Awareness and attitudes toward social entrepreneurship among university students and disabled people. The case of the Czech Republic

Автор: Kroil Ondrej, Pospil Richard, Kosina David

Журнал: Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast @volnc-esc-en

Рубрика: Foreign experience

Статья в выпуске: 5 т.13, 2020 года.

Бесплатный доступ

In the Czech Republic, the concept of social entrepreneurship is still being developed and lacks, for example, systematic public support and regulation. In addition, the total number of social enterprises operating in the Czech Republic is low and thus, the concept of social entrepreneurship cannot reach its potential. To accelerate this development, raising awareness of social entrepreneurship among the Czech population may be important. Based on the survey carried out among 200 possible stakeholders of Czech social enterprises we explored the awareness and attitudes of selected groups of people towards social entrepreneurship. These groups of people are disabled people as typical employees of Czech social enterprises and university students as possible future founders of these enterprises. Our research project focuses on three issues: i) the level of awareness of the concept of social entrepreneurship among university students and disabled people; ii) the position of disabled people in the current labour marketiii) the willingness of students to become entrepreneurs and to start business with social purpose. During the research, we used the method of structured questionnaires. The research shows that the awareness of the concept of social entrepreneurship is generally low. Nevertheless, students consider becoming entrepreneurs and starting a business with social purpose. The research also shows that according to the opinion of the respondents, it is difficult to find employment as a disabled person and that the current labour market does not offer enough vacant positions which could be interesting for these persons. From this perspective, we can assess further development of Czech social enterprises (especially of Work Integration Social Enterprises) as very important.

Еще

Social enterprise, wise, social entrepreneurship, disabled people, university students, awareness

Короткий адрес: https://sciup.org/147225493

IDR: 147225493   |   DOI: 10.15838/esc.2020.5.71.15

Текст научной статьи Awareness and attitudes toward social entrepreneurship among university students and disabled people. The case of the Czech Republic

In the Introduction, the typical features of the social entrepreneurship environment in the Czech Republic are highlighted. At the same time, this chapter also emphasizes the relationship between the conceptualization of social entrepreneurship in the Czech Republic and in the EU countries. This relationship is represented especially by influence of EMES ™ European Research Network approach to social entrepreneurship.

Social Entrepreneurship in the European Union

Nowadays, social entrepreneurship represents one of the possibilities the entrepreneurs can use to contribute to the solution of pressing social problems such as social exclusion, crime and unemployment. The general definition identifies social enterprises as the subjects selling products and providing services to achieve economic self-sufficiency and at the same time following a social purpose. According to Borzaga, Galera, Franchini, Chiomento, Nogales and Carini [1], the term “social enterprise” is often conflated with WISE (Work integration social enterprise) in public understanding in European Union countries. These enterprises focus on the employment of labour-market disadvantaged persons and the objective of these enterprises is to integrate these people into society or prevent their social exclusion. The labour-market disadvantaged persons are disabled persons, socially excluded persons, low-qualified persons and older or long-term unemployed people.

Although the typical feature of the prepandemics labour market (EU-28; 6.3% in September 2019, Eurostat1) is the low rate of unemployment, it is necessary to pay continuous attention to disadvantaged persons because these people face many specific social and health risks. According to Eurostat data, in 2018, 28.7 % of the EU population with a physical activity limitation was at risk of poverty or social exclusion, compared with 19.2 % of those with no limitations. Social entrepreneurship can be an effective tool for the integration of these people into society and an innovative way to protect them against social exclusion.

In EU countries, there is no uniform definition of social entrepreneurship. In some EU countries, social entrepreneurship is included in national legislation (e. g. Slovakia and Finland). In other countries, social entrepreneurship is not yet officially regulated (e. g. the Czech Republic and Austria). The definition of social entrepreneurship according to EMES (research network of university research centres and individual researchers of social enterprise) is widely recognized in the EU countries [2] (Table 1).

The definition provided above suggests that social entrepreneurship is based on two sets of principles – economic and social, and the emphasis is placed on the role of stakeholders.

Social Entrepreneurship in the Czech Republic

Currently, the Czech Republic lacks formal legislative regulation of social entrepreneurship. For this reason, an unofficial definition created by the non-profit organization TESSEA2, inspired by the definition of EMES (introduced above), is used in the Czech Republic. This definition recommends the principles and indicators which should a social enterprise comply with ( Table 2 ). The definition is intended primarily for the allocation of subsidies and not for including social enterprises in the indicative database administered by the Czech

Table 1. The definition of social entrepreneurship according to EMES

Economic principles

The principle

Explanation of the principle

a) continuous activity; production, sale of goods and provision of services

Operating in market of the goods and services is one of the main goals of the social enterprise.

b) a high degree of autonomy

Social enterprises are not the entities managed by public authorities or other organizations.

c) a significant level of economic risk

Those who establish a social enterprise assume totally or partly the risk inherent in the initiative.

d) a minimum amount of paid work

The activity carried out in social enterprises requires a minimum level of paid workers.

