Index

Citation (2017), "Index", Kerlin, J.A. (Ed.) Shaping Social Enterprise, Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 307-317. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-78714-250-320171013 Publisher: Emerald Publishing Limited Copyright © 2017 Emerald Publishing Limited INDEX Note: Page numbers followed by “f,” “t,” and “b” refer to figures, tables, and boxes, respectively. Act on the Establishment and Operation of Public-Service Corporations (South Korea), 54 Agency, 37, 99, 239, 256, 257, 260, 261, 273, 291 enterprising, 245 government, 52–55 human, 21, 225–226, 285 intermediary, 95, 101, 103 international, 91, 35, 121 social entrepreneurial, 244 Alter’s spectrum, 30f, 31–32 Argentina, 15t, 16t, 62, 64, 66, 68–69t, 88t, 178, 231, 259 Associative-Business-Cooperative (ABC) approach, 173, 180, 182, 191–195 associative nonprofit organizations and market approaches convergence, 182–184 businesses and mission-driven business approach convergence, 184–185 hybrid organizations emergence and re-emergence, 185–187 Australia, 4, 22, 255, 281, 302, 304 discussion discursive coordinative and communicative framework, 272–274 historical institutional framework, 271–272 findings micro-level discourses, 269–270 socioeconomic analysis, 265–269 literature review critique, 259–260 embedding discourse in historical institutionalism, 260–261 macro-level studies of social enterprise in, 258–259 method appraisal, 262–263 procedure adaptation, 263–265 socioeconomic data for, 266t Authoritarian governments, 87 Autonomous Communities (Spain), 140, 146, 148, 151, 160, 161, 302 Autonomous diverse social enterprise model, 18, 170–172, 180, 188, 194, 268–270, 283, 293–294b Autonomous mutualism social enterprise model, 17, 157, 190–191, 292b, 297, 301, 306 Bangladesh, 223, 259 Baseline physical capital, 238 Bayesian item response theory models, 33 B-Corps movement, 184–185 Bottom-up approach, 132–135, 220, 225, 257, 297 Brazil, 62, 223 British Council case study, 96, 289, 296 confirmation, 98–99 diffusion of innovation by, 97f funding and implementation, 97–98 from information seeking to decision on adoption, 96–97 social entrepreneur program by, 99f Bulgaria, 114 Bureaucratic-authoritarian regime, 62 Canada, 187 Canyou Group, 82, 98 Capitalist development, 7 Capitalist Development and Democracy (Rueschemeyer, Stephens, and Stephens), 7 Central Compilation and Translation Bureau, 96 Change agents, 86, 91 Chile, 4, 21, 62, 281–284, 290, 291, 296, 301, 304 ABC approach, 180, 182 associative nonprofit organizations and market approaches convergence, 182–184 businesses and mission-driven business approach convergence, 184–185 hybrid organizations emergence and re-emergence, 185–187 analysis, 191–195 institutional analysis based on Kerlin’s conceptual framework, 174–175 autonomous diverse model, 180 government, 176–177 liberal Chilean culture, 175–176 liberal pattern for Chilean civil society, 178, 179t transition to innovation-driven economy, 177–178 institutional changes, 187–191 Kerlin’s conceptual analysis for, 171 organizational models diversity and institutional changes, 171–173 Chilean Department of Cooperatives (DECOOP), 186 China, 4, 20, 79–80, 281, 282, 288, 289, 291, 295, 296, 302, 305 British Council case study, 96 confirmation, 98–99 funding and implementation, 97–98 from information seeking to decision on adoption, 96–97 comparison of case studies, 99–100 country model for social enterprise in, 100–101, 102t discussion, 103–104 literature review, 80–85 Nonprofit Incubator (NPI) case study, 91, 92t, 99 from adoption to restructuring, 93–94 from agenda setting to knowledge and information seeking, 93 from innovation to diffusion, 94–96 mainstreaming and routinizing, 94 theoretical frameworks civil society model, 89–90 culture, 87, 88t diffusion of innovation (DOI), 86 economic stage, 90 government types, 