The tension between social enterprises and municipalities
Daphne Bressers
Thesis research master in public administration and organizational science
University of Utrecht
Prof. Dr. Mark van Twist
Prof. Dr. Steven Van de Walle
1
Foreword .................................................................................................................................... 4
1.
Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 6
1.1 Background ...................................................................................................................... 6
1.2 Statement of the research/research problem ..................................................................... 8
1.3 Objective of the research .................................................................................................. 8
1.4 Scope of the research ........................................................................................................ 9
1.5 Research questions ........................................................................................................... 9
2. Conceptual and theoretical framework ................................................................................ 11
2.1 Social entrepreneurship .................................................................................................. 11
2.1.1 The concept of social entrepreneurship ................................................................... 11
2.1.2 Social entrepreneurs in the field of labor ................................................................ 12
2.1.3 History and development of social entrepreneurship .............................................. 14
2.2 The system of labor participation ................................................................................... 15
2.2.1 How the system is financed ..................................................................................... 15
2.2.2 How the system is organized ................................................................................... 16
2.2.3 Current and future changes in the social system ..................................................... 17
2. 3. Logics ........................................................................................................................... 18
2.3.1 Interacting logics ..................................................................................................... 18
2.3.2 What are logics? ...................................................................................................... 19
2.3.3 Logic of municipalities............................................................................................ 20
2.3.4 Logic of social entrepreneurs .................................................................................. 23
2.4 The intersection of municipalities and social entrepreneurs .......................................... 27
2.4.1 Where do social entrepreneurs and municipalities meet? ....................................... 27
2.4.2. Model of interaction ............................................................................................... 28
2.4.3. The model of interaction between social entrepreneurs and municipalities .......... 29
2.4.4 The potential tension between social entrepreneurs and municipalities ................. 31
2.5 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 34
3. Methods ................................................................................................................................ 36
3.1 Research setting & methods ........................................................................................... 36
3.1.1 Competing logics..................................................................................................... 36
3.1.2 Qualitative research design ..................................................................................... 36
3.1.3 Research method ..................................................................................................... 38
3.1.4 Context of the research ............................................................................................ 38
2
3.2 Background interviews and information ........................................................................ 39
3.2.1 Background research concerning the social system ................................................ 39
3.2.2. Background conversations ..................................................................................... 39
3.3 Cases............................................................................................................................... 40
3.3.1 Case selection .......................................................................................................... 40
3.3.2 Case description ...................................................................................................... 41
3.4 Data analysis .................................................................................................................. 44
3.4.1 Coding process ........................................................................................................ 44
3.4.2 Reliability and validity ........................................................................................... 46
4. Results .................................................................................................................................. 47
4.1 Economic area ................................................................................................................ 47
4.1.1 Where do social entrepreneurs and municipalities meet in economic terms? ......... 47
4.1.2 Logics of municipalities .......................................................................................... 47
4.1.3 Logics of social entrepreneurs ................................................................................. 51
4.1.4 The tension between municipalities and SE in economic terms ............................. 55
4.2 Legal area ....................................................................................................................... 56
4.2.1 Where do social entrepreneurs and municipalities meet in legal terms? ................ 56
4.2.2 Logics of municipalities .......................................................................................... 56
4.2.3. Logic of social entrepreneurs ................................................................................. 59
4.2.4 The tension between municipalities and SE in legal terms ..................................... 61
4.3 Communicative area ....................................................................................................... 62
4.3.1 Where do social entrepreneurs and municipalities meet in communicative terms? 62
4.3.2 Logic of municipalities............................................................................................ 62
4.3.3 Logic of social entrepreneurs .................................................................................. 64
4.3.4. The tension between municipalities and SE in communicative terms ................... 66
4.4. Conclusion: do social entrepreneurs and civil servants experience tension? ................ 68
5.
Conclusion and Discussion .............................................................................................. 71
6.
Reflections & limitations ................................................................................................. 75
7.
Future research ................................................................................................................. 76
3
Foreword
In January 2013 I started up my own company. With this company we sell ice-cream on
festivals, markets and events in Rotterdam. To transport the ice-cream and the freezer we
bought a Vespacar P2. This vehicle is highly unique on the Dutch roads and this led directly
to problems in relation to the government.
After we bought the car we contacted the state service for the Dutch Roads (RDW) to
check whether the car needed an examination before it could enter the road. One technical
advisor of RDW told us that the vehicle needed an examination because due to the size of the
vehicle, the vehicle belongs the administrative category of ‘cars’. Another technical advisor
told us that the vehicle did not need an examination, due to the engine capacity the vehicle
was clearly a moped. Eventually, it did not become clear whether the vehicle is car or a
moped and to what administrative category the vehicle belongs.
After this, we sought for a covered parking place. In the centre of Rotterdam there were,
according to the website of the municipality, many free parking places owned by the
municipality. One can apply for a parking place by filling in an online application form. In
one of the boxes it was required to fill in the sign of the car. For the Vespacar we did only
have an insurance number, but not an official sign of the Dutch state. We called the
municipality to see if we could fill in a separate form. Several civil servants discussed the
issue and after five telephone calls they informed us that it was not possible to place a
Vespacar in the garage because the parking places are only meant for car.
This experience made me think about social enterprises, they are comparable to Vespacars.
They are not a typical BV and not a typical foundation. They work in a hybrid world, in
which economic and social values are combined. They are unique and do therefore not fit into
the administrative systems of government and this could cause tension between government
and entrepreneurs. Due to the existence of Vespacar from the year 1975 I also understand the
existence of the controlling and regulating government. The Vespacar was eventually not
examined by the RDW and therefore we now do not have a handbrake and the wipers do not
always work. This could cause danger to the safety of ourselves and of other people. The
government has an important role to protect the safety of all citizens in the Netherlands. In
this research it was interesting to look more closely at the points of view of entrepreneurs and
civil servants.
4
In the past half year I have been an intern at the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom
Relations and at the same time I started my own company. This was an interesting experience
that together with the research about the tension between social entrepreneurs and
municipalities taught me much about the functioning of public administration. In this research
I was able to speak to many interesting people. I want to thank all the respondents that
cooperated in this research. In addition I also want to thank the team citizenship at the
Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations for the time to conduct the research and for
the feedback that was given on the research. I want to thank Prof. Dr. Mark van Twist for the
support and the feedback during the entire research process. Also, I want to thank Prof. Dr.
Steven Van de Walle for the feedback during the whole thesis trajectory. Finally, I want to
thank my family for the support during my entire study career.
5
1.
Introduction
1.1 Background
ICT companies that work with autistic people, restaurants that work with
mentally disabled people, a brewery that works with psychiatric patients, a call
center that works with blind people, a taxi service that works with ex-prisoners, a
supermarket that works with physically disabled people, a bike repair service that
works with patients in mental health care, art producers that work with long-term
unemployed people, a fashion company that works with a group of multicultural
unemployed women, cafes working with mentally disabled people, a bakery that
works with people with a physical handicaps and production companies that
work with deaf people.
These companies are only a few examples out of the many entrepreneurial initiatives using
the qualities of people with a certain distance to the regular labor market in their production
processes. The employees learn a job in a regular and commercial company in which they are
needed and of which the products and services are actually sold in a competitive market. An
interesting example is Van Hulley, a company working with a group of unemployed women
from different ethnic backgrounds that manufactures underwear from old blouses. These
women learn a craft, learn the Dutch language, learn the basic principles required to maintain
a job such as being on time, and produce a product that is sold in a commercial market.
Another interesting example is Specialisterren, an ICT company that works with autistic
people. These people receive certified education, learn how to function in an everyday
company and perform tasks for companies such as the Rabobank and Hema. These enterprises
thus combine social and economic goals and are known as social enterprises. Although social
entrepreneurship is not a new phenomenon (Bornstein & Davis, 2010) , the development of
social entrepreneurs can no longer be ignored in economic and social terms (Ridley- Duff &
Bull, 2011; Bridge et al., 2009; Bonanni et al., 2012; Sampon, 2011; OECD, 1999), however,
the academic literature in the field of social entrepreneurship is still limited (Nicholls, 2008;
Mair & Mari, 2005).
Social entrepreneurship is not stimulated by the government in a top-down manner, but is
initiated bottom-up (Bornstein & Davis, 2010; Sampson, 2011). Entrepreneurs such as ‘De
Prael’, a brewery that hires people with a background of receiving psychiatric treatment;
‘Broodje Apart’, a restaurant that hires mentally disabled people; or ‘De Verbinding’, a
company that hires deaf people – all these organizations are concerning themselves with the
labor participation of people with a so-called distance to the labor market. Such a bottom-up
development is interesting in times in which the government tries to top-down stimulate the
labor participation of people with a distance to the labor market (Letter to the cabinet, 27 th of
June 2012). Social enterprises can be a solution for creating job opportunities for people with
a distance to the labor market.
6
In a recent cabinet proposal, the Dutch cabinet designed a quota for the labor participation
of people with a distance to the labor market. In the upcoming ten years, 125.000 jobs will be
created for people with a disability. 100.000 of these jobs will be created in commercial
companies and 25.000 jobs at the government. In addition, different laws on the labor
participation of disabled people will be integrated into one law, the so-called law on
participation (Letter to the cabinet, 27th of June 2013). This cabinet proposal will be in the
second chamber by the end of 2013, and when the new law will be accepted it will commence
at the 1st of January 2015. The government in the Netherlands thus wants to stimulate the
labor participation of disabled people in regular companies. The government tries to stimulate
these people to participate in society, to earn money and to develop their skills.
In 2011, the Dutch Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment commissioned a research
conducted by TNO in which the barriers between social entrepreneurs in the field of labor
experience and the government were indicated. Barriers such as non-existing legal forms for
these entrepreneurs, difficulties in gaining permits, difficulties receiving subsidies, a difficult
cooperation with public institutions such as the UVW and the political effect on the work of
social entrepreneurs. In addition, TNO (2011) indicated that the government can also support
social entrepreneurs by providing them information, giving out subsidies, creating a network
and (politically) supporting the organization. It is interesting to notice that the government
wants to stimulate the participation of people with a distance to the labor market, but on the
other hand social enterprises that are initiated bottom-up still experience barriers in contact to
government. Several authors point at the importance of the role of government in the
succession of social enterprises (Korosec & Berman, 2006 & Shirir & Lerner, 2006;
Hoogendoorn, 2011; Van Twist et al. 2012; Sampson, 2011), the barriers can cause tension
that therefore can negatively influence the development of social enterprises.
The tension between social entrepreneurs and municipalities can be explained by the
existence of competing logics. Social entrepreneurs and government act from different logics
which in a moment of interaction come together. Municipalities act from the logics of the
democracy (responsive government) the law (decent government) and efficiency and
effectiveness (performing government) (Bovens et al.; 2012; Dryzak, J.S, 2001; Van der Wal,
2010). On the other hand, social entrepreneurs act from an entrepreneurial logic (running a
company; economic goals), a social welfare-logic (creating social impact) and public sector
logic (working in the social domain) (Nicholls, 2006; Bornstein &Davis, 2010; Dees, 2007).
The different logics come together in for example the application for a subsidy and can cause
tension, for example between the universal law of municipalities and the social entrepreneurs
that perhaps do not fit into the policy- and regulation categories of the municipality.
As mentioned before, several authors point at the importance of governance in the
development of social entrepreneurship (Korosec & Berman, 2006; Sharir & Lerner, 2006;
Hoogendoorn, 2011; Van Twist et al., 2012; Sampson; 2011), but no research has been
conducted about the tension between social enterprises and municipalities. With 22 interviews
with civil servants and social entrepreneurs this research will investigate whether social
entrepreneurs and municipalities experience tension, and if so, whether this tension can be
explained by the existence of different logics. It will do so by answering the following
research question:
7
Do social entrepreneurs experience tension in contact with municipalities, and if so, how can
the different logics explain this tension?
1.2 Statement of the research/research problem
Due to the functioning of social entrepreneurs in the public domain, social entrepreneurs are
more often confronted with government than commercial entrepreneurs. Social entrepreneurs
act in the same area as the government, and government has indicated many rules to ensure
the public values (Bozeman, 1993; Moore, 2013; Du Gay, 2005) that are connected to the
social component of social entrepreneurs. Social enterprises operate in the social domain, but
are not initiated by the government. They give content to the domain according to their own
vision or passion, whether the idea would fit in the current and regular government policy is
not always important. Social entrepreneurs often place themselves outside the standard
procedures (Schulz et al., 2012). New companies in the public domain could raise all sorts of
questions for the government. What if these companies do not fit into the standard rules and
procedures (Rob, 2012; WRR, 2012)? What if a company works with public money? Do we
need additional certificates and permits? What if a company is politically sensitive? (Schultz
et al., 2012). And there are many other questions. The municipalities have to make decisions
when the social enterprises decide to approach government.
All starting social enterprises will meet the regulating, financing or producing government
at one point in time (Schulz et al., 2012). Regulating institutions have a range of instruments
to steer the behavior of subordinate groups. Often the distinction is used between law and
procedures, financial steering and ‘softer’ forms of steering such as information, convincing
or seducing other parties to do something (Majone, 1989; Bemelmans-Vicet et al., 1998;
Bakker en van Waarden 1999). These three areas of law and procedures, finance and
organizational suit the areas that non-academic research of umbrella organizations of social
entrepreneurs indicated as the three areas in which government and social entrepreneurs meet
(Greenwish, 2012; Social Entreprise NL, 2012):
 Financial area (e.g. start-up capital, subsidy, housing)
 Legal- procedural area (e.g. Law, permissions, certificates)
 Communication area (e.g. Information, facilitating, advising, political support)
In these three areas, the logic of government organizations meets the logic of the social
entrepreneurs. Hannan (2007) defines logic in the domain of organizations as follows:
‘socially constructed rules, norms and beliefs constituting field membership, role identities
and patterns of appropriate conduct that are transmitted through regulatory, normative and
cognitive processes’ (p.12). Logics are thus more than rationalities and also imply the context
of a person. At a moment of interaction the logic of municipality meets the logic of social
entrepreneurs and when the logics compete this could lead to tension.
1.3 Objective of the research
As mentioned before, the development of social entrepreneurs can no longer be ignored
(Ridley- Duff & Bull, 2011; Bornstein & Davis, 2010, Bridge et al., 2009; Bonanni et al.,
2012; Sampson, 2011; OECD, 1999). More and more citizens no longer wait until the
8
government will solve the problem, but will start their own initiatives (Nicholls, 2006;
Bornstein & Davis, 2010). Government cannot solve every problem. Hoogendoorn (2011)
argues: ‘governments are increasingly focusing on social entrepreneurs as a vehicle to
address a range of social, ecological, and economic problems, such as generation
employment for those with a distance to the labor market, providing social cohesion,
regenerating deprived inner city areas, and recycling’ (p. 26).
The importance of social enterprises is expected to increase in the Netherlands (Nota doedemocratie, 2013; WRR; 2012; RoB, 2012). Therefore, this research has three main
objectives:
 To give a better insight in the dealing of the government with new (bottom-up)
initiatives in the public domain;
 Government policy has an impact on the success of a social enterprise
(Korosec & Berman, 2006; Sharir & Lerner, 2006), therefore, the possible
tension that can be found in the relation between social entrepreneurs and
government needs to be investigated;
 To add to the limited academic literature in the field of social entrepreneurship.
1.4 Scope of the research
In this research I will examine the conflicting logics between social entrepreneurs and
municipalities. Both parties act in the social domain, but act according to another set of logics.
Social entrepreneurs do appear in all sectors, like health care and (green) energy. The field of
work seems highly relevant to investigate because the social entrepreneurs in this field work
with employees that are concerned with governmental laws and payments (e.g WWB,
Wajong). The social entrepreneurs in the field of labor thus have a clear tie to the government
which requires them in most cases to interact with government.
In addition the field of labor is interesting in current times of budget cuts and the
aforementioned current developments in the law on participation. The system is changing
which could have an effect on the interaction between the two parties. The governmental level
of municipalities is appropriate to investigate in this research because social entrepreneurs act
within one municipality and meet at this level the government in the legal, economic and
communicative terms.
1.5 Research questions
In this research I will answer the following research question:
Do social entrepreneurs experience tension in contact with municipalities, and if so, how can
the different logics explain this tension?
Sub research questions:


When and why do government and social entrepreneurs meet?
How do social entrepreneurs and government relate in financial/economic
terms? What underlying logics can be indicated?
9




How do social entrepreneurs and government relate in legal- procedural terms?
What underlying logics can be indicated?
How do social entrepreneurs and government relate in communicative terms?
What underlying logics can be indicated?
Do social entrepreneurs and municipalities experience tension?
How can the tension between municipalities and social entrepreneurs be
explained?
10
2. Conceptual and theoretical framework
2.1 Social entrepreneurship
2.1.1 The concept of social entrepreneurship
In 1999, the OECD already pointed at the importance of social enterprises: ‘the past few years
have witnessed the emergence and expansion of social enterprises (SE). This new type of
enterprise and its political, economical and financial importance can no longer be
underestimated’ (p. 8). Other authors also point out the importance of social entrepreneurship
to make positive contributions to the economy in terms of innovation, productivity and
growth (Carree and Thurik, 2010; Hoogendoorn, 2011). In the literature about social
enterprises there are many definitions of social entrepreneurship.
Some argue that there is no clear definition of the domain (Zahra et al., 2009; Mort et al.,
2002). In general, social enterprises are concerned with three P’s, namely: People, Planet
(environment/durability) and Prosperity (economy and financially) (Brabander et al., 2009).
Social entrepreneurs appear in all different sectors, such as work reintegration, health care,
energy, safety and sports.
An example of a social enterprise is Granny’s finest. The founder of the company visited his grandma
and noticed that several old women in the care centre were making scarves. One of the woman was
making a scarf without a purpose; no one would eventually actually wear the scarf. The founder
decided to start a company in which fashionable scarves are manufactured by ‘grandmas’. The scarves
are sold in a store in Rotterdam, in a web shop and were also shown in the Amsterdam fashion week.
Each Wednesday these grandmas come together to manufacture the scares that are designed by
starting designers. These grandmas come together, meet new people and therefore are less lonely. In
return the grandma’s are on a regular basis invited to go on a trip. This social enterprise thus clearly
combines a several elements in one business model.
This wide range of social enterprises makes it difficult to define the concept and to define a
common denominator in different countries. In general, social enterprises are businesses that
are bottom-up initiated and combine a social goal with an economic goal. Alter (2007) gives a
useful definition and defines social enterprises as:
‘Any business venture created for a social purpose- mitigating/ reducing a social problem or
market failure, and to generate social value while operating with the financial discipline,
innovation and determination of a private actor.’ (p. 12).
This definition will be used in this research. I would like to add to this definition that social
enterprises do not only solve market problems, but also generate social values where
government failures can be found (Bozeman, 1983). Social entrepreneurs in general place the
social impact/value above the economic value: social impact first (Bornstein & Davis, 2010).
The social value of social entrepreneurs can become visible in the output (organic clothes
that do not harm the environment), or the process (hiring disabled people to work in a
restaurant), or both (hiring psychiatric patients to become a taxi driver in an electric car). Van
11
Twist et al.(2012) point at the differences between the concepts of ‘social entrepreneur’,
‘social enterprise’ and ‘social entrepreneurship’. Generally, an entrepreneur is the person that
is involved in the activity, entrepreneurship is the activity and an enterprise is the
organization. These three concepts are not necessarily the same; an entrepreneur can act for
example without an enterprise.
Social entrepreneurs highly differ in the amount of money they receive from the
government for their company (Sireau, 2011, Alter, 2006; Bornstein & Davis, 2010;
Krosenbrink, 201; Ridley- Duff & Bull, 2011). Some entrepreneurs are fully independent of
government support, while others rely on subsidies. In chapter 2.2 I will elaborate more on
these government provisions. Social entrepreneurs can exist in different legal forms. A social
enterprise can be a foundation, but also be a BV. In the Netherlands social enterprises do not
have a special legal form. In the Netherlands social entrepreneurs often have a ‘BV’ and a
foundation (TNO, 2011). Roughly stated with the foundation (Ambi status) the company can
accept money/gifts and with the BV one can earn money. In England and Italy there are
special legal forms for social firms, and in Germany there is a different tax box for social
entrepreneurs (Hoogendoorn, 2011).
Social entrepreneurship is fundamentally different than ‘corporate social responsibility’.
Large commercial companies can also have social aims, in which they support for example
local communities in areas in which they operate. These companies have a social aim next to
their commercial aim, but the primarily focus stays at the commercial side of the business
(Bornstein, 2010). The social goal is in social enterprises the primary focus, this in contrast to
commercial businesses that have a primary focus on generating economic value. In a social
enterprise the founder or shareholders are not the only ones who profit from the value that is
created in the enterprise. It also contributes to a bigger group in society or society as a whole.
An example is brewery ‘The Prael’ in Amsterdam, where people with a psychiatric
background can work. In this case not only the owner of the brewery profits from the
company, but also the employees who are able to work and perhaps could use this experience
for a job in the future.
Social entrepreneurship is also different from civil initiatives (Alter, 2007; Mair & Marti,
2006; Robberts & Woods, 2005; Granados et al., 2011). A civil initiative could for example
be when citizens living in the same street together decide to protect their street. These citizens
could make appointments about on what day which person in the street will guard and protect
the environment and properties of the neighborhood. This initiative differs from social
entrepreneurship because it does not necessarily have a business model. In social enterprises
there is money involved. Finally, they differ from public-private companies, because those are
initiated by the government. Social entrepreneurs are bottom-up initiated.
2.1.2 Social entrepreneurs in the field of labor
In this thesis I will focus on social entrepreneurs in the field of labour. Social enterprises
concerned with the labour market are also known as social firms (Nicholls, 2006). The
(social) value of these entrepreneurs can be found in the production process or services that an
entrepreneur offers through the involvement of people with a distance to the labour market.
People can have all sorts of distances to the labour market, but the similarity between these
people is that in most cases they are unable or have difficulties in finding a regular job in a
12
regular company. This concerns a wide range of people, for example people that have been
detained, people that have been unemployed for a long time, people with a mental or physical
disability, and blind or deaf people. The social entrepreneurs start up a company in which the
employees can learn a craft, learn to be social in contact with others and have the chance to
fully participate and have value for the society.
Among the social entrepreneurs in the field of labour there are many differences. The
percentage of people that work in these companies with a distance to the labour market can
vary between 25% - 75% (Smit et al., 2008). In addition these companies can differ in the
employees they hire or are concerned with. I argue that the social enterprises concerned with
the employment of people with a distance to the labour market can be divided into two
categories. Kevin Robbie (2005) indicated the following spectrum that clearly points at these
two categories:
Source: Kevin Robbie (2005) p. 7.
On the right side of the spectrum social entrepreneurs can be found that are concerned with
people that due to mental and physical disabilities in different gradations cannot fully work
independently. In most cases these people have a day care program and there is a focus on
care and accompaniment. A social entrepreneur can provide in the day care activities of these
employees.
On the left side of the spectrum social entrepreneurs can be found that are concerned with
people that due to all sorts of causes experience a distance to the labour market. Some people
are for example unemployed for a long time, others are blind or deaf. The difference with the
social entrepreneurs on the right side of the spectrum is that the employees do not need day
care and therefore can work relatively more independently.
An interesting enterprise on the right side of the spectrum is the restaurant Broodje apart. The founder
of the enterprise was involved in a car accident. After her recovery she was not able to find a job. With
the money she received as a compensation for the accident she decided to start up her own company in
which each person gets the opportunity to work. Broodje apart is now a well know restaurant in
Schijndel. The restaurant works with a diverse group of people.Most of the employees have a mental
or physical disability. The company provides in education, work experience and produces qualitative
food for a commercial price. The company has extended in the last couple of years and now also has a
gift shop in which the employees can develop a large diversity of skills. Most employees work on
basis of daycare and the guidance in the company is paid with the PGB of the employees.
An interesting example of a company on the left side of the spectrum is Taxi- E. The goal of the
company is to maximize the comfort of the customer and to minimize the impact on the environment.
The company has only electric cars. In addition the company has an aim to have a highly social policy
with regard to employees. The company hires for example ex-prisoners who due to their background
have difficulties finding a job. Taxi-E gives these employees the change to reintegrate in the society.
13
The group of employees in a company influences many aspects and structures of the business.
In addition this also influences the contact with different governmental organizations. People
on the right side of the spectrum often also need extra health care support. These persons are
often concerned with arrangements of AWBZ (PGB) or Wajong. People close to the left side
of the spectrum are more able to work independently and are often concerned with the
arrangements of WW/WWB/Wajong/WSW. I will elaborate more on the structure of the
social laws and social system in chapter 2.2.
Although social entrepreneurs also have a mix of groups they work with, in this research I
chose social entrepreneurs with a focus on the left side of the spectrum. I will define these
entrepreneurs as follows:
‘Social entrepreneurs that work with a group of employees that has due to all sorts of reasons
a distance to the labour market, but does not need health care support’
2.1.3 History and development of social entrepreneurship
Although social entrepreneurship recently receives much attention, it is not a new
phenomenon. Examples of Florance Nightingale in the ninetieth century who build the first
professional school for nurses and revolutionized hospital constructions show that
entrepreneurship in the public domain is not new (Bornstein & Davis, 2010). Still with the
changing role of the government in the 80’s, the recognition that the government is not able to
solve every problem and the rising level of education accelerated this development (Bornstein
& Davis, 2010; Hoogendoorn, 2011). Hoogendoorn (2011) points at the fact that social
entrepreneurship is most prevalent in high income countries.
The OECD (1999) argues that the development of social entrepreneurship can no longer be
ignored for the phenomenon is growing throughout Europe. In the recent decade new support
organizations for social entrepreneurs came up, such as the Skoll foundation and the Schwab
foundation. Research centers and teaching programs for social entrepreneurs have been
established, including universities as Harvard University (the social enterprise initiative at the
Harvard Business School) and Oxford (the Skoll centre for social entrepreneurship). In
addition the academic attention for social entrepreneurship has risen and resulted in articles
and special issues in for example the Journal of World Business (Hoogendoorn, 2011). In the
Netherlands the university Utrecht School of public administration and organizational science
started courses on entrepreneurship and several platforms for social entrepreneurs have been
established, such as the organization Social Enterprise NL.
The development of social entrepreneurship is a part of a larger development, in which
citizens seem to take more initiatives into their own hands (Bornstein & Davis, 2010). Van
Twist et al. (2009) talk about the breach of trust of citizens towards the ability of politicians to
solve all the economic, societal and individual problems. People do not longer wait for
government to solve their problems, but come up with new solutions (Sampson, 2011). Ted
van de Wijdeven (2012) recently confirmed this development in the book ‘Doe Democractie’
(Do-democracy). In political terms the subject of civil initiatives and citizenship received
much attention in the United Kingdom with the line of argument of the Big Society, initiated
by Cameron who was inspired by Philip Blond. In short Philip Blond argued that due to the
14
economic, democratic and social crisis in the United Kingdom, neither government nor the
market can solve all problems. Citizens have to take initiative and change their environment
(Blond, 2010). Also, in Scandinavia the development received much attention where the
collaboration between government and society is emphasized (Siisianen & Blom, 2009). In
the Netherlands this development receives attention with the growing number of support
organizations for social entrepreneurship (e.g. Greenwish, Kracht in Nederland) and the
recent cabinet nota of the ‘do democracy’.
2.2 The system of labor participation
Social entrepreneurs in the field of labor will be confronted with employees that due to their
distance to the regular labour markets in most cases are connected to a particular law. The law
these employees are concerned with does also determine the organization a social
entrepreneur has to contact with. The social system is thus an important part of the context of
social enterprises and will therefore be explained in this chapter.
2.2.1 How the system is financed
The social system in the Netherlands provides each person a livelihood. This implies that the
government provides an income and in some cases a compensation for high healthcare costs
for each person that is unable to independently earn a sufficient income. The system is
financed either by national/employee insurances or money from the national state and thus
from general taxes.
The national insurances are paid by each person in the Netherlands through taxes a
payment or pension. Employee insurances are paid by employees and are automatically
retracted form loan. Social provisions take care of the so called ‘safety net’. Social provisions
are paid form the general taxes (Janssen, 2012).
National
insurances
AOW
AKW
ANW
AWBZ
TOG
WMO
Employee
insurances
WW
ZW
WIA (WAO)
Insurances
Social system
Social
provision
WWB
Wajong
TW
Wsw
(Source: Janssen, 2012)
15
2.2.2 How the system is organized
Social entrepreneurs in the field of labor have to work with the social system. Their
employees are related to different laws and therefore are also connected to different
organizations. Social entrepreneurs have to contact the municipality, UWV and CIZ. Different
laws have been assigned to different public organizations. The executing part of the
department of social affairs of the municipality is popularly called the ‘sociale dienst’ and
CIZ is called the ‘zorg kantoor’.
Organization
that executes
the law
Law
Suborganization
Focus
Municipalities



WWB
WSW
WMO

Social service
(sociale dienst)/
 Department of
social affairs
Work/ income
UVW
Health insurance






WW
ZW
WIA
TW
Wajong
Wazo



UWV (werkbedrijf)

Work/ income
ZVW
AWBZ
Care office
(zorgkantoor),
 Indication for laws
by CIZ
Healthcare/ care
(Source: Janssen, 2012)
Municipalities
Municipalities are concerned with the laws of WWB, WMO, and WSW (Janssen, 2012). The
WWB (Wet Werk en Bijstand, law of employability and assistance) provides an income to
people that, due to for example long term un-employability, are not able to independently earn
a minimal income. If a person worked for a couple of years, this person will first receive
money from the law of WW (UWV). In general for each year of work one receives one month
of WW. After this period one is concerned with WWB. In addition municipalities are
assigned to execute the WSW. The WSW (Wet Sociale werk voorziening, law on social
workplaces) arranges special workplaces for those who can due to psychological/physical
disabilities not function in regular labor process. The municipalities have to create an adjusted
workplace for people that cannot work in a regular company and that are assigned to the
WSW. Municipalities often have (sheltered) social workplaces to execute the WSW that are
often concerned with assembly work and landscaping. The central government gives
according to the law on social workplaces (WSW), budgets to municipalities to support these
social workplaces. The municipality partly subsidizes the social workplaces, and partly these
social workplaces are financed by the revenues of the workplace. Municipalities are also
concerned with the execution of the WMO. The Law of WMO (Wet Maatschappelijke
Ondersteuning, law social support) determines that municipalities have to support citizens
participating in society through provisions such as wheelchairs and adjustments of houses.
This law tries to stimulate the participation of people in society.
16
UWV
UWV, the Dutch institute for employee insurances (Uitvoeringsinstituut werknemersverzekeringen) is an independent administrative office (ZBO) of the ministry of social affairs
and employment that is organized on a regional level. UWV is a central point for employers
and employees and tries to find a match between these two groups. UWV has the tasks to
stimulate and help unemployed people to find a job. UWV provides re-integration trajectories
and education to prepare employees for a future job. UWV is assigned to execute the laws
WW, ZW, WIA, TW, WIA, Wajong, Wazo (Janssen, 2012). For this research only the law of
WW, ZW, WIA and Wajong are relevant. The law WW (Werkloosheid Wet, law of unemployability) ensures a minimal income to unemployed people. The durance and level of the
payment depends on the years of work of an employee. In general for each year of work, one
receives one month of income. In addition the UWV is concerned with the ZW. The law ZW
(Ziekte wet, law on illness) provides an income for example for (ill) unemployed people and
people with a temporary job. In general employers have to pay for a maximum of two years
for their employees. After this period the state will pay for these employees. In addition the
UWV takes care of the payment of the Wajong. The law Wajong (Wet werk en
arbeidsondersteuning jong gehandicapten, law of employability and employment support for
young disabled people) provides an income to people that are or did become disabled below
the age of 17 and therefore not able to have a full time job or cannot work in regular
circumstances. The UWV is also assigned to arrange the law WIA. The law WIA (Before:
WAO, Wet werk en Inkomen naar Arbeids vermogen, law of employability and income
relatively to ability) provides an income to people who are due to a illness or disability
unemployed for a period longer than two year.
CIZ
CIZ (centre for indication of health care) gives indications and controls the requests for the
AWBZ (Algemene Wet Bijzondere Ziekenkosten, Law of special health care). This insurance
supports high costs of health care that regular insurances companies would not support. This
law provides for example compensation in costs of a long term stay in health care institutions.
The guidelines for the request are formulated by the ministry of health, welfare and sports.
The AWBZ provides a compensation for the costs for extra health care. This compensation
can be in kind (natura) or in money (PGB). If a client chooses for compensation in kind, this
person can for example go to a specialized health centre. If a client chooses for money and a
personal budget (persoons gebonden budget) one can individually buy care. The CIZ can give
indications for personal care, nursing, accompaniment, treatment, stay in an institution and a
short term stay. Also the CIZ can give an indication for day care. In this day care people can
for example work and learn. (www.ciz.nl).
