Türkiye’deki Sosyal Girişimlerin Ekonomi Politiği

Abstract

Batı toplumları tarafından 19. yüzyılda çağdaş türlerinin ortaya çıkarıldığı iddia edilen sosyal girişimler, günümüzde kooperatifler, dernekler, vakıflar ve diğer organizasyon türleri olarak tüm sosyal ekonomi aktörlerini kapsayan bir küme kavram olarak kullanılmaktadır. Buna rağmen, sosyal girişim kavramı tartışılmaya devam etmekte ve henüz tanımı ve kapsamı konusunda bir uzlaşıya varılamamaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, Türkiye’de ticari şirket statüsüne sahip ancak kâr dağıtımı yapmayan (ya da kısıtlayan) sosyal girişimleri ekonomi politik çerçevede analiz etmektir. Bu amaçla, sosyal girişimlerle yapılan görüşmelerden elde edilen bulgular, sosyal girişimlerin temel bileşenleri altında değerlendirilmiştir. Bu bileşenler, sosyal girişimlerle ilgili literatürde evrensel olarak kabul edilen tanımlardan türetilmiş olup kâr amacı gütmeme/kâr dağıtımı kısıtı, ticari faaliyet zorunluluğu, sosyal etki/fayda, yenilikçilik, gönüllülük ve yönetişim olarak sıralanmaktadır. Sonuç olarak, bu bileşenler, elde edilen bulgulara dayalı olarak Türkiye’deki sosyal girişim kimliğini tanımlamaya yardımcı olmakta, sosyal girişimlerin görünmeyen yönlerini ortaya çıkarmaya katkı sağlamakta ve sosyal girişim kimliğini benimseyen ticari şirketlere dair bir çözümleme sunmaktadır.

Keywords

• kâr
• sosyal ekonomi
• sosyal girişim
• yönetişim

The Political Economy of Social Enterprises in Türkiye

Abstract

Social enterprises, which are claimed to have been created in their modern forms by Western societies in the 19th century, are now used as an umbrella term encompassing all social economy actors (such as cooperatives, associations, foundations, and others). Despite this, the concept of social enterprise continues to be debated, with no consensus yet reached regarding its definition and scope. The aim of this study is to analyze non-profit social enterprises (those that do not distribute profits to shareholders) with commercial company status in Türkiye within a political economy framework. Findings from social enterprise interviews have been evaluated under the core components of social enterprises. These components are derived from universally accepted definitions in the literature on social enterprises and include non-profit orientation/restriction on profit distribution, the requirement of commercial activity, social impact/benefit, innovation, voluntarism, and governance. Consequently, these components help describe the social enterprise identity in Türkiye based on the findings obtained, contribute to uncovering the unseen aspects of social enterprises, and provide an analytical framework for examining the future of commercial companies adopting a social enterprise identity.

Keywords

• profit
• social economy
• social enterprise
• governance

References

1. Abeysekera, R. (2019). Social entrepreneurship: Concepts and research areas. Sri Lanka Journal of Management Studies, 1(2), 29-42.
2. Akinyemi, J. O., Dilyard, J., Anderson, D. and Schroeder, K. (2011). Innovation and technology for social enterprises. United Nations, 17, 1-11.
3. Aslan, T., (2018). Conceptual Model for Sustainable Development: An Explorative Study on Social Entrepreneurship in Turkey (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Bahçeşehir Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
4. Baines, S., Hardill, I. and Wilson, R. (2013). Introduction: Remixing the economy of welfare? changing roles and relationships between the state and the voluntary and community sector. Social Policy and Society, 10, 337-339. doi:10.1017/S1474746411000066
5. Bagnoli, L. and Megali, C. (2011). Measuring performance in social enterprises. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(1), 149-165.
6. Bandinelli, C. (2017). Social Entrepreneurship: Sociality, Ethics and Politics (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Goldsmihts, University of London, Centre for Cultural Studies, London.
7. Barendsen, L. and Gardner, H. (2004). Is the social entrepreneur a newtype of leader? https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ltl.100, erişim adresi: 20.10.2022.
8. Bidet, E., Eum, H. and Ryu, J. (2018). Diversity of social enterprise models in South Korea. Voluntas, 29, 1261–1273. doi:10.1007/s11266-018-9951-8

