scholarly journals Social Innovation: Worklessness, Welfare and Well-being

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 457-467 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Roy ◽  
Neil McHugh ◽  
Clementine Hill O'Connor

The UK Government has recently implemented large-scale public-sector funding cuts and substantial welfare reform. Groups within civil society are being encouraged to fill gaps in service provision, and ‘social innovation’ has been championed as a means of addressing social exclusion, such as that caused by worklessness, a major impediment to citizens being able to access money, power and resources, which are key social determinants of health. The aim of this article is to make the case for innovative ‘upstream’ approaches to addressing health inequalities, and we discuss three prominent social innovations gaining traction: microcredit for enterprise; social enterprise in the form of Work Integration Social Enterprises (WISEs); and Self Reliant Groups (SRGs). We find that while certain social innovations may have the potential to address health inequalities, large-scale research programmes that will yield the quality and range of empirical evidence to demonstrate impact, and, in particular, an understanding of the causal pathways and mechanisms of action, simply do not yet exist.

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosemary Lysaght ◽  
Michael J. Roy ◽  
Jack S. Rendall ◽  
Terry Krupa ◽  
Liam Ball ◽  
...  

Purpose The aim of this exploratory, mixed methods study was to develop and test a tool that identifies foundational dimensions of work integration social enterprises (WISEs) for use in empirical studies and enterprise self-assessment. Construction of the initial prototype was based upon a review of the literature and prior qualitative research by the authors. Design/methodology/approach A 20-item question pool with a four-point response scale was constructed to explore WISE business and employment practices and strategies for worker growth and development. Three sequential field tests were conducted with the prototype – the first with 5 Canadian WISEs, the second with 14 WISEs in the UK and the third with 6 Canadian WISEs involved in an outcome study in the mental health sector. Each field test included completion of the questionnaire by persons with managerial responsibility within the WISE and evaluative feedback captured through questions on the applicability and interpretability of the items. Findings Testing of the prototype instrument revealed the inherent diversity in the field and the difficulty in creating questions that both embrace that diversity and produce unidimensional variables definable along a spectrum. A number of challenges with question structure were identified and have been modified throughout the iterative testing process. Research limitations/implications This study identified central domains for inclusion in a multi-dimensional WISE assessment tool. Further testing will help further refine scaling and establish psychometric properties. Originality/value This measure will provide a descriptive profile of WISEs across sectors and identify WISE core dimensions for research and organizational development.


2013 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sian Lockwood

PurposeThis paper seeks to explore the potential of micro‐enterprises to assist local health and well‐being boards in delivering their strategies, especially in relation to tackling health inequalities, prevention and community support.Design/methodology/approachThis paper draws on experience gained by Community Catalysts from its work supporting social care and health micro‐enterprise across the UK. There has been little formal research into social care and health micro‐enterprise and so the paper relies heavily on data gathered by Community Catalysts in the course of its work and uses local case studies to illustrate points.FindingsThe paper explains the importance of social care and health micro‐enterprise to the work of health and well being boards, emphasising its potential to help tackle health inequalities and contribute to effective health and well‐being strategies.Originality/valueThere are no examples as yet of imaginative health and well‐being boards engaging effectively with micro‐providers, but boards can draw on learning from local authorities actively stimulating and supporting local micro‐enterprise.


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamara Bilbija ◽  
Jack Stout Rendall

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide new evidence on the different dimensions of well-being that can occur in work integration social enterprises (WISEs). This study aims to call for a future discussion on the role of meaningful work (MW) and its impact upon well-being beyond satisfaction. Design/methodology/approach Explorative interviews were undertaken with professional workers and beneficiaries within a Spanish WISE. These interviews aimed to uncover similarities and differences across aspects of what makes work meaningful to them as workers. Both eudaimonic and hedonic dimensions of well-being were used to analyse the data. Findings Different groups of employees show that professional employees (those working in the WISE, not because of their disadvantages in the labour market) create their narratives based on MW experiences (eudaimonic well-being), whereas beneficiaries (those working in the WISE because of their disadvantages in the labour market) often describe how satisfied they are at work (hedonic). Originality/value The concept of MW within WISEs to achieve well-being for both beneficiaries and professional workers could be enhanced through discussion of the different types of well-being that are being realised in such settings. Engaging with the concept of “eudaimonia” helps the authors to achieve this aim.


