Blurring boundaries New Labour civil society and the

Blurring boundaries? New Labour, civil society and the emergence of social enterprise Alibeth Somers Senior Lecturer MPA Programme

Research question To what extent does New Labour’s engagement in social entrepreneurship signal an expansion or contraction of the state in key areas of public service delivery? *Big picture presented of empirical study

Research sub-topics • State sponsored- what happens when social entrepreneurship becomes a mechanism of the state? • Dynamics of local, regional, central and European public governance as opportunities for the emergence of social enterprise (and the threats associated with them) • The effect of New Labour’s framing of social enterprise on the UK charitable sector

Spectrum of social entrepreneurial activity Subsidiary of the state, public body Heavily subsidised by the state (emerging market) Funded by the state through contract delivery Trading with public sector customers (established market) Third sector organisations, charities Trading with consumers, competing with private sector businesses Fair Trade

Hypotheses on state and social entrepreneurship interaction • Presence of social entrepreneurship signals institutional weakness in existing market (can be across private, public, or third sectors) • When governments endorse social entrepreneurship, they do so to further their own aims • These aims differ considerably depending on both the extent to which the economy is developed and the political ideology of the state (India vs UK, or UK vs Russia)

Overview of research framework • • A document-based review of existing public policies and relevant corresponding government research on social enterprise from 2001 -2006 Participant observation of various local, national, and international public policymaking forums for social enterprise A survey of all English local authorities to gather their perceptions of and extent of engagement with New Labour’s social enterprise programmes An in-depth case study of a regional local government network for social enterprise development, Londonbased LA Connects

Hypotheses for the study of New Labour engagement in social entrepreneurship • Indicator of institutional weakness, in the public and private sectors, and specifically in a hierarchical public governance framework • Modernising agent, used as a structure for regulatory adjustments, to change the shape and character of British civil society, and ultimately to reduce the financial burden of the charitable sector on the state • Competitive force, whereby an alternative public sector market is created, against which monolith public service organisations are set to compete.

UK Setting • New Labour definition of social enterprise • Emphasis on organisations, not individuals • Emerge as a preferred delivery partner after Private Action, Public Benefit • Community Interest Company is introduced • Critical view: Begins to look like a modernising agent for British civil society, and a mechanism of the state

The implementation landscape: Changes from Governing to Governance (Third Way) Network Model Hierarchical command control Policy makers Cross Departmental Groups (Sure Start) Central Departments Delivery agencies Service users Pre-Thatcher Regional Development Local Agencies Interest groups Policy networks Local Strategic Private sector Partnerships contractors Third Sector Primary Care Organisations Trusts Local Area Partnerships Charities Service users Current state of play

New Labour: Changing political ideology • Third Way thinking, really a new version of Socialism • About an expansion of state provision in real terms, but a change in the processes of public service delivery to gain efficiency savings (which are then re-invested to expand the service) • Creates an instant tension between the goal of delivering efficiency and expanding the reach of the government – Because market mechanisms are hampered – Organisations are not really able to be ‘entrepreneurial’

Key themes emerge • Extension of the state’s machinery- Expansion, not contraction • Rhetoric of a means to stimulate the economy and promote entrepreneurialism do not bear out in reality • Aspirational goal, difficult to achieve in implementation terms • Comes down to tension between state as responsible in the eyes of voters/consumers versus wanting to streamline costs in the public sector • Clear evidence that social entrepreneurship is an opportunity for innovation in traditional public management processes

Conclusions Data bears out all three hypotheses: • Indicator of institutional weakness – In this case in the third sector • Modernising agent – Within the public services themselves • Competitive force – Sets all public and third sector organisations against each other to promote efficiency gains • Can begin to develop a model for understanding state interaction with social entrepreneurship

Towards a model for understanding the emergence of social entrepreneurship in the context of state activity Developing economies • Alternative to the state Proxy for the state: • Innovation in civil society • Health • Competitive force • Education • Infrastructure Developed economies • (Security? )