87, 89 international influence, 90–91 macro-institutional social enterprise (MISE) framework, 85–86 China Philanthropy Development Center (Shenzhen), 85 China Philanthropy Research Institute, 85 China Social Enterprise and Social Investment Forum (CSESIF), 98 China Social Science Academy, 83 Citizen participatory indicator, 34 Civilian-run non-enterprise units (CRNE), 82 Civil society, 8–9, 12–15, 170, 174, 231–232, 305 awareness of, 234 Chilean model of, 189–190 comparable, 70 economy and original country models and, 12, 14–18 exclusion of, 28 and government and economy, empirical relationship, 12, 13 inclusion of, 28 independent variables, 33–34 indicators, 34 liberal, 178, 179t, 180, 188, 189, 268, 269 organizations (CSOs), 34, 48, 87, 189, 234 participation, 34, 40–44, 48 post-authoritarian, 157, 292b, 301 Salamon and Sokolowski’s models of sector structure of, 13t sectors, 12 statist model, 67, 100, 189, 294 Civil Society Research Center (Beijing University), 85 Collectivism, 11, 28, 44, 86, 104, 149–150, 175–176, 212, 230, 283, 284, 286, 288, 299, 300, 303 in-group, 36, 66, 87, 230, 265 Commercial Act (South Korea), 54 Commodification, by storytelling, 241 Commodity networks, 242 Community of Solidarity Organizations, 183 Competitiveness, definition of, 35 Conservative welfare regime, 60 Consumer Cooperative Act (South Korea), 54 Conventional businesses, 31 Cooperative government–business relationship, 58 Cooperatives, 82, 127–129, 132, 186, 189, 206, 283, 289 economic indicators for, 128t see also individual cooperatives Corporate social responsibility (CSR), 184 Corporate Tax Act (South Korea), 54 Coskun, M. E., 4 Country-level institutional factors, 140 Creating shared value (CSV), 184 Croatia, 114 Cultural dimensions, 149 Culture and entrepreneurship, 11–12 Cultures and Organizations (Hofstede et al), 36 Czech Republic, 114 Deferred democratization civil society model, 12–15 Democratic governance, 8 Denmark, 178 Dependent focused social enterprise model, 17–18, 158, 162, 190, 293b, 297, 302 Developmental state, 61–63 political–economic system and welfare regime, 59–61 scholarly discussions on, 57–58 Development Assistance Committee’s (DAC), 33 Diffusion of innovation (DOI), 86, 91, 95 by British Council, 97f by Nonprofit Incubator (NPI), 94f Director of Shanghai Civil Affairs, 93 Discursive institutionalism, 256–258, 261, 265, 272–274 Efficiency-driven economy, 10, 11, 17, 35, 62, 65, 90, 100, 177, 191, 292b, 297, 301, 305 EMES, Spain, 142 Employees’ Mutual Aid Associations (EMAAs), 124 Enmeshed focused social enterprise model, 17–18, 270, 273, 290, 293b Esping-Andersen’s framework, 60 European Commission, 153 European Social Enterprise Research Network (EMES), 207 European Social Fund (ESF), 122, 207 European Union, 158 Eurostat, 111, 114 Explicit social enterprise, 32 Factor-driven economy, 10, 11, 17, 35, 62, 65, 177, 190, 231, 305 Farmers’ Specialized Cooperative Law (China), 82 Farmers’ Specialized Cooperatives (FSC), 81, 82, 101, 103, 295 Financial capital, 240 Finding Australia’s Social Enterprise Sector (FASES), 263, 264 Finnish Association of People with Physical Disabilities, 240 Five Models of Civil Society Sectors, 110 Ford Foundation, 93 Formal institutions, 5, 28 fixed effects, 40–43 For-profit firms, 31 Fragmented Authoritarianism, 103 Framework Act on Cooperatives (South Korea), 54 Franco, Francisco, 145, 149, 301 Germany, 213 Gillard, J., 270 Global Competitiveness Index (GCI), 33, 35, 90, 231 Global Competitiveness Report (GCR), 9–10, 62, 65, 90, 111, 152, 177 criteria for economic development stages, 10t Global entrepreneurship monitor (GEM), 3, 4, 10, 28, 31, 32, 45, 149, 259 Adult Population Survey (2009), 30 Global Health Expenditure Database, 35 Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE), 35–36, 65–66, 87, 210 Research Program survey on culture, 33 Government