Author(s):  
Sanja Franc ◽  
Mirjana Hladika

The global economy brings about new trends, challenges, and needs, which require new solutions. Social innovations can have a major role in satisfying unmet social needs and increasing overall well-being. Measuring social innovation is therefore an important task with the purpose of informing the stakeholders about the performance value that an innovation creates. Standard accounting tools often neglect social or environmental impact, and thus, new or adjusted methods need to be developed. The objective of this chapter is to analyze methods of measuring social innovation and discuss advantages and disadvantages of traditional measures versus new approaches with the purpose of better understanding the significance of social innovation in the global economy. The chapter consists of six parts. After the introduction follows the literature review. The third part of the chapter discusses different approaches to measuring innovations while the fourth part suggests some new approaches to measuring social innovations. The fifth part describes future research perspectives. The final part is the conclusion.


Author(s):  
Rafael Ziegler ◽  
Nadia von Jacobi

Economic space for social innovation is not bounded by markets. Further to the money-based exchange relations in markets, there is self and informal provision based on social norms such as reciprocity, community, public provision of entitlements and of public goods organized via political processes, and professional provision based on expert knowledge. Although these ideal-types blur in practice, they show the rich contours and collaborative pluralism of economic space. Fostering fair space for social innovation requires taking all these modes and their relations into account. Social innovations as messages signal to the public where a change in mode or a reconfiguration of modes is demanded. Fairness as a matter of taking the perspective of those marginalized and least advantaged, calls for evaluative scrutiny with respect to such messages: do social innovations empower beneficiaries to become agents; and do they consider their well-being as patients?


Author(s):  
Muradiye Ates

By aiming at improving social welfare and well-being, social policies, social innovation, and smart territories are closely related to each other. Local authorities are in direct contact with citizens and regional needs, which makes them an important actor in overcoming challenges ranging from housing, spare-time activities to education to improving democratic standards. There are many successful examples of social innovations, including FixMyStreet.com, participatory budgeting, and Open Government Vienna, which are supported by local governments that can contribute to the formation of smart cities and territories. By elaborating related examples from various perspectives, this chapter highlights the relation between social policy, social innovation, and smart cities.


2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 522 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georg Eichler ◽  
Erich Schwarz

Interest in social innovations (SIs) from both the academic and the policy side is growing. Nonetheless, we still know little about which sustainable development goals (SDGs) SIs already address. Furthermore, only little is known about who the innovators developing and implementing SIs are. In this paper, we aim to bring more clarity and structure to the field of SIs. Firstly, a systematic literature review was conducted, before a content analysis was used to analyze the definitions used with regard to similarities. Secondly, all case studies described in the reviewed articles were then further systematically analyzed in order to identify the social or environmental problems addressed and the innovators involved. For the purpose of classifying the diverse types of problems, we used the globally known and broadly accepted 17 sustainable development goals (SDGs). Results showed that most SI case studies deal with an improvement of health and well-being. Furthermore, our study illustrates that there is a pronounced difference in the focus of SIs between developing and developed countries. Concerning the innovators, our results indicate that five types of innovators are fundamentally involved in developing and implementing SIs: social entrepreneurs, NGOs and non-profits, public institutions, civil society, firms, and social enterprises. Our definition analysis as well as the identification and classification of the innovators and addressed social needs bring much-needed clarity and structure to the field. However, our systematic review shows that SI is still in its infancy and it will be interesting to see where the field will head.


