson & Roy, 2019). By engaging with local communities and understanding their specific needs, SE can tailor their offerings to effectively contribute to social inclusion and empowerment (Muñoz et al., 2014). This localized approach not only enhances the effectiveness of social policies but also ensures that they are grounded in the realities of the communities they aim to serve (Domenico et al., 2010).

The interplay between SE and government regulations further underscores their relevance in social policy research. Studies have shown that government support and regulatory frameworks can significantly influence the development and sustainability of SE (Wang et al., 2021). Understanding these dynamics is crucial for policymakers aiming to create an enabling environment for social enterprises to thrive, thus maximizing their potential impact on social issues (Barraket & Yousefpour, 2013). Additionally, the multi-stakeholder nature of SE necessitates a nuanced understanding of legitimacy and accountability, as they must balance diverse stakeholder expectations while pursuing their social missions (Zhong & Zhou, 2020).

In conclusion, the scientific relevance of researching social enterprises in the context of social policies lies in their capacity to innovate, address social inequalities, and adapt to regulatory environments. Their unique positioning allows them to contribute significantly to the development of effective and sustainable social policies that can meet the challenges of contemporary society. Therfore, our panel aims to address the following question :

How do social enterprises interact with, influence and complement social policies, in a global context of economic and societal transformations ?

The aim of the panel is twofold. On the one hand, to identify the latest concrete realities and scientific productions on the links between social enterprises and social policies, in the particular context that the world has been experiencing since the last ten years. On the other hand, over and above the inventory that can be made of these realities in different contexts, the aim is to identify future research needs and opportunities on the roles and place occupied by social enterprises in the production of well-being, always in relation to the social policies implemented by states, more particularly considering the recent changes that have occurred in the world (regional wars, awareness of the dangers of climate change, need for development and sustainability, etc.).

With reference to the research question, we take into account the reality of three key moments in the existence of links between SE and social policies :

-            Because they are rooted at the heart of small communities, SE may play a part in the construction (even per-construction) of social problems. Their activities make inappropriate situations visible and help to convince (or not) public authorities to take action by putting social policies in place ;

-            In addition to this role of claiming and blaming, they also may participate in the making of social policies and in the transformation of social policies, or, on the contrary, implement their own social policies, in competition with or replacing public social policies ;

-            And thirdly, SE may or may not participate actively in the implementation of social policies, whether public or private, in other words, whether or not in collaboration with the public authorities.

As stated in the call for papers, we welcome contributions addressing various aspects of the above issues. Contributions should come from research activities (all possible types), but we as well welcome purely theoretical studies, or reports of field experience.

Selected contributions may be presented online or on-site.

References :

Barraket, J. and Yousefpour, N. (2013). Evaluation and social impact measurement amongst small to medium social enterprises: process, purpose and value. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 72(4), 447-458. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12042

Domenico, M., Haugh, H., & Tracey, P. (2010). Social bricolage: theorizing social value creation in social enterprises. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(4), 681-703. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00370.x

Draperi, J.-F. (2010). L’entrepreneuriat social : du marché public au public marché. Revue internationale de l'économie sociale, (316), 18–40. https://doi.org/10.7202/1020893ar

Ferragina, E. (2022). Welfare state change as a double movement: four decades of retrenchment and expansion in compensatory and employment‐oriented policies across 21 high‐income countries. Social Policy and Administration, 56(5), 705-725. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12789

Finlayson, E. and Roy, M. (2019). Empowering communities? exploring roles in facilitated social enterprise. Social Enterprise Journal, 15(1), 76-93. https://doi.org/10.1108/sej-04-2018-0035

Jackson, B., Nicoll, M., & Roy, M. (2018). The distinctive challenges and opportunities for creating leadership within social enterprises. Social Enterprise Journal, 14(1), 71-91. https://doi.org/10.1108/sej-03-2017-0016

Kundo, H. (2019). Dynamics of designing and implementing social safety net programmes in developing countries. Bangladesh Journal of Public Administration, 25(1). https://doi.org/10.36609/bjpa.v25i1.40