and economy and civil society, empirical relationship, 12, 13 and entrepreneurship, empirical relationship, 9–11 Hierarchical linear modeling, 29 Historical institutionalism, 28, 110, 219, 226, 245–246, 256, 271–272 embedding discourse in, 260–261 and social enterprise, 224–225 theory of, 6–8 Hofstede Centre, 33 How to Change the World (Bornstein), 96 Hungary, 114 Immaterial capital, 240 Implicit social enterprise, 32 India, 223, 299 Individualism, 11, 14, 36, 40, 41, 44, 87, 149, 175–176, 212, 283, 286, 288, 299, 300, 303 Informal institutions, 5, 28 fixed effects, 38–40 In-group collectivism, 36, 66, 87, 230, 265 Innovation-driven economy, 10, 11, 18, 35, 62, 65, 86, 158, 177–178, 191, 269, 293b, 294b, 302, 305 transition to, 177–178 Institutional theory, 27 Institutions, concept of, 5 International aid, 37 Italy, 15t, 16t, 64, 66, 68–69t, 88t, 213–214, 231 Japan, 58, 63 John Hopkins Centre for Civil Society Studies, 121 John Hopkins Comparative Nonprofit Project, 111, 268 Latin America, 63 Latvia, 114 Liberal civil society model, 12, 13, 18 Liberal welfare regime, 60 Lithuania, 114 Local Tax Act (South Korea), 54 Macro-institutional processes and causal paths, 64–65, 64f Macro-institutional social enterprise (MISE), 80, 85–86, 90, 219, 225, 226, 306 framework, 1–6, 28 application, 229–232 critiques of, 18–19 culture and entrepreneurship, 11–12 economy, civil society, and original country models, 12, 14–18 government and economy, 9–13 historical institutionalism, theory of, 6–8 and micro-interactive approach to social enterprise, 244–245 original, 8–9 framework revising, 281–282 country models new insights, 291–301 new applications, 301–302 social enterprise development additional influences and, 282–290 Macro-level institutions, 5, 258–259, 286, 298 María Arizmendiarrieta, José, 145 Mercantilism, 59 Meso-level institutions, 5, 286, 289, 302–304, 306 Microcredit, 83–84 Micro-level institutions, 5, 225, 286, 289, 290, 302–304, 306 Ministry of Health & Social Welfare (South Korea), 58 Ministry of International Trade and Industry (South Korea), 58 Ministry of Labor (South Korea), 54, 55 Mondragón cooperative group (Spain), 145 Monroe-White, T., 4 Montalva, Eduardo Frei, 189 Multilevel modeling, 38 Mutual aid associations, 124–125, 126t economic indicators for, 126t Narada Foundation, 85, 93, 98 National Agency for Economic and Regional Growth (Sweden), 207 National Bank of Romania, 124 National Basic Living Security Act (2000) (South Korea), 52, 58, 60 National Institute for the Promotion of Social Economy (Instituto Nacional de Fomento de la Economía Social, INFES) (Spain), 146 National Institute of Statistics (NIS), 111, 119, 122, 125 Neighborhood Board Act (Chile), 188 Neoliberal economic model, 175–176, 283 NESsT, 183 New Community Movement (Saemaeul Undong), 57 New Zealand, 178, 187 Nongovernmental organizations, 119, 121–124 economic indicators for, 123t Nonprofit firms, 31 Nonprofit Incubator (NPI) case study, 91, 92t, 99, 289 from adoption to restructuring, 93–94 from agenda setting to knowledge and information seeking, 93 from innovation to diffusion, 94–96 mainstreaming and routinizing, 94 programs (2006–2012), 92t Nonprofit organizations, 31, 54–55, 67, 70, 84–85, 89, 93, 95, 99, 101, 110, 119, 121–122, 154–155, 182–184, 196, 201–202, 205–207, 210, 211, 213, 268, 295, 297 Nonprofit sector–state relationship, 110 Organization, definition of, 31–32 Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD), 33 Parlinfo tool, 264 Participative citizenship, 34, 40–44, 48, 144, 150, 154, 213, 214 Pensioners’ Mutual Aid Associations (PMAAs), 124, 132 Percent sales, 32 Pinochet, A., 283 Poland, 114 Political–economic system and welfare regime, 59–61 Post-authoritarian civil society, 157 Postmaterialism, 37, 287–288 Power, significance of, 6, 28, 256 Power distance (PDI), 36, 38, 41 Production cooperative (Reventós) (Spain), 145 ProHumana, 185 Quantitative assessment, 27–29 analysis, 37–38 data dependent variable, 30–32 independent variables, 33–37 discussion, 43–44 formal institutional fixed effects, 40–43 informal institutional fixed effects, 38–40 limitations, 44–45 methodology, 29–30 Regional Competitiveness Index (RCI), 153, 160 REGIS database, NIS, 111–112 Restriction of Special Taxation Act (South Korea), 54 The Rise of the Social Entrepreneur (Leadbeater), 96 Romania, 4, 20, 109–112, 282, 291, 296–297, 305 cooperatives, 127–129 mutual aid associations, 124–125, 126t nongovernmental organizations, 119, 121–124 social economy actors in, 120t social enterprise model, 129–133 welfare state profile in CEE countries overview and, 112–119, 120t Rudd, K., 270 Rural social enterprise, 223–224, 239 interaction with spatial context, 237–238 outcomes of, 242–243 Satterthwaite approximation, 37 Self-control type, of relationship, 58 Semi-Strategic Focused model, 100, 103, 104, 294b, 305 Sequential mixed methods, 227 Shanghai Civil Affairs Bureau, 95 Shanghai Venture Philanthropy Competition, 95 Simon de Sirene, 183 Singapore, 58 Sistema B, 184, 185 Slovakia, 114 Slovenia, 114 Social action, 160 Social capital, 133 and community capital, 238–240 Social change, 169–171 Social contracting, 113 Social-democratic civil society model, 12–15 Social democratic regime, 60 Social economy, 50, 53, 62, 70, 79, 298 in Romania, 111–119, 120t, 122, 124, 127, 129–134 in Spain, 141–147, 149–151, 156–159, 161–163 Social Economy Act (2011) (Spain), 143, 147 Social Employment Project (2003) (South Korea), 58 Social enterprise ABC approach for, 192t active certified, 56f Alter’s typology of, 30f as blurring economy traditional sector boundaries, 169–171 characteristics, 69t, 102t, 161t, 267t Chilean institutional context, 181t convergence and emergence dynamics on, 187f definitions of, 4–5, 30, 31, 53, 79, 85, 139, 170, 220 explicit, 32 growth and trends of related organizations, 83f and historical institutionalism, 224–225 implicit, 32 models, 17–18 China case mapping, 101t country models, 14–16t, 292–294b, 305t macro-institutional processes and causal paths, 9f, 64f reduced, with institutional variables predicting, 41t South Korean case mapping, 72t newly registered and surviving, 56f organizations, 30 versions, 208f Social Enterprise: A Global Comparison (Kerlin), 3 Social Enterprise Journal , 4, 30 Social Enterprise Promotion Act (SEPA) (2006), 52, 53, 67, 70, 291 Social Enterprise Research Center, 85 Social Enterprise Support Committee (South Korea), 54 Social Entrepreneur Award Program (British Council, 97 Social entrepreneur program, by British Council, 99 Social inclusion, 272 Social Investment Platform, 97 Social issues conceptualization, in rural sub-Saharan Africa, 220–221 socio-spatial context, 221–223 Social norms, 243 Social organizations, 31–32 “Social origin” theory, 110 Social revolutions, 7 Social value, 242 Social Welfare Enterprises (SWEs), 81–82, 101, 103 Social Welfare Service Act (South Korea), 54 Socioeconomic Council of Spain (Consejo Económico y Social de España, CES), 146 South Korea, 4, 20, 49–52, 88t, 282, 291, 294–295, 305 comparative institutionalism framework application, 63–70 implications, 71–73 developmental state, 57–63 discussion, 73–74 public policies, 52–57 Spain, 4, 20, 139–141, 156t, 281, 282, 288–289, 301–302, 304 Kerlin’s framework application to, 147–148 civil society analysis, 154–155 context, culture, and society analysis, 148–150 economy analysis, 151–153 government and political context analysis, 150–151 international influences, 155–156 national model of social enterprise and evolution over time, 157–159 regional differences, 159–161 social enterprise characteristics for, 161 social enterprises overview concept, 141–142 historical development of field, 145–147 Spanish social enterprise