9. Borzaga, C. (2020). Social enterprises and their ecosystems in europe: Italy. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
10. Borzaga, C. and Depedri, S. (2015). Multi-stakeholder Governance in Civil Society Organizations. J. L. Laville, D. R. Young ve P. Eynaud (Ed.), Civil Society, the Third Sector and Social Enterprise içinde (109-121). Londra ve New York: Routledge.
11. Borzaga, C., Galere, G., Franchini, B., Chiomento, S., Nogales, R. and Carini, C. (2020). Social enterprises and their ecosystems in Europe. https://www.bollettinoadapt.it/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/KE0220042ENN.en_.pdf, erişim tarihi: 12.03.2022.
12. Bradac Hojnik, B. and Crnogaj, K. (2020). Social impact, innovations, and market activity of social enterprises: Comparison of European countries. Sustainability, 12, 1-15. doi:10.3390/su12051915
13. British Council (2019). Türkiye’de Sosyal Girişimlerin Durumu. https://www.britishcouncil.org.tr/sites/default/files/20190702_se_research_report_the_state_of_social_enterprise_in_turkey_tr_double_page.pdf, erişim tarihi: 02.02.2022.
14. Bugg-Levine, A., Kogut, B. and Kulatilaka, N. (2012). A new approach to funding social enterprises. Harward Business Review, https://hbr.org/2012/01/a-new-approach-to-funding-social-enterprises, erişim tarihi: 05.04.2023.
15. Byerly, R. T. (2014). The social contract, social enterprise, and business model innovation. Social Business, 4(4), 325-343. doi.org/10.1362/204440814X14185703122883
16. Chell, E., Nicolopoulou, K. ve Karataş-Özkan, M. (2010). Social entrepreneurship and enterprise: International and innovation perspectives. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 22(6), 485–493. doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2010.488396
17. Clifford, J., Markey, K. and Malpani, N. (2013). Measuring social impact in social enterprise: The state of thought and practice in the UK. https://e3m.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/E3M-Social-Impact-Report-2013.pdf, erişim tarihi: 15.03.2023.
18. Costa, E. and Andreaus, M. (2020). Social impact and performance measurement systems in an Italian social enterprise: a participatory action research project. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 33(3), 289-313. doi: 10.1108/JPBAFM-02-2020-0012
19. Dart, R. (2014). The legitimacy of social enterprise. Nonprofıt Management and Leadership, 14(4), 411-424.
20. Defourny, J. (2013). From third sector to social enterprise. In C. Borzaga, & J. Defourny (Eds.) The Emergence of Social Enterprise. In (1-18). Londra: Routledge.
21. Defourny, J. and Nyssens, M. (2006). Defining social enterprise. M. Nyssens (Ed.), Social Enterprise içinde (3-26). Londra: Routledge.
22. Defourny, J. and Nyssens, M. (2008). Social enterprise in Europe: Recent trends and developments. Social Enterprise Journal, 4, 202-228.
23. Ebrahim, A. and Rangan, V. K. (2014). What impact? A framework for measuring the scale and scope of social performance. University of California, 56(3), 118-141.
24. EC (2013). Social economy and social entrepreneurship. https://www.ess-europe.eu/sites/default/files/publications/files/dgempl_social_europe_guide_vol.4_en_accessible_new.pdf, erişim tarihi: 11.01.2022.
25. Fraisse, L., Gardin, L., Laville, J.L., Petrella, F. and Richez-Battesti, N. (2016). Social enterprise in France: at the crossroads of the social economy, solidarity economy and social entrepreneurship? https://base.socioeco.org/docs/france_-_fraisse_et_al.pdf, erişim tarihi: 15.03.2022.
26. Galera, G. and Borzaga, C. (2009). Social enterprise an international overview of its conceptual evolution and legal implementation. Social Enterprise Journal, 5(3), 210-228. doi:10.1108/17508610911004313
27. Gutberlet, J. (2009). Solidarity economy and recycling co-ops in São Paulo: microcredit to alleviate poverty. Development in Practice, 19, 737-751.
28. Hurst, B., Johnston, K. A. and Lane, A. B. (2023). A relational approach to social impact: Moving beyond instrumental and consumer approaches. Public Relations Review, 49, 1-9.
29. Hustinx, L., Handy, F. ve Cnaan, R. (2010). Volunteering. Taylor R. (Ed.), Third Sector Research içinde (73-89). New York: Springer.
30. Işık, V. (2018). Değişen Çalışma Anlayışı ve Sosyal Girişimler: Ashoka Türkiye Üyeleri Üzerine Bir Alan Araştırması. Üçüncü Sektör Sosyal Ekonomi, 53(1), 229-258. doi: 10.15659/3
31. Johnson, S. (2000). Literature review of social entrepreneurship. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/246704544_Literature_Review_Of_Social_Entrepreneurship, erişim tarihi: 15.04.2022
32. Kallio, H., Pietila, A. M., Johnson, M. and Kangasniemi, M. (2016). Systematic methodological review: developing a framework for a qualitative semi-structured interview guide. doi: 10.1111/jan.13031
33. Kerlin, J. A. (2006). Social enterprise in the United States and Europe: Understanding and learning from the differences. Voluntas, 17, 247–263. Doi: 10.1007/s11266-006-9016-2
34. Laville, J. L. (2015) ‘Social and Solidarity Economy in Historical Perspective’, in Utting, P. (ed.) Social and Solidarity Economy Beyond the Fringe pp. 41-56. London: Zed Books.
35. Lewis, D., Kanji, N. and Themudo, N. S. (2021). Non-Governmental Organizations and Development. Londra: Routledge.