2.2.3 Current and future changes in the social system
In the upcoming two years several changes have been planned in the system. More laws will
be transferred to the municipalities. This process of decentralization has the aim to make the
laws integrated and more efficient. The process of decentralization brings along three major
changes.
17
First the AWBZ that first was the task of care offices will be integrated into the WMO and
thus becomes a task of the municipalities. The WMO will be adjusted and more people will be
assigned to the WMO instead of the AWBZ. The PGB will still exist but due to the relatively
smaller budgets the PGB it is expected that the PGB budget will be less. Secondly, the GGZ
care of youth will become a task of municipalities. Thirdly, the municipality has to execute
the new law of participation. This law is extended and will be discussed in the second
chamber in the end of 2013. With the approval of this proposal the law Wajong will be a task
of the municipality. In addition the municipalities are responsible for creating new jobs in the
public and private sector for people with a distance to the labor market. In the beginning of
2013 a 5% quota was introduced for each company with more than 25 employees. In the
proposal that will be in the second chamber by the end of 2013 it is proposed to create
125.000 new jobs up to 2016. The municipality thus has the integrated task of stimulating
people with a distance to the labor market to work (Source: Kamerbrief actualisering brief
over decentralisaties op het terrein van ondersteuning participatie en Jeugd, 16-05-2013).
With the decentralization the laws that concern people with a disability will be in the hands
of one organization: the municipality. First a person was obliged to contact the
municipality/UWV for an income and CIZ/ Care offices for the compensation of the costs of
health care. Still with the decentralization the budgets will increase significantly. Major
budgets cuts have to be realized in for example the WSW and Wajong.
2. 3. Logics
Tension between two parties can be understood by competing logics of both parties. If one
party for example has a particular kind of resources, this party has different kinds of logics to
open up these resources to another party. If a social entrepreneur for example asks for a
permit at a municipality, the municipality considers for example trough the logic of the law
and the democratic logic whether they give the permit. If the democratic and political risks are
too high the permit is probably not granted. The logic in the interaction thus determines the
result of the interaction. I argue that the tension between social entrepreneurs and
municipalities can thus be explained by looking closely at the different logics that prevail in
moments of interaction.
2.3.1 Interacting logics
All actors in the public domain have to deal with a diversity of logics, reagardless of their
position in the public domain (Mayntz & Scharpf, 1995; Van Gestel et al., 2009). Nicolette
van Gestel (2010) argues that especially in sectors like education, the social security system or
health care, there are many interests from different actors and these actors act from a different
set of logics. The different logics can cause tension between two parties. WRR (2004) and
Hemerijck & Helderman (1995) also point at tension between the logics of institutional and
provision organizations.
Due to the complexity of problems government cannot act according to just one logic
(Aberbach & Christensen, 2009; Mohoney et al., 2009). The government acts according to the
legal, efficient & effective (economic) and political logics (Clemens & Cook, 1999; Pandey &
Wright, 2006; Bovens et al., 2012). Also entrepreneurs do not act from one logic, and
18
function in a hybrid world (Alter, 2006, Bornstein, 2010) in which an entrepreneurial, socialwelfare and public sector logic play a role (Peach & Chowdhury, 2012). In the interaction
between social entrepreneurs and municipalities both act from their own logic that determines
the decisions and acts of the both parties. These logics can explain the type of interaction
between social entrepreneurs and municipalities.
2.3.2 What are logics?
In the social sciences there are, in contrast to for example math, no unified tools or
methodologies for building a theory or argument and thus come to a universal logic.
According to Hannan et al. (2007) the essential problem lies in the use of language. Language
often leaves room for interpretation and nuances. Hannan et al. (2007) point at the difference
between extensionally and intentional logic. The extensionally logic is often described as the
classical or first order logic. An often quoted example within the extensionally logic is: all
men are moral; Socrates is a man; Socrates is moral. The first order logic must impose two
important requirements. First, the theoretical statement must be universal and does not admit
any exception. In addition the concepts used must be universal. Extensionality logic simplifies
the logic but is also makes it more abstract and rough. Hannan et al. (2007) points to the fact
that in the social sciences statements are often less uniform and they can allow exceptions.
Modern intentional logic leaves space for nuances and exceptions.
In society there are all sorts of domains in which different logics prevail. The main role of
logic in science is to clarify the notion of ‘logical interference’ or a ‘sound’ argument’. The
modern concept of logic points at the arguments that suit in the context of the domain. Reay
& Hinings (2013) point at this use of the concept of logics and point at the shared rules, norms
and structures that create logic in a certain domain. According to Hanna (2006) logics are
intrinsically normative. Hannan (2007) defines logic in the domain of organizations as
follows: ‘socially constructed rules, norms and beliefs constituting field membership, role
identities and patterns of appropriate conduct that are transmitted through regulatory,
normative and cognitive processes’ (p.12). This definition will be used in this research.
Reason and rationality are closely related to logic. Hanna (2006) argues: ‘rational human
animals are essentially logical animals, in the sense that a rational animal is defined by its
being an animal with an innate constructive modular capacity for cognizing logic (p.68). A
logic thus comes from a rationality. Still, the concepts are not exchangeable because
statements that are logical do not always have to be rational. In this research the concept of
logics will be used because logics also point at the constructed rules, norms and beliefs.
Decisions and acts of social entrepreneurs and civil servants are probably in most cases not
only let by rational decisions, but are also influenced by the context of these two groups.
In research concerning logics an important question to answer is: how can one recognize
logics? Much research has been conducted in the field of competing logics (e.g. Thornton,
2002; Reay & Hinings, 2009; Mullins, 2006). These authors try to identify different types of
logics. It is interesting that most of the researchers chose two competing logics, for example
the logics of professionals and the logics of market (Thornton, 2002). This research also
consists of two major types of logics, namely the logic of municipalities and the logic of
social entrepreneurs, but these logics are divided into three separate types of logics. In the
research concerning competing logics the logics are described in a precise manner and
19
characteristics of each logic are identified, these characteristics can be used to identify
different types of logics in the data.
2.3.3 Logic of municipalities
The logic of municipalities consists of three sub-logics. The following three logics can be
distinguished (Bovens et al., 2012; Dryzak, 2001; Van der Wal, 2010):



Effective and efficient: performing government
Legality: decent government
Democracy: responsive government
Effective and efficient: performing government
The first logic is the economic logic in which concepts of effectiveness and efficiency prevail.
The concept of effectiveness refers to the achievement of the before established goals and to
the optimization of the cost-benefit equation (Bovens et al., 2012). The problems in the
society are always bigger than the means to solve to these problems, therefore, choices have
to be made (Snellen, 2002, Bovens et al., 2012). These concepts did become highly important
in public administration due to the growing costs of the welfare state.
The awareness about the performance of public organizations played an important role in
the most significant political changes and government reforms in recent history (Rainey,
2009). The development of new public management that prevailed in the eighties was also led
by economic and financial considerations (Pollitt & Bouckart, 2012). The mindset connected
to this development can still be found in current policies. This development of new public
management consists of five concepts, namely: the market, decentralization, transparency,
management culture and entrepreneurship. The first concept is the market. Public
organizations have to become similar to private companies and have to try to maximize the
efficiency, effectiveness and productivity of the organizations. With the least amount of
money, a large amount of services and products have to be delivered. The second concept is
decentralization. Government has to contract out tasks to organizations that can carry out the
public tasks better and more efficiently. The organization has to be more flexible and less
hierarchic to be better able to make decisions and to save costs. The third concept is
transparency. By making the organization more transparent more rational choices can be
made. The transparency of the organization makes it also easier to control the results of the
organization. The fourth concept is the management culture. The managers in the
organizations have to keep an eye on the efficiency and effectiveness of the processes. The
fifth concept is entrepreneurship. Managers and civil servants have to be creative with their
means. All employees have to think in an entrepreneurial and innovative manner. Risk taking
is a part of the entrepreneurial attitude.
To see whether an organization is effective and efficient, the output and the effects of the
organizations have to be measured (Waal & Kerklaan, 2004). Rainey (2009) points at the
discussions concerning the goal and performance criteria of public organizations, the multiple
authorities and actors in the government system do not always agree on the performance
criteria of public organizations. The performance of public organizations is hard to measure
and steer. Waal & Kerklaan (2004) mention six considerations that public organizations have
to make in designing a performance model:
20
1. The political element in public organizations makes decision-making more complex.
Politics makes the decision about the strategy of the organization.
2. The value of public organizations is hard to measure. The diversity of stakeholders can
have conflicting values; one person wants to pay less taxes while another person wants
a higher government payment.
3. Government organizations have internal and external policies. Public organizations
need other organizations and citizens to execute their policies. The effects of the
external policies are difficult to measure.
4. Ambiguity of goals. Goals in public organizations can be conflicting. This freedom in
policy is often consciously implemented because politics wants to satisfy as much
stakeholders as possible. This ambiguity makes it difficult for public organizations to
measure the outcomes and effects.
5. The satisfaction of citizens is hard to measure. The group of citizens to which the
policy is aimed is not always clear defined.
6. Private as well public organizations have material resources. Public organizations also
have immaterial resources, such as power that is visible in for example law
enforcement.
Public organizations do not only need to be effective and efficient due to economic or
financial reasons, but public money should also be spend justly and should serve the whole
population. Public organizations have to be integer organizations (Waal & Kerklaan, 2004).
Public money should not be spent on individual goals and gains, but should meet societal
goals.
Legality: decent government
States possess several major monopolies, such as the levy of taxes, determination of laws and
the monopoly on violence. Because the power of the states needs to be regulated and
controlled, the law has an important function. Every act of a (public) person of organizations
needs to be grounded in the law. The law leads the acts of the state and prevents unequal
treatments (Bovens et al., 2012).
Bovens et al. (2012) argue that the influence of the law on public organizations has been
increased in recent years. More often lawsuits have been held against public organizations, for
instance if a person suffers damage due to a damaged road. Judges more often judge public
organizations. Bovens et al. (2012) describe this process as juridification: the growth of
formal rules and the growth of formal systems of conflict management. Public managers and
civil servants complain that their work is influenced by this growing system of rules and argue
that the government is forced to an aversion of risks and formal behavior (Todd, 1969).
Weber (1946) pointed at the leading principle of the law in public administration. Weber
(1946) argues that modern officials function according to the principle of fixed and official
jurisdictions, which are in general ordered by rules, laws and regulations. Bureaucracies are
governed by a set of impersonal rules and procedures which are applied universally, without
regard for personal characteristics of particular individuals. The essential elements that
constitute the legal rationality are: equality before the law, legal security and protection from
21
arbitrary action. The legal system has a self referential character for it has its own structures
of relevance. Clarity and consistency are essential.
Also Perry (1994) points at the supremacy of the law: ‘the law requires the use of legally
established principles (rather than arbitrary decisions), equality before the law, protection of
individual rights, constraint on agencies by authoritative legal rules, the application of
administrative power by authorized and regular processes, impartiality, uniformity, and some
degree of predictability in administrative behavior’ (p. 117). The problem is that civil
servants need discretion to apply their expertise and to achieve effective and efficient
solutions. Davis (1969) argues that the goal of administrative law must be to find a balance
between the need of protecting against abuse of power and the ensuring of sufficient
discretion. Moe (1987) tells us that with these arguments a false dichotomy is created between
the rule of the law and efficient public management. Lipsky (1980) points at the discretionary
space of civil servants that are in direct contact to citizens. The civil servants have to make a
decision in direct contact with citizen within a certain context, which can influence the
execution of laws and rules.
Within the scope of the law, policies and regulations are formulated by politicians and
executed by civil servants. The guideline of the law leads according to Rainey (2009) to
different structures in the public organizations. The first structure is the formalization of the
bureaucracy. Rules and regulations are formally established in written rules and regulations.
Also Weber points out that bureaucracies are based on written documents to control the
functioning of the bureaucracy. Social phenomena are categorized into legally relevant
categories. The formalization of the bureaucratic processes leads to the concept of red tape
bureaucracy (Bozeman, 1993). Rainey argues that red tape consists of a burdensome
administrative rules and requirements.
Democracy: responsive government
Democracy functions according to the principle of sovereignty which implies that public
organizations, politicians and civil servants act in the name of the citizens. Politicians are
looking for a legitimate position and try to comply with the majority of the citizens. If the
majority of the citizens does not agree with the chosen policies then politicians have the risk
to not to be reelected. Bovens et al. (2012) argue that this principle forces politicians and civil
servants to be responsive to developments in society. Public decision making has to be
transparent and accessible to all citizens.
According Niskanen (1971) there are two types of actors with government: bureaucrats and
politicians. ‘The bureaucrats are the sole supplier of public goods and services, and
politicians are the only buyers of bureaucratic outputs. The goals of each actor are equally
simple. Bureaucrats are aiming to maximize their agency’s budget …. And politicians, in
turn, are aiming to maximize the votes cast for them in the next election’. Politicians try to
maximize their votes. Bruce Bueno de Mesquita (2003) point at the process of political
survival in which politicians give in times of elections attention to specific topics. Politics try
to survive in times of elections by strategically choosing topics and in symbolically solving
problems.
Politics and the public bureaucracy are interwoven (Easton, 1965 & Gawtorp, 1984).
Peters (2010) points at the concepts of ‘accountability’, that is important in public
22
organizations. The concept of accountability is often used interchangeably with concepts such
as ‘responsiveness’ and ‘responsibility, but have different meanings. These three concepts
point at the discussion concerning the (political) control of bureaucracies. Accountability is
about the requirement of public organizations to account for the financial, administrative, or
political decisions that have been made. Accountability depends on external organizations,
usually with political legitimacy, to assess the acts of the bureaucracy. Responsibility is a
concept that points at the control of external organizations, but also at the internal compass of
bureaucracy based on ethical standards and trainings. Peters (2010) argues that it is often
assumed that civil servants work, at least indirectly, for all citizens. Responsiveness is the
third concept that points at the discussion of controlling the bureaucracy. The idea of
responsiveness is that government has to respond to the demands of the public.
Responsiveness is a difficult concept to civil servants, by responding to the demands of
citizens they could pass the wishes of the political masters.
Rainey (2009) tells us that the media scrutiny of government plays an important role in
governance. Rainey (2009) argues that the news media also reports aggressively on scandals
in private business, but appears to place more emphasis on the scrutiny of government. The
risk of negative media attention influences the acts of politicians and civil servants. Dees
(2007) argues that, in contrast to private companies, in government it is not accepted to take
risks. Private companies, involved with private money, can experiment to find out what is the
best solution to a problem. In the public sector failure is often not accepted.
The three logics of government are often combined and a civil servant has to act according
to multi logic considerations (Snellen, 2002). Logics do not only consist of rational
considerations but are, as mentioned before, also embedded in norms, beliefs and role
identities that are transmitted through regulatory, normative and cognitive processes. Peters
(1999) also points at the effect of formal (vertical) structures, patterns, institutionalized rules
and procedures, routines and informal norms and habits on government organizations. This
permits civil servants to act without regard to logics, but for example to the routine of the
bureaucracy. In addition civil servants act in a system (Kunneman & Keulartz, 1985) and due
to political, legal and economic reasons have to look at all different interests in society.
2.3.4 Logic of social entrepreneurs
The logic of social entrepreneurs consists of three sub logics:



Entrepreneurial logic: running a company
Social- welfare logic: creating social impact
Public- sector logic: working in the social domain
Peach & Chowdhury (2012) argue that social entrepreneurs engage in entrepreneurial
activities similar to any other entrepreneur, but they do so in a very different context. Social
entrepreneurs depend on a complex web of stakeholders that influence the logic of social
entrepreneurs. Peach & Chowdhury (2012) argue that for a social entrepreneur to be
successful they need to be skilled at building a bridge between competing commercial, social
well-fare and public- sector logics. Also other authors (Alter, 2006; Bornstein & Davis, 2010)
point at the hybrid world of social entrepreneurs. Peach & Chowdhury (2012) formulated the
following scheme that points at the different logics of social entrepreneurs.
23
Social entrepreneurs and the Social-welfare, commercial and public sector logics
Social-Welfare Logic
Commercial Logic
Public-Sector Logic
Goals
Improve social conditions
and relieve suffering of
beneficiaries
Maximize surplus
revenue from
organizational activities
Ensure fairness and
transparency across
different levels of society
Institutional
stakeholders
Nonprofit social partners,
charitable
and philanthropic
funders,
beneficiaries
Clients, business
partners,
investors, shareholders
National and local
government
entities, multilateral
funding
agencies, regulators,
elected
officials
Social entrepreneurs’
interaction with
stakeholders
Collaboration on specific
projects,
knowledge transfer from
organizational peers,
service
delivery to beneficiaries
Delivering goods and
services to clients,
developing relationships
with suppliers,
managing investor and
shareholder expectations
Managing relationships
with
elected officials,
regulators,
and funding agency
officials
Social entrepreneurs’
dependencies on
stakeholders
Funding from charitable
and
philanthropic
organizations,
legitimacy and material
resources
from social organizations
Revenues from sales to
clients, reliable service
from suppliers and other
business partners,
investment from
shareholders and
investors
Certification from
regulators,
funding from government
agencies and
multilaterals,
political backing from
elected
officials
Source: Peach & Chowdhury (2012), p. 497
Entrepreneurial logic: running a company
Peach & Chowdhury indicated a ‘commercial logic. ’ I argue that an ‘entrepreneurial logic’ is
a more appropriate to describe the logics of social entrepreneurs. In the logics of social
entrepreneurs the entrepreneurial logic is reflected by the recognition by chances in the
market. Cucly et al. (2002) argue that all acts of entrepreneurship start with the recognition of
an attractive opportunity, ‘for social entrepreneurs, an ‘attractive’ opportunity is one that has
sufficient potential for positive social impact and to justify the investment of time, energy, and
money required to pursue it seriously’. Social entrepreneurs thus combine an economic goal
with a social goal.
Westhead et al. (2011) argue that there are in general two types of entrepreneurial inputs
explored by economist, namely:
- Imagination and creativity & innovation
- New combinations, idea’s, products and businesses
- Opportunity identification
- Environment: demand and supply
24
-
Process
Organization
Imagination and creativity are important aspects of entrepreneurship. Shackle (1966) stresses
the limited scope of economic rationality when it comes to imagination and creativity.
Imagination and creativity are expressed in the output of the enterprise, such as services and
products. Schumpeter (1934) suggests that entrepreneurs are the catalysts of dynamic change.
According to Schumpeter (1934) entrepreneurs come up with innovative solutions and new
combinations. Entrepreneurs come to these new solutions in a learning process. ‘Social and
business entrepreneurs have to uncover or create new opportunities through a process of
exploration, innovation, experimentation and resource mobility. This is an active, messy,
highly decentralized learning process’ (Dees, 2007). According to Dees (2007)
entrepreneurship is comparable to natural selection, including a continuous cycle of
differentiation, selection and expansion.
In addition entrepreneurs have to recognize opportunities and evaluate the demand and
supply equations in the market. The recognition of the chances and the response to the
environment bring along risks (Westhead et al., 2012). The entrepreneur is not sure of the
results of the action and therefore has to deal with great uncertainty. The response to the
environment is an important criterion in the success of social entrepreneurs (Sharir & Lerner,
2006). Next to the recognition of chances in the environment social entrepreneurs can also
identify opportunities within the organization and the processes in the organization (Sharir &
Lerner, 2006). Such as the optimization of the production processes to maximize the surplus
revenue from organizational activities. The costs have to be as low as possible to make as
much products or deliver as many services as possible to create high economic revenues, or in
the case of social entrepreneurship create social impact. In addition an entrepreneur could also
recognize opportunities in the organizational model and look at the composition of the staff.
Social welfare logic: creating social impact
Social entrepreneurs want to create value, not only in economic terms, but also in social
terms. The logic of creating social impact consists of three motivations:
-
Personal experience
Social needs
Need for change
Social enterprises are often initiated by a personal story (van Twist et al., 2012). An example
is the company of the Thomas houses. The father of Thomas, named Hans, was not able to
find a home-like house for his son. Therefore, he decided to start up his own company to
provide housing for disabled people. Many new enterprises arise from the entrepreneurs’
education, work experience or their personal environment (Guclu et al., 2002).
‘Dissatisfaction with the status quo often spurs entrepreneurial activity, prompting social
entrepreneurs to look for new approaches to problems and frustrations they have encountered
personally, witnessed among family or friends, or seen on the job’ (Guclu et al., 2002, p. 2).
Personal experience is vulnerable but also limited. Ideas could appeal to the entrepreneur, but
could not ground in market realities.
25
Social entrepreneurship can also be stimulated by the experience of social needs. Social
needs can be understood as the gap between the socially desirable condition and the existing
reality. These desirable conditions are grounded in personal values and may serve as a
powerful motivator for social entrepreneurs and their ideas (Guclu et al., 2002). Social
entrepreneurs can experience this need in a personal experience or notice this need in society.
Social entrepreneurs often act according to an ideal and they want to improve social
condition (Pache & Chowdhury, 2012). Also Dave Roberts and Christine Woods (2005)
clearly point at the passion that leads social entrepreneurs: ‘Passion was a word that cropped
up in every interview, a passion for what they are doing, whether it was starting a business,
creating a theatre company or reviving a run- down company. Their passion, the conviction
that what they were doing is important, gave them the second characteristic, the ability to
leap beyond the rational and the logical and to stick with their dreams, if necessary against
all evidence’ (p.46).
Nicholls (2006) argues that some social entrepreneurs do not stop at creating social value,
but also want to bring a sustainable shift in the social and economic relations of disadvantaged
groups. An example is the Green Hotel in Mysore, Southern India which provides a model of
environmental and social tourism, employing abused women and ‘dalits’, the untouchables.
This initiative does not only add social value in providing the woman an income, but also
changes the perspectives and attitudes towards these women.
Public- sector logic: working in the social domain
Social entrepreneurs act in the public domain and often depend for their resources on public
sector stakeholders. Social entrepreneurs that are able to understand the social system and
cooperate with public stakeholders can for example create strong financial partnerships with
local governments or can lobby to change a certain policy. Social entrepreneurs are thus
embedded in the public sector logic and have to adapt this logic to effectively operate in the
field (Sampson, 2011). The public sector logic is focused on the goals of ensuring fairness and
transparency across all acts, to act within bureaucratic principles and in the notion of
democratic governance. Peach & Chowdhury (2012) argue that the institutional logic of
government shapes in important ways the behavior of the actors with whom they interact.
Some compliance of the logic in a field is thus important to generate support and to survive in
the domain.
The public sector consists of stakeholders and a system. First social entrepreneurs have to
manage relationships within a complex web of public stakeholders, such as regulators, elected
officials and funding agencies. These stakeholders can influence the company and the social
enterprises can depend on these stakeholders for certificates, permits, funding and political
backing. Social entrepreneurs have to maintain a strong relationship with these stakeholders
and have to be aware of the demands of the stakeholders in the field. Not only do social
entrepreneurs have to interact with stakeholders that are related to the government. Also
customers have expectations of social entrepreneurs to act in a decent way with a vulnerable
group of employees. Due to the position in the public domain social entrepreneurs can receive
more attention.
Secondly, social entrepreneurs have to deal with the social system. In this system several
public organizations are situated that act according to a governmental logic and that came to
26
existence by political decision making. The system of the public system may have come to
existence by an incremental process and therefore, may not be logic to social entrepreneurs to
understand. Social entrepreneurs have to understand the social system with its complex web
of laws and organizations to be successful (Peach & Chowdhury, 2012).
The three logics of social entrepreneurs are thus combined in a hybrid form of logic in
which the entrepreneurial, social-welfare and public sector logic are combined. Social
entrepreneurs have to interact with a wide range of stakeholders.
2.4 The intersection of municipalities and social entrepreneurs
Social entrepreneurship can be perceived as a self supporting entity (Van Twist et al., 2012).
There is a limited amount of research that investigates the relation between social
entrepreneurship and government. Still, Korosec & Berman (2006) conducted a quantitative
study and showed that in municipalities with a high level of support for social entrepreneurs
more social entrepreneurship exists. Sampson (2011) also points at the positive influence of
municipal support on the development of social enterprises. Municipalities thus play a role in
the development of social entrepreneurship. Therefore, it is interesting to study more closely
the interaction between municipalities and social entrepreneurs.
2.4.1 Where do social entrepreneurs and municipalities meet?
Regulating institutions have a range of instruments to steer the behavior of subordinate
groups. They can steer an organization to act in line with the targets and goals of their own
organization. Regulating institutions have three instruments to steer other subordinate groups,
namely with financial instruments, with laws and procedures and with softer forms of steering
such as information, convincing or seducing other parties do something (Majone, 1989;
Bemelmans-Vicet et al., 1998; Bakker en van Waarden, 1999; WRR, 2004). Institutions could
for example steer by setting particular criteria for subsidies (Dimaggio & Powell, 1983) or
setting particular laws that make a particular activity impossible. At these three areas
government and surrounding organizations often meet. Also social entrepreneurs and
municipalities seem to meet in these three areas (Greenwish, 2012; Social Enterprise NL,
2012; Hood, 1883; Linder & Peters 1998).



Financial/economic area (e.g. start-up capital, housing facilities, subsidy, state money
or payments);
Legal/procedural area (e.g. permits, certificates);
Communicative area (e.g. information, facilitating, network, advising, political
support/attention).
Dependent on the request and the group of employees, social entrepreneurs will meet different
departments of municipalities, such as the department of social affairs, economic affairs, care
and welfare. In addition social entrepreneurs could also be in contact with UWV if employees
receive for example an income from Wajong, or they could be in contact with health offices to
make arrangements concerning PGB.
Bemmelmans-Videc et al. (1998) describe the three instruments, of government, namely
the financial, legal and communicative instruments and compare these three instruments with
27
carrots (financial), sticks (legal) and sermons (communicative). This points at the strengths of
these instruments. The financial and legal types of interactions can be described as directive
and communication is a softer form of steering. It can be expected that the different steering
mechanisms also lead to a particular sequence and phases in interaction. In government, the
law is the leading principle (Weber, 1946; Perry, 1994). It can be argued that the legal area is
the basis is for other types of interaction. Entrepreneurs for example first need a permit or an
adjusted zoning plan before the enterprise can operate. Also the entrepreneurs need a legal
subscription at the chamber of commerce. It can be expected that after this phase the
entrepreneurs will have less contact on the legal area. Financial steering can be one-off or
structural. Also in this area different phases of interactions can be expected (Twist et al.,
2012). Government can for example mainly steer in the start-up phase of the enterprise.
Finally, municipalities and social entrepreneurs can meet in communicative terms.
Bemmelmans-Videc et al. (1998) describe the communication as a softer form of steering.
The interaction in this area can therefore be more open-ended.
2.4.2. Model of interaction
Much research has been conducted in the field of inter organizational relations; why would
organizations interact? And in the cases of this research: why would social entrepreneurs and
municipalities interact? And what type of interaction causes tension? In the literature two
major approaches of inter-organizational relationships have emerged. The first approach
views inter-organizational relationships from an exchange perspective (Levine and White,
1961; Tuite, 1972; White, 1994). In this perspective relations come to existence when two or
more organizations have perceived mutual benefits or gain from interaction. The leaders of
each organization are motivated to interact because they assume that they are better able to
attain goals by interacting with another organization. Aiken & Hage (1968) argue that these
interactions come up in times of scarce or declining resources. Schmidt & Kochan (1977)
argue that the exchange approach also implies that the interaction between participants in
these relations can be characterized by a high degree of cooperation and problem solving
because both parties are motivated to maximize joint benefits.
The second approach is the power-dependency approach. In this approach it is implied that
the motivation to interact is asymmetrical. One party is motivated, but the other is not. The
interaction will only exist when the motivation of one party is powerful enough to interact
with another party. Bargaining and conflict are the form of interaction in this approach
(Schmidt & Kochan, 1977).
Ahrne (1994) argues that the interaction approaches of ‘exchange’ or ‘power-dependency’
can be explained by the resources of the organizations. The resources can either be inside of
the organization or outside of the organization. Inside of the organization can be for example
money or funds and outside of the organization can for example be customers. Ahrne (1994)
indicated four types of interaction that are based on the different resources. The four types are
indicated in the following model:
28
Position of resources
Form of
interaction
Struggle
Inside
Inside
O
Outside
Conflict
Competition
Exchange
Collaboration
Cooperation
Forms of interactions between organizations – Source: Göran Ahrne (1994).
Organizations can thus either struggle or cooperate. A conflict is a struggle for a resource that
one of the organization has in its control. Ahrne (1994) points at the example of a war, in
which case one country has money or land that another country wants to obtain. The country
that wants the money or land has to make much effort to obtain the resources. At the same
time the organization has to defend its own resources. Competition is another pattern of
struggle between organizations. In competition the conflict is indirectly. Organizations can for
example compete for resources outside of the organizations, such as support of voters and
corporations can compete for customers. Ahrne (1994) argues that it is not always clear when
the conflict ends and the competition begins. Often, competition can occur between more than
two actors or parties. In competition all parties are assumed to use their strengths and to use
their resources against each other.
Cooperation occurs when one or both parties involve their resources in the interaction. In a
relationship of exchange there is a dependency between two parties. Conflicts are often
resolved by an agreement in the form of an exchange. An exchange could for example be an
agreement between employers and a union about wages or an agreement between the renting
or leasing of property. An exchange is in most cases based on a contract that regulates the
interaction between the two parties. Collaboration comes to existence to achieve common
goals that are outside of their control. Instead of competing with another party, one could try
to collaborate. Organizations can also collaborate to fight against common enemies.
2.4.3. The model of interaction between social entrepreneurs and municipalities
The model of Ahrne (1994) could explain the (type of) tension between social entrepreneurs
and municipalities. The monopoly position of municipalities in the economic and
legal/procedural area makes social entrepreneurs dependent on municipalities for example for
permits and subsidies. In these cases the municipality has a large power position which can
lead to a relationship of conflict. If the resources are outside the reach of both social
entrepreneurs and municipalities the interaction can be characterized as competition. This can
be the case if both social entrepreneurs and municipalities try to find workplaces for their
employees/clients. Both parties can compete for workplaces. Both the types of interaction of
conflict and competition fit into the before mentioned power-dependency approach.
29
An example of a situation of exchange between social entrepreneurs and municipalities can
be a contract between social entrepreneurs and municipalities about (government) payment of
employees. An interaction of collaboration can come to existence if both parties experience
problems of the economic crisis and collaborate to find solutions to be able to ensure their
existence. The interaction types of exchange and collaboration can thus be understood from
the before mentioned exchange perspective (Schmidt & Kochan, 1977). In these types of
interaction both parties are motivated to maximize joint benefits.
Both the exchange approach and the power-dependency approach assume an interaction
between the organizations from which one or all parties benefit. This implies that when
organizations have no benefits they will not compete, conflict, exchange or collaborate
(Huberts & van Hout, 2011). In this case two organizations can function independently from
each other and two different worlds come to existence. This can for example happen after a
situation of conflict and a social entrepreneur received a permit. After this period, the
interaction can be limited.
This analysis leads to the following scheme. Conflict thus implies that one organization has
resources that the other party would like to have. The party with the resources can steer the
other party. An interaction of competition thus implies that the resources are outside of the
organizations. Both parties are looking for resources to make their position more stable. An
interaction of exchange thus implies that both parties have resources that can help the other
party. The parties can work independently and still benefit from the resources of the other
party. An interaction based on collaboration exists when both parties have to work together to
have better results and to solve problems. They share their resources. Finally, an (non)
interaction of separate worlds can come into existence and in this case both parties do not
need each other to reach their goals and are not interested in the resources of the other party.
The logics determine whether an interaction lead to a certain type of interaction.
Conflict
Competition
Exchange
Collaboration
Separate worlds
30
In this research the question is whether there is a tension between social entrepreneurs and
municipalities. In this case the question arises: what is a tension? A tension is an interaction
based on a power-dependency relationship. The interests and logics of the organizations are
not in one line. A tension can thus be understood in the type of interaction of conflict or
competition. Friction can also exist in case of exchange and collaboration. If for example a
contract has to be formulated, parties have to collaborate for this to come to existence through
bargaining and this could bring friction along. Still, in the interaction of exchange and
collaboration both parties have the same goal and this simplifies the interaction and causes
less tension. Tension in this research is thus seen as an interaction of conflict or competition.
2.4.4 The potential tension between social entrepreneurs and municipalities
The tension between social entrepreneurs and municipalities has not been investigated in an
empirical systematic manner. The literature concerning the relationship and the development
of social entrepreneurship is still highly limited. Still, when considering the different logics of
municipalities and social entrepreneurs, potential tension in the economic, legal and
communication area can be expected.
Tension in the economic relations
In the economic area potential tension can be found between the entrepreneurial and socialwelfare logic of social entrepreneurs and the democratic and legal logic of municipalities.
Social entrepreneurs have more costs than ‘regular’ entrepreneurs (TNO, 2011), due to higher
costs of accompaniment and the guidance and development of their employees. Social
entrepreneurs are in most cases dependent on municipalities for the compensation of extra
costs. This dependency gives municipalities a large power position as they can set out criteria
for the entrepreneur to meet.