mapping complexity, 142–145 Spanish Federation of Social Economy Entities (Confederación Empresarial Española de Economía Social, CEPES), 146 State autonomy, 59, 61 State-control, 58 State institutions, 7 States and Social Revolutions (Skocpol), 7 Strategic Diverse model, 86, 294b, 295, 305 semi-, 296 Support for Non-Profit Private Organizations Act (South Korea), 54 Sustainable subsistence model, 14, 17, 292b, 299, 300, 305 Sweden, 4, 15t, 16t, 64, 66, 68–69t, 88t, 201–203, 205f, 231, 265, 268, 281, 282, 286, 287, 303 institutional factors, 209–211 pragmatism, 213–214 social enterprises ecosystem, 208–209 social entrepreneurship and social enterprises in, 203 social enterprise versions emergence, 206–208 welfare state development, 203–204 welfare state under transition, 204–205 values and norms, 211–213 Swedish Confederation of Enterprise, 204 Swedish Trade Union Confederation, 204 Switzerland, 178 Synthetic institutionalism, 260 Taiwan, 58 Top-down approach, 262 Trust-in-others variable, 37 Tukosepo B Interest Group, 239 UNCAR Federation, 125 Uncertainty avoidance (UNCRTA), 36, 40, 87, 149, 150, 175, 230, 265 United Kingdom, 178, 187, 271 United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), 90, 259 Institute for Statistics, 35 United States, 15t, 16t, 64, 66, 68–69t, 88t, 223, 231, 265, 268, 299, 300 Uruguay, 62 V-Dem civil society participation indicator, 34 V-Dem Codebook (Coppedge et al), 34 V-Dem Institute, 33 Venture philanthropy, 95 Weavers’ Association (Asociación de Tejedores) (Spain), 145 Weavers’ Industrial Company (Compañía Fabril de Tejedores) (Spain), 145 Welfare partnership civil society model, 12–15 Welfare state independent variable, 34–35 profile in CEE countries, overview of, 112–119, 120t regime typology, 60 Work integration social enterprise (WISE), 118, 132–134, 207 World Bank, 33, 35, 111, 221, 259 World Development Index (WDI), 33 World Economic Forum, 33 World Governance Indicators, 231 World Health Organization (WHO), 35, 90 World Values Survey, 33, 37, 212, 287, 299 Xiaoshan Du, 83 You Change Foundation, 97 Zambia, 4, 21, 219, 281, 282, 285, 288, 291, 298, 300, 303, 305 discussion MISE framework and micro-interactive approach to social enterprise, 244–245 findings, 229 MISE framework application, 229–232 primary data collection, 232–243 sample frame, 228–229 social and economic information on, 231t social ventures methodology in, 226–228 Zhao Lu, 93 Zhun Yu, 98 Zimbabwe, 15t, 16t, 64, 66, 68–69t, 88t, 231–233, 259 Book Chapters Prelims Chapter 1 The Macro-Institutional Social Enterprise Framework: Introduction and Theoretical Underpinnings Chapter 2 An Updated Quantitative Assessment of Kerlin’s Macro-Institutional Social Enterprise Framework Chapter 3 South Korea: Government Directed Social Enterprise Development: Toward a New Asian Social Enterprise Country Model Chapter 4 China: The Diffusion of Social Enterprise Innovation: Exported and Imported International Influence Chapter 5 Romania: Fostering Social Enterprise in a Post-Transitional Context: Caught between Social Enterprise Country Models Chapter 6 Spain: Understanding Social Enterprise Country Models across Time and Sub-Country Regions Chapter 7 Chile: The Influence of Institutional Holdovers from the Past on the Social Enterprise Country Model Chapter 8 Sweden: Tracing Social Enterprise across Different (Social) Spheres: The Interplay among Institutions, Values, and Individual Engagement Chapter 9 Zambia: Innate Resource Legacies and Social Enterprise Development: The Impact of Human Agency and Socio-Spatial Context in a Rural Setting Chapter 10 Australia: Understanding Future Social Enterprise Model Development through Individual-Level Policy Discourse Analysis Chapter 11 Conclusion: Revising the Macro-Institutional Social Enterprise Framework Index

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.