Social principles

e) an explicit aim to bring a benefit to the community

The main goal of the social enterprise is to serve society as the whole or to a certain group of people.

f) the initiative launched by a group of citizens

The social enterprise is the result of a joint effort of citizens who share the idea of pursuing a socially beneficial goal.

g) one member = one vote

The decision-making power is not derived from corporate capital.

h) a participatory nature, which involves various parties affected by the activity

The impact of the stakeholders on decision making in a social enterprise.

i) a limited profit distribution

Social enterprises are non-profit organizations or enterprises in which any profit is redistributed only to a limited extent.

Source: EMES.

2 Definition and Principles of Social Enterprise, TESSEA. Available at:

Table 2. The principles of social entrepreneurship according to TESSEA

Principle

Meaning

Social impact

Implementation of activities beneficial for society or a specific group of disadvantaged people

Employing of disadvantaged people in the labour market (in case of WISE)

Economic impact

Possible profit is used for further development of an enterprise

Autonomy in management decision-making

Sales from the sale of own products and services must form at least a part of the revenue

Ability to manage economic risks

Environmental impact and impact on local society

Taking into consideration the environmental impacts of business activities of the enterprise

Cooperation of the social enterprise with local entities

Source: TESSEA.

Table 3. The indicators for social enterprises according to TESSEA

Area

Indicator

Social

Employees are regularly and systematically informed of activities of the enterprise, its revenues and implementation of socially beneficial activity

People from disadvantaged groups form at least 30 % of all employees (in the case of WISE)

Economic

At least 50 % of profit is used for further development of the enterprise and its socially beneficial objectives

In its decision making, the management is not dependent on other entities.

Sales from the sale of own products and services form at least 30 % of the total revenue

The enterprise uses one of the standard methods of economic management or risk management

Environment and local society

The enterprise has formulated principles of environmentally friendly policy and fulfils them in practice

The enterprise communicates and cooperates with local entities

Source: TESSEA.

Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (listing in the database is voluntary). The principles and indicators are recorded in the following tables:

The following table 3 contains indicators that specify the implementation of the principles.

The research carried out in the Czech Republic in 2018 by the authors of this article suggests that WISE are the most frequented type of social enterprises. Czech WISE focus predominantly on the integration of disabled people back into society by giving them job opportunities (Krocil, Dopita, Pospfsil, [3]). At the same time, the research showed that in 2018, there was an excess supply over the demand for work of disabled people. That suggests even higher importance of the existing WISE as without them the excess supply would be even more significant.

According to TESSEA3, there are currently 300 social enterprises operating in the Czech Republic and 90% of them have the character of WISE. 80% of these companies focus on the integration of people with disabilities – in 2018 they employed almost 4,000 such disadvantaged people (according to Czech Labour Office4, in December 2019 there were 33,000 unemployed disabled people in the labour market). However, in the Czech Republic, the concept of social entrepreneurship is still being developed and lacks, for example, systematic public support and regulation. In addition, the total number of social enterprises operating in the Czech

Republic is low and thus, the concept of social entrepreneurship cannot reach its potential. To accelerate this development, raising awareness of social entrepreneurship among the Czech population may be important. In this research we focus on two selected groups of people within Czech population – these are disabled people as typical employees of Czech social enterprises and Czech university students of humanities as potential founders of new social enterprises. The relationship between social entrepreneurship on the one hand, and university students and people with disabilities on the other, is supported by the following Literature Review.

Список литературы Awareness and attitudes toward social entrepreneurship among university students and disabled people. The case of the Czech Republic