Municipalities set out criteria for enterprises to meet in order to qualify for certain
subsidies. Municipalities can steer entrepreneurs with economic instruments. A municipality
can for example give subsidies to steer an entrepreneur into to the criteria of the subsidy.
Municipalities can for example in general not give subsidies to a BV (TNO, 2011). A BV
aims at gaining profit, but once a company makes profit the given subsidy cannot be justified.
This can cause tension with social entrepreneurs because the intention of the entrepreneur
does not change with the legal label of the organization. In this case the plans of the
entrepreneurs are thus steered and restricted by the rules of the municipality and there is
tension between the entrepreneurial and social welfare logic of social entrepreneurs and the
legal logic of municipalities.
Not only the rules can cause tension between the entrepreneurial logic and the legal logic,
but also the system in which the legal logic is embedded can cause tension. WRR (2012)
points at different tensions in the economic area between entrepreneurs and municipalities.
Municipalities more often stick to standard procedures, while entrepreneurs look for new
solutions. Dees (2007) argues that social entrepreneurs have the opportunity to go through a
process of exploration, innovation, experimentation and resource mobilization to create new
combinations and opportunities and find new solutions for (social) problems. In addition
entrepreneurs think in informal terms and in terms of trust, while municipalities mainly make
decisions and appointments within standard procedures. Also, entrepreneurs think in
31
individual parts, while municipalities think in systems and have to think about the interest of
all actors in society. The different logics can lead to long procedures that can cause tension
between social entrepreneurs and municipalities.
In addition, social entrepreneurs act with public money which can cause (political)
problems and problems with accountability (SER, 2005). The social element combined with
an entrepreneurial element of social entrepreneurs can cause difficulties in the policies and the
criteria of municipalities. Social entrepreneurs can add social and economic value to the
society (Hoogendoorn, 2011). This can in times of budget cuts and limited sources be highly
important to municipalities. At the same time can social entrepreneurs who deal with public
money bring political risks along (SER, 2005). Projects of social entrepreneurs can fail and
the company can get bankrupted and public money can disappear. Municipalities thus have to
be careful with social entrepreneurs to prevent political risks. This can cause tension between
the entrepreneurial logic of social entrepreneurs and the political logic of municipalities.
The assumed tension between social entrepreneurs and municipalities can thus be found in
the tension between the entrepreneurial and social-welfare logic of entrepreneurs and the legal
and political logic of municipalities. Social entrepreneurs have to fit into the standard and
uniform forms and this could restrict the financial and social aims of the entrepreneurs.
Tension in legal relations
In the legal area there is potential tension between the entrepreneurial and social-welfare logic
of social entrepreneurs, and the legal and political logic of municipalities. The municipality
has a monopoly position when it comes to the law and social entrepreneurs are dependent on
municipalities for the permits and certificates.
The municipality can give permits and certificates that give the enterprise the right to exist.
Dimaggio & Powell (1983) argue that government forces surrounding organization to be the
same by making them fit into the same laws and regulations. Similarity is rewarded because
in this case organizations will fit into the administrative categories and the procedures and
application will be efficient and quick. To municipalities uniformity in law is highly
important; all citizens and companies need to be treated in the same way (SER, 2005). This
could cause tension with social entrepreneurs that perhaps do not fit into the regular
administrative categories (WRR, 2012). Social entrepreneurs can change their organization
but then perhaps do not reach the goals of the company. As mentioned before, social
entrepreneurs have difficulties with different legal labels, such as the BV and the label of a
foundation. Social entrepreneurs do not fit in one of the two categories (TNO, 2011), which
makes it difficult to apply for example for subsidies. Procedures of permits can be intensive
and time-consuming, while entrepreneurs have to respond quickly and flexible to their
environment. WRR (2012) argues that many citizens often experience they need much
patience in government procedures. Here the legal logic of municipalities causes tension with
entrepreneurial logic of entrepreneurs.
Laws are formulated by politicians and the civil servants have to execute the law. When
the law has not been followed by a civil servant, and the civil servant advantaged for example
a particular enterprise, this could lead to political problems (WRR, 2012). The law is thus a
leading principle to civil servants and will strongly influence the relationship with social
entrepreneurs. Not only do entrepreneurs have to comply with the uniform law. Due to the
32
political element the law changes on a regular basis and this is difficult for an enterprise to
depend on. This dependency on politics can cause tension between the political logic of
municipalities and the social welfare and entrepreneurial logic of social entrepreneurs.
In addition the existence of the different laws in the social system causes that entrepreneurs
for the execution of different laws have to interact with different public organizations. For
employees concerned with the Wajong, entrepreneurs have to contact the UWV, while for
employees concerned with the WWB they have to contact the municipality. The
compartmentalized system makes it difficult for the social entrepreneur to understand the
system.
The assumed tension can thus be found between the political and legal logics of
municipalities and the entrepreneurial and social-welfare logic of social entrepreneurs. Social
entrepreneurs possibly do not fit into the law and therefore experience difficulties in the
interaction with government. Social entrepreneurs can be restricted by the law and in some
cases have to adjust or even end their plans, this process costs much effort and time of social
entrepreneurs.
Tension in the communicative relations
The interaction in the communicative area is presumably more open-ended, therefore the
tension in this area can be limited. Still, it can be expected that social entrepreneurs and
municipalities experience tension between the social-welfare and entrepreneurial logic of
entrepreneurs and the political and legal logics of municipalities.
In the communicative area social entrepreneurs and municipalities meet each other for
example for information, their network, advice, to facilitate and to give political support and
attention. In this area the interaction is more open-ended, because the entrepreneur is less
dependent on the municipality. Hoogendoorn (2011) argues that a social entrepreneur often
has a large network in which the entrepreneur can gain much help and information. Social
entrepreneurs can thus use their own network, and need less government. Entrepreneurs can
involve several actors in their business plans and processes. This places the enterprise at a
distance from municipalities that have fewer abilities to steer the initiative.
Social entrepreneurs often have a strong (personal) story that is told by the enterprise. In
addition, the network of social entrepreneurs can help to promote the enterprise and its story
for example in the media. Also the municipality can give (political) attention to the enterprise.
This could cause tension, because the enterprise came in some cases to existence as a protest
against the treatment of particular groups in society or against governmental provisions
(Schulz, 2013). It can cause tension when the municipality creates publicity and positively
influences the image of the social enterprise and the municipality at the same time. Here
tension can be found between the social-welfare logic of social entrepreneurs and the political
logic of municipalities.
In addition communication in general between social entrepreneurs and municipalities can
cause tension. The municipality can be highly compartmentalized (WRR, 2012). WRR (2012)
argues that many activities in government are divided into smaller parts. This causes that for
some activities many people have to be involved. This costs much time and effort and in
addition, a citizens or entrepreneur is not able to build a relation with a civil servant. This
makes it difficult for an entrepreneur to obtain the right information about the governmental
33
organization. This is especially the case for social entrepreneurs that work with the
municipality, UWV and CIZ at the same time. A tension can be found here between the
entrepreneurial logic of entrepreneurs and the legal and political logic of municipalities.
In the communicative area the entrepreneurial and social welfare logic of social
entrepreneurs thus seems to create tension with the political and legal logic of municipality.
It is interesting to notice that in all three areas the potential tension can be found between the
entrepreneurial and social logic of social entrepreneurs and the political and legal logic of
municipalities.
2.5 Conclusion
Social entrepreneurs in the field of labor work with a group of people with a distance to the
regular labor market. Due to this social aspect of the company social entrepreneurs meet
government on a regular basis. Social entrepreneurs and municipalities meet in the economic,
legal and communicative area. In these three areas potential tension can arise between social
entrepreneurs and municipalities.
In practical terms the tension between social entrepreneurs and municipalities can be
studied by looking at the logics of municipalities and social entrepreneurs. At a moment of
interaction in which tension arises the logics of social entrepreneurs and municipalities come
together. Municipalities act from an economic logic, legal and democratic logic. In the
economic logic the concepts of effectiveness and efficiency prevail. In the legal logic
government acts according to the laws, rules and regulations set out by the political system. In
addition municipalities act from a democratic logic; here responsiveness to the society is
important. Civil servants act from a multitude of logics in which the economic, legal and
democratic logics are combined. Social entrepreneurs also acts according to three logics,
namely: an entrepreneurial, social welfare and public-sector logic. In the entrepreneurial logic
social entrepreneurs focus at the survival of the company; the entrepreneurial logic aims at
running a company. In addition social entrepreneurs act from a social-welfare logic, in which
social entrepreneurs act to change the situation of their employees. In addition social
entrepreneurs act from a public sector logic, in which they have to adapt to the logics within
the social system. Social entrepreneurs act from a hybrid logic, in which all three logics can
exist at the same time.
At a moment of interaction the three logics of municipalities meet the three logics of social
entrepreneurs. The tension between municipalities and social entrepreneurs can be explained
by a model of interaction in which five types of interaction are identified. The first type of
interaction is conflict. This is the case if one party has resources that the other party would
like to have. The second type of interaction is competition. Here the resources are outside the
reach of both the organizations and both the organizations try to gain access. The third type of
interaction is exchange, where both organization have resources that in exchange could
benefit both parties. The fourth type of interaction is collaboration. In this type both parties
have to work together to obtain resources outside of the company. The fifth type of interaction
points at the absence of interaction. Both parties do not need each other to reach their goals.
The types of interaction of conflict and competition can be defined as a tension between
34
organizations. In the other types of interaction bargaining is often needed and tension can
come to existence, but due to the common goals the tension will be less intensive.
In the literature potential tensions can be expected in the three areas between the
entrepreneurial and social logic of social entrepreneurs and the political and legal logic of
municipalities. In the economic area potential tension can be expected between the legal logic
of municipalities and the entrepreneurial logic of municipalities because the plans of social
entrepreneurs can be restricted or hindered by the rules and the system in which the rules are
embedded. In addition there can in economic terms be tension between the entrepreneurial
and social welfare logic because social entrepreneurs deal with public money and this could
cause political problems. In legal terms tension can be expected between the entrepreneurial
and social-welfare logic of entrepreneurs and the political and legal logic of municipalities
because the municipality has a monopoly in this area and can thus stop or restrict the plans of
the entrepreneurs. In addition several legal provision are divided over different public
organizations (municipalities, UWV, CIZ) which gives difficulties in the interaction with
these organizations. In communicative terms tension can be expected between the
entrepreneurial and social-welfare logic and the political logic of municipalities. Politicians
have to be responsive to the society and can use social enterprises to advance their image
which could cause tension with social entrepreneurs. As mentioned before there can also be a
tension between the entrepreneurial and social-welfare logic of social entrepreneurs and the
legal logic of municipalities. The municipality is divided in different parts to execute the law.
This compartmentalization can be difficult for social entrepreneurs to work with.
35
3. Methods
3.1 Research setting & methods
3.1.1 Competing logics
Several researchers (Thornton, 2002; Reay & Hinings, 2009; Mullins, 2006) investigated
competing logics in or between organizations. Reay & Hinings (2009) argue that logics are
important theoretical constructs to understand a common purpose and unity in an
organizational field and thus understand the tension between two organizations.
This research will focus on the competing values of municipalities and social
entrepreneurs. In the field of social entrepreneurship there are only a few empirical studies
conducted, of which most are case study based (Hoogendoorn, 2011). Only few studies
focused on the relation between social entrepreneurs and government (Korosec & Berman,
2006; Van Twist et al., 2012; Sampson, 2011; Sharir & Lerner, 2006; Dees, 2007). Only one
research focused on the role of municipalities in the development of social entrepreneurship.
This article ‘municipal support for social entrepreneurship’, by Korosec & Berman (2006)
was a quantitative research among civil servants in the United Nations of America. This
qualitative research with 22 interviews with municipalities and social entrepreneurs in the
Netherlands will therefore contribute to the academic debate.
3.1.2 Qualitative research design
The research design is a case study. Yin (2003) indicated four types of cases studies. A case
study can be based on single cases and on multiple cases. A single case is appropriate if for
example the case is highly unique and there is only one case available. Yin (2003) argues that
more cases give analytic benefits and single cases are vulnerable because ‘you have all your
cases in one basket’ (Yin, 2003: p. 53). In addition cases can be holistic or embedded. In the
case of holistic, one unit will be studied per case. In the case of embedded, more units are
embedded in one case. These two axes lead to four possible case study designs.
36
Single- case designs
Multiple- case designs
Context
Context
Holistic
(Single unit
of analysis)
Case
Case
Context
Context
Case
Context
Case
Case
Context
Context
Context
Context
Context
Embedded
(multiple
units of
analysis)
Case
Embedded
unit 1
Embedded
unit 2
Source Yin (2003). Basic types of case studies.
For our investigation we have chosen a multiple embedded cases study. A multiple cases
study is considered to be more robust than a single case study (Herriott & Firestone, 1983). In
a multiple case study design, it is important to carefully select the cases. A multiple case study
should be considered as an experiment in which the cases are carefully selected and in which
a replication of the study is possible to make research more robust. The number of cases
depends on the certainty the researcher wants to have about the multiple case results. The
number of cases depends on the complexity and the context of the cases. An embedded
research design is appropriate if a case does not consist out of one unit. The research question
will determine the case study design.
The multiple embedded cases study design seems appropriate for this research because the
Netherlands has 408 municipalities and there are thus many possible cases. The research
concentrated on 5 large cities in the Netherlands. It is expected that the context of the
economic crisis, budget cuts and the process of decentralization has comparable influences on
the cities. Due to the comparable sizes it is thus expected that the cases will have comparable
results. In this research 5 cases are chosen to have a sufficient level of validity and make the
research feasible within the amount of time that was available for this research. These cases
are selected by finding a match between a large city and social enterprise that meets the
definition that is formulated in paragraph 2.2.1. It is the aim of the research to investigate the
37
tension between municipalities and social entrepreneurs. In order to answer the research
question an embedded research design seems appropriate. With this design in one case and
context, both the position of municipalities and the position the social entrepreneurs can be
investigated.
Yin (2003) points at the cyclical research method that suits a multiple case study design.
This cyclical process is strengthening in this research by the fact that only little research has
been conducted on the relation between social entrepreneurs and municipalities. An
explorative design seems therefore appropriate. Hennie Boeije (2010) argues:
‘When a research has an explorative nature – for instance, a newly emerging field of interest
that not yet been extensively examined – you need methods with a maximum of explorative
power. Qualitative methods do live up to this because of their flexible approach. As we have
seen, the research questions can be tailored to the field of study. In addition, data collection
and data analysis can be continually adjusted to the emerging findings. That is why both
activities are conducted in small cycles instead of one after the other.’ (P.32).
Also other authors (Hakvoort, 1995; Van Thiel, 2010) point at the cyclical process of
qualitative research. Due to the explorative character of the research new findings come up
that are interesting to investigate. In this research a multiple embedded case study with an
explorative nature has thus been used as a research design.
3.1.3 Research method
To fully understand the relation between social entrepreneurs and municipalities I chose to
have in-depth interviews. An interview is a conversation between the interviewer and the
respondent in which the interviewer tries to gain information from the respondent. Interviews
are an appropriate method in an explorative research (Van Thiel, 2010).
Due to the explorative character of the research, semi-structured interviews are appropriate
(Field, 2009; Boeije, 2010; Silverman, 2006). For the semi-structured interview I made a
topic list (attachment 2). In this research parts of the topic list were inspired by the theoretical
framework while other questions are related to knowledge that was gained during the research
and the interviews. This again points to the small cycles in qualitative research (Boeije, 2010).
I designed one topic list for both municipalities and social entrepreneurs (attachment 2),
because I was looking for the tension between these two parties. By paying attention to the
same topics I was able to see where possible tension between the two parties can be found.
In this research I focused on the current vision of the civil servants and social entrepreneurs
on the relation with each other. The information presents the current situation and the analysis
cannot give information about the development or future of the relationship.
3.1.4 Context of the research
Each selected case is embedded in a particular context. In each city the policies concerning
people with a distance to the labor market differ. In addition changes in the social system,
such as the process of decentralization and the law on participation can impede the interaction
between social entrepreneurs and municipalities. Also the economic crisis can have a large
impact on the relation between the two parties. The impact can be two-sided. First, the
38
number of unemployed people still rises in comparison to early years (CBS, 2013). The
government has to take care of a higher number of people with a government payment and
thus have to lead a higher number of people to a job. Secondly, municipalities have to deal
with budget cuts because the municipalities receive less money from the state and other
sources of income. It is expected that the context of the rising unemployment count will have
an influence on the results.
The context can give problems for the generalization of the results. Flyvbjerg (2001) points
out the importance of context in social sciences. Lincoln & Guba (1985) discuss the problem
of generalization as follows: ‘the only generalization is: there is no generalization’. Also
Flick (2009) argues that we should look for findings that are transferable from one context to
the other.
3.2 Background interviews and information
3.2.1 Background research concerning the social system
In the first interviews with the respondents I noticed that the field of labor contained its own
complex jargon, to be able to fully understand the social system a sub-research has been
conducted. First the laws that relate to the social system have been studied. In addition to
understand the development and the past changes in the system, policy notes have been
studied. The assignment of laws to certain organizations and the division of tasks into
different laws can be better understood by these notes. In addition during this research many
changes have been proposed by the second chamber to the social system. To understand the
upcoming changes I spoke with two policy advisors of the Ministry of Interior and Kingdom
Relations who were closely involved with the upcoming changes in the social system. Also all
recent policy notes and newspaper articles related to the subject have been studied.
In addition five respondents have been interviewed. First a program coordinator of
MVO/CSR at UWV was interviewed. The person was able to give more insight into the
functioning of the UWV. In addition two persons who worked at the department of social
affairs at the municipality of Capelle aan den IJssel were interviewed. Both persons were job
coaches. Job coaches have the task to lead people with a government payment to a paid job or
to an education. One of the job coaches was mainly focused on people with a relative short
term WWB payment while the other job coach was focusing on people who were long-term
unemployed (WWB). The second person had also worked in the GGZ sector and was often
confronted with the law AWBZ and the organization CIZ. In addition a project leader at the
department of social affairs of Rotterdam was interviewed. This person guides the process of
decentralization in the municipality of Rotterdam. In addition a job coach at the department of
social affairs of the municipality of Rotterdam was interviewed. This job coach worked for 10
years at the UWV and was able to give an overview of the social system.
3.2.2. Background conversations
From the 4th of February until the 27th of June I have been an intern at the Ministry of Interior
and Kingdom Relations at the department of citizenship and information policy, in the team
of citizenship. This is a team that focuses on civil initiatives and social entrepreneurship in the
Netherlands. As an assignment for my internship I conducted all sorts of interviews with
municipalities, social entrepreneurs, founders of civil initiatives and umbrella organizations,
39
which gave me a better understanding of the context of both municipalities and social
entrepreneurs. A total of 21 background interviews were held.
I interviewed several actors in the field of social enterprises. Three project leaders of banks
have been interviewed to get an understanding of the financing of social entrepreneurship
(ABN AMRO and the Rabobank). In addition a meeting was attended of the social impact
platform about the establishment of social bonds. These social bonds have to make the
financing of social enterprises feasible by designing methods to measure the social impact of
the company. Eight organizations that support social entrepreneurs and create a platform for
social entrepreneurs to meet have been interviewed. Here, the directors of Social enterprise
NL, Kracht in Nederland, Social powerhouse, Greenwish, Bouwen voor Social, Stadslab
Leiden and Nudge have been interviewed. In addition several social entrepreneurs in other
areas than the area of labor have been interviewed. A manager at the enterprise Broodje apart
has been interviewed. In this restaurant both mentally and physically people concerned with
an AWBZ (PGB) payment get the opportunity to work in an actual restaurant. In addition the
owner of the Leeszaal West has been interviewed. The Leeszaal West is an alternative library
and a meeting place for people in the neighborhood. People can bring their residual books to
the library and can without an administrative system take other books home. Also the coinitiator of the initiative Singeldingen was interviewed. Singeldingen is an initiative in which
citizens in Rotterdam West together run a kiosk in a public park. Finally, a teacher of social
entrepreneurship at the USBO was interviewed.
In addition several civil servants at different municipalities were interviewed. These
interviews were held for the project of the ‘knowlegde broker’ (Kennismakelaar) of the
Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations. In this project academic insights about the
current transition of government were coupled on practical questions of municipalities, social
entrepreneurs and a diverse set of organizations that for example support civil initiatives.
During these conversations the subjects of civil initiates and social entrepreneurship were also
a topic that was discussed. For this project the secretary of the municipality of Schijndel has
been interviewed, a policy maker at the municipality of Amersfoort, a policy maker at the
municipality of Zeist, a policy advisor at the municipality of Berkelland, a program
coordinator at the municipality of Enschede and a project leader at the municipality of Peel en
Maas.
3.3 Cases
3.3.1 Case selection
I selected 5 cases for this research, namely the cases of the cities of Amsterdam, Rotterdam,
Den Haag, Utrecht and Groningen. In these cities I held 22 interviews with civil servants and
social entrepreneurs to investigate the tension between the social entrepreneurs and
municipalities. To make a case selection I first made a list of all social entrepreneurs in the
field of labor in the Netherlands that were traceable in different databases (attachment 1). By
researching all databases of social entrepreneurs in the field of labor (e.g. Normaalste zaak
and Social Entreprise NL) and in addition magazines and separate websites, a saturated and
complete list was formed.
40
Then I selected five large cities with at least one social enterprise in the field of labor. I
selected five large cities in the Netherlands to have comparative cases and to reduce the
influence of the size of a city on the relation between the social entrepreneurs and
municipalities. It can be expected that in small municipalities contacts between civil servants
and social entrepreneurs are more direct and therefore differ from large cities.
In each city I chose one social entrepreneur that fitted in the definition described in chapter
2.1.2. These entrepreneurs have a focus on labor. I tried to select companies in different
sectors (e.g. ICT, fashion). In all cases I spoke to the founding entrepreneur of the enterprise
to be able to get insight in the whole process of the social enterprise.
Social entrepreneur
Specialisterren
Van Hulley
Enterprise
ICT
Fashion
DNA Charlois
ART
De 7 Deugden
Vilt aan Zee
Brewery
ART
Target group
Law
Autistim
Wajong/ WWB
Multi-cultural group of WWB
woman
Multicultural group of WWB/ WW
Woman
Diverse group
WWB/WW/ Daycare
Diverse group
WWB/WW
In addition I selected civil servants at these municipalities because I argue that civil servants
are confronted with social entrepreneurs in everyday situations, in for example the application
of permits and subsidies and therefore possibly experience tension. I did not select politicians.
In the cases of Amsterdam, Utrecht and Groningen I called different departments of the
municipality to investigate which person was acquainted with the subject of social
entrepreneurship. In the cases of The Hague and Rotterdam I was referred to the right person
by civil servants of the ministry. In Rotterdam I used the snowball method to interview more
people in the municipality.
3.3.2 Case description
Amsterdam
With 799.442 inhabitants Amsterdam is the largest city of the Netherlands. Amsterdam has a
potential labor force of 580.052 persons. 75 per 1000 people receive a WWB payment, 28 per
1000 receive a WW payment, 13 per 1000 people receive a Wajong payment (CBS, 2012). To
gain a clear insight into the policy concerning people with a distance to the labor market of
the municipality of Amsterdam, a project leader of the department of residence, health and
society, a mediator for civil servants (participatie makelaar) and a policy officer at the
department of social development have been interviewed.
To research the relation between the municipality and social entrepreneurs the research
focused specifically on the social enterprise de Zeven Deugden, initiated by Garmt Haakma.
In 2008 Garmt Haakma decided to establish a brewery. Before that he worked at the policy
office of the political party CDA where he decided to hire a person with autism. After nine
months of work Garmt was not able to extend the contract of the person: the person did not fit
into the team and the accompaniment cost much time and effort. Garmt decided that he
wanted to help this kind of people and started up his own brewery in Amsterdam. De zeven
41
deugden produces beer, bottles the beer and has an own unique label. Garmt indicted 7 virtues
(deugden), for instance faith, hope and love. In the themes of these virtues several kinds of
beers are made. De zeven deugden employees several groups of employees with a diverse
background. Some of the employees have been in a coma, others are autistic or have a
mental/physical disability. Garmt emphasizes the need of a good organizational culture. Due
to the large differences between employees some employees will be quicker in doing their
work than other employees. De zeven deugden works in close contact with the social
workplace of the municipality of Amsterdam.
Groningen
The municipality of Groningen has 195.080 inhabitants, of which 148.805 belong to the
potential labor force. 70 per 1000 people receive a WWB payment, 22 per 1000 people
receive a WW payment and 24 people per 1000 receive a Wajong payment (CBS, 2012). To
research the policies of the municipality in the field of labor participation of people with
distance to the regular labor market, two account managers at the department of economic
affairs have been interviewed. These account managers maintain relations between the
municipalities and entrepreneurs. Each new enterprise in the municipality is visited by one
account manager.
In the municipality of Groningen the research specifically focused on the social enterprise
Van Hulley, initiated by Jolijn Creutzberg. In 2011 Jolijn Creutzberg started the company
Van Hulley to use her skills to add value to the society in social terms. 10 years ago she made
a boxer short for her husband from a blouse that he still liked but could not wear anymore.
She used the sleeve to make a spurt and manufactured unique details. The idea of the boxer
short stayed in her mind and thought that this idea was perhaps interesting to place on the
market. Jolijn decided that she wanted to manufacture these boxer shorts with a multicultural
group of women. She has always been interested in the other cultures and dressmaking is a
craft that is build for women she argued. When Jolijn told other people about the idea, many
people were interested in supporting the idea. One person designed the boxer shorts and made
a design for fashionable boxer shorts with unique details. The foundation Jasmijn in
Groningen helped Jolijn by finding women that wanted to participate in the project and
offered Jolijn a space to work in for the first period of time. The women that work at Van
Hulley get the chance to learn a craft, to speak the Dutch language, participate in a real
company in which their presence is essential, and the company is able to sell the boxer shorts
for a commercial price. Van Hulley works with different arrangement. Some woman have a
so called ‘participation job’ provided by the municipality of Groningen, others participate as
part of an internship. The goal of Van Hulley in the long run is to provide a regular paid jobs
at Van Hulley or lead the women to a paid job in another company.
42
Utrecht
Utrecht has 316.448 inhabitants, of which 232.846 persons belong to the potential labor force.
41 per 1000 people receive a WWB payment, 24 per 1000 people receive a WW payment and
15 per 1000 people receive a Wajong Payment. To investigate the policy of the municipality a
policy advisor at department of societal development was interviewed. This policy advisor
focused on the process of decentralization and the development of social entrepreneurship in
the municipality of Utrecht.
The research specifically focused on the social enterprise Specialisterren, established by
Sjoerd van der Maaden & Ronald van Vliet in 2009. Both the entrepreneurs are the father of
an autistic son and they tried to create a company in which the abilities and strengths of
autistic people are recognized and utilized. Specialisterren is ICT testing company in Utrecht.
The combination of autism and ICT appeared to be a strong combination and the company did
become highly successful. Specialisterren already has many customers such as the Rabobank,
Hema and the municipality of Utrecht. Specialisterren provides a certificated education to
their employees, provide internships and tries to lead the employees to regular paid jobs at
Specialisterren or other companies. Sjoerd points at the personal growth of the employees.
There is a job coach inside of the company that guides the employees in the work-related
issues and personal issues.
Den Haag
The Hague has 502.802 inhabitants, of which 347.651 persons belong to the potential labor
force. 69 per 1000 people receive a WWB payment, 29 of 1000 people receive a WW
payment, 15 of 1000 people receive a Wajong payment (CBS, 2012). To investigate the
points of view and policies of the municipality a policy advisor at the department of economy
and entrepreneurship and account manager at the department of social affairs employers point
(werkgeverspunt) were interviewed. The policy advisor was concerned with the economic
development in the city. The account manager tried to maintain good relationships between
the municipality and the entrepreneurs and in addition he was trying to find work places for
unemployed persons in the municipality.
In addition the social enterprise Stichting leren doen, initiated by Sander Eijkenbroek was
interviewed to research the relation between the social enterprise and the municipality. The
foundation leren-doen is an organization that helps youth to become independent and to
prepare them for a future job. The foundation has a workplace and a shop in which bicycles
are sold.
The research in Den Haag mainly focused on the social enterprise Vilt aan zee, initiated by
Sandra Burggraaf. Vilt aan zee is a company that is established in 2010 by Sandra Burggraaf
in Den Haag. Sandra is an architect and a few years ago she was confronted with a burn-out
situation. She noticed that for people with a burn out there is only a limited package of help
available. Sandra went to a care farm to recover and she noticed that this manual labor in a
natural environment did have a healing effect. With this experience she came to the idea to set
up a company in which people were able to reintegrate into the society, an inter phase
between an illness and regular work. In 2010 Sandra established the company Vilt aan zee, in
which she makes art products with felt. The company produces for example wand lights and
light panels. Currently Sandra is experimenting in finding the right business model in which
43
she can hire people that need an extra period between a period of un-employability and work,
such as people with a burnout. In addition Sandra is looking for a new workplace where she
can also keep sheep to produce the felt and to provide in extra work for the employees. This
experimental phase clearly points at the problems to which a social entrepreneur is confronted
in the start-up phase.
Rotterdam
Rotterdam has 616.260 inhabitants, of which 425.042 people belong to the potential labor
force. 94 per 1000 people receive a WWB payment, 30 per 1000 people receive a WW
payment and 16 per 1000 people receive a Wajong payment (CBS, 2012). In the municipality
of Rotterdam five civil servants have been interviewed, namely a policy advisor at the
department of youth, education and society, a policy advisor at the administrative department
(bestuursdienst), a project leader at the department of income and work, a Job coach,
department of social affairs and employability, a project leader of the social workplace
Rotterdam. In addition a meeting concerning social entrepreneurship for civil servants at the
municipality of Rotterdam was attended.
To investigate the relationship between the municipality and social entrepreneurs the social
enterprise of Granies Finest and Enviu have been interviewed. The research in particular
focused on the social enterprise DNA Charlois, initiated by Ivo van der Baar.
In 1999 Ivo van der Baar established the company wandschappen in Rotterdam. This
company develops art in the public area. In 2012 Ivo van der Baar started the project DNA
Charlois. The idea behind this project is: 160 nationalities in one neighbourhood, 160 crafts,
160 designers leads to 160 successes. In the upcoming five years wandschappen wants to
work with all different 160 nationalities in the neighbourhood. In total 25 art projects will be
designed each year. Per year Ivo van der Baar offers ten people a learn-work trajectory. After
this year these people will have enough experience to apply for a regular paid job. In the
project DNA Charlois thus produces art in collaboration with a multicultural group of people.
This group of people was concerned with the law of WWB and WW.
3.4 Data analysis
3.4.1 Coding process
To be able to analyze the data I recorded all the interviews and made exact reports of these
interviews. These exact reports gave me the opportunity to analyze the interviews with the
least interpretation of the words of the respondent. In addition during the interviews I made
memos of the interesting findings and patterns in the interview. These memos were highly
useful in the analysis.
The first step in the analysis was the process of open coding: ‘breaking down, examining,
comparing, conceptualizing and categorizing data’ (Strauss & Corbin, 2007:61). In this
process I read all the interviews carefully. Then I coded the interviews into the categories of
‘financial area’, ‘legal-procedural area’ and ‘communication area’:
 Financial area: all items that are related to money, subsidies and compensations
 Legal- procedural area: all items related to the law, rules and regulations
44

Communicative area: all items related to an non- material exchange of information
or network
No selection is made in the relevance of the research material. When coding the data the data
is thus segmented into smaller parts and these smaller parts/themes/categories are labeled by a
code. I printed all the interviews and coded the material by highlighting the different areas
into different colors. When a fragment fits into two areas I tried as precisely as possible to
highlight the right parts of the fragment in one color.
In the second phase of the coding, I used the method of axial coding or focused coding
(Boeije, 2010). In this phase I coded the three main themes of ‘the financial area’, ‘the legalprocedural area’ and ‘the communicative area’ into smaller codes (Attachment 4). Within the
three areas I distinguished sub-themes and specified these themes into different categories and
characteristics. I coded these subthemes by writing words in the margins such as ‘zoning
plans’ and ‘arbo’. In some cases I described a sub-theme by a word that I formulated myself,
in other cases I used the exact words of the respondent. The word that best covered the
content of the fragment was chosen. It is important to choose words that are close to the data.
This coding process led to a diverse set of words, which I later divided into large categories.
In the legal area I for example divided the themes into national and local laws, regulations and
rules. These larger categories where highly useful for the analysis and in order to make links
and distinctions between the different themes.
In the third phase of the analysis I used the method of the selective coding (Boeije, 2010).
Here I tried to make sense of the different categories. Why do civil servants and social
entrepreneurs have a specific point of view in an interaction? With regard to the theoretical
framework I identified different key terms/characteristics to identify the logics (attachment 5).