2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_4) ◽  
Author(s):  

Abstract Health inequalities - systematically higher rates of morbidity and mortality among people with a lower socioeconomic position - have been on the public health agenda for decades now. However, despite massive research efforts (and somewhat less massive policy efforts) health inequalities have not narrowed - on the contrary, relative inequalities have widened considerably. It is therefore time for a re-think: after decades of research we need to step back and ask ourselves: what went wrong? Johan Mackenbach argues, in a book published by Oxford University Press (2019), that the main problem is that public health researchers and policy-makers have misunderstood the nature of health inequalities. They have too often ignored insights from other disciplines, such as economics (which has a stricter attitude to issues of causality) and sociology (which has a subtler understanding the nature of social inequality). They have also failed to integrate contradictory research findings into mainstream thinking. This workshop will focus on three such contradictions, and will discuss whether it is possible to re-think health inequalities in a way that will allow more effective policy approaches. (1) It has been surprisingly difficult to find convincing scientific evidence for a causal effect of socioeconomic disadvantage on health. Should public health reconsider its idea that health inequalities are caused by social inequalities, and widen their scope to give more room to social selection, genetic factors and other non-causal pathways in their analysis? (2) There is not a single country in Europe where over the past decades health inequalities, as measured on a relative scale, have narrowed. This is due to the fact that all groups have improved their health, but higher socioeconomic groups have improved more. This is even true in the only European country (i.e., England) in which the government has pursued a large-scale policy program to reduce health inequalities. Should public health accept that reducing relative inequalities in health is impossible, and focus on reducing absolute health inequalities instead? (3) The Nordic countries, which have been more successful than other European countries in reducing inequalities in material living conditions, do not have smaller health inequalities. It is as if inequalities in other factors, such as psychosocial and behavioural factors, in these countries have filled the gap left by reduced inequalities in material living conditions. Should public health reconsider its idea that material living conditions are the foundation for health, and re-focus on psychological, cultural and other less tangible factors instead? In this round table Johan Mackenbach will present and illustrate these contradictions and propose his answers to these contentious issues. Then, the four panelists will present their view-points, followed by a general discussion between panelists and the audience. Key messages After four decades of research into health inequalities, it is necessary to step back and ask ourselves why it has so far been impossible to reduce health inequalities. More effective policies to tackle health inequalities will only be possible when public health has come to grips with contradictory research findings. Johan Mackenbach Contact: [email protected] Johannes Siegrist Contact: [email protected] Alastair Leyland Contact: [email protected] Olle Lundberg Contact: [email protected] Ramune Kalediene Contact: [email protected]


Author(s):  
Thiemo Fetzer ◽  
Marc Witte ◽  
Lukas Hensel ◽  
Jon Jachimowicz ◽  
Johannes Haushofer ◽  
...  

We conducted a large-scale survey covering 58 countries (N = 108,075) at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic—between March 20th and April 7th 2020—to explore how beliefs about citizens’ and government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and the actions taken by governments, affected mental well-being. Our analyses reveal three findings. First, many respondents indicate that their country’s citizens and government’s response was insufficient. Second, respondents’ perception of an insufficient public and government response was associated with lower mental well-being. Third, we exploit time variation in country-level lockdown announcements, both around the world and through an event-study in the UK, and find that strong government actions—i.e., announcing a nationwide lockdown—were related to an improvement in respondents’ views of their fellow citizens and government, and to better mental well-being. These findings suggest that policy-makers may not only need to consider how their decisions affect the spread of COVID-19, but also how such choices influence the mental well-being of their population.


2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 421-437 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne Blake

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the potential fruitfulness of the theory of Alasdair MacIntyre for understanding how social enterprises may facilitate well-being, using empirical evidence from doctoral research to illustrate this. Design/methodology/approach This paper is based on findings from research conducted at a mental health training and employment organisation which used gardening as rehabilitative tool. Participant observation and semi-structured interviews with staff, volunteers and service users were used to generate the data, a MacIntyrean lens used to analyse the data, and some suggestions are made as to why social enterprises may be particularly suited to such an approach. Findings Practitioners encouraged the seeking of “internal goods” or “goods of excellence” within practices, as it was this which was understood to facilitate well-being. Service users shared in this view, perceiving their time on the case site primarily as “work” and choosing to engage with the service out of a desire to meaningfully contribute to the community project. Research limitations/implications This research is conducted on a small scale and therefore lacks generalisability. The lack of comparison with other organisational forms using the same practice is also a limitation. Originality/value This theory offers an alternative lens for considering how social enterprises might contribute to well-being. The data presented here also complement the growing body of research literature on Work Integration Social Enterprises, considering some of the wider well-being benefits beyond work integration, which thus far has received limited empirical attention.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document