  • Borzaga C., Galera G., Franchini B., Chiomento S., Nogales R., Carini Ch. Social Enterprises and Their Ecosystems in Europe. Comparative Synthesis Report. European Commission, 2020. 30 p.
  • Defourny J., Nyssens M. The EMES approach of social enterprise in a comparative perspective. Working Paper no. 12/03, 2012. 47 p. Available at: from https://emes.net/content/uploads/publications/EMES-WP- 12- 03_Defourny- Nyssens.pdf
  • Kročil O., Dopita M., Pospíšil R. Integration social enterprises as a tool of employment policy. Ekonomski Pregled, 2019, vol. 70, pp. 554–571.
  • Defourny J., Nyssens M. Social enterprise in Europe: Recent trends and developments. EMES Working Papers no. 08/01 (transversal paper), 2008. Available at: https://emes.net/publications/working- papers/socialenterprise-in- europe- recent- trends- and- developments/
  • Defourny J., Gregoire O., Davister C. Work integration social enterprises in the European Union: An overview of existing models. EMES Working Papers no. 04/04 (transversal paper), 2004. Available at: https://emes.net/publications/working- papers/work- integration- social- enterprises- in- the- european- union- an- overview- ofexisting-models/
  • Spear R., Bidet E. The role of social enterprise in European labour markets. EMES Working Papers no. 03/10 (transversal paper), 2003. Available at: https://emes.net/publications/working- papers/the- role- of- socialenterprise-in- european- labour- markets/
  • Adam S., Aviles G., Ferrari D., Amstutz J., Crivelli L., Enrico C., Gafner A., Greppi S., Schmitz D., Wüthrich B., Zoebeli D. Work integration social enterprises in Switzerland. Nonprofit Policy Forum, 2016, vol. 7, pp. 509–539.
  • Greblikaite J., Sroka W., Grants J. Development of social entrepreneurship in European Union: Policy and situation of Lithuania and Poland. Transformations in Business and Economics, 2015, vol. 14, pp. 376–396.
  • Asmalovskij A., Sadilek T. The current state of social entrepreneurship in the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Sociologia, 2016, vol. 48, pp. 319–339.
  • Anastasiadis M. Work integration social enterprises in Austria – characteristics, evolution and perspectives. Nonprofit Policy Forum, 2016, vol. 7, pp. 541–564.
  • Shier M., Graham J.R., Jones M.E. Barriers to employment as experienced by disabled people: A qualitative analysis in Calgary and Regina, Canada. Disability & Society, 2009, vol. 24, pp. 63–75.
  • Thornton P. Disabled people, employment and social justice. Social Policy and Society, 2005, vol. 4, pp. 65–73.
  • Harris S.P., Renko M., Caldwell K. Accessing social entrepreneurship: Perspectives of people with disabilities and key stakeholders. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 2013, vol. 38, pp. 35–48.
  • Caldwell K., Harris S.P., Renko M. The potential of social entrepreneurship: conceptual tools for applying citizenship theory to policy and practice. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 2012, vol. 50, pp. 505–518.
  • Hall E., Wilton R. Alternative spaces of ‘work’ and inclusion for disabled people. Disability & Society, 2011, vol. 26, pp. 867–880.
  • Shaheen G.E. Inclusive entrepreneurship: A Process for improving self- employment for people with disabilities. Journal of Policy Practice, 2016, vol. 15, pp. 58–81.
  • Buhariwala P., Wilton R., Evans J. Social enterprises as enabling workplaces for people with psychiatric disabilities. Disability & Society, 2015, vol. 30, pp. 865–879.
  • Smith P., McVilly K.R., McGillivray J., Chan J. Developing open employment outcomes for people with an intellectual disability utilising a social enterprise framework. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 2018, vol. 48, pp. 59–77.
  • Kummitha R.K.R. Social entrepreneurship as a tool to remedy social exclusion: A win – win scenario? South Asia Research, 2016, vol. 36, pp. 61–79.
  • Franco M., Haase H., Lautenschläger A. Students’ entrepreneurial intentions: An inter- regional comparison. Education and Training, 2010, vol. 52, pp. 260–275.
  • Ashour S. Social and business entrepreneurship as career options for university students in the United Arab Emirates: The drive – preparedness gap. Cogent Education, 2016, vol. 3.
  • Kedmenec I., Rebernik M., Peric J. The impact of individual characteristics on intentions to pursue social entrepreneurship. Ekonomski Pregled, 2015, vol. 66, pp. 119–137.
  • Ip Ch.I., Wu S.Ch., Liu H.Ch., Liang Ch. Revisiting the antecedents of social entrepreneurial intentions in Hong Kong. International Journal of Educational Psychology, 2017, vol. 6, pp. 301–323.
  • Barton M., Schaefer R., Canavati S. To be or not to be a social entrepreneur: Motivational drivers amongst American business students. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 2018, vol. 6, pp. 9–35.
  • Kireeva N.S., Zavyalov D.V., Saginova O.V., Zavyalova N.B. Students’ perception of social entrepreneurship. Revista de la Universidad del Zulia, 2019, vol. 10, pp. 200–210.
Еще
Статья научная