I compared these characteristics with the statements of the civil servants and social
entrepreneurs to identify different types of logics. The logics were not always easy to
distinguish, because the different types of logics are closely interlinked. In these cases I
divided the statement into smaller parts or searched for the main message or logic in the
statement. The subthemes were thus divided into different logics. These different types of
logics were reported in the results.
In the fourth phase I compared the logics of the municipalities and social entrepreneurs to
investigate what type of interactions can be found. It was possible to identify these types of
interaction because the civil servants and social entrepreneurs in the interviews and statements
constantly compared and referred to the other party as they pointed at the logics of the other
party.
The four stages of the research as described above were not embedded in a linear process.
In some phases ideas were raised for later stages or vice versa. In some cases when looking in
the fourth phase at the logics the distinctions in subthemes became clear. During the research
I focused specifically on the research question. This implies that where some fragments and
codes in the text are less relevant to the research, decisions have to be made in the research.
An example is that social entrepreneurs will also be confronted with laws, rules and
regulations on a national level, but the research concentrates on the relation between social
enterprises and municipalities. The national level is less relevant and therefore less intensively
studied.
45
In the research 22 background interviews have been held. These interviews have been used
to understand the statements and the context of the respondents, but were not analyzed for the
research.
3.4.2 Reliability and validity
Reliability often refers to the degree to which findings of a research are independent of
accidental circumstances of their production (Kirk & Miller, 1986). It deals with the questions
whether other research can do the same research and have the same results. Moisander and
Valtonen (upcoming) point out two things to satisfy reliability criteria in non-quantitative
research. First, by making the research process as transparent as possible. One should describe
the strategy and analysis method as precisely as possible. Secondly, one should pay attention
to the theoretical transparency and make all the theoretical stances from which the
interpretation takes place. In this research I tried to make the decisions as transparent as
possible. In addition I described the context of the respondents to enable other researcher to
repeat the research.
Validity refers to the extent to which a research actively represents the social phenomenon
to which it refers. Proposing accurate statements involves the possibility of two errors:
1. Type 1 error is believing a statement to be true when it is not
2. Type 2 error is rejecting a statement that is in fact true
The concept of validity originates in quantitative research. Silverman (2006) argues that the
concept is also applicable to qualitative research. A type 1 error arises when one accepts a
‘spurious’ correlations. If x is always followed by y, it does not necessarily mean that y is
caused by x. There can be a third Z factor that influences the relation. In addition it can
happen that people in interviews present a situation that does not correlate with the way they
behave in naturally occurring situations. The interpretation and behavior of people can
influence the statements of the research. As mentioned before, due to the subject-subject
relation statements are interpreted. Besides that, in this research I asked social entrepreneurs
questions about municipalities and vice versa. The placement against this group could lead to
a more explicit position of both parties on the subject and thus statements that not fully
correspond with reality.
46
4. Results
Municipalities meet each other for economic affairs, legal affairs and for the exchange of
information and communication. At the moment of interaction the logics of municipalities
(economic, legal and democratic) meet the logics of social entrepreneurs (entrepreneur,
social- welfare and public- sector). Different combinations of logics can lead to different
types of interaction.
Logic of municipalities
Effectiveness and efficiency
Legality
Democracy
Logic of social entrepreneurs
Entrepreneurship
Social welfare
Public sector
In this chapter I will describe the intersection of municipalities, UWV and intermediate
organizations and social entrepreneurs in the economic, legal and communicative area to
investigate where tension can be found and how this tension can be explained. For each area it
is first described where social entrepreneurs and municipalities meet. Secondly, the different
logics that exist in the area are described. Thirdly, it is described what type of interactions can
be found in the particular area and what logics play a role in the type of interaction. The type
of interaction together with the different logics will give an explanation of the tension.
4.1 Economic area
4.1.1 Where do social entrepreneurs and municipalities meet in economic terms?
Social entrepreneurs and municipalities can in economic terms interact on a short and long
term basis. On a short term or one-off basis they meet for subsidies and funds. An example is
subsidies to adjust workplaces to disabled employees. In times of budget cuts the subsidies
and funds are minimized and therefore the interaction between social entrepreneurs and
municipalities is limited.
On a long term basis they interact on the basis of employment of people with a government
payment. In most cases social entrepreneurs hire employees that are still (financially)
connected to the municipality (department of social affairs) or UWV. Social entrepreneurs
have to make contracts with municipalities or UWV and after this the employees have to be
monitored. An example of this contract can be a participation job. In Groningen participation
jobs are meant for those people that cannot easily find a job. A participation job is an
intermediate phase between a regular job and a period of unemployability. Social
entrepreneurs and municipalities thus mainly meet with regard to employees.
4.1.2 Logics of municipalities
Efficiency and effectiveness: Performing government
Municipalities in general cannot support the organization of social entrepreneurs. First
municipalities have less money for example to subsidize organizations and secondly subsidies
are in general not meant for enterprises. For civil servants a social enterprise is comparable to
any other company. Some funds or subsidies are available for social enterprises in the start-up
47
phase of the company. The municipality of Groningen for example has innovation vouchers
that stimulate entrepreneurs to start innovative projects.
The municipality does in general not support the organizational aspects of the company,
but is prepared to invest in the development of employees. The attitude of government
towards social entrepreneurs that act with people with a distance to the labor market is
changing. Municipalities are confronted with many changes in the labor market. First
municipalities are confronted with the decentralization of tasks and the executing of the
Wajong and the law on participation. Secondly, the decentralization of the tasks is combined
with large budget cuts which means that more tasks have to be executed with relatively less
money. In addition, there is a growing number of people with a government payment and at
the same time it becomes more difficult to find a job for people. These changes bring
municipalities in a difficult situation and municipalities have to look for new opportunities
and possibilities. Social entrepreneurs can be seen as a solution to reach targets and to provide
in jobs.
Rene Cannoo (municipality of Rotterdam) argues that before, municipalities did have tons
of money to execute the WSW. In the past, large groups of people that were not able to find a
job were placed in the WSW. Eventually the WSW was a gathering of all sorts of people with
diverse abilities. With the current process of decentralization and budget cuts this situation is
changing. Martin Bluijs (Utrecht) argues:
‘Things are changing. In the past we asked people with a inability to work ‘What do you want
to do?’ – ‘I want to paint’. In this situation we provided a workplace where a person was able
to paint. Nobody did ask what this person could really do, or what production capacity this
person had. That was also not necessary. This is changing. This is financially not possible
anymore’.
Within municipalities the necessity to change the social system increased. New possibilities
are explores, such as an exchange and collaboration with other parties. Municipalities more
often seem to exchange tasks and assignments. In each of the interviews with civil servants
the concept of ‘social return on investment’ was mentioned. This concept implies that for
each public tender at the municipality the winning party has to give 5% in social return to the
municipality. Nienke Boesveldt (Amsterdam) points at the example of KPMG that received a
consultancy assignment for the municipality of Amsterdam and in return KPMG works as an
accountant for the Prael, a social enterprise in Amsterdam. Another example is landscaping
companies that have the contract and assignment to take care of all the parks in a particular
city. In return for this large assignment the landscaping company has to spend 5% of the
amount of the contract on social purposes, such as the hiring of unemployed people. Social
return on investment tries to create a win-win situation for both the company and the
municipality. This is a large development in cities in which municipalities are discovering a
new position.
Municipalities are also exploring new possibilities with smaller parties. Perry van Rijn
(municipality of Rotterdam) argues that the municipality is often looking for partners that
look and act like government and that can be trusted, in most of the cases these are large
institutions. This attitude is changing because these large parties appeared not always to be
48
effective and efficient with public money. Also there seem to be a mind shift towards social
entrepreneurs. Perry van Rijn (Rotterdam) tells us that first municipalities were scared of
entrepreneurs in the public domain. These entrepreneurs deal with public money, take risks
and they deal with a vulnerable group of citizens. As a municipality you do not want people to
earn money on groups that you as a municipality protect. This attitude is changing; the
municipality has less money and realizes that small parties can have a large social value. To
deal with social entrepreneurs entails risks, but in times of budget cuts the municipality seems
more willing to take risks and to explore new possibilities.
The development of social entrepreneurship in the labor area can in economic terms be
highly positive for municipalities. Social enterprises can provide workplaces for people for
who it is difficult to find a job in a regular company. The municipality of Rotterdam designed
the following scheme.
On the left side of the scale people need (health) care and have high costs. They have a large
distance to the labor market. Then there are people in the social workplaces (SW- Beschut A,
B,C,D). The different indications (A,B,C,D) are different stages of the intensity of work. Then
there are possibilities to work in groups in an external company (Groepsdeta). An example in
Rotterdam is the company Verstege (spices) that in their production process works which
people with the indication of ‘groepsdeta’. After this stage people are individually placed in a
company. The municipality is trying to make each person move more to the right side of the
spectrum, because here people will cost less money for the municipality. The municipality has
different tools to stimulate people to move to a different indication. Martin Bluijs
(municipality of Utrecht) mentioned that in the past people worked for 20 years in a social
workplace. No one did wonder if this person was also able to work in a regular company. Due
to the budget cuts municipalities have to look more critically to the social workplace and to
the place a person could take in society.
Social entrepreneurs can provide jobs in different stages of the spectrum, but in most of the
cases they take care of the ‘individuele detachering/individual detachement’. In the scheme
one can see that in this stage a person will contribute more to society than he/she costs. Marja
Talen (Rotterdam) mentioned that this is an important stage in the development of people
with a distance to the labor market. There are not many places where people can work on a
individual basis, especially not in times of the current crisis. Social entrepreneurs can thus be
49
highly important to municipalities. Rob Burghouwt (Rotterdam, social workplace) mentioned
that only 1% of all people with an indication of WSW or ‘groepsdeta’ will eventually work on
an individual basis (individual detachement). Social entrepreneurs thus only represents a very
small group in the large process of labor participation. Although the employees in the phase
of ‘individuele detachering’ maintain a financial tie to the municipality, jobs in this stage will
save money for municipalities. People have more economic value in this stage and there is a
possibility that these employees eventually will be guided to a higher level of participation.
Legality: decent government
Due to the budget cuts there is hardly anyone to offer subsidies to entrepreneurs and most of
municipalities argued that subsidies are not meant for entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurs have to be
able to function independently. Social entrepreneurs are in essence entrepreneurs and do not
differ other entrepreneurs is that aspect.
‘A while ago we did have an application to subsidy the rebuilding of a restaurant where
psychiatric patients work. This is difficult. It is a place where people with a distance to the
labor market could possibly work, but then you are subsidizing a restaurant.’ (Nienke
Boesveldt, Amsterdam).
All the civil servants did speak about the fairness of competition in the market. Government
cannot financially support a company. A municipality has to look at all the interests of every
person in the municipality. Every person has exactly the same rights. There are almost no
subsidies for entrepreneurs and the ‘BV’ status could give problems receiving a subsidy.
Some entrepreneurs experienced that it is not possible to receive subsidies or funds with a
BV, and therefore placed a foundation next to the BV. Specialisterren has for example a BV
and a foundation that are interlinked. Perry van Rijn (Rotterdam) tells us municipalities
cannot accept if companies receive governmental money and make profit at the same time.
All governmental money is related to laws, regulations and rules. Entrepreneurs have to
comply with criteria to be able to receive one-off subsidies or funds and have to adapt to
criteria to receive governmental money that is related to their employees. The employees of
social entrepreneurs are in many cases concerned with different laws (e.g. WWB, Wajong).
The re-integration process and the amount of money that is connected to these different
groups of people are determined by the law.
Democracy: responsive government
Social entrepreneurs deal with public money and often work with a vulnerable group of
people. Social entrepreneurs have to take risks and explore new opportunities. This could
bring political risks along: ‘what if something goes wrong?’. Civil servants and politicians
have to be able to explain their decisions and have to accountable. Perry van Rijn (Rotterdam)
argues that civil servants always have to be able to justify their decisions to prevent
arbitrariness.
Trust is a word that popped up in every interview with civil servants. Providing subsidies
and signing contracts with social entrepreneurs is not only about criteria, but civil servants
need the feeling that an entrepreneur can be trusted and that the public values are protected. I
50
had the following dialogue with Rene Burghouwt (project leader social workplace):
Rene
Why do you think social entrepreneurs work with people with a distance to the labor
market?
Interviewer Because these entrepreneurs have a social goal and are able to combine this with an
economic goal.
Rene
No, why do you really think social entrepreneurs hire these people? What is a motive of
an entrepreneur?
Interviewer Well, of course I understand that it is an enterprise, but is also has a clear social goal.
Most of the entrepreneurs started the company from a personal experience.
Rene
Well, I think that is a minority, I think the motive of an entrepreneur is money.
Also Rob de Rooij (Den Haag) pointed out the perceived motives of social entrepreneurs and
stated that municipalities cannot accept when an entrepreneur strategically provides work to
people with a distance to the labor market to earn money. An entrepreneur will receive
€12.000 for hiring one employee for half a year with a disability. Perry van Rijn (Rotterdam)
mentioned that sometimes people misuse this incentive and do not offer these employees a
durable and stable labor position. Nienke Boesveldt (Amsterdam) argues that the last thing a
government wants is that a vulnerable group has an unstable position in a company.
Specialisterren points at the fact that in the social system people with a distance to the
labor market can be used by companies as a reusable resource. An entrepreneur can hire a
person, earn €12.000 and fire this person after half a year after which another entrepreneur
can earn again €12.000 with the same person. Civil servants argue that they do not want to be
treated as fools and therefore distrust some entrepreneurs. In the past an organization that
hired people with a distance to the labor market received the total amount of money at once.
Rob de Rooij (Den Haag) mentioned that the municipality has learned not to trust each
entrepreneur. Therefore, an entrepreneur will now receive the money in small parts. If the
municipality if not satisfied with the result it can be decided to not to pay out the last amount
of money.
As mentioned before many of the social entrepreneurs are in close contact to an
organization that intermediates between the company and the municipality. This has a positive
effect on the trust between the company and the municipality. De 7 Deugden (Amsterdam) is
in close contact to a GZZ institution and Van Hulley (Groningen) with the foundation Jasmijn
that operated in Groningen for over 25 years. The intermediate position of these organizations
seems to have a positive effect on the trust of the municipalities towards the social
entrepreneurs. Van Hulley (Groningen) argues:
‘The municipality does not tightly control these jobs, they think these participation jobs are
arranged by Jasmijn: that will be alright.’
4.1.3 Logics of social entrepreneurs
Entrepreneurial logic: running a company
The social entrepreneurs in general prefer the least financial ties with government. The social
entrepreneurs argue that it is not healthy to have subsidy ties to government. This would kill
the entrepreneurial spirit. In addition the procedures are long and complicated. Most of the
entrepreneurs did once apply for a subsidy and several entrepreneurs did have bad experiences
51
with the procedure of the application. If an entrepreneur will not receive the subsidy, the
application did cost much effort without an effect. In general there seems to be a lack in
applying for separate subsidies.
‘Every day I am concerned with the issues of that day. When I have time left I think about and
make plans for the future. I think about how I can expand my market. In these moments I do
not think about subsidies, but I think how to contact ABN AMRO. Every support almost has to
come to me ready-made for me to use it’. (Van Hulley, Groningen).
Currently there are only a few possibilities of receiving subsidies or funds, still it is interesting
to see the lack of applying for these. These applications cost in general much time and a
entrepreneurs is not certain that this investment in time will eventually pay out. In addition
there is still a strong idea about the ‘Paper load that is concerned with applying for a
subsidy.’ (Van Hulley, Groningen). Also the waiting times for applications are often very
extensive. In addition several entrepreneurs argued that if you apply to much for funds, you
will eventually be let by the criteria of these funds.
Social entrepreneurs thus seem to be reluctant to apply for one-off subsidies, whereas all of
the interviewed social entrepreneurs did have a structural economic relation with public
organizations. These ties were related to the employees in the company. This structural ties
determined for a large part, together with the service or product, the income of the company.
Social entrepreneurs work with a large diversity of employees. Some of the employees are
related to an income from government. Others work on an internship basis, and thus will not
be paid by government. The employees that are related to governmental money can roughly
be divided in two groups of employees which also determines the source of income that is
related to this group of people. Entrepreneurs experienced that it is difficult to run a social
enterprise without this government support. The following two groups of employees can be
distinguished:
 Employees that due to all sorts of reasons have a distance to the labor market but can
function (mainly) independently (WW, WWB & Wajong);
 Employees that due to all sorts of reasons have a distance to the labor market and need
extra care and accompaniment (AWBZ (PGB), Wajong).
Government is stimulating employees that belong to WW/WWB/Wajong to a regular job.
Municipalities have different tools to guide and to stimulate a person to a job in a regular
company. One of these tools is the participation job and arranges that people can work in a
company and at the same time retain their government payment + €100. Van Hulley for
example makes use of this arrangement. Van Hulley guides a multicultural group of women to
a regular job by teaching them the Dutch language, learn a craft and learn skills that are
needed in a regular job (e.g. being on time). The women work on a voluntary basis at Van
Hulley and the company thus does not have to pay a loan to these women. Another tool is
loan dispensation. Loan dispensation is a compensation of missed productivity that is caused
by the inability of a person. If a person has a specific handicap and can only function for 60%,
the government can pay the remaining 40%. This could for example be used for people with a
Wajong background. The company Specialisterren (Utrecht) is able to receive loan
dispensation for their employees. The company decided not to accept this dispensation
52
because in this case the employees have to sign for their disability and make explicit the part
that they cannot do. The company wants to stimulate the confidence of the employees and
signing for a disability does not stimulate a person’s confidence.
Although in this research we choose to focus on social entrepreneurs that are mainly
concerned with work (not care), due to the mixed models of the entrepreneurs some
entrepreneurs did also hire people that need day cay (AWBZ (PGB), Wajong). The company
de 7 Deugden (Amsterdam) works for example in corporation with a GGZ institution. De 7
Deugden provides work places for the (mentally) disabled people from these institutions.
These people thus work on a voluntary basis at the company.
Most of the entrepreneurs were trying to create a business model that was able to fully hire
and pay all the employees, but the social entrepreneurs noticed that a business model without
government support is highly difficult. The dependency on government causes uncertainty for
the company. Social entrepreneurs also have problems trusting government due to the
political element of government. Government organizations can in times of elections change
quickly. Entrepreneurs cannot make an agreement based on trust, because the civil servants
follow the instructions of the politicians.
Most of the entrepreneurs thus have a structural financial tie to the government when it
comes to the costs of employees. Still, the entrepreneurs sell a product or deliver a service.
Many of products are unique and have a luxurious look. De 7 deugden for example produces
beer in different unique flavors. Each beer presents its own virtue. Also van Hulley produces
boxer shorts of old blouses. The boxer shorts have unique orange details and the boxer shorts
are, together with a poem, sent in a printed box. The products are unique and tell a story. The
entrepreneurs clearly think in entrepreneurial terms and look at the market.
Also in organizational terms entrepreneurs have to think in innovative terms.
Specialisterren for example has to find a solution for the problem of insurances for the
employees. As long as an employee has a government payment this person has an insurance at
the UWV of municipality. This insurance is valid for four year after which the entrepreneur
has to take care of the insurance. The cost of insurance of people with a disability is extremely
high and is not affordable for a regular company as Specialisterren argued. The company thus
has to make the decision to fire a person after four years or to pay the high cost.
Specialisterren mentioned that valid express, a post service with people with disabilities, was
in big problems due to this problem. Specialisterren thus has to find a solution for this
situation.
Social – welfare logic: creating social impact
Most of the entrepreneurs have a mixture of people that are paid by government funds and
have people that bring no money along. The social entrepreneurs argue that they want to
support the social goal, regardless whether a person brings along money. The costs of
accompaniment and personal attention make it difficult to design a profitable business model,
but profit is in most cases not the aim. Van Hulley argues ‘you should not start a social
enterprise to get rich easily’. Also de 7 Deugden argues that all the work in the brewery can
also efficiently and effectively be managed by two full time employees, but this is not the
model the company has chosen.
53
Social entrepreneurs also invest in their employees by giving them education and personal
attention. All of the entrepreneurs argued to give much attention and time to the development
of the employees. Specialisterren (Utrecht) provides for example a certificated education for
their employees. The municipality pays €8000 of the costs of this education, while
Specialisterren argues that this is only a small part of the actual costs. The employees need
this certificate to execute their work in a professional way. Also other social entrepreneurs
pay much attention to the person development of their employees. Van Hulley teaches the
women at the company the skills that are needed in a regular job. Van Hulley teaches the
women for example not to make an appointment with the dentist of doctor on the day that one
should work. In addition the company teaches the women the Dutch language. The guidance
of the employees costs much time.
Public sector: working in the social domain
As mentioned before the employees of a social enterprise are often connected to laws. These
laws are executed by organizations such as UWV and the departments of social affairs of
municipalities. There are many actors in the field of labor. There are for example
municipalities, UWV and reintegration bureaus, schools and institutions (e.g. GZZ) that are
all looking for jobs or learning places to make their clients participate in the society. Social
entrepreneurs have to interact with these different parties.
In general social entrepreneurs experience many difficulties with UWV. UWV seems
stricter in the monitoring of the employees. The goal of UWV is to lead people to a job.
Several social entrepreneurs argue that the UWV is more bureaucratic than municipalities.
The company Wandschappen wanted in the project of ‘DNA Charlois’ in Rotterdam to use
the skills and crafts of all different nationalities in the neighborhood of Charlois to make art
products. Wandschappen worked on a project basis and wanted to pay each employee a unit
price. People that for example made a chair received €300. Most of the employees received a
UWV payment. Wandschappen tried to make arrangements with UWV. This situation was
highly difficult for UWV because Wandschappen could not offer a full-time or part-time
contract to the employees. Due all the difficulties the employees were afraid to lose their
payment and here the project stopped. The bureaucratic character of the company thus demotivated the social entrepreneur. Perry van Rijn (Rotterdam) argued that if an entrepreneur
fits into the system things are easily arranged, but if not, things can become highly
complicated.
UWV is organized on a regional level and therefore has according to several entrepreneurs
a large distance to the actual labor market. Also the headquarter of the UWV is highly
bureaucratic and has a political sensitive position. In some cases the local UWV wants to
make a distinction, but the national UWV does not approve this. In addition some
entrepreneurs mentioned that institutions such as the UWV are not aware of the actual
situation on the work floor. Cemil Yilmaz (program coordinator of MVO/CSR at UWV)
mentioned that UWV is currently working on the social goals of the organization. Only
recently UWV hired people with a Wajong indication. Cemil Yilmaz mentioned that only
recently UWV realized what implication the presence of a person with a Wajong indication
can have in a team. The team needs to adjust to this person, and in some cases for example
54
explain certain procedures several times. This was an interesting lesson for UWV. UWV aims
to have 1% of their employees with a distance to the labor market.
Social entrepreneurs also pointed at the compartmentalization of the social system. This is
especially the case when an entrepreneur works with different groups of employees. De 7
Deugden (Amsterdam) has a large diversity of employees, such as a person that has been in
coma, persons that hardly have an inability but need a gently push, a person with an autistic
background and a person with a burn-out. All these employees are connected to different
regulations and public organizations. To entrepreneurs it is often highly difficult to get a full
grasp of the social system and the different sources of income can be highly complicated to
administrate.
4.1.4 The tension between municipalities and SE in economic terms
The economic logics of municipalities and social entrepreneurs seem in current times to be in
one line: municipalities are looking for work places for people with a government payment
and social entrepreneurs are looking for stable factors in their business model. Social
entrepreneurs can help municipalities to reach their targets and to stimulate the development
of a person. Social entrepreneurs are looking for resources that make it possible to run an
enterprise that is expensive due to a lower production and a high accompaniment cost of the
employees. Still, social entrepreneurs are not fully focused on effectiveness and efficiency.
The development of the employees in combination with a healthy company is the focus of
these entrepreneurs. Due to these equal interests in financial terms there is collaboration
between government and social entrepreneurs. Both parties have an interest to exchange
resources and the relation can be explained by the exchange approach (Levine and White,
1961; Tuite, 1972; White, 1994) in which there is a high degree of cooperation and problem
solving because both parties are motivated to maximize joint benefits. The recourses are
within the company and therefore this interaction can be characterized as exchange.
The logic of social-welfare and the public sector seem to match the democratic and legal
logics of municipalities. When an entrepreneur can be trusted to spend public money in a
correct way and treat employees in a decent manner, the political risks will decrease and the
municipality is more prepared to exchange and collaborate with social entrepreneurs. For
municipalities it is highly important that an entrepreneur can be trusted. In the economic area
the logic of the law and the logic of the democracy dominate when an entrepreneur was
suspected to have wrong intentions. The interaction through intermediate organizations seems
to positively influence this interaction. In addition if an entrepreneur understands the public
system it is more easily to interact with government. Social entrepreneurs have to get a grasp
on the possibilities, constraints and opportunities in the social system. In some cases the
entrepreneur has to comply with the criteria of the municipality to make the interaction more
easily. Some social entrepreneurs have for this reason for example a BV and a foundation.
The system of checks and balances to diminish the legal and democratic risks can cause
tension between social entrepreneurs and municipalities because it constrains the act of the
entrepreneurs. In addition this system changes on a regular basis which causes problems for
the enterprise. Municipalities and social entrepreneurs can thus interact and exchange
resources if the entrepreneur operates within the democratic and legal frames.
55
When social entrepreneurs are known and trusted by the municipality, the social enterprise
fits within the legal and political frames and the social entrepreneurs understand the social
system, there is less interaction between the two parties. Social entrepreneurs become
institutionalized and a regular channel for the municipality. In general social entrepreneurs
and municipalities only experience tension in the start-up phase of the company. After this
phase, when the enterprise fits within the legal and political logic, there is in general not much
tension between social entrepreneurs and municipalities in the economic area. Social
entrepreneurs often depend on municipalities for financial support but in recent times social
entrepreneurs can also add positive contributions to the goals of municipalities. Once social
entrepreneurs are trusted, the interests of municipalities and social entrepreneurs are in one
line and municipalities can make arrangements for social entrepreneurs to hire employees.
4.2 Legal area
4.2.1 Where do social entrepreneurs and municipalities meet in legal terms?
Social entrepreneurs and municipalities meet on a local level for example to change zoning
plans. In addition social entrepreneurs have to comply with the local rules and regulations
with regard to the labor participation of people with distance to the labor market. The
employees that work in social enterprises that still have a financial tie to government have to
comply with regulations.
In addition social entrepreneurs have to comply with national rules and regulations with
regard to the organization, such as regulations concerning hygiene and the environment.
Social entrepreneurs also have to comply with national rules concerning the safety and
wellbeing of employees (ARBO). These regulations are thus determined on a national level
and are checked on a regular basis.
4.2.2 Logics of municipalities
Efficiency and effectiveness: performing government
To municipalities a social enterprise is like any other company. The laws, rules and
regulations are standard and no adjustments can be made. Even if, by adjusting a rule, money
can be saved the rule is the leading principle.
‘The law is leading, whether you like it or not. As civil servants we cannot change the rules
and laws. If you want to change something you have to vote for the political party that wants
to change a particular law’ (Rob de Rooij, Den Haag).
Municipalities have the possibility of financially supporting an entrepreneur with the
adjustments that have to be made to comply with the law. If an entrepreneur works with
people in wheelchairs the desks and tables have to be adjusted to create a comfortable
workplace. The municipality can compensate the entrepreneur in the cost to adjust to the law,
but cannot adjust the law to financial benefits.
Legality: decent government
As mentioned before social entrepreneurs and municipalities meet on both a local and a
national level. With regard to permits, uniformity and equality are highly important. Each
person has to be treated in the same way. In addition the municipality is the mediator between
56
different interests for these to be considered before a permit is given to a certain party. The
position of municipalities as an intermediate of the different interests came back in every
interview.
Social entrepreneurs and municipalities meet for organizational permits on a local level.
An example are zoning plans. In these plans it is determined how particular areas or buildings
can be used. The decision concerning a zoning plan can in general take 6-8 weeks. Perry van
Rijn (Rotterdam) mentioned that the waiting time is caused by the carefulness of the civil
servants. Each application receives the same attention, every person needs to be treated in the
same way and one cannot make mistakes in the application. Vincent Holleman (Den Haag)
pointed at the fact that once a permit is given or a zoning plan is changed this cannot easily be
changed. Once a ‘horeca’ permit is given this cannot easily be changed, not even when the
company that applied for the permit gets bankrupted.
Municipalities can create space in their policies. Perry van Rijn (Rotterdam) point at the
trick of a ‘pilot’ or experiment. In pilots or experiments rules are less applicable. Civil
servants have a bit more space to make decisions. Perry van Rijn argues that this is an
interesting process because some acts do not fit within the rules and regulations. Innovation
in the law can be difficult, but one also has to be careful in writing down new policies. Nienke
Boesveldt (Amsterdam) argues that once you make policies the flexibility disappears. ‘You
cannot write down we will be flexible in some cases. If you write down the policy and
formalize the process you will make clear what rules are in favor or against social
enterprises’. Rob de Rooij (Den Haag) emphasizes that in fact entrepreneurs are often the
parties that ask for laws and regulations. At a tender the municipality of Den Haag received
always many complains because companies arguing that they were disadvantaged in
comparison to other entrepreneurs. Politics took this seriously and tried to make the tenders
transparent. Rob de Rooij argues that now entrepreneurs complain that they cannot comply
with the criteria they asked for themselves.
Municipalities and social entrepreneurs also meet on a local level concerning the
employees of the enterprise. The employees the social entrepreneurs work with are connected
to a social law. These laws are determined on a national level, but the municipality has to
execute the laws (e.g. wsw). In addition the system is currently changing, which makes the
execution more complex for municipalities. Social entrepreneurs have to make contracts with
local municipalities or UWV concerning the employees in the enterprise. In these contracts
assignments about the monitoring and guidance of the employee are arranged. Both the
employee and the social entrepreneur have to agree with the contract. Municipalities thus
execute these laws and look at the interest of the employees.
Finally, social entrepreneurs also meet government with regard to national laws. On a
national level entrepreneurs are confronted with rules and laws concerning the safety and
wellbeing of the employees, such as the law on work conditions (ARBO). Several civil
servants point at the uniformity of these national rules. Arrangement can thus be made, but the
national rules will not be adapted. One cannot adjust universal laws to individual cases. The
safety and wellbeing of the employees is highly important. In addition entrepreneurs have to
meet laws concerning the hygiene and the environment. There are no special regulations for
enterprises dealing with people with a distance to the labor market. An enterprise is like any
57
other enterprise and has to comply with all the rules on a national level, such as hygiene, safe
workplaces, safe work condition and for example the number of hours of work.
Democracy: responsiveness government
This political element appeared in every conversation with civil servants: ‘what if the
employees are not treated well in a company?’, ‘what if is a company hires a person and then
fires this persons again?’, ‘what if a enterprise cannot be certain about their existence in the
future?’, ’‘what if employees misspend public money’, ‘what if entrepreneurs hires people
and ignoring other groups of employees’ and ‘what if they do not fit in the regulations?. In the
meetings I attended concerning social entrepreneurship these topics were often discussed. It
was interesting to notice that when the decisions made by civil servants were in direct contact
to unemployed people these ‘what if’ questions did not play a role. These civil servants based
many decisions on trust. In addition the economic logic plays a role in these decisions by
taking a risk people can possibly obtain a new workplace.
There seems to be a clear distinction between the civil servants close to the politics and
civil servants that have to execute the law. They seem to act from different logics. Civil
servants close to politics are more afraid of political consequences, while civil servants that
execute the law in direct contact with the social enterprises are focused on finding jobs for
people with government payments. Both civil servants have to justify their decisions, but
place emphasize on different elements. In addition there was also a large difference between
civil servants from the different departments. Civil servants from the economic department
saw the existence of the social entrepreneurs as economic value for the city, while civil
servants from the department of social affairs emphasized the jobs that are created in these
companies.
The media can be a risk if a civil servant bypasses the law. The UWV pointed at the danger
of the media.
‘We have a task to execute the law, for example the law WW. This law says that the income
from WW will disappear if a person has another source of income. UWV cannot make
exceptions because we are dealing with public money. As a professional one could think this
is a nice initiative, but you cannot do something against the law, because if the example
would come in the media people start thinking that the UWV has double standards or even
worse the UWV does not execute the law’.
If the UWV does not completely comply with the law and the media will find out this could
cause large problems for the image of the UWV. Due to the media civil servants have to be
careful for political consequences some decisions or experiments could have. The risk
avoidance strategy could cause difficulties in procedures in innovative projects. Innovation is
per definition about taking risks and making decisions outside of the determined regulations.
For social entrepreneurs the political element of public organization can be difficult to pursue
a plan.
58
4.2.3. Logic of social entrepreneurs
Entrepreneurial logic: running a company
Entrepreneurs are in some cases dependent on government to make steps in their plans. If a
permit is not given, this could even imply the end of an entrepreneurial plan. In general social
entrepreneurs mainly have contact in the start-up phase of the company with the municipality
concerning permits. De 7 Deugden argues:
‘Now I only have contact with Pantar (social work plaza) for the participation jobs. In the
start-up phase I did have contact with the municipalities for permits and those sorts of things.
