Social Entrepreneurship in
LUT School of Business and Management
2.11.2015 | Aalto
Background and context
Roots in III sector service provision, co-operative movement, entrepreneurship as an alternative for civil society activities or employment
Development projects with ESR and ERDF funding
New, poorly known and contested concept Saila
Recent reviews and studies- ETLA: Esiselvitys yhteiskunnallisesta yrittmisest, 2015. - LUT: Yhteiskunnallinen yrittjyys innovatiivisessa arvonluonnissa, 2015. - Russell, Pttiniemi and Koivuneva, 2014: A map of social enteprises and their ecosystems is Europe. A Country report on Finland. European commission- Kostilainen and Tykkylinen, 2013: TheCharacteristics of Finnish Social Enteprises.- Karjalainen ja Syrjnen, 2009: Onko Suomessa yhteiskunnallisia yrityksi?
Ecosystem is fragile and patchy
Policy actions: Law on work integration social enterprises (2003),
recommendations by MEEs working group on SE (2010-2011)
Marketing and awareness rising: Social Enteprise Mark (2011)
Community building and interest representation: SYY ry (2009), Arvo-
liitto ry (2014)
Finance: No specialized sources of funding. Sitras project on impact
investment (2014-2016), crowdfunding platforms and instruments
Research and education: Coordinated by Finsern. Some actors in the field
Aalto, LUT, Diaconia University of Applied Sciences,
Training and consultation: Kasvuhuone, KSL - opintokeskus
Finnish social enterprisesCriteria applied by SEM and Arvo-liitto
- Operates in markets, takes financial risks
- Primary purpose is to produce common good
- Major part of profits is used to promote the companys social aim
- Transparency and openness of the business
The difficulty of counting
- ETLA (2015): more than 19 000 SEs which have about 126 000 employees (registered associations, n=3000 in Russell et al., not included)
- Russell et al. (2014): about 5 000 SEs (privately owned SMEs not included)
- Karjalainen ja Syrjnen (2009): about 12 000 SEs (only SMEs included)
Variety regarding social causes, ownership structures, industries, organizational forms, sizes and life spans is great (Etla, 2015; Kostilainen ja Tykkylinen, 2013).
Some Finnish peculiarities
- Social mission can be pursued with profit distribution
- More strongly associated with operational logics and terms of business sector than with those of community economy
- Some (recognized) SEs are owned by public sector actors
Social-impact enterprise: Mifuko Ltd.
Social-profit enterprise: Diacor Ltd.
Social-process enterprise: Diadome Ltd.
Social-output enterprise: Viittakivi Ltd.
Lets stay in touch, email@example.com
presentation available in www.slideshare.org
THANK YOU! KIITOS!