Search

Despite the growing academic and policy interest in social enterprises, existing debates fail to answer how these organizations innovate without compromising their social mission. In particular, the mechanisms that assist social enterprises to innovate in line with their mission have been overlooked in the social enterprise literature. Through an empirical study of four social enterprises in Scotland, UK, we focus on Design Thinking and show that, through stimulating the engagement of diverse stakeholders, generating organizational knowledge and challenging traditional power dynamics, Design Thinking assists social enterprises in inducing missionaligned innovation. Through the lens of Intellectual Capital theory, our article shows the applicability of Design Thinking in the field of social entrepreneurship, and draws implications for policy and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Community Orientated and Opportunity Learning (COOL) Music was a 12-month collaborative project between researchers at Glasgow Caledonian University and practitioners at the Edinburgh-based social enterprise Heavy Sound. The project began in October 2017 and involved 16 sessions of participatory music making with 32 'hard-to-reach' young people (aged 12-17) aimed at increasing confidence and self-esteem and improving social skills. Using COOL Music as a case study, this article explores some of the challenges faced by community-based arts organisations tasked with delivering such interventions, contrasting COOL Music's small-scale, targeted, community-based approach with prevailing top-down music interventions in Scotland. We argue that such programmes are particularly suitable in engaging those at the margins of society, reaching them on their own terms through music that resonates with their own lived experience. However, we acknowledge the short-term and transitory nature of such projects may prove problematic for some hard-to-reach groups who require more stability in their lives and may also lead to staff fatigue and burnout. We call for further research in these areas, and greater policy attention to be paid to the sustainability of such projects.

Although frequently perceived as a 'woolly' policy concept and a means to reduce public service delivery costs, co-production can lead to increased quality and efficiency of services. In this paper, we explore the contribution of a community empowerment policy to co-production processes. Analysing empirical findings from a mixed-method, longitudinal study through the lens of Myers et al.'s (2017) Theory of Change, the paper develops a model of a successful co-production process. We show that changes in working practices and shifts in power can create friction between co-producing actors. By critiquing specific policies, we inform future co-production research, policy, and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent work in children's geographies and geographies of education has presented the argument that when conceptualising the various roles that adults occupy in children's lives, it is equally important to conceptualise adultism. In this paper we argue that this existing work critiques adultism's logics but does not adequately conceptualise adultism's structural and scalar spatialities. We reconceptualise adultism as a structural and scalar phenomenon by examining our case study of a community music programme designed to reconnect children with their 'learning identities'. We borrow the spatial metaphor of 'chains' from human geography's postcapitalist literature to highlight how adultism structurally pervades this space of resistance, underscoring the more broadly applicable point that practices of resistance that fail to address adultism's co-creative relationships with other structures of domination can end-up reasserting adultist relations. However, towards the end of the paper we argue that this reconceptualisation of adultism does not mean community music (or other critical pedagogies) should be abandoned, rather illustrating how the organisation in our case study innovate in order to address adultism's structural and scalar facets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The "woolliness" and "methodological hurdles" of co‐production make it challenging to compare and contrast different co‐production policy initiatives and their outcomes, and distil "what works", for whom and in what circumstances. Inspired by Nabatchi et al. (2017) 3Ws typology of the Who, When, and What of co‐production, we draw on co‐production theory deriving from a narrative literature review and empirical research of co‐production cases in Scotland and Australia. We propose a new "5Ws" co‐production framework of Who, When, What, Why, and Where, arguing that the context (where) should be an integral part of co‐production analyses as socio‐political, geographical conditions, and service settings influence the processes and outcomes of co‐production, and that the reasons (why) behind co‐production determine who is involved in co‐production. The paper suggests that the 5Ws of co‐production can offer a useful theoretical lens for analyzing a variety of international co‐production cases to inform future policies and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examine the principles, purpose and practice of Community Wealth Building (CWB). Our case study, located in the UK, involves a Local Authority (LA), local community groups and local people, and the implementation of a CWB initiative by the LA. Action research enabled us to scrutinise the LA approach to the CWB initiative in terms of community engagement and consultation. We identified power and control tensions in relationships between the LA and different community groups (including local development trusts) that undermine the theoretical principles of CWB. Examination of these issues through a Bourdieuvian lens reveals the role played by power relations and highlights the need for 'practical reflexivity' in any community engagement process especially where institutions are at risk of misinterpreting how CWB might be accomplished in practice. Our study contributes a reflexivity model of CWB for purpose and practice, grounded in ethics, fairness and inclusion, and is of significance to LA initiatives claiming a CWB mission, vision and strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using Giddens's structuration theory and empirical data from a study with social enterprise stakeholders, the article explores how social entrepreneurs and the structure co-create one another. We show that the development of the contemporary significance of social entrepreneurialism lies in a combination of complex context-specific structural forces and the activities of agents who initiate, demand, and impose change. Social entrepreneurs intentionally tackle social challenges, but their actions bring unintentional results, such as the transfer of state responsibilities onto communities. Direct outputs of their activities introduce indirect outcomes, bringing wider changes in culture and policy. The evolving nature of entrepreneurship and a number of factors that interplay in time and space, and enable and constrain social entrepreneurs, confirm the applicability of Giddens's theory in the field of social entrepreneurship. The originality of this article derives from revealing mechanisms that enable social entrepreneurs to emerge and reasons for structural change. We also build a "co-creation model of structure and agency" that can be used to "engineer" the process of social entrepreneurship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Democracies are under pressure and public administrations must evolve to accommodate new forms of public participation. Participation processes may reproduce or disrupt existing power inequalities. Through a multi-method empirical study of "Participation Requests," a new legislative policy tool to open up public services in Scotland, this article addresses an empirical gap on governance-driven democratic innovations (DIs). We use Young's distinction of external and internal inclusion and find Participation Requests replicate the pitfalls of traditional forms of associative democracy. We contend that DIs should be co-produced between institutions and communities to bring a participatory and deliberative corrective to temper bureaucratic logics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]