Perspectives of Autonomy for Social Enterprises in the Governance Process in the Mediterranean Capitalist Model: The case of northern and southern Italy

As a consequence to the "tectonic societal change" (Osborne and Brown, 2011) of the last fifteen years social enterprises have assumed a strategic importance worldwide (Defourny and Nyssens, 2010). Social enterprises have... [ view full abstract ]

As a consequence to the "tectonic societal change" (Osborne and Brown, 2011) of the last fifteen years social enterprises have assumed a strategic importance worldwide (Defourny and Nyssens, 2010). Social enterprises have different meanings in different economic and political context. Drawing on the social innovation school, which assigns primacy to the production of outcomes rather than the income approach (Defourny and Nyssen, 2010), this paper investigates how social enterprises preserve their autonomy, as part of the network contributing to the production of public policies. 

The study focuses on the Mediterranean capitalist model (also known as “mixed market economy”) typical of the Italian context (Regini 2016, Ravines 2016), characterized by a strong intervention of the state, the concentration of large enterprises in the hands of narrow elites, a weak system of the stock exchange, a large number of employment contracts regulated by the market, and limited social protection mostly relying on family networks (Hall and Soskice 2001). The aim is to understand whether producing outcomes for the satisfaction of unmet social needs  social enterprises  comply or subvert the social order established between the different actors within existing governance structure  (Capano, Howlett and Ramesh, 2015).
The study refers, in the governance’s literature, to Fukuyama’s definition of governance as "government's ability to make and enforce rules, and to deliver services, regardless of whether that government is democratic or not" (Fukuyama 2013, p. 3) and uses a qualitative approach based on two case studies: one in northern and one in the southern Italy. The rationale for the choice is that the two areas are characterised by quite different economic and social conditions: while the North is characterized by long industrial and manufacturing tradition,  the South suffers for phenomenon like migration and youth unemployment and has a greater degree of deprivation, nevertheless it see the increased presence of social enterprises own rule (Venturi and Zandonai 2014) compared to the richer north.
The paper argues that social enterprises have an independent and distinctive role in addressing unmet social needs despite other actors still have a predominant part, namely public authorities in one case (with a high risk of political capture) and the for-profit business in the other case. It is interesting to see how it could have played the role of social enterprises residing in the same capitalist system, but at the same time belonging to different economic contexts from a structural point of view, to judge of any common or dyscrasias points. Social enterprises have several perspectives to ensure their independence regardless if shall adopt them or not.
This paper could be useful to understand how governance, being a dynamic concept (Capano, Howlett and Ramesh 2015), can be reconfigured to maintain political legitimacy, to vary perspectives that the social enterprises realize to preserve their autonomy, thus re-establishing new social orders. This paper also addresses the need felt by Davies of larger comparative studies to understand the market mix, hierarchy and networks that characterize contemporary governance (Davies 2002). 

• Burroni L. (2016), Capitalismi a confronto. Istituzioni e regolazione dell'economia nei paesi europei, Il Mulino Bologna Collana “Itinerari”.
• Capano G.; Howlett M.; Ramesh, M. (2015), Re-Thinking Governance In Public Policy. Dynamics, Strategy And Capacities, in: Varieties of Governance Dynamics, Strategies, Capacities, london, Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1 – 24
• Davies, J. S. (2002), “The governance of urban regeneration: a critique of the ‘governing without government’ thesis”. Public Administration, 80: 301–322
• Defourny J. and Nyssens M. (2010), “Social enterprise in Europe: At the crossroads of market, public policies and third sector”, Policy and Society 29 (2010) 231–242.
• Fukuyama F., (2013), “What Is Governance?” CGD Working Paper 314. Washington, DC: Center for Global Development. http://www.cgdev.org/content/p...
• Osborne, S. P. and Brown, L. (2011), “Innovation, Public Policy and Public Services Delivery In The Uk. The Word That Would be King?”, in Public Administration, 89: 1335–1350
• Regini M. (2016), “Capitalismo mediterraneo: la strada stretta fra economie forti dell’Eurozona ed economie deregolate” in "SOCIOLOGIA DEL LAVORO " 143/2016, pp. 25-43, 
• Thompson P., Williams R., Kwong C., Thomas B., (2015) “The potential of trading activity income to fund Third Sector organisations operating in deprived areas”,in Local Economy 30(6):627-649·September 2015
• Venturi P. e Zandonai F. (2014), (a cura di), “L’impresa sociale alle soglie della riforma” in “L’impresa Sociale in Italia, Identità Sviluppo in un quadro di riforma” http://www.irisnetwork.it