Socially Enterprising Communities: Their Dynamics and Readiness for Service Innovation

Shortall, Sally; Radford, Katy

doi:10.4337/9781849808415.00015

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This does not exclude economic success or a business‐like professional operation and organisation, even without profit orientation. They may also be characterised as social enterprises, a concept that is more prominent in the UK (Radford and Shortall ) Even though the reduction, privatisation and/or market‐based restructuring of public services are at the background of citizens’ dissatisfaction, their reorganisation also offers opportunities. Redesign leads to the development of business and delivery models that operate following a substantially different logic compared to current private or public services.…”

Section: Distinctive Features and Added Value Of Rural Social Innovationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rural Marginalisation and the Role of Social Innovation; A Turn Towards Nexogenous Development and Rural Reconnection

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rural development in Europe is a long‐standing issue that has been supported through EU policies in various ways. The effects of rural development have been uneven, and differences between well‐to‐do and marginal rural areas have been increasing both across and within countries. This process is reinforced by the current financial crisis. Recently, social innovation has been introduced as the new panacea for realising development and growth while, at the same time, warranting social inclusion and counteracting social inequality. A central question of this article is whether social innovation may help to effectively fight rural marginalisation, why that could be the case and what conditions then must be met. Three examples of rural social innovation are used to distil specific features of social innovation and compare them with other concepts and approaches to rural development. Rural social innovation is distinctive in its dependence on civic self‐reliance and self‐organisation due to austerity measures and state withdrawal, and its cross‐sectoral and translocal collaborations. This article concludes that it is time to go beyond earlier ideas of exogenous versus (neo‐)endogenous development and introduces the idea of nexogenous development with socio‐political reconnection as an engine of revitalisation.

show abstract

Section: Distinctive Features and Added Value Of Rural Social Innovationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rural Marginalisation and the Role of Social Innovation; A Turn Towards Nexogenous Development and Rural Reconnection

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is well known in literature that these capabilities may not be equitably distributed and often social enterprise relies on key individuals (e.g. Muñoz et al, 2014;Radford and Shortall, 2012;Roy et al, 2015). It is also well known that the scope of local economic development activity is still largely dictated by policy and funding priorities (Atkinson, 1999;Stanton, 2014).…”

Section: The Empowerment Of Communities Through Social Enterprisementioning

confidence: 99%

Empowering communities? Exploring roles in facilitated social enterprise

Finlayson

Roy

2019

SEJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose States and development bodies are increasingly stimulating social enterprise activity in communities as an empowering social and economic development intervention. This type of development initiative is often facilitated by actors who are external to communities, and the role of community members is not clear. This paper aims to explore whether facilitated social enterprise benefits or disempowers communities. Design/methodology/approach The focus is a case study of a project based in Scotland designed to stimulate the creation of social enterprises involved in community growing. The case study approach involved a mix of methods, including formal (semi-structured) interviews, participant observation and analysis of documentary evidence. Analysis of findings was undertaken using Muñoz and Steinerowski’s (2012) theory of social entrepreneurial behaviour. Findings Findings suggest that social enterprise that originates outside communities and is facilitated by external actors is potentially disempowering, particularly when social enterprise development does not necessarily align with community needs. The paper reiterates findings in previous studies that certain roles in facilitated social enterprise require to be community-led. Projects that do attempt to facilitate social enterprise would benefit from community participation at the project planning stage. Originality/value If facilitated social enterprise is increasingly promoted as an empowering development intervention, this paper provides insight about how facilitated social enterprise occurs in practice and gives preliminary information about possible barriers to empowerment using this approach to development.

show abstract

“…While reasons for this behaviour were not explicitly investigated, the literature and previous research suggest a range of explanatory ideas. Previous study has noted that communities are at various stages of receptivity for participation and that some maybe prone to hegemonic power, with prominent local people exerting influence over others [ 40 ]. For Community A, there was evidence of community leaders spreading advice not to participate as this would indicate compliance with health service change.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Community participation to design rural primary healthcare services

Farmer

Nimegeer

2014

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThis paper explores how community participation can be used in designing rural primary healthcare services by describing a study of Scottish communities. Community participation is extolled in healthcare policy as useful in planning services and is understood as particularly relevant in rural settings, partly due to high social capital. Literature describes many community participation methods, but lacks discussion of outcomes relevant to health system reconfiguration. There is a spectrum of ideas in the literature on how to design services, from top-down standard models to contextual plans arising from population health planning that incorporates community participation. This paper addresses an evidence gap about the outcomes of using community participation in (re)designing rural community health services.MethodsCommunity-based participatory action research was applied in four Scottish case study communities in 2008–10. Data were collected from four workshops held in each community (total 16) and attended by community members. Workshops were intended to produce hypothetical designs for future service provision. Themes, rankings and selections from workshops are presented.ResultsCommunity members identified consistent health priorities, including local practitioners, emergency triage, anticipatory care, wellbeing improvement and health volunteering. Communities designed different service models to address health priorities. One community did not design a service model and another replicated the current model despite initial enthusiasm for innovation.ConclusionsCommunities differ in their receptiveness to engaging in innovative service design, but some will create new models that fit in a given budget. Design diversity indicates that context influences local healthcare planning, suggesting community participation impacts on design outcomes, but standard service models maybe useful as part of the evidence in community participation discussions.

show abstract

Socially Enterprising Communities: Their Dynamics and Readiness for Service Innovation

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Rural Marginalisation and the Role of Social Innovation; A Turn Towards Nexogenous Development and Rural Reconnection

Rural Marginalisation and the Role of Social Innovation; A Turn Towards Nexogenous Development and Rural Reconnection

Empowering communities? Exploring roles in facilitated social enterprise

Community participation to design rural primary healthcare services

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About