36. Light, P. C. (2006). Reshaping social entrepreneurship. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 4(3), 47-51.
37. Low, C. (2006). A framework for the governance of social enterprise. International Journal of Social Economics, 33(5/6), 376-385. doi: 10.1108/03068290610660652
38. Mair, J. and Marti, I. (2006). Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight. Journal of World Business, 41, 36–44. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2005.09.002
39. Manetti, G. (2012). The role of blended value accounting in the evaluation of socio-economic impact of social enterprises. Voluntas, doi: 10.1007/s11266-012-9346-1
40. Martí, I. (2018). Transformational business models, grand challenges, and social impact. Journal of Business Ethics, doi: 10.1007/s10551-018-3824-3
41. Meijs, J. C. P. M., Handy, F., Cnaan, R. A., Brudney, J. L., Ascoli, U., Ranade, S., Hustinx, L., Weber, S. & Weiss, I. (2003). All in the eyes of the beholder? Perceptions of volunteering across eight countries. In P. Dekker & L. Halman (Eds.), The Values of Volunteering Cross-Cultural Perspectives. In (19-36). New York: Springer.
42. Mendell, M. and Barbosa, E. (2013). Impact investing: a preliminary analysis of emergent primary and secondary exchange platforms, Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 3(2), 111-123.
43. Moore, M. H. (2003). The public value scorecard: a rejoinder and an alternative to strategic performance measurement and management in non-profit organizations by Robert Kaplan. Hauser Center for Nonprofit Organizations Working Paper No. 18 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID402880_code030502590.pdf?abstractid=402880&mirid=1, erişim tarihi: 20.04.2023.
44. Moulaert, F. and Ailenei, O. (2005). Social economy, third sector and solidarity relations: A conceptual synthesis from history to present. Urban Studies, 42, 2037-2053.
45. Mulgan, G. (2012). The theoretical foundations of social innovation. https://sirdi-csi.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Social-Innovation-Blurring-Boundaries-to-Reconfigure-Markets-by-Alex-Nicholls-Alex-Murdock-eds.-z-lib.org_.pdf#page=51, erişim tarihi: 25.04.2023.
46. Osborne, S. P. (1998). Voluntary Organizations and Innovation in Public Services. Londra: Routledge.
47. Petrella, F. and Richez-Battesti, N. (2016). Patterns of evolutions of social enterprises in Fance: a focus on work integration social enterprises. International Review of Sociology, 26, 234-246. doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2016.1181390
48. Polat, O., (2020). Etkinlik Teorisi Bağlamında Yerel Kalkınma Amaçlı Sivil Toplum Kuruluşlarında Sosyal Girişimciliğin İncelenmesi: Türkiye Örneği (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). İnönü Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Malatya.
49. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling Alone. New York: Simon & Schuster.
50. Roper, J. and Cheney, G. (2005). Leadership, learning and human resource management the meanings of social entrepreneurship today. Corporate Governance International Journal of Business in Society, 5(3), 95-104. doi:10.1108/14720700510604733
51. Salamon, S. M. and Anheier, H. K. (1992). In search of the non-profit sector. I: The question of definitions. Voluntas, 3(2), 125-151.
52. Sombart, W. (2011). Burjuva (çev. O. Adanır). Ankara: Doğubatı.
53. Şemşit, S. ve Gürsoy, T. (2020). Avrupa Birliği’nde Sosyal Girişimcilik. Paradoks Ekonomi, Sosyoloji ve Politika Dergisi, (Sayı 16), 103-118.
54. Tardivo, G., Santoro, G. and Ferraris, A. (2017). The role of public-private partnerships in developing open social innovation: the case of GoogleGlass4LIS. World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 13(5/6), 580–592.
55. Tirumalsety, R. and Gurtoo, A. (2019). Financial sources, capital structure and performance of social enterprises: empirical evidence from India. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment. doi: 10.1080/20430795.2019.1619337
56. TÜSEV (2018). Sosyal kooperatifçilik: yasal mevzuat açısından Avrupa Birliği örnekleri ve Türkiye’deki gelişmeler. https://tusev.org.tr/usrfiles/images/TUSEV_SosyalKooperatifBilgiNotuTR.08.11.18.pdf, erişim tarihi: 10.03.2022.
57. Vakil, A. C. (1997). Confronting the Classification Problem: Toward a Taaonomy of NGO. World Development Journal, 25(12), 2057-2070.
58. Westlund, H. (2003). Social economy and employment-the case of Sweden. Review of Social Economy, 61(2), 163-182.
59. Wilson, J. (2000). Volunteering. Annu. Rev. Sociol, 26, 215–240.
60. Wilson, J. and Musick, M. (1997). Who cares? Toward an integrated theory of volunteer work. American Sociological Review, 62(5), 694-713.
61. Wry, T. and Haugh, H. (2018). Brace for impact: Uniting our diverse voices through a social impact frame. Journal of Business Venturing, https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbvent/v33y2018i5p566-574.html#download, erişim tarihi: 19.04.2023.
62. Yahyasev, O., (2021). Hibrit Örgütler Olarak Sosyal Girişimlerin Analizi: Türkiye'den Bir Sosyal Girişim Örneği (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Uludağ Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Bursa.
63. Zhang, Y. and Li, Y. (2017). A literature review on social enterprise. Research on Modern Higher Education, 3, doi: 10.24104/rmhe/2017.03.01006