1Participation toSocial Enterpriseby those with Social Risks-Based on interviews to Italian Social Cooperatives Type B-Doshisha University Graduate School
Department of Sociology
Major in Social Welfare
ND
2 Grade of Mater Course
Yujiro MINAMI

2Objective/Methodology of Research・To enlighten the actual situation of participation to Social
Enterprise by those with Social Risks
・The departing point of analysis is「Participation」upon 「Co-Production」concept
by Victor Pestoff
・To analyze the qualitative dataobtained through interviews topeople in the management level ofItalian Social Cooperatives Type B

ResearchBackground13Employment rate of Specially-Supported high school：24.3％

Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare(2012)

Lack of Participation in work

4Research Background2
Necessity of Mediator
Limit of dualism – Labour market or Welfare employment
・Labour market：quantitative restriction first(employment rate)qualitative restriction second(Rational Consideration)
profit>welfare function
・”Welfare employment”：wage unable to guarantee living standards
profit<welfare function

Necessity of Mediator to balance
between profit and welfare function

5Expectation to Social Enterprise in Japan

Driving Force of Intermediate Labour Market

Social Security Council(2013)

6Research Question“It is Continuity and Durability that areimportant for social enterprises to pursue inorder to complete their mission.”

Matsunaga K.(2012)

Do Continuity and Durability secure the participation tosocial enterprises by those with social risks?

What is the current situation of participationby those with social risks to Italian Social
Cooperatives as the first legal form?

7Comprehensive characteristics of Social Enterprises①

Clearly Noted
Social Objectives

Asset Lock
Possession/GovernanceBy Multi-Stake Holder (Non-distribution of profit)

OECD(2008)

8

Participation：Pestoff’s Idea1①. Entrance of Participation
Low(Not participatory)High(participatory)

Greater

Active consumer

Active co-producer(ideal)Less

Passive client
Ad hoc participant(traditional
governance (sometimes in importanttype)matters)

accessibility
ImportanceAccessibility: the distance to the service provider, the information available to citizens about theservice and its provisions, and so on.
Importance: whether the service can have an direct impact on the life and the life chances of
those affected, their families, their loved ones,

9

Participation：Pestoff’s Idea2②. Contents of Participation(examples in preschool services)
Political Participation：involvement in discussions and decision making
Economical Participation：contribution time and materials to the runningof maintenance of a facility
Social Participation：to plan and contribute to various social events suchas the winter holiday part, spring party, and so on
Service Specific Participation：from the management and maintenanceof a facility, replacement of the staff in caseof sickness or seminar, to work on aregular basis

10Participation: Pestoff’s Idea3③. Continuity/Ordinariness of Participation
DurabilityLowMediumHighOrdinariness
HighMedium

Low

Vertical：Level of ordinary participation in the provision of public services
Horizontal：Durability of relationship between staff and those with Social risksTime density(Enduring social services are better)

11

Italian History: Legislative System
1978

Basaglia Law(Low no. 833 )Emergence of Social Cooperatives

1981

The Outline of the Bill “Social Cooperatives Act”

1991

Social Cooperatives Act(Low no. 381)：details in Appendix 1

Tanaka N.(2004)

Okayasu K.(2011)

1997

Reform of Employment Promotion of Persons withdisabilities Act: Legal Employment Rate 7%

2003

Reform of probation labour system(apprendistato),
Introduction of labour insertion system(inserimento lavorativo)

2006

New Act on Social Enterprise
Mitsubishi UFJ Research & Consulting Co., ltd.(2010)

12

Outline of field work
Place：Province of Tuscany, Prefecture of Florence
Period：02/28/13 till 03/04/13
Interviewee：5 people(1/3/1) in the management level at 3
social cooperatives(A/B/C)
Duration：1-1.5 hours eachmethod：semi-structured interview
ethical consideration：Verbal consensus on research objectives,
meaning, method, free intension ofcontribution to research, protection ofprivacy, method of presentation
analytical method：verbatim report→code→categorize
Sato I.（2010）→modelling→to story

13

Result of field work①. Entrance of Participation
Promotion factorof participation

・Making good use of ample legal systems(direct/indirect)
・Internal mutual supplement system by being in thesame group with other cooperatives
・Impeccable principle’s basis

Inhibition factorof participation

・Situation to reluctantly give priority toauthenticated people
・Making no use of volunteers as capitals

Making good use of legal system as capitals⇔Dilemma to exclude people leaking out from the system

14

Result of field work②. Contents of Participation
Political Participation： ‐ Participation in the general meeting to be held once a year at least- Participation in daily discussions=“Container with rules”- Participation in informal discussions like at dinner- Multi-layered discussion system
Manager at site→Director→Administrator‐Fixed meeting every 2 weeks among parties(Cooperative C)
Economic Participation： Participation limited to operate at site
Social Participation： No result
Service Specific Participation：Participation in the project team considered as adequate foreach those with Social Risks

・The overall degree of participation is low.
・Major part of participation is at the operating site.
・However, there are various ways to participate indiscussions and decision making.

15

Result of field work
Durability/Ordinariness of Participation- Ordinariness between staff and those withSocial Risks is high only in the rare situations.
- Durable only if;
Social Cooperatives are durable,
or
There are adequate jobs for those withSocial Risks.

16

Towards future research①Entrance of Participation
・How can people exiting from the legal system
be connected?
ex: local authority
other cooperatives(consortium)
enterprises for profit in the community
・How should volunteers be make good use of?
②Contents of Participation
・How can we establish the regular-basis reassessment system?
③Durability/Ordinariness of Participation
・How should authority subsidize incase of serious difficulties in cooperatives?
・How should cooperatives deal with cases of nojobs adequate for those with Social Risks?

17

Thank you very much foryour kind attention!

ANNEX
Outline ofResearch2

18

GRUPPO COOPERATIVO CGM

Cooperative A
Place：9km from Florence
Population：@48,000
Type：B(ex-A)
Foundation：2009
Member：86(31/12/2011)
Full time: 55
part time: 10‐27－46yrs
People with problems: 32
Rate of Work Integration：
37％ on the average(2011)
Work：Dry Cleaning(28％),
art(24％), Cleaning work
Turn Over：1,628,000euro(2011)

CO&SO. FIRENZE
Cooperative B
Place：11km from Florence
Population：@20,000
Type：B(forming a group withothers)
Foundation：2002
Member：189(2011, 750 inthe group)
People with problems : 58
+ training 12
Rate of Work Integration：
34.8％
Work：Maintenance of publicparks, operation of small
restaurant, Cleaning work,
Garbage collectionなど
Turn Over：@12,000,000euro(bythe whole group, 2011)

Cooperative C
Place：23km from Florence
Population：@8,000
Type：B
Foundation：1994
Member：12人(at the site)
People with problems: 12
Rate of Work Integration：91％(at site)
Work：landscape gardening,
maintenance of public parks,
Garbage collection, Cleaningworks
Turn Over：unknown