Search

As the processes of market liberalization and globalization increase the confidence of international actors involved in national third sectors, there exists a cosmopolitan tension between ‘mobile elites’ and ‘locked in’ nationals. This paper explores the impact of these tensions on the social enterprise ecosystem in the Republic of Poland and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. Focused on the internationalized mechanisms of support, the relationship between the social enterprise incubators and international stakeholders, and power distance inherent to the global versus local debate, the findings suggest that normative isomorphic pressures are causing a fundamental ecosystem shift. The monopolization of support and terms of reference have led to entrepreneurs detrimentally being treated as ‘organizational heroes’ risking burnout, the primacy of international voices within the local context, and the transference of nationals from being ‘locked in’ to national processes to being ‘locked out’ of national support. The research suggests the cosmopolitan‐led transformation of activists into entrepreneurs needs to be more carefully considered, to ensure that enforced alignment to international system does not alienate them from other sources and means of sustainability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Motivation: Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) expand the development agenda. While all major development actors support policy coherence for development (PCD), analysis has been lacking on how this can be achieved as the development agenda expands. We discuss the relationship between SDGs and PCD through a comprehensive case study from Finland. Purpose: To examine the coherence of Finland's foreign and development policy for achieving the SDGs, while leaving no one behind. Particular focus is given to policies related to the private sector's role in development, and attention is also paid to ministries other than the Ministry for Foreign Affairs. Approach and methods: We carried out interviews with policy‐makers and other stakeholders, and analysed relevant documents. We reviewed governmental high‐level policy statements, sectoral alignments, and development aid documents. We also reviewed the position papers that the Finnish Government had issued on European Union (EU) processes, particularly regarding development relating to the private sector. Findings: Finland has been uniquely positioned to advance PCD in its foreign policy, thanks to co‐ordination structures across government. Nonetheless, mainstreaming of the expanded development agenda has been largely limited to the Ministry for Foreign Affairs and its development policy department. The breadth of the SDG agenda has enabled individual targets to be cherry‐picked, with less attention paid to advancing the Agenda 2030 as a whole and to implementing its Leave No One Behind (LNOB) principle. Despite an institutional framework seemingly ideal for policy coherence, traditional sectoral divisions between development policy as a separate field and sustainability as an environmental issue, remain. Five factors in particular hindered policy coherence: (a) Finland's position papers to the EU on taxes and migration all but ignored Agenda 2030 commitments; (b) the Finnish emphasis on the private sector in development narrowed the considerations of development to economic growth; (c) sustainability was seen as green technology, with scant regard to social sustainability; (d) private firms interpreted the SDGs to mean that environmental sustainability could address human rights‐related concerns with corporate social responsibility initiatives; and (e) cuts to staffing in the Finnish Government stymied innovative thinking and working across departmental boundaries. Policy Implications: Finland is generally seen as a front‐runner in mainstreaming development issues, which makes it an interesting case. We outline the key challenges that Finland has faced in tackling PCD, which should be relevant for other Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development (OECD) countries as well. Many challenges related to PCD are political and organizational. As such, they are highly dependent on the particular institutional settings in each country. Our methodological approach could be replicated in other similar countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]