That was the most intensive period and also the least pleasant period. It took terribly long
and people did not work together.’.... ‘In April I applied for a permit to brew on this location,
eventually in November I got the permission. This is off course way too long. In the meantime
I did not have a job, because I already left my old job. Everyone told me that I needed
maximum three months for all the permits, eventually it took much longer’ (De zeven
Deugden, Amsterdam).
The waiting time is difficult for the entrepreneurs because one cannot make any steps in the
business plan. In addition this time costs an entrepreneur much money. The start-up phase of
an organizations could also give space to an enterprise. Van Hulley (Groningen) argues that in
the start-up phase there is much leniency. Van Hulley did not experience to be overwhelmed
by rules and regulations. Perry van Rotterdam (Rotterdam) argues that entrepreneurs have the
tendency to be impatience. They are used to that they can arrange things really quickly and in
some cases entrepreneurs now have to wait for months because they are dependent on the
permits of the municipality. In addition, Vincent Holleman (Den Haag) points at the behavior
and conceited of entrepreneurs. ‘Entrepreneurs have the tendency to be conceited and they
say ‘I will not hire an architect to make my building plans, I will do it myself.’ These selfmade plans are not always architectural responsible.’
Wandschappen (Rotterdam) mentioned the difficult application forms that some permits
bring along. Wandschappen wanted to place art made of steel in the public place. The
company received pages with questions, for example about the construction, material,
pressure- weight calculation. Wandschappen mentioned that even the steel company that
produced the art was not able to make an exact calculation.
The adjustment of uniform rules costs time and money, but entrepreneurs try to come up
with new solutions or interpretations of the law and regulations. Specialisterren mentioned the
example of job coaches. Each unemployed person has a job coach, this coach guides the
unemployed person to a job and in most cases also guides this person in the new job.
Specialisterren had at a certain time 18 job coaches, each in contact with different employees.
All of these coached needed to have a conversation on a regular basis with the owners of the
company and this costs much time. Specialisterren proposes an experiment to the UWV in
which one job coach guided all the employees. The job coach was in this position also able to
see similarities or patterns in the behavior of the employees in the company. Specialisterren
was thus a pioneer in this method and this costs much time and effort.
Being dependent on laws and regulations brings risks along for the economic situation of
the company. The social system is changing often and rapidly. Especially in the recent years
59
many plans have been made concerning participation jobs and the decentralization. This is
difficult for social entrepreneurs that are dependent of PGB or participation jobs. In addition
some task come with the decentralization to the municipalities. At the same time the budgets
that come to municipalities are relatively smaller. Municipalities have to execute more laws
with relatively less money. For social entrepreneurs this brings uncertainty along. They do not
know if certain provisions will exist in the future and in addition they do not know how the
budgets will change. Social entrepreneurs can in these cases not prepare themselves for the
future. Specialisterren argues that in these uncertain times both the municipalities as the UWV
did become paralyzed. The position of the Wajong was not certain for a while and both parties
did not pay much attention to this law; they both did not feel responsible for the law.
Social welfare logic: creating social impact
As mentioned before social entrepreneurs can depend on decisions of municipalities for
example for zoning plans or rules related to the employment of people (e.g. ARBO). In this
sense municipalities have a large power position. A dream of an entrepreneur can thus partly
depend on governmental decisions and the arrangement of permits which costs much time and
effort. In this research only social enterprises have been interviewed that passed the start-up
phase in which most of the permits have to be arranged. This implies that all legal barriers
have been passed. The company Specialisterren experienced for example problems with the
standard ARBO law. These rules are uniform and cannot be adapted to individual cases.
These arrangements costs much effort and money.
‘The standard ARBO rules can be conflicting. One of the ARBO requirements is that
employees need enough daylight during a workday, therefore rooms need windows. Our
employees would prefer to work without daylight and any distraction. They like to work in
places with least stimuli and light to be able to fully concentrate. As an entrepreneur you have
to arrange and justify these adjustments’ (Specialisterren, Utrecht)
Public sector logic: working in the social domain
In general social entrepreneurs did not experience difficulties due to the social and innovative
aspects of the company. Social entrepreneurs have to meet, like any other company, the
standard rules and laws. A restaurant has to meet for instance all the hygiene regulations; the
social aspect of a restaurant does not make any difference. Municipalities have the possibility
of financially supporting an entrepreneur in the adjustments that have to be made. If an
entrepreneurs works with people in wheelchairs the desks and tables have to be adjusted and
there is more space needed. The municipality can compensate the entrepreneur in the cost of
the adjustments.
In general the system of social laws appeared difficult to understand for social
entrepreneurs. In most cases social entrepreneurs deal with a particular group of employees.
In some cases this group is closely related to a personal background. The owners of
Specialisterren have for example both an autistic son. Social entrepreneurs get specialized in a
particular part of the social system. Still all the arrangements are not always logical and it
depends on what label a person received during his or her life. There is a difference in
60
Wajong, WSW and WWB, while Marja Talen (Rotterdam) argues that one person could, due
to the circumstances end up in one of these categories.
4.2.4 The tension between municipalities and SE in legal terms
In this part of the interaction of social entrepreneurs and municipalities the legal logic of
municipalities clearly prevails over the entrepreneurial, social-welfare and public sector logic
of entrepreneurs. Uniformity, equality before the law and the democratic position of politics
as a representative of the whole society are highly important. At the national level there are
uniform rules that apply for all entrepreneurs. Here rules can be found concerning the safety
and wellbeing of employees. On a local level there is more space for exceptions, but still in
the system all interests have to be considered before a decision is taken. The compliance with
the law is related to the democratic system. No exceptions to the law can be made on an
individual basis because this is not in line with the democratic system. Exceptions in the law
can also be captured by the media and this causes problems for politics and the relation
between citizens and the municipality. The power position of municipalities in the legal area
causes tension in the interaction with social entrepreneurs. The plan of social entrepreneurs in
some cases depends on the decisions of municipalities. If the municipality rejects a permit,
this could imply the end of a project. In addition, if the application does not fit into a policy
this could lead to long procedures and a large paper load that is required to obtain a permit.
This process costs much effort and money from the entrepreneurs and leads to an interaction
that can be described as a conflict.
Social entrepreneurs argued to have most contact with municipalities in the legal area in
the start-up phase of the enterprise. In the start-up phase most permits related to the
organization have to be arranged. This is not different from commercial companies. Other
regulations, such as the ARBO regulations, connected to employees are checked on a regular
basis. In addition with every new employee the entrepreneurs have to make contracts with the
municipality. The contacts in the legal area with regard to the organization thus decrease,
while the contact concerning the employees maintains. Still, the social entrepreneurs argued
that when learning about the system, it becomes more easily to find a way in the legal and
bureaucratic system.
The law and regulations are more important to municipalities than economic profit.
Entrepreneurs have to safeguard in all cases the safety and wellbeing of the employees,
customers and environment. The legal and democratic logic thus prevails over the economic
logic. Still, in the legal area the entrepreneurial spirit and logic of entrepreneurs is apparent.
Social entrepreneurs look for space in the system and come up with solutions to make the plan
or project possible. The procedures can take persistence, time and effort of social
entrepreneurs. The network of social entrepreneurs can help in these procedures.
Entrepreneurs that have the right contacts within the municipality and are for example in close
contact to the alderman can more easily arrange permits. Social entrepreneurs thus look for
opportunities; this does not directly increase tension with municipalities, but make the
realization of the project more feasible.
61
4.3 Communicative area
4.3.1 Where do Social entrepreneurs and municipalities meet in communicative terms?
Social entrepreneurs and municipalities meet in communicative terms to exchange
information. Social entrepreneurs can gain information at the municipality concerning
procedures and rules. The municipality can gain information from the entrepreneurs about the
procedures and statements of the entrepreneurs and can see if it is possible to learn from these
procedures. In addition a municipality can facilitate an entrepreneur by giving the
entrepreneur access to the network of the municipality.
Finally, municipalities meet social entrepreneurs to give publicity to the initiative. An
alderman can visit a social entrepreneur and raise attention in the media for the enterprise.
The contact in communicative area is more open-ended than in the other two areas.
4.3.2 Logic of municipalities
Effectiveness and efficiency: performing government
The tasks of the civil servants are changing. Civil servants are more expected to create a
network and provide information to the citizens. Perry van Rijn (Rotterdam) argues that
traditionally the municipality is seen as a money supplier but because the municipality has
less money it is looking for new roles. Civil servants have to visit social entrepreneurs with
empty pockets, but they can advise entrepreneurs about procedures and regulations. Civil
servants take more and more the role of an advisor. As Hans Ohlenroth (Groningen) argues:
‘we cannot help with money, but with men power’. Vincent Holleman (Den Haag) argues that
civil servants are more expected to think together with the entrepreneurs about procedures and
applications.
In addition the municipality gives information to entrepreneurs. Nienke (Amsterdam)
argues that many social entrepreneurs are not ready for changes that come from the process of
the decentralization. The municipality gives information to the entrepreneurs about the new
procedures and budgets. Also Den Haag and Groningen organize on a regular basis meetings
in which they provide new information to entrepreneurs. Groningen has assigned nine account
managers that visit all new companies in the city. These account managers check whether the
entrepreneur has any questions or suggestions with regard to the municipality. These account
managers try to answer the question or find the person in the government that can answer the
question.
The municipality also provides a network. The civil servants know many other
entrepreneurs and other organizations. The municipality of Groningen organizes information
meetings in which entrepreneurs, the chamber of commerce and civil servants can exchange
information. Also Perry van Rijn (Rotterdam) tells that the coupling of the right people
becomes an important part of the role of civil servants. This network is also important if
employees of social entrepreneurs have outgrown the company. The civil servants at the
departments of social affairs have a large network of many entrepreneurs and are constantly
looking in this network for workplaces for employees. This is also the reason these
departments are in close contact to social entrepreneurs.
62
In addition civil servants more often visit the initiatives. Civil servants can learn about the
initiative and see what problems an enterprise encounters. Perry van Rijn (Rotterdam) argues
that some entrepreneurs cannot write good applications. Perry van Rijn (Rotterdam) tells that
civil servants like nicely written application. Some entrepreneurs even hire offices to design
the application. The application of entrepreneurs that are less neatly organized can be
misunderstood by civil servants. When visiting an entrepreneur a civil servant can discover
the actual motivation and story of a social enterprise.
Legality: decent government
In the communicative area the legal logic did not clearly appeared. Still, civil servants
consider the interest of all citizens before giving advice and trying to divide their attention in
an equal manner. Also, civil servants serve as guide through the bureaucratic organization.
Hans Ohlenroth (Groningen) argues the role of civil servants is changing. First a civil servant
would say ‘here is an application form, fill it in and you will hear from us within 8 weeks’.
Now, civil servants more often guide citizens though the process and analyzes beforehand if it
is usefull to fill in an application. This saves much effort and time from citizens and
entrepreneurs.
In addition civil servants more often explain the decisions of the municipality to the
applicant. The decision process is more transparent and entrepreneurs can more easily find out
about the reasoning of the decision. Perry van Rijn (Rotterdam) tells that civil servants have
to be able to explain their decision.
Democracy: responsive government
Networks become more important. The network of civil servants becomes more important to
learn about the actual situation in the sector. The municipality more often realizes that civil
servants cannot only make policies in the buildings of the municipalities; civil servants have
to go into the city. In addition the network of social entrepreneurs becomes more important.
Perry van Rijn (Rotterdam) argues that social entrepreneurs can bypass civil servants by
directly contacting for example an alderman in their network.
In addition for politicians in the municipality it is important to know about social
enterprises in their field of policies. Almost all social enterprises have on the homepage of
their website a link to ‘our story’. The story of the enterprise is an important part of the
company and the goodwill of the customers. Van Hulley for example adds unique details to
their project and with the delivery of the boxer shorts the person receives a poem and on a
card it is written which person has manufactured the boxer shorts. In addition van Hulley
works on their publicity in magazines and on the radio. The story can be positive to the
enterprise, but can also influence the public opinion towards government provisions; ‘why did
government not provide this provision?’ and ‘It is nice that the enterprise exists, but actually
it should not have been necessary’. This story of the entrepreneurs could imply that the
government is not able to take care of disabled people in an effective and efficient manner.
The marketing and publicity of social entrepreneurs can thus influence the image of the
government.
Social entrepreneurs emphasize the success of the company. Rob de Rooij (Den Haag)
argues that entrepreneurs have the tendency to emphasize the tension with government and
63
are reluctant to admit that the government helped them. Due to the positive association of
social entrepreneurs in society politicians can contact the initiatives to show the citizens that
the municipalities are aware of the developments and support these initiatives. Politicians can
show that the municipality is a part of the success of an enterprise. The visual support of the
municipality of social entrepreneurs shows that these enterprises are not competition for
public organizations, but are stimulated by the government.
In addition Hans Ohlenroth (Groningen) argues that social entrepreneurs are highly busy
with the everyday business. To ease social entrepreneurs municipalities arrange meetings with
the alderman of the municipalities, a report and pictures of these meetings often appear in the
local newspapers and imply free publicity for social enterprises. The alderman will not visit
all enterprises in a city and attention is therefore sometimes distributed unequally. In addition
in Amsterdam the alderman of the city buys beers of de 7 deugden as a gift for his contacts.
This beer is an original gift of the alderman and promotes the company. In addition the
political attention also is meant as compliment to the entrepreneur that the initiative is
appreciated.
4.3.3 Logic of social entrepreneurs
Entrepreneurial logic: running a company
In general, social entrepreneurs will not contact the municipality when the contact does not
have results for the company. Van Hulley (Groningen) argues that the municipality and the
camber for commercial organizes on a regular basis information meetings, but she will not go
to a meeting if the meeting is too general. These meetings will cost much time and time is
highly scarce to most entrepreneurs. The information has to be applicable to the aims of the
company and the provision of information has to be effective and efficient.
Social entrepreneurs also experience diffulties finding the right person in the government
organization. The provision of the municipality to support enterprises and the persons that
work in a particular area are in some cases hard to identify. If an entrepreneur will not hear
about provisions he or she will not look for the provisions. In addition social entrepreneurs
did not have the tendency to first figure out about every detail of an arrangements: ‘we just
started’. Some entrepreneurs argued that they learned along the way about the procedures in
the sector. Still, social entrepreneurs argued to create a network with government to have a
direct contact person in case of problems. Good contact with municipalities can at the end
have positive effects.
Specialisterren argues that the information that government can provide is in some cases
not the information needed by the entrepreneur. Specialisterren for example looks for young
autistic people with a background in HBO with an affinity to ICT. According to
Specialisterren the system of UWV is organized to the disabilities of people and they do not
have a system to search for abilities or affiliations. In addition Specialisterren argues that the
contact with the municipality is too slow. In some cases an entrepreneur already started a
project before the municipality has responded.
Social entrepreneurs experienced difficulties in contacting the UWV and the
municipality. Cemil Yilmaz (UWV) argues that the municipality and the UWV are ‘concolleges’. Although both organizations handle with public money, they have their own
interest in placing a person in a company. A social entrepreneur thus in most cases has to
64
contact UWV separately from the municipality. This causes tension and costs extra effort. The
relation between the UWV and the municipality can highly differ. In Groningen there is close
contact between the department of social affairs and the UWV, yet in other cities there is a
large distance between these organizations. In addition both organizations are still highly
compartmentalized.
Social welfare logic: creating social impact
Social entrepreneurs often have a large network. They have much people in their surrounding
that help the company. Van Hulley tells that she started the company by telling many people
what she was planning to do. She was amazed by the positive reactions and offers to help
from people in her network. People were enthusiastic about the aim of the company. This
network helped her in the start-up phase of the company and she did not need much help from
government. Social entrepreneurs have a large network in which they have to cooperate with
different actors. More than a ‘commercial’ company they have to cooperate with public
organization and foundations. Social entrepreneurs argued that they would rather contact their
network for information than the municipality.
As mentioned before, social entrepreneurs have a story that they tell. This publicity creates
goodwill at the customers. Van Hulley explains that when the story of the company receives
attention in the media the sales will immediately raise. The companies Van Hulley and de 7
deugden emphasize that all products are handmade and they have a link on their website to
‘our story’. In this story the unique character of the company becomes apparent and the social
goal of the company is elaborated. They emphasize that not only do people buy a product, but
also add to a social goal.
Still social entrepreneurs emphasize that enterprises are not only about ‘nice stories’ and
‘nice initiatives’. The social entrepreneurs emphasized that they do not run a foundation. The
company has to deliver a decent product or service and cannot survive on goodwill of
customers. Specialisterren argued that the company has certificates and tries to be fully
comparable to other enterprises in the sector. The company is not for fun but it is an actual
company that has to survive within a market. Wandschappen points at the competition that is
organized by the municipality. Social enterprises can also opt in these competitions. Projects
or companies can win money and free publicity with the competition. Wandschappen argues
these competitions are not appropriate for social entrepreneurs. Wandschappen is not just a
fun project that by facebook tries to win votes for their company, but is a serious company
with a clear aim and does cannot spend time to win votes on facebook.
Public sector logic: working in the social domain
Some social entrepreneurs are skeptical towards political attention. They argue that politicians
use their project to win votes. This is especially the case in times of elections.
‘An alderman of Utrecht has been here, then they twitter ‘it has been inspiriting at
specialisterren’ Click, - picture. Its election rhetoric. Now we have to be careful again with
the upcoming elections, then we become ‘hot’ again.’ (Specialisterren, Utrecht).
‘At the moment you commit an alderman to your project they will market themselves with the
project. The alderman appears in the newspaper with our project. We did become a bit
shivery for this.’ (Wandschappen, Rotterdam).
65
Some social entrepreneurs are skeptical about the actual intentions of politicians. The
politicians cannot arrange assignments for the company, still the municipality claims positive
attention for the enterprise. This especially causes attention when the enterprise has many
difficulties in the economic or legal area in contact with municipalities. In times of budget
cuts municipalities are in most cases not able to assign social entrepreneurs a subsidy.
Therefore with free publicity municipalities try to support the initiative. The attention of an
alderman in a newspaper could give positive attention and legitimacy to an initiative. The
intention of the civil servants are in some cases differently perceived by social entrepreneurs.
4.3.4. The tension between municipalities and SE in communicative terms
The contact between social entrepreneurs and municipalities in communicative terms is noncommittal. The power of municipalities in this field is limited. In times of budget cuts
municipalities cannot steer an organization with subsidies. Still municipalities try to provide
information to entrepreneurs, give entrepreneurs free publicity and create a network in which
questions and answers of entrepreneurs and organizations can be matched. Municipalities are
looking for another role in which they still can have an important role in society; here the
democratic and economic logic is apparent. Only if the information is provided in an effective
and efficient manner social entrepreneurs can use this information. Social entrepreneurs make
a clear consideration about the direct relevance of the information; here the entrepreneurial
logic of social entrepreneurs prevails. Some entrepreneurs stay in contact to municipalities
and try to create a good relationship. For municipalities contact with social entrepreneurs can
also be highly useful to be aware of the development of company and to be able to be
supportive to the company. The alderman can learn from the initiative. Social entrepreneurs
and municipalities can thus exchange in communicative terms if one of the parties benefits
from the contact.
Social entrepreneurs thus are in contact to municipalities if they benefit from the
interaction. At the same time social entrepreneurs have a large network. Many people help the
enterprise and give advice on different aspects of the company. The entrepreneurs are in
contact to many different organizations and find ways in their networks to reach the aims in
an effective and efficient manner. Social entrepreneurs argued that they would rather contact
their network for information than the municipality. Social entrepreneurs act according to the
social welfare logic and use different paths to reach their goals. Social entrepreneurs can thus
operate independently from municipalities.
Social entrepreneurs experience tension with municipalities in communicative terms
because the contact with different public organizations is fragmented. Social entrepreneurs in
most cases have to contact municipalities separately from the UWV. This costs more effort
and time and causes tension in the entrepreneurial logic. In addition the contact with the
municipality is often slow and not effective. In addition the publicity of social enterprises can
be difficult to deal with for municipalities. Social entrepreneurs can implicitly say something
about the provision of government. Social entrepreneurs have a story that they tell and have a
clear image and a goal. This could imply competition for the image of government. The
entrepreneurs showed skepticism about the visits of politicians to their company. Some
entrepreneurs did have the feeling that interest was not sincerely or they did not want to add to
the election campaign of a politician. Other entrepreneurs use the publicity to receive
66
attention for their company. This interaction thus causes tension between social entrepreneurs
and municipalities.
67
4.4. Conclusion: do social entrepreneurs and civil servants experience tension?
The types of interactions can be summarized in the next scheme.
Economic area
Legal area
Conflict
Tension between the
entrepreneurial logic of
S.E. and the legal and
political logic of
municipalities. S.E. can
bring along political risks
and have to fit within the
legal frames.
S.E. are limited by the
rules and restrictions of
municipalities. The plan of
S.E depends on the
decisions of municipalities.
The logic of social welfare
and the entrepreneurial
logic of S.E and the Legal
and political logic of social
entrepreneurs cause
tension. Still S.E look for
space in the rules and
regulations.
Exchange
The economic logic of
municipalities is in line
with the entrepreneurial
logic of S.E. in times of
budget cuts. This is only
the case when S.E are
trusted and are thus in
line with the political and
legal logic of
municipalities. There is
an exchange of
employees and subsidies.
S.E. and municipalities
exchange information
if both parties benefit.
Collaboration
Competition
Differentiation- After the company is
institutionalized the
different
contact between
worlds
municipalities and S.E. is
limited.
Communicative
area
After all the organizational
permits are arranged social
entrepreneurs can function
more independently from
government.
There is competition
between S.E. and
municipalities for a
good image. Social
entrepreneurs can
implicitly say
something about the
performance of
government.
Due to the large
network of S.E. they
often do not need
municipalities.
68
Conflicts can be mainly found in the legal area. The rules and regulations of municipalities
can restrict the plans of social entrepreneurs. Municipalities are looking for security and look
for parties that they can trust. Equality and equity are highly important. Social entrepreneurs
are regarded as entrepreneurs and thus have to comply with the same rules as commercial
entrepreneurs. If an entrepreneur wants to deviate from the standard rules this costs much
effort and time and leads to tension with municipalities. The power position of municipalities
is clearly appeared in this area.
Social entrepreneurs and municipalities exchange in economic and communicative terms.
Municipalities see chances in social enterprises to place people with a government payment
and social entrepreneurs can use the financial ties to government as a structural source of
income. Municipalities are only prepared to exchange with social entrepreneurs when they
can be trusted with the public money. The misuse of public money can lead to political
problems. The social welfare logic of social entrepreneurs and the image of the company can
help in the relation of trust. In addition the public sector logic of social entrepreneurs and the
understanding of the social system can help the interaction. In addition social entrepreneurs
and municipalities exchange in the communicative area, but this is only the case if the
information or network adds to the goals of the social enterprise and when social
entrepreneurs cannot gain the information in their own network. Civil servants can use the
information in their policy plans. In general social entrepreneurs and municipalities maintain a
good relationship in communicative terms to use in a later period.
Competition can only be found in the communicative area. Social entrepreneurs have a
story to tell and this implicitly tells a story about the image of government. Social
entrepreneurs are able to combine several goals in one company, whereas the government can
be seen as ineffective and inefficient. Municipalities can visit entrepreneurs to show that they
support the enterprise and to create publicity for the enterprise. This attention can be
interpreted differently by social entrepreneurs.
When the questions was asked to entrepreneurs ‘what contact do you have with
municipalities?’, they often answered ‘not much’. This can be explained by the existence of
two worlds. Only the start-up phase in the legal area is intensive. In this phase the
organizational permits have to be arranged. After this phase the entrepreneurs only have
contacts with regards to their employees. Social entrepreneurs often have structural ties to
government, but when the social entrepreneur is trusted and gets institutionalized the contact
between social entrepreneurs and municipalities is limited. In addition social entrepreneurs
have a large network that they can use to create publicity or to obtain information and
therefore can work independently from government.
To conclude most of the conflicts can be found in legal terms. Exchange can be found in
economic and communicative terms. Competition can only be found in the communicative
area. Differentiation can be found in the legal and communicative area, and partly in the
economic area. As described before, tension can be described as an interaction of conflict or
competition. Tension can thus be found in the legal and communicative area. Economic
interactions also have to fit into legal frames and therefore tension can also be found in the
economic area. The tension in the legal and economic area can mostly be found in the start-up
phase of the company. After the start-up phase this tension will decrease and social
entrepreneurs and municipalities can for example exchange within the legal and political
69
frames. The tension in the communicative area is less intensive, because the interaction is
more open-ended.
70
5. Conclusion and Discussion
Social entrepreneurs meet in economic, legal and communicative terms. Social entrepreneurs
and municipalities meet in economic terms for one-off subsidies. In addition most of the
social entrepreneurs have structural financial ties with public organizations that are related to
the employees. In legal terms the contact is the most intensive, because the entrepreneur is
this phase fully dependent on the decisions of government. In legal terms social entrepreneurs
and municipalities meet with regard to national rules (e.g. arbo) and local rules (e.g. zoning
plans). In addition they meet the departments of social affairs of the municipality and the
UWV for the employment of people with a distance to the labor market (e.g. hours of work).
In the communicative area the interaction between social entrepreneurs and municipalities is
more open-ended. Municipalities and social entrepreneurs meet each other for information
and networks.
In the economic area the current context of budget cuts seems to have an effect on the
interaction between municipalities and social entrepreneurs. In economic area municipalities
and social entrepreneurs do not often meet for one-off subsidies. Due to the budget cuts the
municipality does not have much money to provide subsidies and there seems to be a lack of
applications for subsidies at the side of social entrepreneurs. Social entrepreneurs and
municipalities meet for long term financial ties that often are connected to employees with a
government payment. This interaction changed in recent years. With the decentralization,
budget cuts and a growing number of government payments it becomes more difficult for
municipalities to pay the social system. New possibilities and opportunities are explored. In
the economic area the economic logic of municipalities is more in line with the
entrepreneurial logic of social entrepreneurs. Both parties can interact because they both
benefit from the interaction. Municipalities will only interact with social entrepreneurs if the
company fits within the legal frame. In addition dealing with public money can cause political
risks. Trust was an issue that emerged in every interview. The economic interaction has to fit
within the legal and political logic of municipalities. The closer the civil servants are to
politics the more the political logics prevail. Civil servants that are closer to the execution of
actual policies will be able to think more in economic logics. Due to the necessity for changes
in the social system the mindset towards social entrepreneurs is changing. If social
entrepreneurs are able to understand the social system this will advance the interaction.
If the social entrepreneur fits into the legal and political frames, the interaction between
social entrepreneurs and municipalities in economic terms can be characterized as exchange
(Levine & White, 1961; Tuite, 1972; White; 1994). Both parties gain from the exchange.
Problems are solved more easily and both parties are motivated to maximize joint benefits
(Schmidt & Kochan, 1977). In the theoretical framework tension was expected between the
entrepreneurial and social-welfare logics of social entrepreneurs and the legal and political
logics of municipalities (TNO, 2011; WWR, 2012; SER, 2005; Hoogendoorn, 2011). This
tension was confirmed in this research. Social entrepreneurs have to fit within the legal frames
and civil servants are due to political risks careful with public money. In addition social
entrepreneurs do in the start-up phase experience difficulties with the functioning of the social
system. Still, the research added nuances to this statement. In the economic area there is
71
currently in practice not much tension because the municipalities are more prepared to change
their regular paths. The economic logic of entrepreneurs is more in line with the
entrepreneurial logic of social entrepreneurs and the mindset of civil servants towards social
entrepreneurs is changing. Social entrepreneurs are more trusted. In addition social
entrepreneurs that understand the social system and the provisions of government are better
able to interact with government and this decreases the tension between the two parties.
Most of the tension between social entrepreneurs and municipalities can be found in the
legal area. The current context of decentralization and changes in the laws of the social
system do have an effect on the interaction. The contact in the legal area can mainly be found
in the start-up phase of the company. In this phase, the permits have to be arranged and
contracts have to be made between the social enterprises and municipalities, UWV or
intermediate organizations. During the start-up phase of a social enterprise, a social
entrepreneur is confronted with the logics of democracy and the law. The universal law is
highly important and political risks are avoided. When an entrepreneur needs to make
adjustments to the universal law this costs much effort and time. This in turn causes tension
with the entrepreneurs whose ideas and feasibility often depend on the decisions of the
municipality. The ideas of these entrepreneurs are often guided by a personal experience and
motivation. Here the social-welfare logic of social entrepreneurs is clearly apparent.
The interaction between social entrepreneurs and municipalities can be characterized in
terms of power and dependency (conflict) (Schmidt & Kochan, 1977). The municipality has
the monopoly to assign permits and to sign contracts for example for participation jobs, on
which the entrepreneurs are highly dependent. After the start-up phase, when all
organizational permits are arranged the entrepreneur can function more independently from
the municipality. The results in the legal area confirm the expectations in the theoretical
framework (Dimaggio & Powell, 1983; WRR, 2012, TNO, 2011). Municipalities act from a
legal rationality in which uniformity and equality is highly important. Social entrepreneurs
experience difficulties in dealing with a system that changes on a regular basis in which they
have to interact with different stakeholders and public organizations. Social entrepreneurs
seem to learn from the social system and learn how to interact in an efficient way so that the
interaction causes less tension. This research showed that the tension can mainly be found in
the start-up phase of the enterprise. After this period the tension will decrease.
In the communicative area the interaction is more open-ended than in the economic and
legal area. Time is scarce to social entrepreneurs and they will only interact if the information
or network will add to the goals of the enterprise. Still, social entrepreneurs and municipalities
try to maintain a good relationship. In general social entrepreneurs have a large network, this
makes that in many cases they do not need government for information or a network. Due to
the large network they can function independently. In the area of communication competition
can be found for the image of the company. Municipalities want to be associated with the
initiative and create publicity for social enterprises. The intentions of politicians to show
interest in the enterprise are perceived skeptically by social entrepreneurs and this causes
tension. Only when both parties see the benefits, an exchange in the area of communications
can develop (Levine & White, 1961).
These results in the communicative area partly confirm the expectation in the theoretical
framework. It was expected that the political attention of municipalities would cause tension
72
between the social entrepreneurs and municipalities (Schulz, 2013). In the research it was
confirmed that the political attention to social enterprises can lead to tension between the
municipality and the entrepreneurs. In addition it was expected that the compartmentalized
system would cause difficulties for social entrepreneurs (WWR, 2012). This research showed
that through to the open-ended interaction, large network and embeddedness, and knowledge
of social entrepreneurs of the social system the tension in this field was limited. Also through
the interaction in the communicative area, social entrepreneurs and municipalities can
function independently from each other, which causes the existence of two separate worlds
(Huberts & van Hout, 2011).
The tension between social entrepreneurs and municipalities can thus mainly be found in
the legal area where the plans of the entrepreneurs can be restricted by the rules and
regulations of municipalities. This tension can be explained by an intersection of the
entrepreneurial and social welfare logic of social entrepreneurs and the democratic and legal
logic of municipalities. The interactions in the economic area are also restricted by the legal
frames. There appeared to be a difference between the civil servants with a different position
in the municipality. The closer a civil servant is situated to the political level of the
municipality, the more the legal and democratic logic played a role. The tension will
disappear after the start-up phase of the enterprise. After the start-up phase entrepreneurs can
function more independently from municipalities. In the communicative area also tension can
be found in the form of competition. Social entrepreneurs can understand the political
attention of municipalities as an act to gain votes while the company does not profit much
from this attention. Still, the tension in this area is less intensive because the interaction is
more open-ended and both the municipality and the social entrepreneurs can choose for the
interaction.
In this research an embedded case study design was chosen. Five cities were selected in
which one or more civil servants and one social entrepreneur was interviewed. Five large
cities have been chosen to make the results better comparable. In the research it was
confirmed that all five cities were confronted with budget cuts, savings, changes in the social
system and the process of decentralization. The context was thus comparable; still the policies
of municipalities concerning social enterprises slightly differed. Amsterdam did for example
have an explicit written policy concerning social entrepreneurs, while the other four cities
only have policies concerning entrepreneurs in general. In addition Groningen does have
account managers that have a personal contact with each entrepreneur. This creates closer
contacts between social entrepreneurs and municipalities. Also each civil servant was in
another context and from another department, at the department of social affairs civil servants
have other policies than civil servants at the department of societal development. Finally, also
social entrepreneurs are situated in other areas (e.g. fashion, ICT). This could have influence
on the comparability of the cases. The separate contexts of the embedded cases should thus be
considered. In this research not much attention has been given to individual cases because in
general no large and crucial differences have been found between the cases.
Only few studies focused on the relation between social entrepreneurs and government
(Korosec & Berman, 2006; Van Twist et al., 2012; Sampson, 2011; Sharir & Lerner, 2006;
Dees, 2007), but only one research focused on the municipal level (Korosec & Berman,
2006). This was the first qualitative research that systematically and empirically has
73
investigated the interaction between social entrepreneurs and municipalities by investing five
cases (22 interviews) and conducting 23 background interviews. In this research the role of
government appears highly important in the (start-up) development of social entrepreneurs.