Loosemore, M., & Higgon, D. (2015). Social Enterprise in the Construction Industry: Building Better Communities (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315741697

Muñoz, S. (2010). Towards a geographical research agenda for social enterprise. Area, 42(3), 302-312. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4762.2009.00926.x

Muñoz, S., Steiner, A., & Farmer, J. (2014). Processes of community-led social enterprise development: learning from the rural context. Community Development Journal, 50(3), 478-493. https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsu055

Nullmeier, F., Reufels, D., & Obinger, H. (2022). Introduction: international interdependencies and the impact on social policies., 1-10. In: Nullmeier, F., González de Reufels, D., Obinger, H. (eds) International Impacts on Social Policy. Global Dynamics of Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86645-7_1

Phillips, W., Alexander, E., & Lee, H. (2017). Going it alone won’t work! the relational imperative for social innovation in social enterprises. Journal of Business Ethics, 156(2), 315-331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3608-1

Ranabahu, N. (2020). ‘wicked’ solutions for ‘wicked’ problems: responsible innovations in social enterprises for sustainable development. Journal of Management & Organization, 26(6), 995-1013. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2020.20

Wang, J., Cai, L., Murad, M., Shahzad, F., & Ashraf, S. (2021). Impact of social entrepreneurial factors on sustainable enterprise development: mediating role of social network and moderating effect of government regulations. Sage Open, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211030636

Zhong, W. and Zhou, Y. (2020). Business model innovation, legitimacy and performance: social enterprises in china. Management Decision, 59(11), 2693-2712. https://doi.org/10.1108/md-05-2019-0678

Social enterprises (further : SE) have become key players in shaping social policy accross the globe, blending social missions with market-driven approaches. Their primary focus is on social impact rather than profit maximization.

It is undeniable that, because they aim to bring about social change and improve people's living conditions, SE have various roles and functions within the framework of social policies. As Gleeson (2013) concludes, SE influence social policy and vice versa.

Because they are rooted at the heart of small communities, SE play a part in the construction of social problems. Their activities make inappropriate situations visible and help to convince (or not) public authorities to take action by putting social policies in place.

In addition to this role of claiming and blaming, they also participate in the making of social policies and in the transformation of social policies.

And thirdly, SE participate actively in the implementation of social policies, whether public or private, in other words, whether or not in collaboration with the public authorities.

In the light of these considerations, we propose a panel focusing on the following research question:

How do social enterprises interact with, influence and complement social policies, in a global context of economic and societal transformations ?

This research question holds significant scientific relevance due to the evolving role of SE in addressing complex social, economic and environmental challenges. They are unique in that they blend entrepreneurial strategies with social missions, often addressing policy failures where traditional actors (government or private sector) fail short. The relationship between SE and social policies remain an underexplored domain in both entrepreneurship and public policy literature. This research question addresses a critical gap in the theoretical frameworks that define the roles of SE within welfare systems. Few studies explore how SE engage with social policy frameworks.

Proposals addressing the following issues and questions are welcome (but not exclusive) :

1)        Social problem construction
- How do SE lead to the identification of social situations as problematic?
- How do SEs manage to convince (or not) the public authorities to commit to resolving a situation deemed to be problematic?

2)        Policy making
- How do SE influence the development and/or transformation of social policies
- What role does social innovation implemented by SE play in the creation and/or transformation of social policies?
- Are SE leaders in the policy-making process or/and do they have to submit to the authority of the public authorities?
- Do public authorities encourage the development of public policies by SE and if so, how?

3)        Social policies implementation
- Which roles play SE in the implementation of social policies ? In what situations are they perceived as partners of governments, and when do they enter into competition with them ?
- How do SE contribute to strengthening social protection systems ?
- What social innovations from the entrepreneurial sector can be integrated into large-scale social policies ?
- What impact do SE have on improving the living conditions of the beneficiaries of the social policies in which they are involved?

We welcome a wide range of contributions: case studies, literature reviews, theoretical and applied research, theoretical and methodological contributions.

Proposals should not exceed 500 words.