The research therefore adds important insights to the discussions concerning social
entrepreneurship. The development of social entrepreneurship is expected to grow in the
Netherlands (Nota doe-democratie, 2013; WRR; 2012; RoB, 2012). A better understanding of
the different logics that come up in a moment of interaction can be highly useful in this
development. The results of this research will give a better understand of the tension between
social entrepreneurs and municipalities and this will possibly ease the interaction between the
two parties.
74
6. Reflections & limitations
The current financial crisis does have a large impact on the department of social affairs of
municipalities. Municipalities have to deal with budget cuts, the process of decentralization
and a growing number of government payments. This changes the attitude towards social
entrepreneurs. The municipality cannot execute all the programs as they did in the past and
are looking for new solutions. These developments thus also have a large impact on this
research. When the municipality is less in needing for new solutions the necessity to work
with social entrepreneurs would probably be less. This research represents the logics of both
parties and it can be expected that in other periods of time not the logics will change, but the
emphasis on particular logics. This would imply that the line of argument in this research
would hold. The research should be repeated after a certain period to investigate the influence
of the crisis on the tension between social entrepreneurs and municipalities.
In the research I concentrated on social entrepreneurs in the field of labor. Currently large
reforms have been proposed in the field of labor (e.g. law on participation). This makes the
area of labor an interesting area to investigate. Social entrepreneurs in different areas, such as
health care or energy will probably have different interactions with government. Government
has legal tasks in the field of labor which is different than in the field of energy. The results of
this research are therefore not generalizable to other domains.
In addition I only interviewed social entrepreneurs that passed the start-up phase. This
could cause a bias in the results. The social entrepreneurs that in fact have experienced an
intensive tension are not interviewed. In future research also entrepreneurs that did not pass
the start-up phase should be interviewed to have a full understanding of the tension between
the entrepreneurs and municipalities.
Also, it was difficult to find civil servants in the municipalities that were in their work
directly confronted with social entrepreneurs. In some cases I was directed to persons that in
general had ties with (social) entrepreneurs, for example people from the department of
economic affairs. These people could have a different attitude towards social entrepreneurs
than civil servants that are directly confronted with entrepreneurs in the field of labor.
Although in this research it is tried to have a large diversity in respondents at the side of the
municipalities, more research should be conducted to understand the differences in the points
of view of civil servants at different departments.
75
7. Future research
Only little research has been conducted in the field of social entrepreneurship (Korosec &
Berman, 2006; Van Twist et al., 2012; Sampson, 2011; Sharir & Lerner, 2006; Dees, 2007).
This qualitative research was the first empirical research that focused on the tension between
social entrepreneurs and municipalities. Social entrepreneurs can become in the future
important actors to solve complicated public problems, therefore it is important to conduct
more research on these entrepreneurs in the public domain.
The current financial crisis does probably have an influence on the tension between social
entrepreneurs and municipalities, therefore the research should be repeated after a certain
amount of time to update the results. This research was the first qualitative research. More
quantitative research should be conducted to possibly discover patterns in the results.
This research was conducted in a Dutch context in five large municipalities. More
municipalities should be interviewed to discover differences between different municipalities.
Also smaller municipalities should be interviewed because it is expected that the relationship
between small municipalities and social entrepreneurs is different than in large cities. In
addition the research should be repeated in an international context needed to further the
discussions concerning social entrepreneurship.
In addition in this research only one enterprise in the field in for example art and fashion
was investigated. If more enterprises in the same sector will be interviewed, possible
similarities in the interaction with government can be found within the group of social
enterprises in the field of labor. Also, different types of social enterprises should be
investigated. This research focused on social enterprises in the field of labor. The research
should be extended to other parts of the public domain such as health care and energy.
This research confirmed that municipalities play an important role in the development of
social entrepreneurs. More research is needed to investigate the success factors that influence
social entrepreneurs. Municipalities appeared to play an important role in the (start-up)
development of social entrepreneurs. Further research is needed to investigate what other
factors do influence the development of social enterprises.
76
Biography
Aberbach, J.D. & Christensen, T. (2003). Translating theoretical idea’s into modern state
reform: economics- inspired reforms and competing models of governances. Administration
and society, 35 (5). P.491-509
Alter, K. (2007). Social entrepreneur typology. Virtue Ventures LLC.
Ahrne, G. (1994). Social organizations: interactions inside, outside and between
organizations. Sage: Londen.
Bakker, W. & Waarden, F. van. Ruimte rond regels. Stijlen van regulering en
beleiduitvoering vergeleken. Amsterdam: Boom.
Bemelman- Videc, M.L., R.C. Rist & Verdung (eds). (1998). Carrots, sticks and Sermons.
Policy instruments and their evaluation. New Brunswick: transaction publisher.
Boeije, H. (2010). Analysis in qualitative research. London: SAGE publications Ltd.
Blond, P. (2010). Red theory, how left and right have broken Britain and how we can fix it.
Bonanni, C, Lépineux, F. & Roloff, J. (2012). Social responsibility, entrepreneurship and the
common good. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bornstein, D. & Davis, S. (2010). Social entrepreneurship: what everyone needs to know.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bovens, M.A.P., Hart, P.’t. & Twist, M. van. (2012). Openbaar bestuur: beleid, organisatie
en politiek. Deventer: Kluwer.
Bozeman, B. (1993). A theory of government ‘red tape’. Journal of public administration
research and theory: J-PART, vol. 3. No 3 (Jul., 1993). Pp. 273- 303.
Brabander, R., Emmerik, R. Pijpelink, P. Walraven, G. & Zoeteweij, P. (2009). Een
waardevolle spagaat. Een verkenning van sociaal ondernemerschap. Lectoraat van de stad.
Appeldoorn: garant.
Bridge, S., Murtagh, B. & o’Neill, K. (2009). Understanding the social economy and the third
sector. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bruce Bueno de Mesquita (2003). The logic of political survival. University of California.
Carree, M.A. & Thurik, A.R. (2010). The impact of entrepreneurship on economic growth. In
Z.J. Acs and D. Audrestsch (eds.), handbook of entrepreneurship research (pp.557-594)
Springer.
CBS. (2012). Personen met een uitkering per gemeente. http://www.cbs.nl/nlNL/menu/themas/arbeid-sociale-zekerheid/cijfers/extra/personen-uitkering.htm
77
Clemens, E.S. & J. Cook. (1999). Politics and institutionalism: explaining durability and
chance. Annual review of sociology 25. P. 441-466.
Davis, K. (1969). Discretionary justice. Baton Rouge: Louisiana state University Press.
Dees, J.G. (2007). Taking social entrepreneurship seriously. Transaction social science and
modern society. Vol. 44, No. 3.
Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (1998). The landscape of qualitative research: theories and
issues. Londen: Sage
Dimaggio, P.J & Powell, W.W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: institutional and collective
rationality in organizational field. American sociological review. Vol. 48 (2). Pp. 147- 160.
Du Gay, P. (2005). The values of bureaucracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Easton, D. (1965). A framework for political analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Printice- Hall.
Field, U. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research. Edition 4. London: SAGE.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2001). Making social science matter: why social inquiry fails and how it can
succeed again. Cambridge University press.
Gartner, W.M. (1985). A conceptual framework for describing the phenomenon of new
venture creation. The Academy of Management Review: Vol. 10, No. 4, Oct., 1985.
Gawthorp, L.C. (1984). Public sector management, systems and ethics. Bloomington, IN:
University press.
Gestal, N. Van. Botsende logica’s van besturen. Universiteit van Tilburg.
Goodsell, C.T. (2000). Red tape and a theory of bureaucratic rules. Bureaucracy and red tape
by Barry Bozeman review by: Charles. T. Goodsell. Public administration review, vol. 60,
No. 4 (Jul- Aug., 2000), Pp. 373- 375.
Guglu, A., Dees, G. Anderson, B.B. (2002). The process of social entrepreneurship: creating
opportunities worthy to serious pursuit. Center for the advancement of social
entrepreneurship, Fuqua school of business.
Granados, M.L., Hlupic, V., Coakes, E. & Mohamed, S. (2011). Social enterprises and social
entrepreneurship research and theory. Social enterprise Journal. Vol. 7. No. 3. P. 198- 218.
Greenwish (2012). De creative samenleving en de overhead. Visie van intermediaire
organisaties op de rol van de overheid t.a.v. maatschappelijk initiatief.
78
Hakvoort, J.L.M. (1995). Methoden en technieken van bestuurskundig onderzoek. Delft:
edubron.
Hanna, R. (2006). Rationality and the ethics or logic. The journal of philosophy, Vol. 103.
No. 2. P. 67-100.
Hannan, M.T., Polos, L. & Carroll, G. (2007). Logics of organization theory: audiences,
codes and ecologies. Oxford: Princeton university press.
Herriot, R.E. & Firestone, W.A. (1993). Multisite qualitative policy research: optimizing
description and generalizability. Educational researcher, 12, 14-19.
Hood, C. (1983). The tools of government. Londen: Macmillan.
Hoogendoorn, B. (2011). Social entrepreneurship in the modern economy, warm glow cold
feet. Doctoral thesis Erasmus University.
Huberts, L. & Hout, e. Van. (2011). Goed bestuur, kiezen of delen? Bestuurskunde 20(2), p.
53-62.
Janssen, L.(2012) Arbeidsrecht en sociale zekerheid. Den Haag: Boom Juridische Uitgevers.
Kirm, J. & Miller, M. (1986). Reliability and validity in qualitative research. SAGE: London
Korosec, R. L. & Bernman, E. M. (2006). Municipal support for social entrepreneurs. Public
administration review, May/Jun 2006. Vol (66). No 3. Pp. 448.
Kunneman, H. & Keulartz (1985). Rondom Habermas, analyses en kritieken. Amsterdam:
Boom.
Krosenbrink, S.C. (2011). Social entrepreneurship and the acquisition of resources. Erasmus
University Rotterdam.
Levine, S. & White, P. (1961). Exchange as a conceptual framework for the study of
interorganizational relationships. Administrative science quarterly. 5. P. 583- 601.
Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E.gG. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Londen: sage.
Linder, S.H. & Peters, B.G. (1998). The study of policy instruments: four schools of thought.
In Peters and van Nispen 1998: 33- 45.
Lipsky, M. (1980). Street level bureaucracy. In the sociology or organizations. Classic,
contemporary and critical readings. Editor Michael J. Handel. London: SAGE publications.
Mahoney, J.T. & Mcgahan, A.M. & Pitelis, C.N. (2009). The interdependence of private and
public interests. Organization science. 20 (6). P. 1034- 1054.
Mair, J. & Marti, I. (2006). Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation,
prediction, and delight. Journal of World Business 41. P. 36- 44.
79
Majone, G. (1989). Evidence, argument and persuasion in the policy process. New Haven:
Yale University Press.
Marshall, C. & Rossman, G. B. (2011). Designing qualitative research. London: SAGE.
Mayntz, H.B. & Provan, K.G. (2000). Governing the hollow state. Journal of public
administration research and theory. 10 (2). P. 359-279.
Moe, R.C. (1987). Exploring the limits of privatization. Public administration review, no. 47
(6). P. 453-460).
Moisander, J. & Valtonen, A. Qualitative marketing research: a cultural approach. SAGE:
Londen.
Moore, M.H. (2013). Recognizing public values. Cambride: Harvard University Press.
Mort, G.S, Weerawarenda, J. & Carnegie (2002). Social entrepreneurship: towards
conceptualization. International journal of nonprofit and voluntary sector marketing. Vol. 8.
No 1.
Mulgan, G. (2007). Social innovation. What is it, why it matters and how can it be
accelerated. London: the Young Foundation.
Nicholls, A. (2006). Social entrepreneurship: new models of sustainable social change.
Oxford: University press.
Niskanen, W.A. (1973). Bureaucracy, servant or master? Lessons from America. London:
institute of economic affairs.
OECD. (1999). Social enterprises. Paris: OECD publications.
Pache, A.C. & Chowdhury, I. (2012). Social entrepreneurs as institutional embedded
entrepreneurs: towards a new model of social entrepreneurship education. Academy of
management learning & education. Vol. 11. No. 3. P: 494- 510
Pandey, S.K. & Wright, B.E. (2006). Connecting the dots in public management: political
environment, organizational goal ambiguity, and the public managers role ambiguity. Journal
of public administration research and theory. 16. P. 511-532.
Peters, G. (1999). Institutional theory in political science. London: Pinter.
Peters, G. (2010). The politics of bureaucracy: an introduction to comparative public
administration. London: Routlegde.
Perry, J.L. (1996). Handbook of public administration. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Pollitt, C. & Bouckaert, G. (2012). Public management reform: A comparative analysis- new
public management, governance, and the neo- Weberian state. Oxford university press.
80
Rainey, H.G. (2009). Understanding and managing public organizations. San Francisco:
Jossey- bass.
Reay, T. & Hinings, B. (2009). Managing the rivalry of competing institutional logics.
London: sage.
RoB. Loslaten in vertrouwen. www.rob-rfv.nl
Robbie, K. (2005). Social firm UK. The extra elements: a social firm trainer. Element E.
www.socialfirmsuk.co.uk.
Roberts, D. & Woods, C. (2005). Changing the world on a shoe string: the concept of social
entrepreneurship. University Ackland business review.
Sampson, D.N. (2011). Social entrepreneurship. New York: Nova science publishers Inc.
Schmidt, S.M. & Kochan, T.A. (1977). Inter-organizational relationships: patterns and
motivations. London: sage.
Shackle, G. (1966). The nature of economic thought. Cambride: Cambridge University Press.
Schultz, M., Steen, M. Van der Steen. & Twist, M. Van. De realisatie van publieke waarden
door sociaal ondernemerschap. Bestuurskunde 2013. Vol. 22, No. 1.
Schumpeter, J.A. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambride, MA. Harvard
University Press.
Sharir, M. & Lerner, M. (2006). Gauging the success of social ventures initiated by individual
social entrepreneurs. Journal of business 41. Pp. 6-20.
Silverman, D. (2006). Interpreting qualitative data. SAGE: Londen.
Smit. A.A., Genabeek, J. Van. & Klerkx, M. (2008). Europese ervaringen met sociale
economie. Werk voor gehandicapten en langdurig werklozen in sociale ondernemingen.
Hoofddorp: TNO, 2008.
Snellen, I. (2002). Conciliations of rationalities: the essence of public administration.
Administrative of public administration. Vol. 24. No. 2. P. 323- 346.
Social enterprise NL (2012). Wat zijn de kansen en belemmeringen. www.social-entreprise.nl
Sireau, N. (2011). Micro financing; how social entrepreneurs are building a new road to
development. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing Limited.
Strauss, A.L. & Corbin, J. (2007). Basics of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: sage.
Thiel. S. Van. (2010). Bestuurskundig onderzoek: een methodische inleiding. Bussum:
Uitgeverij Coutinho
81
Todd, J. D. (1969). The risk management function in municipal government. The Journal of
risk and Insurance. Vol. 36 (3). Pp. 285- 295.
TNO. (2011). Sociale ondernemingen en werknemers met een arbeidsbeperking. 031.21018.
Tuite, M.F. (1972). Towards a theory of decision-making. Inter- organizational decision
making: p. 9-19.
Twist, M.J. W., Steen, van der, M., Schulz, M. Cointre, Le, S. (2012). Exploring the relation
between social entrepreneurs and government.
Waal, A.A. & Kerklaan, L.A.F.M. (2004). De resultaat gerichte overheid. Den Haag: SDU
Uitgevers.
Weber, M. (1946). From Max Weber: essays in sociology. edited and translated by H.H.
Gerth C. Wright. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Weber, M. (1978). Bureaucracy. Chapter 11 in economy and society. 1978. Berkeley, Los
Angeles, Londen: University of California Press
Weber, M. (1968). Economy and society: an outline of interpretative sociology. New York:
Bedminster
Westhead, P., Wright, M. & Mcelwee, G. (2011). Entrepreneurship: perspective and cases.
London: Pearson.
Wijdevan, T. (2012). Doe-democratie. Over actief burgerschap in standswijken. Delft:
Eburon.
White, P.E. (1974). Intra- and inter-organizational studies. Administration and society. 6.
105- 152.
WRR (2004). Bewijzen van goede dienstverlening. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
WRR. (2012). Vertrouwen in burgers. www.wrr.nl
Yanow, D. (2000). Conducting interpretative policy analysis. Thousand Oaks, sage
Yanow, D. & Schwartz-Shea. P. (2006). Introduction. Interpretation and method: emperical
research method and interpretative turn. D. Armonk, N.Y.: Sharpe.
Zahra, S. Gedajlovic, E. Neubaum, D. & Shulman, J.M. (2009). A typology of social
entrepreneurs: motives, search processes and ethical challenges. Journal of business
venturing 24 (5), 519- 5312.
Sources:
82
Letter to the cabinet, 27th of June 2013. http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten-enpublicaties/kamerstukken/2013/06/27/kamerbrief-over-participatiewet-en-quotum-na-sociaalakkoord.html
Kamerbrief actualisering brief over decentralisaties op het terrein van ondersteuning
participatie en Jeugd, 16-05-2013. http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten-enpublicaties/kamerstukken/2013/05/16/kamerbrief-actualisering-brief-over-decentralisaties-ophet-terrein-van-ondersteuning-participatie-en-jeugd.html
83
Attachment I
List of social enterprises
Source: Social enterprise NL (Mark Hillen), Start foundation, normaalstezaak.nl,
documentation of ministry of inferior and kingdom Relations.
Municipality
Social firm
Activity
Target group
Amsterdam
Annie
connect
De prael
Call center
People with diverse background with
distance to the labor market
People from mental health care
People with diverse background with
distance to the labor market
Physically or mentally disability
Woman with a distance to the labor
market
Young people with Mental or physical
disability
Amsterdam
Amsterdam
Fifteen
Brewery
Restaurant
Amsterdam
Amsterdam
Tulpfietsen
Rose of east
Bycycle company
Handmade product
Amsterdam
Web service
Amsterdam
Swink
webservices
De lokatie
Amsterdam
Taxi- E
Green taxi
Amsterdam
Mensjelief
Café
Amsterdam
Amsterdam
Rambles
Restaurant
Freud
Fashion
Restaurant
People with diverse background with
distance to the labor market
People with diverse background with
distance to the labor market
People with diverse background with
distance to the labor market
Street and homeless youth
People with
Almere
Amersfoort
Tante Truus
Restaurant
Restaurant
Mental disability
Mental disability
Apeldoorn
Support & co
Supermarket
Apeldoorn
Arhnem
Mobi bus
Bunschoten
Den Bosch
Den Haag
Den Haag
Den Hague
Autitalent
Bus company
Courier
and
cleaning
ICT
Nelis
Vilt aan zee
Restaurant
Taxi service
Window clearer
Design
Deventer
Parolo
Café
Enkhuizen
Soci com
Production
Emmen
Es
Burg
De
onthaasting
Mel service
In de roos
Tap taxi
Bike shop
Den Texelhoeve
Recycling company
Bike repair service
Restaurant
People with diverse background with
distance to the labor market
55+ People
car People with difficulties finding a job
(WAO)
Autism
Mental or physical disability
Labor disability
Youth with limited job opportunities
Women with a distance to the labor
market
People with diverse background with
distance to the labor market
People with diverse background with
distance to the labor market
People from mental health care
Physically or mentally disability
84
Elst
Ermelo
Gemonde
Groningen
Droom
Groningen
De
verbinding
Groesbeek
Buurtmarkt
breedeweg
Edelhout
Helmond
Hilversum
Houten
Puur Smaek
Hoorn
Ittervoort
Ridderikhoff
Lievelde
Nieuwkuijk
Nijmegen
Nieuwe-gein
Oosterhout
Oss
Rotterdam
Rotterdam
Rotterdam
Rotterdam
Rotterdam
Schijndel
Restaurant
Proeverij de Lunch café
ontmoeting
Webmaster ICT
y
Van hulley Clothing recycling
company
Production
window frames
Market
People that have difficulties leaving their
homes
Women with a distance to the labor
market
of Deaf people
Mental or physical disability
Production
Moroccan people with distance to labor
market
Mental disability
Mental or physical disability
Restaurant
Eet cafe het Restaurant- café
atelier
WestromRisse
Facilitair
Hacron
Groen
Sathin
Labor disability
People with a mental disability
Restaurant
Cleaning company
Labor disability
People with diverse background with
distance to the labor market
Green projects
People with diverse background with
distance to the labor market
Production of fabrics
People with diverse background with
distance to the labor market
People with a psychiatric background and
mental disability
Brood op de Bakery and café
plank
Curam zorg Heath care
Mode met
een missie
Macek
Technica
Electric
Scooter
Factory
Beautiful
people, fairtrade drinks
Oli’s
callcentre
Wandschappen
Granies
finest
Fashion
Broodje
apart
Foreign people with a distance to the
labor market
Woman with diverse background with
distance to the labor market
Productiom
Production
scooters
People with diverse background with
distance to the labor market
of School drop-outs
Production of drinks
People with a mental disability
Call centre
Blind/ people with less visual ability
Art
People with diverse background with
distance to the labor market
Fashion
Grandma’s
Restaurant
Physically or mentally disability
85
Tilburg
Prins heerlijk
Restaurant
Utrecht
Utrecht
Zizo
I did slow
fashion
Specialisterren
Chain
Logistics
Lunch café
Fashion and design
Driekant
fabriek
Dineren in
het donker
Utrecht
Uden
Zutphen
Zeist
People with learning difficulties or (light)
disability
Mental disability
Foreign people with a distance to the
labor market
ICT projects
Autism and high intelligence
assemblage activities
People with diverse background with
distance to the labor market
Bakery
20-30 People with diverse background
with distance to the labor market
Blind people
Restaurant
Attachment 2
Vragenlijst
1. Heeft u contact met sociaal ondernemers/ gemeenten?
2. Hoe verlopen de contacten op Financieel vlak?
- Start- up geld
- Subsidie
- Huizen
- Beleid?
3. Hoe verlopen de contacten op Legaal vlak?
- Law
- Permissions
- Certificates
- Beleid?
- Ruimte in regels? Verantwoordelijk?
4. Hoe verlopen de contacten op communicatief vlak?
- Information
- Facilitating
- Advising
- Political support
- Beleid?
5.Zijn er spanningen waar te nemen tussen u en de sociaal ondernemers/ gemeente?
6. Waardoor worden deze spanningen veroorzaakt?
7. Hoe zou u het contact omschrijven?
86
Attachment 3
Respondents
Case municipality of Amsterdam
-
Nienke Boesveldt, project leader at the department of residence, heath and society
Rob van Veelen, mediator for civil initiatives and the municipality in Amsterdam east
Hettie politiek, policy officer at the department of societal development
De De zeven deugden – Garmt Haakma
Case municipality of Groningen
-
Hans Ohlenroth, accountmanager at the department of economic affairs
Ferdi Hendriks, accountmanager at the department of economic affairs
Van Hulley – Jolijn Creutzberg
Case municipality of Utrecht
-
Martin Bluijs, Policy advisor at department of societal development
Specialisterren – Sjoerd van der Maaden & Ronald van Vliet
Case municipality of Den Haag
-
Vincent Holleman, policy advisor at the department of economy and entrepreneurship
Rob de Rooij, department of social affairs, employers point (werkgeverspunt)
Stichting leren doen - Sander Eijkenbroek
Vilt aan zee – Sandra Burggraaf
Case municipality of Rotterdam
-
-
Perry van Rijn, policy advisor at the department of youth, education and society
Wim Reijierse, administrative department (bestuursdienst) municipality of Rotterdam
Rene Cannoo, project leader at the department of income and work
Marja Talen, Job coach, department of social affairs and employability
Rene Burghouwt, project leader of the social workplace Rotterdam
Granies finest - Niek van Hengel
Enviu, Walter aan de Wiel
Oli’s callcenter.
DNA Charlois – Ivo van der Baar
Background conversations
Social system
- Cemil Yilmaz, program coordinator of MVO/CSR at UWV
87
-
Bram Ligtenberg, klantmanager (WWB) social work plaza (werkplein), Capelle aan
de IJssel.
Jaap Smit, klantmanager, wide range of expertise, social work plaza (werkplein),
Capelle aan de IJssel.
Municipalities
- Frank van Geffen, municipality of Schijndel
- Nico Paap, municipality of Amersfoort
- Ypkje Grimm, municipality of Enschede
- Geert Schmitz, municipality of Peel en Maas
- Arno Schepers, municipality of Zeist
- Judith Harmsen, municipality of Berkeland
Social entrepreneurship
- Jeanne Roozendaal, restaurant Broodje apart
- Mark Hillen, owner of social enterprise NL, a platform for social entrepreneurs
- Peter Linde, teacher social entrepreneurship USBO
- Leeszaal west, Maurice Specht
- Singeldingen, Marieke Hillen
- Social powerhouse, Kristel Logge
- Meeting social impact platform: werkconferentie sociale werkbedrijven & Social
impact bonds
- Jan van Betten, director of Nudge
- Marije van der Berg, stadslab Leiden
- Silvia de Ronde Bresser, Kracht in Nederland
- Ingrid de Moel, Bouwen voor Sociaal
- Eric Buckens, ABN AMRO
- Paul Iske, ABN AMRO
- Bas Ruter, Rabobank
Attachment 4
CODINGSCHEME AREAS AND SUB-THEMES
Municipalities
Economic area
Savings
-
Changes in the system
Less money
Effectiveness and efficiency in
social workplaces
More people with a government
payment
Social entrepreneurs as a possible
solution
The social system cannot last in its
current form
88
-
Structural
subsidy
-
Social workplaces as a reservoir of
all sorts of people
Social system was not used to
commercial thinking
Social return on investment
Structural ties connected to the
company
-
Structural ties connected to the
employees
-
Careful of misuse; political risk
Social enterprises depend on
municipalities
Stimulation
Not many subsidies available
Start-up phase
Careful of misuse; political risk
Careful of unequal competition
One off
subsidies
-
Local laws,
rules and
regulations
-
Rules concerning
organization
-
Legal area
-
-
Rules concerning
employees
-
-
In general no structural ties
to company; false
competition
-
Structural ties to
employees
- Strict procedures
- Development of
employees is main goal
- Compartmentalization
- Different policies
UWV/municipalities
Zoning plans: Once determined not easily
returned
Interests of all other citizens in city
Uniformity: no exceptions for individual
cases
Precise procedure; long procedures
Political risks
Politics changes laws. Civil servants will
execute these laws
Difficult to make exceptions in a
bureaucracy
Compartmentalization; a label of a person
refers to an organizations
Protection of the rights of all citizens
Considering the interest of all citizens
Uniformity: no exceptions for individual
cases
Changing laws and system
Integral decision
Political risks: prevent misuse
Politics changes laws. Civil servants will
execute these laws
Politics can give space within the rules
Difficult to make exceptions in a
bureaucracy
89
National laws,
rules and
regulations
-
Rules concerning
organization
-
-
Rules concerning
employees
-
Information
-
Giving information
-
Communicative area
-
Publicity
-
Collect information
-
Political attention to
enterprise
SE does not
emphasize good
work of government
Showing good
examples
Thinking together
with SE about new
solutions / new
partners
Network
-
-
BV/ Foundation
Politics changes laws. Civil servants will
execute these laws
Difficult to make exceptions in a
bureaucracy
Environment
Hygiene
ARBO: safety and wellbeing
Influence of Ministry
Changing laws and system
Politics changes laws. Civil servants will
execute these laws
Difficult to make exceptions in a
bureaucracy
The system is changing and SE need
information about the changes
Information about tenders
The council visits the SE to learn about the
enterprise
90
Social enterprises
Structural
subsidies
-
Subsidies connected to the company
-
-
Subsidies connected to the employees
-
Economic area
-
One off
subsidies
-
No subsidies
-
Investment
in -
A company should be healthy and
not depend on government
subsidies
One cannot depend on subsidies
and this is also not the goal of the
company
Difficult to run a company with
people with a distance to the labor
market without subsidies
Difficult to work with these
employees due to the changes in
the system: dependent on politics
Municipalities distrust SE
SE should be trusted by the
government to receive subsidies
SE experience that they have to
proof their ability
Employees are afraid to make
mistakes, so that the government
will cancel their government
payment
Government acts slowly
Difficult to understand the system
A company should be
healthy and not depend on
government subsidies
One- off subsidies are
complicated and one is not
certain of the result
Companies should find
solutions in the market to
run the company
The company should not
be influenced by the
criteria of the subsidy
A company should be
healthy and not depend on
government subsidies
Subsidies give the wrong
incentive to employees
Entrepreneurs should
rather focus on the market
than on the government
The company wants to
function independently
Not aware of the existence
of subsidies
Invest in employees in
91
social goal
Local laws,
rules and
procedures
money and in time
-
Rules concerning
organization
-
-
Rules concerning
employees
-
Legal area
National laws,
rules and
procedures
-
Rules concerning
organization
-
-
Rules concerning
employees
-
Zoning plans; complicated and
cause a delay in the business plan
Difficult to understand
The focus on uniformity makes it
difficult to make changes
SE like any other company
Due to legal system different
public organizations for different
employees
Contracts with municipalities/
intermediate organizations/ UWV
Municipality less strict than UWV
Monitoring of employees
Changes often, difficult to depend
on. Uncertainty.
In uncertain times public
organizations can be paralyzed
Difficult to understand the system
The focus on uniformity makes it
difficult to make changes
The municipality is comparable to
an island; does not know about the
actual situation
SE should be trusted; intermediate
organizations can help
Combinations of BV/ foundation
Fit into administrative categories
ARBO can be difficult
In general not much difficulties;
like any other company
92
Information
-
-
Information is useful if it
answers individual
questions
Boroughs are useful,
closer contacts
Municipality does not
understand the initiative
Raises the sales
-
Political attention
-
Communicative area
Publicity
-
Network
-
Communication with
different
organizations
Politicians can use the promotion of
SE for their own interest
Political attention can be useful if
politicians raise attention in the
society for the enterprise; rise of
sales
A civil servants can link
SE to right person
Intermediate organizations
are useful in the network
Many people in own
network that help; do not
need network of
municipality
Difficult to maintain
relations with different
organizations
Attachment 5
CODINGSCHEME LOGICS
Municipalities
Logics
Economic logics
Legal logic
Democratic logic
Characteristics/ Key terms
- Efficiency: maximizing cost-benefit equation
- Effectiveness: achievement of goals
- Performance: the output of the organization
- Targets: achievement of goals
- Budget cuts/savings
- Integrity: spending public money in the right way
- Equality
- Aversion of political risks
- Impersonal rules and procedures
- Rules are applied universally; no regard for personal characteristics
- Legal security of all individuals
- No arbitrary acts; clarity and consistency
- Supremacy of the law
- Formalization and bureaucracy: written rules and regulations
- Relevant legal categories
- Legitimate position
- Responsive to society
93
-
Social enterprises
Logics
Entrepreneurial logics
Social welfare logic
Public sector logic
Accountability
Responsibility
Transparent
Maximize votes
Media scrutiny
Characteristics/ Key terms
- Chances in the market
- Demand – supply equation
- Recognition of opportunities
- Imagination and creativity
- Maximizing impact, social and economic
- Optimalization of processes in the organization
- Efficiency
- Effectiveness
- Dissatisfaction with status quo
- Maximizing social impact
- Stimulated by personal experience
- Recognition of social needs
- Need for change
- Passion
- Sustainable change
- Corporate with public actors
- Understanding public sector and social system
- Adapt to public sector: ensuring fairness, transparency, democratic
governance
- Institutional acts
- Corporate with a complex network of stakeholders
- Depend on public and political decision making
94
95
Overheidsparticipatie overdacht
Daphne Bressers
Master Publiek Management
Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam
Eerste lezer: Prof. Dr. Mark van Twist
Tweede lezer: Prof. Dr. Steven Van de Walle
96
Voorwoord
Dit onderzoeksverslag is geschreven voor de bestuurskundige master ‘publiek management’
aan de Erasmus Universiteit te Rotterdam. Dit verslag is een aanvulling op en uitdieping van
de scriptie voor de bestuurskundige onderzoeksmaster in ‘public administration and
organizational science’ aan de Universiteit van Utrecht. Daar waar de scriptie voor de
onderzoeksmaster ingaat op de interactie tussen sociale ondernemers (markt) en de overheid,
zal dit onderzoeksverslag de interactie tussen de samenleving en de overheid scherper in kaart
brengen. Dit onderzoeksverslag belicht dus een andere kant van de driehoek overheid - markt
- samenleving, en zal daarnaast ingaan op de verschillende rollen die gemeenten aan kunnen
nemen in de nieuwe verhoudingen.
De overheid krijgt met twee verschillende ontwikkelingen te maken. Aan de ene kant is de
overheid genoodzaakt taken over te hevelen naar de samenleving, een ontwikkeling die ook
wel te beschrijven is als vermaatschappelijking. Aan de andere kant ondernemen burgers,
zonder tussenkomst van bestuurders, meer activiteiten in het publieke domein. Deze
ontwikkelingen kunnen op elkaar aansluiten; daar waar de overheid zich terugtrekt kunnen
burgers dit gat opvullen. Desondanks blijken de nieuwe verhoudingen allerlei vragen met zich
mee te brengen waar gemeenten antwoord op moeten geven. Welke (publieke) taken kunnen
we overlaten aan de samenleving? Welke taken is de burger bereid om over te nemen? Welke
activiteiten vanuit de samenleving kunnen we volledig loslaten? Wat is de rol van de
democratie nog binnen deze ontwikkeling? En nog vele andere vragen die tot interessante en
fundamentele discussies leiden.
Van 4 februari tot 27 juni 2013 heb ik stage gelopen bij het Ministerie van Binnenlandse
Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties. Ik heb hier met vele gemeenten mogen spreken, bij
verschillende congressen met gemeenten aanwezig mogen zijn en mee mogen schrijven aan
de kabinetsnota over de ‘doe -democratie’. Deze ervaringen hebben me veel geleerd over de
veranderende verhoudingen tussen de overheid en de samenleving. De discussies hebben me
veel nieuwe inzichten gebracht over de werkwijzen van gemeenten. Deze ervaringen hebben
geleid tot de ideeën die aan de basis staan van dit onderzoek.
97
1. Introductie
De gemeente Berkelland stond een aantal jaar geleden voor een grote bezuinigingsopgave.
Hieruit ontstond een fundamentele politieke discussie over de publieke taken van de
gemeente, bijvoorbeeld over de toekomst van de bibliotheek en het zwembad die met publiek
geld gefinancierd waren. De gemeente besloot om de contracten met de bibliotheek op te
zeggen en een budget voor ‘leesbevordering’ te reserveren in plaats van een budget voor ‘de
bibliotheek’. Iedereen in de gemeente met een idee ter bevordering van de leesvaardigheid
binnen de gemeente kon aanspraak doen op het budget door middel van een
aanbestedingsprocedure. Er wordt bij het afstaan van publieke taken dus niet meer alleen
gekeken naar de markt, zoals in de jaren 80 het geval was (Skelcher, 2007; Van Thiel, 2001),
maar de burger lijkt ook steeds vaker een oplossing te zijn voor het overnemen van publieke
taken (Cook, 2007; Marinetto, 2003; Verhoeven & Tolkens, 2013; Uitermark & Van Beek,
2010). Het overdragen van publieke taken aan de maatschappij kan ook wel omschreven
worden als vermaatschappelijking (Steen et al., 2013).
Tegelijkertijd ontstaan er vanuit de samenleving initiatieven ter bevordering van de
leesvaardigheid, zonder dat de overheid daarom heeft gevraagd. Een voorbeeld hiervan is de
voorleesexpres, een groep vrijwilligers die werkt aan de lees- en taalvaardigheid van gezinnen
met een taalachterstand. Een halfjaar lang komt er wekelijks een vaste voorlezer bij de
gezinnen langs. Bottom-up nemen burgers steeds meer initiatief om bij te dragen aan de
publieke zaak. Deze ontwikkeling waarbij burgers het heft in eigen hand nemen is ook wel te
beschrijven als actief burgerschap (Farrelly, 2009; Bakker et al., 2012).
De verhoudingen tussen de overheid en de burger zijn dus aan het veranderen. Deze
nieuwe verhoudingen zijn grofweg in te delen in twee ontwikkelingen, met aan de ene kant de
top-down ontwikkeling die te beschrijven is als ‘vermaatschappelijking’, waarbij de overheid
steeds meer taken en verantwoordelijkheden overdraagt aan de gemeenschap, en aan de
andere kant burgers die bottom-up steeds meer ondernemen. De term ‘actief burgerschap’
wordt in verschillende contexten gebruikt. Actief burgerschap wordt vaak gebruikt in de trend
van vermaatschappelijking. Actief burgerschap kan dan een invulling zijn van de
vermaatschappelijking en het overdragen van taken aan de samenleving bevorderen. Actief
burgerschap wordt zo gezien als een ontwikkeling die top-down gestuurd kan worden om
doelen te bereiken. In dit onderzoek zal actief burgerschap echter worden begrepen als een
bottom-up initiatief dat vanuit de burger zelf komt.
Deze veranderende verhouding tussen de overheid en de burgers wordt aangeduid met vele
termen, zoals de vitale samenleving, burgerkracht, energieke samenleving, zelfsturing, actief
burgerschap, doe-democratie, doe-het-zelf-democratie, maatschappelijk initiatief en
burgerinitiatief (Kabinetsnota, 2013). In Nederland zijn er recentelijk verschillende rapporten
verschenen die de discussie over de nieuwe verhoudingen hebben verbreed. Zo heeft de
Wetenschappelijke Raad voor Regeringsbeleid (2012) het rapport ‘Vertrouwen in burgers’
geschreven en de Raad voor Openbaar Bestuur (2012) het rapport ‘Loslaten in vertrouwen’
uitgebracht. Ook het SCP (2009) en de Raad voor Maatschappelijke Ontwikkeling (2011)
kwamen met rapporten over het thema. In juli 2013 is daarnaast de kabinetsnota over de ‘doe98
democratie’ verschenen. Het thema lijkt dus te leven in Nederland. De trend is niet alleen in
Nederland gaande, maar bijvoorbeeld ook in Canada (Ilcan and Basok, 2004), Verenigde
staten (Bloom and Kilgore, 2003), Zweden (Lundstorm, 1996) en Verenigd Koninkrijk
(Acheson, 2001), aldus Verhoeven & Tolkens (2013).
De ontwikkelingen van actief burgerschap en vermaatschappelijking brengen een andere
rol voor de overheid ten opzichte van de burger met zich mee. Vrielink & Verhoeven (2011)
constateren twee beleidslijnen voor de invulling van de rol van de overheid, namelijk de
liberale beleidslijn en de communitaristische beleidslijn. Het nationale en liberale beleid stelt
dat de overheid burgers meer los moet laten in hun activiteiten en dat de overheid zich steeds
minder moet mengen in activiteiten die burgers ondernemen. De overheid moet slechts
‘zorgen voor’ voorzieningen die het burgers makkelijker maken om activiteiten te
ondernemen. De tweede, meer specifieke, beleidslijn is er op gericht om te ‘zorgen dat’
burgers meer onderling actief worden en zo meer ‘meedoen’ en meer verantwoordelijkheid
nemen voor publieke taken. Deze meer specifieke beleidslijn is volgens Vrielink &
Verhoeven (2011) ook wel te kenmerken als een communitarische opvatting van burgerschap.
Deze twee beleidslijnen zorgen volgens Vrielink & Verhoeven voor een paradox waar
gemeenten mee moeten werken. Gemeenten moeten aan de ene kant initiatieven loslaten en
aan de andere kant strategisch initiatieven in de samenleving stimuleren en opwekken.
Verschillende raden proberen grip te krijgen op wat de nieuwe verhoudingen betekenen
voor de rol van de overheid (WRR, 2012; ROB, 2012; RMO, 2012). Om ordening aan te
brengen binnen de veranderende verhoudingen heeft de Raad voor Openbaar Bestuur ‘een
overheidsparticipatietrap’ ontwikkeld met vijf rollen die overheden aan kunnen nemen in
relatie tot burgers. De Raad voor Openbaar Bestuur (ROB) is een adviesorgaan van de
regering een het parlement, maar daarnaast wordt het advies ook gebruikt door lagere
overheden (VNG, 2013). De ROB heeft de volgende overheidsparticipatietrap onderscheiden:
Reguleren
Regisseren
Stimuleren
Faciliteren
Loslaten
Figuur 1. De overheidsparticipatietrap. Bron: ROB (2012).
Bij de bovenste trede van de trap geeft de overheid de minste ruimte aan burgers en bij de
onderste trede krijgen burgers de meeste ruimte om activiteiten naar eigen inzicht in te vullen.
Of zoals de ROB (2012) stelt: ‘De vitaliteit in de samenleving krijgt meer ruimte als de
overheid de overheidsparticipatietrap zo min mogelijk beklimt.’ (p.68). Ook geeft de ROB aan
dat er niet een ideale rol voor de overheid is; per situatie zal de politiek en de raad moeten
bepalen voor welke rol zij kiezen. De participatietrap bevat een tweetal vooronderstellingen:
99
1. De overheid kiest één trede in een bepaalde situatie: dit impliceert dat de treden los
staan van elkaar;
2. De treden sluiten logisch op elkaar aan: dit impliceert dat er een orde bestaat binnen de
treden.
De vooronderstellingen van de overheidsparticipatietrap zijn nog niet eerder systematisch
onderzocht, terwijl het advies van de ROB en de daarin voorgestelde participatietrap wordt
gebruikt door verschillende overheden (VNG, 2013; kabinetsnota Doe- Democratie, 2013). In
dit onderzoek zullen de vooronderstellingen van overheidsparticipatietrap worden onderzocht
aan de hand van negen interviews met ambtenaren die door het Ministerie van Binnenlandse
Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties (Team Burgerschap) zijn aangemerkt als ‘koplopers’ op het
gebied van de veranderende verhoudingen tussen burgers en de overheid. Deze koplopers zijn
in Nederland het verst op het gebied van ‘minder overheid, meer burger’, een ontwikkeling
die zowel vermaatschappelijking als actief burgerschap omvat.
Het Team Burgerschap houdt zich binnen het Ministerie bezig met de verhoudingen tussen
de samenleving en de overheid en het optimaliseren van de relatie daartussen en heeft dus als
taak om op de hoogte blijven van de ontwikkelingen op dit gebied. Dit team heeft de
koplopers geïdentificeerd aan de hand van intensieve contacten en bijeenkomsten met
verschillende gemeenten rondom het thema. Ook voor de kabinetsnota over de 'doedemocratie’ en voor het tijdschrift ‘Tijdschrift over de veranderende relatie tussen
samenleving en overheid’, thema: gemeente en gemeenschap heeft het Ministerie gemeenten
geïdentificeerd die ten opzichte van andere gemeenten veranderingen hebben doorgevoerd
(zowel politiek als ambtelijk) op het gebied van vermaatschappelijking en actief burgerschap.
De geselecteerde ambtenaren hebben binnen de gemeente de taak om aan deze nieuwe
ontwikkeling vorm te geven. In dit onderzoek zal de volgende onderzoeksvraag worden
beantwoord:
Hoe geven de koploopgemeenten vorm aan de verschillende rollen van de participatietrap,
kloppen de vooronderstellingen gemaakt door de Raad voor Openbaar Bestuur met de
werkelijke situatie in de koploopgemeenten, en zo niet; kan er een ander model worden
voorgesteld?
2. Theoretisch kader
2.1 Verhoudingen tussen de overheid en de burger
De veranderende verhoudingen tussen de overheid en de burger zijn niet alleen van deze tijd,
ook in de laatste decennia zijn de verhoudingen aanzienlijk veranderd. Lenos et al. (2006)
heeft drie generaties onderscheiden op het gebied van de verhoudingen tussen overheid en
actieve burgers. De eerste generatie kwam in Nederland op in de jaren ‘70. Burgers kregen
steeds meer formele en directe inspraak; zo is het referendum in deze periode in de wet
opgenomen. Burgers mochten meer reageren op het beleid dat door de overheid werd
gemaakt.
De tweede generatie kwam op in de jaren ’90. Burgers mochten door interactieve
beleidsvorming en coproductie steeds meer participeren in de beleids- en besluitvorming. Bij
100
deze tweede generatie is de burgerparticipatieladder ontworpen. Deze ladder bevat vijf
treden: informeren, raadplegen, adviseren, coproduceren en (mee)beslissen. Meebeslissen is
de hoogste trede waarbij burgers de meeste zeggenschap krijgen. Van de gemeente werd
verwacht dat zij de ladder steeds verder beklommen en dat zij steeds meer overlieten aan
burgers. Burgers kregen dus al in een vroege fase de gelegenheid om mee te denken in het
beleid. Een voorbeeld hiervan is dat de gemeente samen met de burgers een bezuinigingsplan
opstelt.
De derde generatie burgerparticipatie kwam op rond de eeuwwisseling. Van de Wijdeven
et al. (2013) geven aan dat burgers het heft in eigen hand nemen en ideeën zelf tot uitvoer
brengen. Deze vorm van participatie staak haaks op de voorgaande vormen van participatie,
omdat hier de burger haar ideeën niet via het beleid van de overheid tot uitvoer brengt, maar
het heft in eigen hand neemt. Zij hebben rechtstreeks invloed op het maatschappelijk
middenveld (WRR, 2012). Dit maakt dat in deze generatie niet de burgers aan moeten sluiten
bij de procedures van de overheid, maar de overheid moet aansluiten bij de initiatieven die
opkomen vanuit de samenleving. De derde generatie wordt daarom ook wel omschreven als
overheidsparticipatie in plaats van burgerparticipatie (ROB, 2012). Deze drie generaties
bestaan naast, zoals generaties in families ook naast elkaar kunnen bestaan (Van de Wijdeven
et al., 2013).
Deze drie generaties duiden dus op de drie rollen van burgers ten opzichte van de overheid.
De ontwikkeling van vermaatschappelijking is van een andere aard en is bezien vanuit het
perspectief van de overheid. Daar waar de overheid in de jaren ’80 taken overhevelde naar de
markt, wordt er nu steeds meer gekeken naar de burger voor oplossingen in het publieke
domein (Kuiper et al., 2012). Op deze manier is actief burgerschap niet alleen iets wat vanuit
de burger komt, maar wat ook gewenst is vanuit de overheid. Deze ontwikkeling loopt dus
gelijk op met de ontwikkeling van de derde generatie burgerparticipatie.
2.2 Actief burgerschap
Het begrip burgerschap wordt in veel verschillende contexten gebruikt. Zoals eerder vermeld
kan actief burgerschap worden bezien vanuit de trend van de vermaatschappelijking als een
gewenste vorm van burgerschap. Door burgers actief te maken kan de overheid namelijk haar
doelen bereiken. In dit onderzoek zal actief burgerschap echter op een andere manier worden
benaderd: het wordt bezien als een ontwikkeling vanuit onderop. Actief burgerschap duidt op
ontwikkeling waarbij burgers zelf het heft in eigen hand nemen zonder dat de overheid
daarom heeft gevraagd. De WRR (2012) geeft aan dat burgers steeds mondiger worden en een
steeds directere invloed willen hebben op het maatschappelijke middenveld zonder
tussenkomst van bestuurders.
Het is moeilijk een eenduidige definitie van het begrip burgerschap te formuleren. Het
begrip burgerschap kan met termen zoals ‘goed’, ‘volwaardig’ en ‘verantwoordelijk’ of
‘actief’ een andere betekenis met zich mee brengen (Van de Wijdeven, 2012). In dit
onderzoek zal de definitie van Van den Brink (2007) worden gehanteerd: ‘Burgerschap
verwijst naar het vermogen en de bereidheid om zich op één of meerdere gebieden van het
maatschappelijke leven in te zetten voor de publieke zaak’. Actief burgerschap wijst dan ook
op de inzet van burgers voor de publieke zaak op één of meerdere gebieden van het
maatschappelijke leven.
101
Actief burgerschap kent vele vormen. Bakker et al. (2012) geven aan dat het moeilijk is
hier zicht op te krijgen. Burgers kunnen individueel of in groepsverband een initiatief
opzetten en de initiatieven komen op alle terreinen voor. Zo zijn er burgers die zelf het
initiatief nemen bijvoorbeeld op het gebied van voedsel, energie, sociale cohesie, opleiding en
ontwikkeling (Brannan et al., 2006). Wijdeven et al. (2013) geven aan dat de vele vormen het
begrip ook karakteriseren. Ze komen van onderop op lokaal niveau, hebben daardoor een
plaatselijke invulling en zijn verbonden met het persoonlijke leven van burgers. Daarnaast
geven Denters et al. (2013) aan dat deze vormen ook vaak weer snel veranderen. De WRR
(2012) vergelijkt de ontwikkeling met een mierenhoop die één kant op te lijkt te bewegen. Als
men het echter van dichtbij bekijkt, gaat elke mier een andere richting op, maar stemt zijn
daden wel voortdurend af met de andere mieren. Bakker et al. (2012) geven aan dat er een
aantal kenmerken zijn die actief burgerschap karakteriseren. Ten eerste is het een collectieve
actie. Ondanks dat een persoon het idee bedenkt, is het meestal een groep die het idee verder
uitwerkt en uitvoert. Daarnaast is het idee zelforganiserend: de doelen en de uitvoering
worden bepaald door de burgers zelf. Ook is een burgerinitiatief in principe onafhankelijk van
publieke organisaties en functioneert het onafhankelijk. Vaak vindt het initiatief plaats in
wijkgemeenschappen en heeft daarom ook vaak betrekking op veiligheid, leefbaarheid,
sociale activiteiten, kunst en sport. Actief burgerschap kan in alle lagen van de bevolking
voorkomen, maar toch wijzen verschillende auteurs (Verba et al., 1995; Bovens & Wille,
2011; Denters et al., 2013) erop dat de hoogopgeleide burgers, die daarnaast ook man, blank
en van middelbare leeftijd zijn, oververtegenwoordigd zijn bij de actieve participatie van
burgers.
Het SCP (2009) geeft aan dat Nederland altijd al een rijke traditie in vrijwilligerswerk
heeft gehad. Zo werd er bijvoorbeeld na de tweede wereldoorlog in kerkverband veel
vrijwilligerswerk verricht, maar ook na de ontzuiling is het aantal leden dat als vrijwilliger is
aangesloten bij een maatschappelijke organisatie redelijk constant gebleven. Van de Wijdeven
et al. (2013) geven echter aan dat recent steeds meer burgers los van maatschappelijke
organisaties zelfstandig het initiatief nemen. Ook de WRR (2012) geeft aan dat burgers steeds
vaker zonder tussenkomst van bestuurders activiteiten uit willen voeren.
Dat burgers meer zelfstandig initiatieven ondernemen wordt door verschillende auteurs op
een andere manier onderbouwd. Bornstein & Davis (2010) geven aan dat een hoger
opleidingsniveau en toegenomen toegang tot informatie ertoe hebben geleid dat burgers meer
zelf ondernemen. Rosenthal (2002) geeft aan dat er sprake is van een vertrouwensbreuk
waardoor burgers minder vertrouwen hebben dat politici hun problemen op een snelle en
effectieve manier oplossen. Van de Walle et al. (2008) tonen echter aan dat er geen bewijs is
voor een structurele daling van het publieke vertrouwen in de overheid. De ROB geeft
daarnaast aan dat met de verzuiling en individualisering de kerk of gelijksoortige verenigen
als intermediair tussen de overheid en de burger zijn verdwenen. De overheid kan hierdoor de
burger moeilijker bereiken en het is moeilijker om beleidsdoelen op individueel niveau te
bereiken, wat tot minder tevredenheid leidt onder burgers. Maurice Specht (2012) spreekt van
een kritisch enthousiasme onder burgers. Het enthousiasme en de energie waarmee burgers
deelnemen in de nieuwe democratische vormen is aanstekelijk. Als men dit enthousiasme
kritischer gaat bekijken, is er een kritische houding bij burgers te vinden ten opzichte van
bepaalde situaties in de samenleving. Internationaal wordt het ‘CLEAR-model' veelvuldig
102
gebruikt om te begrijpen waarom burgers participeren in de samenleving (Lowndes et al.,
2006) en bestaat uit vijf factoren: ‘Can do’, Like to’, ‘Enabled to’, ‘Asked to’ en ‘Responded
to’.
2.3 Vermaatschappelijking
Vanaf de jaren ’80 lijken de verhoudingen tussen de overheid, de markt en de samenleving te
veranderen. Met de oliecrises van 1973 en 1982 liep de verzorgingsstaat tegen haar grenzen
aan; er moest bezuinigd worden. De hoop werd gevestigd op de markt, die op een efficiënte
en effectieve manier in publieke waarden kon verzorgen (ROB, 2012; Kuiper et al., 2012).
Publieke taken werden geprivatiseerd en de managementbenadering van het ‘new public
management’ werd ingevoerd in publieke organisaties (Skelcher, 2007; Barzelay, 2001). De
ROB (2012) beschrijft dat na de eeuwwisseling een eind lijkt te komen in het vertrouwen in
de markt. Zeker na de kredietcrisis en de financiële crisis komt het marktdenken in een
negatief daglicht te staan. De focus verschuift naar de maatschappij en de burgers. Steeds
vaker wordt gekeken naar wat burgers zelf kunnen en wordt gepoogd burgers meer
verantwoordelijkheid te laten nemen voor de eigen omgeving. Zo werden in het
regeerakkoord van het kabinet Rutte I strategieën omschreven die tot een compactere
overheid zouden moeten leiden. Deze overheid zou efficiënter, effectiever en kleiner moeten
zijn. Een van de strategieën om tot een kleinere overheid te komen, is door in de
beleidsuitvoering meer ruimte te geven aan de samenleving. Burgers zouden bijvoorbeeld
meer betrokken kunnen worden bij de beleidsuitvoering (ROB, 2012).
Diverse auteurs geven aan dat in beleid de nadruk steeds meer wordt gelegd op de eigen
verantwoordelijkheid van burgers met betrekking tot werk, gezondheid en financiën (Borgi &
Van Berkel, 2007; Fuller et al., 2008). De trend van vermaatschappelijking is geen nieuwe en
unieke trend. De trend is ook terug te vinden in onder andere Canada, de Verenigde Staten,
Zweden en het Verenigd Koninkrijk (Verhoeven & Tolkens, 2013). In de afgelopen twee
decennia lijkt er sprake te zijn van een heroriëntatie op de kerntaken van de overheid. Er
wordt steeds vaker van burgers verwacht dat zij door middel van vrijwilligerswerk taken
uitvoeren die voorheen tot overheidstaken behoorden, zoals het geven van steun en zorg aan
kwetsbare groepen in de samenleving. Ook Uitermark en Van Beek (2010) geven aan dat de
overheid actieve burgers steeds vaker als verlengstuk van beleid heeft gemaakt. Trommel
(2010) plaatst een kritische noot bij het beleid tot een compactere overheid en stelt dat door
het besef dat de overheid niet meer alles zelf op kan lossen het geloof in de maakbaarheid
logischerwijs af zou moeten nemen. Trommel stelt dat een tegengestelde ontwikkeling gaande
is in het beleid om burgers meer eigen verantwoordelijkheid te geven, en zo lijkt de
maakbaarheidsidealen juist te worden aangesterkt.
103
De ontwikkelingen van actief burgerschap en vermaatschappelijking zijn door Van der
Steen et al. (2013) in de onderstaande figuur overzichtelijke weergeven.
Overheid
Vermaatschappelijking
Actief
burgerschap
Samenleving
Privatisering
Sociaal
ondernemerschap
Markt
Figuur 2. Veranderende verhoudingen tussen overheid, markt en gemeentschap.
Bron: Van der Steen et al. (2013)
2.4 Twee beleidslijnen
Oude Vrielink & Verhoeven (2011) wijzen op de recente en groeiende belangstelling van
beleidsmakers voor het fenomeen actief burgerschap, een begrip dat dus zowel duidt op de
trend van vermaatschappelijking als op de bottom-up initiatieven. In het beleidsveld lijken
twee tegengestelde beleidslijnen te bestaan. De eerste lijn is een generieke beleidslijn waarin
de overheid vertrouwt op het initiatief en de creativiteit van burgers om actief te zijn in het
publieke domein. Ook de WRR (2012) wijst met haar publicatie ‘Vertrouwen in burgers’, de
ROB met ‘Loslaten in vertrouwen’ en de RMO met ‘Terugtreden is vooruitzien’ dat de
overheid meer moet loslaten en meer vertrouwen moet tonen in burgers. Ambtenaren moeten
een aanvullende houding hebben in plaats van een invullende houding, zoals Van de
Wijdeven en Geurtz (2009) beargumenteren. Deze generieke beleidslijn is ingevuld vanuit
een liberale positie ten aanzien van burgers. Vanuit dit perspectief worden burgers gezien als
individuen die naar eigen inzicht hun leven inrichten. De burger heeft relatief veel rechten en
weinig plichten. Mits een burger zich aan de wet- en regelgeving houdt, mag de burger veel
zelf ondernemen (Beiner, 1995; Van Gunsteren, 1998; Dekker & De Hart, 2002). Van de
Wijdeven et al. (2013) geven aan dat de stelling binnen deze beleidslijn is: ‘Laat burgers een
eigen verantwoordelijkheid nemen voor de eigen en de publieke zaak en zit daar als overheid
zo min mogelijk in de weg’ (p. 28). Ambtenaren moeten dus een stapje terug zetten, op hun
handen zitten en pas stappen ondernemen als de burger daarom vraagt. Door ruimte te geven
aan het initiatief zullen er meer initiatieven ontstaan, zo is de vooronderstelling.
Anderzijds is er een meer specifieke beleidslijn. Deze legt de nadruk op ‘meedoen’ en
‘eigen verantwoordelijkheid’ (Oude Vrielink & Verhoeven, 2011). De kracht van de burgers
wordt gebruikt om het beleid uit te voeren (Uitermark en Van Beek, 2010). Zo wordt de
kracht bijvoorbeeld gebruikt ter bevordering van de sociale cohesie en de leefbaarheid in de
wijk (Bakker et al., 2012). Dit beleid lijkt een meer communitaristische benadering van het
begrip burgerschap te hebben. In het communitaristische perspectief op burgerschap staat niet
104
het individu maar de gemeenschap centraal. Individueel burgerschap is dus als het ware een
onderdeel van een groter geheel. Door burgers actiever te maken zullen zij gezamenlijk meer
publieke problemen aanpakken en zal de gemeenschap als geheel daarvan profiteren. Van de
Wijdeven et al. (2013) geven aan dat de stelling binnen deze beleidslijn is: ‘Zorg dat burgers
onderling actief worden om de sociale gemeenschap te versterken en problemen daarmee aan
te pakken’ (p.28). Gemeenten lijken dus te moeten balanceren tussen de twee verschillende
uitgangspunten en in de juiste situatie de juiste rol te moeten kiezen.
2.5 De rollen van de overheid
De verhoudingen tussen de burgers en de overheid veranderen. De ROB (2012) heeft binnen
deze ontwikkeling vijf rollen geïdentificeerd die gemeenten aan kunnen nemen in de nieuwe
situatie. De vijf rollen zijn: reguleren, regisseren, stimuleren, faciliteren en loslaten (zie figuur
1). Deze rollen worden echter zeer beknopt toegelicht in het rapport van de ROB (2012).
In een regulerende rol bepaalt de overheid door wet- en regelgeving of een initiatief
toegestaan kan worden. De overheid kan ook processen regisseren; hierbij hebben andere
partijen ook een rol, maar de overheid behoudt de regie in het proces. De overheid kan
bijvoorbeeld een regisserende rol aannemen door verschillende partijen bij elkaar te brengen.
Het is in dit geval dus de overheid die andere partijen betrekt en de overheid neemt dus het
initiatief. De overheid kan ook een stimuleerde rol aannemen; hierbij bedenkt de overheid zelf
het beleid, maar laat de uitvoering aan andere partijen over. De overheid probeert andere
partijen over te halen om een taak op zich te nemen. Ook bij deze rol neemt de overheid dus
het initiatief. Wanneer de overheid een faciliterende rol heeft, is het initiatief gekomen vanuit
de samenleving en steunt de overheid het initiatief waar nodig. De overheid ziet er belang in
om het initiatief mogelijk te maken. De laatste stap op de participatietrap is loslaten. Dit is het
geval wanneer de overheid het initiatief vanuit de samenleving volledig loslaat zonder enige
vorm van bemoeienis. Over het thema loslaten is onlangs veel gepubliceerd. De overheid
moet ruimte geven aan de ‘vitaliteit’ (ROB, 2012) en ‘energie’ (Hajer, 2011) van de
samenleving.
De rollen van reguleren, regisseren en stimuleren zijn er dus opgericht om te zorgen dat
burgers binnen bepaalde kaders activiteiten ondernemen of om activiteiten uit te lokken.
Burgers worden dus uitgelokt om zelf meer te ondernemen in het publieke domein. Deze
manier van interactie met burgers is dus sturend en past binnen het communitaristische
standpunt, omdat burgers worden gezien als een onderdeel van de gemeenschap die
gezamenlijk tot de realisatie van publieke waarden moeten leiden. De rollen van faciliteren en
loslaten wijzen op een terugtredende interactie van de overheid. De overheid ondersteunt
alleen in de gevallen waarin het initiatief daarom vraagt. De overheid mengt zich zo min
mogelijk in het initiatief, het individu staat centraal. Deze rollen passen daarom binnen het
liberale standpunt.
De ROB (2012) heeft in de trap niet duidelijk gedefinieerd of de rollen verschillen per
initiatief. Als de gemeente de groenvoorziening overlaat aan een bepaalde wijk
(vermaatschappelijking) of burgers nemen vanuit eigen initiatief de verantwoordelijkheid
voor plantsoenen in de wijk (actief burgerschap), dan zal dit een andere rol voor de gemeente
met zich mee brengen. De gemeente kan in beide gevallen de groenvoorziening ‘loslaten’ en
105
zich niet (meer) mengen in de groenvoorziening. Gemeenten kunnen dus zelf bepalen vanuit
welke invalshoek zij een bepaalde rol invullen.
Van de Wijdeven et al. (2013) wijzen erop dat ambtenaren per situatie moeten kijken wat
een geschikte rol is. Ook andere auteurs wijzen op de contextafhankelijke rolbepaling van de
overheid (WRR, 2012, ROB, 2012, Oude Vrielink & Verhoeven, 2011). Uyterlinde et al.
(2007) stellen dat er met deze flexibele rolbepaling veel gevraagd wordt van de publieke
professional. Zo dienen zij enerzijds initiatieven te ‘empoweren’ en uit te lokken en
anderzijds moeten zij initiatieven op een gepaste manier faciliteren. Het is in de praktijk voor
ambtenaren vooral een zoektocht naar een passende rol (Van de Wijdeven, 2013, ROB, 2012;
van der Steen et al., 2013).
3. Methoden
3.1 Methoden
Voor dit onderzoek is gebruikgemaakt van een kwalitatieve onderzoeksmethode in de vorm
van interviews. Voor deze interviews is een topiclist (bijlage I) geformuleerd waarin de
verschillende rollen worden besproken die de overheid ten opzichte van initiatieven kan
aannemen. De respondent kreeg de ruimte om binnen de kaders van het gespreksonderwerp
andere facetten van het onderwerp toe te lichten. Om de positie van de gemeenten beter te
leren kennen in een onderzoek dat vooral exploratief van aard is, is het gebruik van interviews
geschikt (Field, 2009; Boeije, 2010; Silverman, 2006). In de interviews kon de context en de
geschiedenis van de gemeenten worden toegelicht, wat een beter inzicht geeft in de huidige
werkwijzen van de gemeenten.
3.2 Casusselectie
Deze interviews zijn gehouden in het kader van het project ‘De kennismakelaar: ruimte voor
initiatief’ van het Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties. Dit project heeft
als doel meer zicht te krijgen op de ontwikkelingen in het brede kader van ‘minder overheid,
meer burger’. Voor het project is gesproken met diverse organisaties die burgerinitiatieven
steunen (Nudge, Greenwish, Kracht in Nederland, Bouwen voor Sociaal, Stadslab Leiden) en
banken die bezig zijn met de ondersteuning van burgerinitiatieven in financiële zin (ABN
AMRO, Rabobank). Ook is er gesproken met 9 ambtenaren binnen ‘koploopgemeenten’. Het
team burgerschap binnen het Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties heeft
deze gemeenten geïdentificeerd. Deze zogenaamde ‘koploopgemeenten' zijn volgens het
ministerie met meest vooruitstrevend in de ontwikkeling van ‘minder overheid, meer burger’.
Het team burgerschap houdt zich bezig met de verhoudingen tussen de samenleving en de
overheid en het optimaliseren van de relatie daartussen. Het team burgerschap heeft deze
koplopers op verschillende manieren geïdentificeerd:
- Intensieve contacten met verschillende gemeenten die zich bezig houden met de
zogenoemde transitie ‘minder overheid, meer burger’;
- Twee maandelijkse leerkringen waarin vraagstukken rondom de transitie worden
besproken;
106
Verschillende projecten waarin, in samenwerking met de VNG, ‘best practices’
werden verzameld voor de vermelding in het tijdschrift ‘Tijdschrift over de
veranderende relatie tussen samenleving en overheid’.
- De kabinetsnota over de doe-democratie, waarin voorbeelden zijn verzameld van
gemeenten die op een vernieuwende wijze bezig zijn met de verhoudingen tussen
overheid en samenleving.
De koploopgemeenten zijn dus vastgesteld aan de hand van de ervaringen en vaststelling van
het team burgerschap dat zich bezig houdt met de begeleiding van gemeenten in de transitie.
-
3.3 Casus beschrijving
De volgende acht gemeenten zijn geïdentificeerd: Rotterdam, Amsterdam, Enschede, Peel en
Maas, Amersfoort, Berkelland, Zeist en Schijndel. De interviews met deze gemeenten dienen
als basis voor dit onderzoek. De andere interviews zullen gebruikt worden als
achtergrondinformatie. De geselecteerde gemeenten verschillende in grootte en context. Met
dit gegeven zal rekening worden gehouden in het onderzoek.
Binnen de geselecteerde gemeenten zijn ambtenaren geselecteerd (bijlage II) die de taak
hebben om de nieuwe verhoudingen tussen de overheid en de burgers binnen een gemeente
vorm te geven. Binnen de gemeente Rotterdam is gesproken met een beleidsadviseur binnen
de bestuursdienst van de gemeente. De bestuursdienst binnen de gemeente helpt de politieke
ambities te vertalen naar beleid voor de stad. Binnen de bestuursdienst worden dus
verschillende beleidsvraagstukken behandeld. Binnen de gemeente Amsterdam is gesproken
met een beleidsadviseur van de Dienst Maatschappelijke Ontwikkeling (DMO). Onder DMO
valt kunst & cultuur, onderwijs, jeugd, sport, burgerschap en diversiteit. De taak van de dienst
is in brede zin om te zorgen dat alle burgers participeren (www.amsterdam.nl). Binnen de
deelgemeente Amsterdam-Oost is gesproken met een participatiemakelaar. Deze
participatiemakelaar schakelt tussen initiatieven van burgers en de (deel)gemeente. De
participatiemakelaar werkt dus op verschillende terreinen en met alle initiatieven die zich
voordoen in de stad. Binnen de gemeente Enschede is gesproken met een beleidsadviseur
binnen de afdeling opleiding en participatie. Deze afdeling houdt zich bezig met zowel
onderwijs als met beleid om alle burgers te laten participeren in de samenleving. De
gesproken ambtenaar is eerder actief geweest als initiatievenmakelaar in Enschede, die net
zoals de participatiemakelaar in Amsterdam-Oost een brug vormt tussen de gemeente en de
initiatieven. Binnen de gemeente Peel en Maas is gesproken met een strateeg op het gebied
van participatie. Deze strategisch adviseur geeft advies op het gebeid van participatie aan het
college van B&W. Binnen de gemeente Amersfoort is gesproken met een projectleider
wijkgericht werken. Deze beleidsadviseur houdt zich bezig de participatie van burgers in
specifieke wijken. Er wordt zowel gekeken naar welke taken overgedragen kunnen worden
aan de wijken als welke initiatieven er in de wijk opkomen. Binnen de gemeente Berkelland is
gesproken met een algemeen directeur die zich vooral bezig houdt met de transities binnen de
gemeente. De gemeente Berkelland moest in 2009 drastisch bezuinigen en de gemeente heeft
toen veranderingen doorgevoerd waarbij burgerbetrokkenheid expliciet naar voren komt. De
transitie in Berkelland van minder overheid naar meer burgers is nog steeds gaande. Binnen
de gemeente Zeist is gesproken met de manager van de afdeling strategie en bestuur. Deze
107
manager geeft advies aan het college van B&W. Ten slotte is binnen de gemeente Schijndel
gesproken met de gemeentesecretaris die in brede zin kijkt naar de transitie in de gemeente.
De geïnterviewde ambtenaren houden zich dus bezig met een tal van activiteiten binnen de
gemeenten. De ambtenaren zijn niet expliciet verbonden aan één beleidsgebied waardoor zij
een breed beeld hebben van de situatie in de gemeente. Het onderzoek is vooral exploratief
van aard en zal daardoor het brede veld van ‘minder overheid, meer burger’ verkennen en
minder ingaan op specifieke beleidsterreinen. De ROB (2012) heeft één
overheidsparticipatietrap ontwikkeld zonder in te gaan op specifieke beleidsterreinen en de
consequenties daarvan op de verschillende rollen.
3.4 Data analyse
Tijdens de interviews zijn schriftelijke aantekeningen gemaakt die direct na de interviews zijn
uitgewerkt tot een verslag. De data is in drie stappen geanalyseerd.
Eerst zijn de kenmerken van de verschillende rollen beschreven (tabel 1) aan de hand van
de definities van de ROB (2012). Aan de hand van deze kenmerken konden de vijf rollen op
een systematische manier worden onderzocht. De ambtenaren lichtten in de interviews veelal
aan de hand van voorbeelden toe waarom zij voor een bepaalde rol hebben gekozen. Deze
voorbeelden belichten dan ook duidelijk de context en de overwegingen van de gekozen rol.
In de verslagen zijn de verschillende rollen in verschillende kleuren gemarkeerd. In sommige
gevallen liepen de rollen door elkaar heen en werden in verschillende volgorden meerdere
rollen in één situatie gebruikt. In deze gevallen is binnen één situatie/voorbeeld per zin
bekeken welke rol er aangenomen werd door de gemeente.
Tabel 1. De kenmerken van de rollen van de participatietrap
Rollen
Reguleren
Regisseren
Stimuleren
Faciliteren
Loslaten
Kenmerken
- De overheid legt andere partijen kaders op, andere parijen zijn genoodzaakt zich
te gedragen binnen deze kaders
- De overheid stuurt andere partijen door andere partijen te begeleiden in het proces
- De overheid laat de uitkomst van het proces open
- De overheid hecht er belang aan om de regie te behouden
- De overheid heeft een wens dat bepaald beleid/ bepaalde interventie van de grond
komt
- De overheid laat de uitvoer aan andere partijen over
- Het initiatief ligt bij andere partijen, maar de overheid steunt/helpt waar nodig
- De overheid ziet belang in de realisatie van een initiatief
- De gemeente is op de hoogte van het initiatief
- De overheid mengt zich niet (meer) in het initiatief
In de tweede fase zijn er subthema’s gekoppeld aan de verschillende rollen om zo de
overwegingen en context van een situatie goed te begrijpen. Zo kwamen de termen
‘besparingen’, ‘op handen zitten’, ‘risico’s’ en ‘politiek’ vaak naar voren. Er is met deze
termen geprobeerd zo dicht mogelijk bij de woorden van de respondenten te blijven. Er
kwamen ruim 65 termen naar voren die verbonden zijn aan de verschillende rollen.
108
In de derde fase zijn de verschillende termen onderverdeeld in grotere categorieën. Zo
bleek bij elke rol er een ‘motivatie’, een ‘houding’ en ‘middelen’ naar voren te komen:
- ‘Motivatie’ duidt op het doel van de houding. Een besparing kan bijvoorbeeld een
motivatie zijn.
- ‘Houding’ duidt op de relaties die de ambtenaar heeft ten opzichte van de burger.
Als een ambtenaar aangeeft ‘op zijn/haar handen te zitten’ dan kan dat een houding
zijn.
- ‘Middelen’ duiden op de manier waarop de gemeente een initiatief stuurt of
ondersteunt. Dit is dus niet het geval bij de rol van loslaten. Een middel kan
bijvoorbeeld geld zijn.
De verschillende termen zijn in deze categorieën onderverdeeld om zo beter onderscheid te
kunnen maken tussen het doel en het middel en de houding die daarbij aansluit. Sommige
termen zijn weer verder onderverdeeld in kleinere categorieën. Zo is binnen de regulerende
rol in de categorie ‘motivatie’ het subthema ‘risico’s’ weer verder ingedeeld in politieke en
legale risico’s. Tijdens de analyse zijn de data dus in steeds kleinere categorieën ingedeeld om
de invulling van de verschillende rollen en de relaties tussen de verschillende thema’s beter te
kunnen begrijpen.
4. Resultaten
4.1 De rollen
Reguleren
De gemeenten gaven aan dat een basiscriterium voor het toestaan van een initiatief is dat het
binnen de legale en beleidskaders past. Deze kaders bepalen dat initiatieven op bepaalde
terreinen en domeinen gereguleerd worden. Bij alle gesproken gemeenten kwamen de thema’s
schoon, veilig en de openbare orde naar voren als thema’s die in elk geval niet losgelaten
kunnen worden. Op het gebied van deze thema’s kunnen geen mislukkingen toegestaan
worden. Vooral binnen een grote stad zijn er veel verschillende belangen en heeft een
initiatief al snel invloed op andere actoren.
Daarnaast wijzen verschillende gemeenten op de politieke overwegingen om een initiatief
al dan niet toe te staan. Democratische principes zijn zeer belangrijk en alle belangen moeten
worden afgewogen. Ook moet er goed naar de bestemmingsplannen worden gekeken. Niet
elke voetbalclub kan bijvoorbeeld een horecagelegenheid starten, omdat dit de balans in de
gemeente zou verstoren. De gemeente moet dus rekening houden met de belangen van alle
actoren binnen de gemeente en moet ervoor zorgen dat publieke waarden gewaarborgd
blijven. Het verstoren van deze waarden is dus een basisvoorwaarde om tot het reguleren van
een initiatief over te gaan.
De gemeenten wijzen op het feit dat de gemeenteraad binnen de gemeente steeds meer
probeert over te laten aan burgers, maar dat dit politiek soms zeer lastig is doordat sommige
onderwerpen moeilijk losgelaten kunnen worden. Een interessant voorbeeld waar
verschillende gemeenten op wijzen is het opzetten van een kinderopvang. Wanneer is er
sprake van een informele kinderopvang en wanneer moet de gemeente deze reguleren? Is er
109
een bepaald aantal kinderen dat een ‘oppasadres’ tot een ‘kinderopvang’ maakt?
Verschillende gemeenten geven aan dat hier geen concrete richtlijnen voor zijn en dat het
voor een gemeente moeilijk te bepalen is wanneer er gereguleerd moet worden. Daarnaast kan
de kinderopvang buiten het gezichtsveld van de overheid plaatsvinden waardoor de overheid
geen zicht heeft op het bestaan van het initiatief. De kinderopvang blijkt politiek een gevoelig
thema en zorgt er dus voor dat gemeenten strikter reguleren rondom deze initiatieven.
In sommige gevallen wil een gemeente een initiatief loslaten, maar zijn zij door
procedurele en soms bureaucratische regels genoodzaakt om te reguleren. Een illustratief
voorbeeld is een bankje dat was geplaatst door burgers in een openbaar parkje in de woonwijk
IJburg in Amsterdam. De gemeente gaf aan dat er in principe zonder toestemming geen
objecten mogen worden geplaatst in de openbare ruimte, maar had besloten om dit
kleinschalige initiatief door de vingers te zien. Een buurtbewoner was het niet eens met de
aanwezigheid van het bankje en besloot een formele klacht in te dienen, waardoor de
gemeente genoodzaakt was een formele procedure te starten. In sommige gevallen wil de
gemeente dus wel loslaten, maar bepalen procedures en de bureaucratie dat de gemeente een
initiatief moet reguleren. Ook de gemeente Zeist geeft aan last te hebben van de formele
regelgeving bij het loslaten van initiatieven. Ze geven aan dat sommige gemeentelijke wetten
wel 150 jaar oud zijn en niet altijd antwoord geven op hedendaagse problemen.
De context en de aard van het initiatief bepalen dus of de gemeente aan de hand van
wetten, regels, beleid en procedures een initiatief zal reguleren. De regulerende rol lijkt dus
een basisrol voor andere rollen; als een initiatief gereguleerd moet worden zal niet overgegaan
worden tot regisseren, stimuleren, faciliteren of loslaten.
Regisseren
De rol van regisseren betekent dat ook andere partijen een rol hebben, maar dat de gemeente
de regie blijft behouden. De gemeente formuleert geen einddoelen of gewenst beleid, maar
behoudt wel de leiding over een proces en/of taak. Deze rol kwam bij de interviews beperkt
naar voren. Enkele gemeenten kozen voor deze rol omdat zij in de politiek gekozen hadden
om een ‘stapje terug te zetten’. De gemeenten wilden niet meer de leidinggevende partij zijn
in samenwerkingsverbanden, maar wilden ervoor zorgen dat andere partijen meer met elkaar
zouden samenwerken. Enerzijds doordat dit besparingen met zich mee zou brengen en
anderzijds doordat de problemen en vraagstukken in de gemeenten zeer complex zijn,
waardoor de gemeente individueel niet tot passende oplossingen zou kunnen komen.
Verschillende gemeenten hebben een regisserende rol gebruikt om een project op te zetten
om verschillende partijen bij elkaar te brengen. Zo probeert de gemeente Rotterdam partijen
bij elkaar te brengen die samen leiden tot een betere stad, bijvoorbeeld met het programma
duurzaam. Voor dit programma brengt de gemeente partijen zoals banken en
energieleveranciers aan tafel rondom het thema duurzame energie. De gemeente
vertegenwoordigt de belangen van de stad en zet in de gesprekken in op de kosten,
betrouwbaarheid en duurzaamheid van energie. De gemeente leidt het proces en heeft dus ook
de regie over de vorm van de dialoog, maar heeft niet de regie over de uitkomsten van het
beleid. Ook de gemeente Amersfoort heeft verschillende partijen rondom energie bij elkaar
gebracht om hen gezamenlijk tot een samenwerkingsverband te laten komen. Voor de
110
gemeente is het van belang om verschillende partijen bij elkaar te brengen die gezamenlijk tot
oplossingen komen die gegrond zijn in de samenleving.
De gemeenten behouden dus de regie in de regisserende rol. Andere partijen krijgen een
rol in de uitkomsten en resultaten, maar de gemeenten bepalen de vorm van het proces. In
veel gevallen besluit de gemeente een stapje terug te zetten, maar wil de regie niet volledig
verliezen en kan door deze rol nog sturend zijn in een samenwerkingsverband.
Stimuleren
Als de gemeente een stimulerende rol aanneemt, heeft de gemeente bepaalde doelstellingen,
maar wil de realisatie van deze doelstellingen aan een andere partij overlaten. Daar waar het
accent bij regisseren vaak ligt op het proces, ligt bij stimulering de focus ook op de uitvoering
van het beleid of proces. De stimulerende rol heeft twee kanten; enerzijds proberen de
gemeenten initiatieven uit te lokken in de samenleving en anderzijds proberen verschillende
gemeenten burgers te stimuleren taken over te nemen van de gemeente. De gemeenten
stimuleren actief burgerschap op terreinen die zij zelf niet (meer) kunnen voltooien.
Het uitlokken van initiatieven in de samenleving kan bijvoorbeeld door het uitschrijven
van prijzen of door een investeringsfonds op te zetten waar burgers die een duurzaam
initiatief op willen zetten een lening met een relatief lage en vaste rente kunnen afsluiten.
Verschillende gemeenten stimuleren burgers taken van de overheid over te nemen door
bijvoorbeeld te kijken of burgers het onderhoud van de stad over kunnen nemen en dan met
name de groenvoorziening. De gemeente kijkt hoeveel de buurt zelf kan doen en stelt hier een
bedrag voor beschikbaar. Hierbij wordt uitgegaan van de kracht in de samenleving en dat er in
elke wijk bijvoorbeeld een architect of een aannemer beschikbaar is die een rol zou kunnen
spelen in het project. In andere gemeenten bekijkt men of de burgers (voormalige) publieke
taken kunnen overnemen, zoals het zwembad en de bibliotheek, om zo te stimuleren dat
burgers verantwoording nemen in het publieke domein.
In andere gevallen is enkel het terugtrekken van de overheid uit publieke voorzieningen
voor burgers een reden om zich in te zetten voor de publieke zaak. In deze gemeenten wordt
aangegeven dat het sluiten van een publieke voorziening, zoals een buurthuis, kan leiden tot
opstand onder burgers die vervolgens zelf het heft in handen nemen en het buurthuis
overnemen van de gemeente. Doordat de gemeente zich dus terugtrekt kunnen burgers
gestimuleerd worden een taak over te nemen.
De stimulerende rol wordt vormgegeven vanuit het belang van de overheid; de overheid
stimuleert de opkomst van initiatieven of stimuleert de overname van publieke taken/
verantwoordelijkheden. Deze rol is dus sturend ten opzichte van burgers.
Faciliteren
De ROB geeft aan dat gemeenten vooral kiezen voor een faciliterende rol als het initiatief van
elders komt, maar de gemeente er belang in ziet om het initiatief mogelijk te maken. De
meeste gemeenten geven aan dat wanneer er een initiatief in de samenleving opkomt
ambtenaren zolang mogelijk op hun handen moeten blijven zitten. De gemeente moet wachten
totdat het initiatief zelf om hulp vraagt. Gemeenten moet zich afwachtend opstellen.
Verschillende gemeenten geven aan dat de gemeente geen initiatieven in leven kan en dient te
111
houden. De gemeente kan een initiatief helpen en een initiatief aanvullen, maar dient het niet
over te nemen.
In sommige gemeenten werd er vanuit een politieke invalshoek gekozen om een initiatief
te ondersteunen. Steeds meer gemeenten proberen ambtenaren te stimuleren om niet de
ambtenaar te zijn die zegt ‘zoek het maar uit’, maar die zegt ‘we zoeken het samen uit’. De
gemeenten hopen zo beter aan te sluiten bij de samenleving en responsief te kunnen zijn aan
de samenleving.
In andere gemeenten stimuleert men initiatieven om zo de stad verder te helpen. Een
gemeente kan bijvoorbeeld een netwerk ter beschikking stellen als daarmee een initiatief
waarde kan leveren aan de samenleving. Dit kan zowel economische als sociale waarde zijn.
Zo kan een initiatief goed voor het imago van de stad zijn, maar ook de leefbaarheid in een
wijk vergroten.
Ook faciliteren gemeenten initiatieven door wel of juist geen vergunningen af te geven.
Een voorbeeld hiervan is dat de gemeente Amersfoort een groep burgers gefaciliteerd heeft
door geen vergunning te geven. In Amersfoort was er een braakliggend terrein en de eigenaar
van het stuk terrein wilde pas weer wat met dit stuk grond gaan doen als er een nieuw project
zou starten. De buurtbewoners wilden dit stuk grond graag gebruiken om een buurttuin te
bouwen. Deze buurttuin paste niet in het bestemmingsplan van de gemeente en de gemeente
heeft besloten om geen vergunning af te geven voor een buurttuin, maar het initiatief wel toe
te staan. De gemeente gaf aan dat vergunningen ook handhaving met zich mee brengen en
geen vergunning geven is dan soms makkelijker. Vervolgens heeft de gemeente een brief
gestuurd aan alle inwoners van de wijk waarin zij aangaven dat zij het initiatief toestaan, maar
dat als de projectontwikkelaar iets met de grond wil doen, de bewoners dit direct met deze
projectontwikkelaar af moeten stemmen. De gemeente heeft dus als intermediaire partij
opgetreden en staat toe dat er activiteiten plaatsvinden die buiten het bestemmingsplan vallen.
De gemeente krijgt hier een buurttuin voor terug en wellicht ook een verhoogde tevredenheid
van de burgers.
Bij de faciliterende rol proberen de ambtenaren binnen de gemeente zoveel mogelijk op
hun handen te zitten. Alleen als het een initiatief zelf niet lukt dan zal de gemeente helpen. De
gemeente moet er belang bij hebben om een initiatief te ondersteunen.
Loslaten
Loslaten blijkt binnen veel gemeenten moeilijk te zijn. Loslaten impliceert dat de gemeenten
eerst bepaalde taken wel vast hadden. Toch kan de rol van loslaten ook inhouden dat een
gemeente een initiatief dat vanuit de gemeenschap komt loslaat. De verschillende gemeenten
geven op een andere manier vorm aan de rol van loslaten; sommige gemeenten leggen de
nadruk op het loslaten van de regie en invloed, andere gemeenten maken alle banden los met
een initiatief.
Alle gemeenten benadrukten dat niet alle taken losgelaten kunnen worden. Sommige taken
moeten namelijk ook gereguleerd worden. Zoals eerder aangegeven, kunnen taken met
betrekking tot de waarden schoon, veilig en orde niet losgelaten worden. Initiatieven moeten
binnen het legale kader passen. Verschillende gemeenten experimenten steeds vaker met het
loslaten van taken in de groenvoorziening van wijken. Deze taak brengt weinig risico en
overlast voor andere omwoners met zich mee.
112
Daarnaast moeten initiatieven binnen het politieke kader passen. Loslaten kan namelijk
risico’s met zich meebrengen; als er iets misgaat, kan de gemeente en meer specifiek de
politiek daarop aangesproken worden. Verschillende gemeenten kijken op een steeds
rationelere manier naar risico’s: kan de gemeente alle risico’s wegnemen of is het soms
gewoon botte pech? Is de gemeente wel de hoeder van alle risico’s? Het vraagt wel om
politieke rugdekking als ambtenaren meer risico’s nemen. Illustratief hiervoor is het
voorbeeld in de gemeente Amersfoort van een door burgers zelfgemaakt klimrek in een
bosachtig gebied. Als het klimrek gekeurd zou moeten worden dan zou het waarschijnlijk
afgekeurd worden. De burgermeester van Amersfoort is vervolgens met een aantal
ambtenaren bij het klimrek gaan kijken en gaf aan dat de gemeente met dit soort initiatieven
met verstand om moet gaan. Als iemand uit het zelfgemaakte klimrek valt dan is de gemeente
verantwoordelijk. Maar een stuk verder staat een boom, daar klimmen de kinderen ook in. Als
ze daaruit vallen is het pech, maar als ze uit het klimrek vallen is het de schuld van de
gemeente. De burgermeester gaf aan dat de kans dat er daadwerkelijk iets gebeurt zeer klein
is. De gemeente besloot daarom het initiatief los te laten en de verantwoordelijkheid aan de
burgers te geven.
Daarnaast moet een gemeente geen belang hebben in het initiatief en/of vertrouwen dat het
initiatief ook tot stand komt zonder inmenging van de gemeente. Als een gemeente een
economisch of politiek belang ziet in het initiatief, zal een gemeente eerder besluiten om te
interacteren met het initiatief. Toch heeft de gemeente niet altijd de keuze om iets al dan niet
los te laten. Verschillende gemeenten geven aan soms ‘snel te moeten lopen’ om bij een
initiatief te zijn. In sommige gevallen waren de gemeenten trekker van het initiatief en daarna
waren zij slechts één van de partijen omdat het ook sterk begon te leven bij andere partijen.
Deels was dit een gewenst resultaat, deels was dit een vreemde positie omdat de gemeenten
geen regie meer over het initiatief hadden.
Gemeenten laten initiatieven dus alleen los wanneer zij binnen de politieke en legale
kaders vallen en wanneer de overheid geen belang ziet om verbonden te blijven met het
initiatief.
4.2 De vooronderstellingen
In de inleiding zijn twee vooronderstellingen die horen bij de participatietrap van de overheid.
Deze vooronderstellingen zijn:
1. De overheid kiest één rol in een bepaalde situatie, wat impliceert dat de rollen los
staan van elkaar;
2. De treden sluiten op elkaar aan, wat impliceert dat er een orde bestaat binnen de
treden.
Uit de analyse blijkt dat gemeenten de vijf rollen combineren. Gemeenten kunnen in de
faciliterende rol partijen stimuleren om door te gaan of juist een initiatief faciliteren door los
te laten. De rollen bleken moeilijk te onderscheiden en de intentie van een bepaalde rol kon
ook een andere rol tot gevolg hebben. De rollen zijn staan hierdoor niet los van elkaar en de
gemeenten kunnen verschillende rollen met elkaar combineren. Ook kunnen gemeenten
binnen één situatie meerdere rollen gebruiken. Zo kunnen zij in het begin een initiatief
113
reguleren en als het initiatief dan binnen de politieke en legale kaders valt een initiatief
faciliteren. Daarnaast blijkt uit de analyse van de interviews dat de verschillende rollen uit de
participatietrap niet unidimensionaal zijn. ‘Eén rol’ blijkt niet te bestaan in de werkelijkheid
omdat gemeenten in verschillende mate kunnen kiezen voor een bepaalde rol. Gemeenten
kunnen bijvoorbeeld in meer of mindere mate een initiatief stimuleren of faciliteren. Binnen
de onderscheiden rollen zijn er dus nog verschillende gradaties waarin een gemeente voor een
bepaalde rol kan kiezen. Met deze bevindingen is de eerste vooronderstelling weerlegd.
Uit de analyse blijkt dat ook de tweede veronderstelling weerlegd is. De rollen sluiten niet
zozeer op elkaar aan, maar lijken vanuit een andere invalshoek gekozen. Zo is de regulerende
rol een basisrol voor de andere rollen. De regulerende en stimulerende rollen zijn sturend ten
opzichte van de burgers en hebben vooral een invullende houding ten opzichte van de taken
en verantwoordelijkheden van burgers. De regisserende rol brengt namelijk mensen bij elkaar
en vanuit de stimulerende rol probeert de gemeente initiatieven uit te lokken of burgers te
stimuleren meer taken en verantwoordelijkheden op zich te nemen. De faciliterende rol en de
rol van loslaten geven meer ruimte aan het initiatief. Bij de faciliterende rol komt het initiatief
vanuit de burgers en de gemeente bepaalt of zij het initiatief zal ondersteunen. Als de
gemeente een initiatief loslaat, kan dit zowel een taak/verantwoordelijkheid zijn die de
gemeente ooit vasthad, zoals de groenvoorziening, als een initiatief dat vanuit de samenleving
opkomt waarbij de gemeente besluit zich niet te mengen in het initiatief. De treden lijken dus
niet op elkaar aan te sluiten, maar het initiatief komt vanuit een andere hoek. Dit zorgt voor
een andere benadering van burgerschap. Beide vooronderstellingen bij de metafoor van de
overheidstrap zijn aan de hand van dit onderzoek dus weerlegd.
4.3. Een voorstel voor een nieuw model
De assumpties die behoren tot de participatietrap van de overheid blijken uit dit onderzoek
niet houdbaar. Om deze reden stel ik een nieuw model voor dat beter inzicht geeft in de
participatierollen van de gemeenten:
Liberale
benadering
Loslaten
Passief
Faciliteren
Reguleren
Regisseren
Actief
Stimuleren
Communitaristische
benadering
Figuur 3. Participatierollen voor gemeenten
:‘zorgen voor’
114
Uit de analyse blijken de rollen niet unidimensionaal te zijn; een gemeente kan in meer of
mindere mate voor een bepaalde rol kiezen, waardoor een rol meer richting een andere rol kan
neigen. Een matrix met verschillende assen is daarom geschikter om de rollen van de
gemeente weer te geven.
In de gesprekken met de gemeenten werd duidelijk dat gemeenten niet alle publieke taken
los kunnen laten en niet alle initiatieven vanuit de gemeenschap kunnen tolereren. De
initiatieven en de losgelaten taken moeten binnen de legale en politieke kaders van de
gemeente passen. Om deze reden vormt de regulerende rol een basisvoorwaarde om tot de
andere rollen te komen. De regulerende rol is om deze reden in het midden van de matrix
geplaatst.
De verschillende rollen binnen de gemeenten komen voort uit twee verschillende
standpunten. De rollen van ‘loslaten’ en ‘faciliteren’ passen binnen de liberale benadering van
burgerschap. Hierbij geeft de gemeente meer ruimte aan de initiatieven en interacteert niet of
slechts in beperkte mate met een initiatief. Een gemeente kiest voor een actieve rol wanneer
zij economische en/of politieke belangen ziet in het vanuit de gemeenschap opgekomen
initiatief en de burgers hulp nodig hebben bij het uitvoeren van het initiatief. Een gemeente
kiest binnen het liberale standpunt voor het loslaten van een initiatief wanneer het initiatief
binnen de legale en politieke kaders past. Daarnaast kiest de gemeente voor deze rol wanneer
de gemeente vertrouwt dat het initiatief zonder de hulp van de overheid ook tot stand zal
komen of wanneer er geen economische en/of politieke belangen zijn. De overheid neemt in
dit geval een passieve rol aan.
De rollen ‘regisseren’ en ‘stimuleren’ passen binnen de communitaristische benadering van
burgerschap. De gemeente probeert de burgers (onderling) te activeren en te motiveren om
meer te ondernemen en zich meer te mengen in het publieke domein. Deze rollen zijn dus topdown geïnitieerd. De gemeente kiest voor een regisserende rol wanneer zij partijen bij elkaar
poogt te brengen die gezamenlijk tot een resultaat kunnen komen. De regisserende rol is
relatief passief omdat de gemeente slechts het proces begeleidt, maar het proces en de
uitkomst niet stuurt. De gemeente kiest voor een stimulerende rol wanneer zij wenst dat
doelen gerealiseerd worden, maar de realisatie aan andere parijen overlaat. De gemeente
probeert op verschillende manieren andere partijen te stimuleren om taken over te nemen van
de gemeente en publieke doelen te realiseren.
5. Conclusie en discussie
De ROB is een belangrijk adviesorgaan voor regering en parlement. De door de ROB
onderscheiden overheidsparticipatietrap wordt door verschillende overheden gebruikt (VNG,
2013; Kabinetsnota Doe-Democratie, 2013). Zo waren in de interviews alle respondenten op
de hoogte van deze trap. Uit deze analyse blijkt de metafoor van de trap niet te kloppen. De
vooronderstellingen waarop de overheidsparticipatietrap is gebaseerd blijken niet te kloppen,
waardoor de metafoor van een trap niet overeen lijkt te komt met de werkelijke invulling van
de rollen.
De eerste vooronderstelling dat de overheid kiest voor één trede per situatie en dat de
treden van de trap los staan van elkaar blijkt niet te kloppen. Gemeenten combineren
verschillende rollen in één situatie: zo kan een gemeente door te faciliteren tegelijkertijd ook
115
initiatieven stimuleren in een bepaalde richting. Of als de gemeente taken loslaat, kunnen
burgers worden gestimuleerd om actie te ondernemen. De treden lopen in de werkelijkheid
dus door elkaar heen en de rollen zijn in de werkelijkheid minder strikt te onderscheiden. De
rollen blijken niet unidimensionaal te zijn. Zo kan de faciliterende rol bijvoorbeeld op vele
manieren worden ingevuld, waarbij men in de ene situatie actiever handelt dan in de andere
situatie en waarbij men in de ene situatie meer sturend is dan in de andere situatie. Een matrix
met verschillende assen past daarom beter bij de omschrijving van de rollen.
Ten tweede vooronderstelt de trap dat er een logische volgorde bestaat in de treden. De
vooronderstelling dat hoe minder de overheid de trap beklimt, hoe meer ruimte wordt gelaten
aan de samenleving blijkt uit de analyse te kloppen. De treden loslaten en faciliteren laten de
meeste ruimte aan de samenleving. Daarop volgen de rollen stimuleren en regisseren, die
meer sturend zijn in de activiteiten van burgers. Bij de laatste regulerende rol kan de overheid
een initiatief volledig beperken. Toch lijkt de volgorde van de trap niet te kloppen: de rollen
sluiten niet op elkaar aan, maar worden gekozen vanuit een andere invalshoek. Aan de ene
kant probeert de overheid in de trend van de vermaatschappelijking meer taken en
verantwoordelijkheden aan de samenleving over te laten en bijvoorbeeld te stimuleren en of
regisseren dat bepaalde initiatieven opkomen. Aan de ander kant probeert de overheid
initiatieven die opkomen vanuit de samenleving meer eigen verantwoordelijkheid te geven en
de initiatieven alleen te faciliteren als daarom wordt gevraagd. Door deze verschillende
invalshoeken en beleidslijnen heeft de overheids-participatietrap, onderscheiden door de ROB
(2012), geen logische volgorde; de ene trede volgt niet uit de andere trede maar komen voort
vanuit een andere benadering.
Beide vooronderstellingen die verbonden zijn aan de metafoor van de overheidsparticipatietrap blijken dus niet te kloppen. In dit onderzoek is een nieuw model in de vorm
van een matrix voorgesteld. Dit model kan gemeenten meer inzicht geven in de verschillende
toepassingen van de rollen. Binnen het beleid rondom participatie bestaan twee verschillende
beleidslijnen, namelijk de liberale en de communitaristische beleidslijn. Zoals eerder gesteld
zorgen deze twee beleidslijnen volgens Vrielink & Verhoeven (2011) voor een paradox waar
gemeenten mee moeten werken. Het voorgestelde model geeft meer inzicht in de rollen die
verbonden zijn aan de verschillende beleidslijnen. Per beleidslijn kan men andere rollen
toepassen. Dit onderzoek heeft meer duidelijkheid gebracht in de verschillende discussies van
actief burgerschap en vermaatschappelijking die vaak door elkaar heen lijken te lopen.
Beide vooronderstellingen die verbonden zijn aan de overheidsparticipatietrap zijn met dit
onderzoek weerlegd. Daarnaast is er een voorstel gedaan voor een nieuw model dat inzicht
geeft in de keuze voor een bepaalde rol. Om de resultaten en het model te kunnen
bevestigen/weerleggen moet er meer onderzoek worden verricht naar de praktische invulling
van de verschillende rollen van de gemeente. Voor dit onderzoek zijn 9 ambtenaren
geïnterviewd. Meer gemeenten zouden moeten worden geïnterviewd om de rollen beter te
kunnen onderbouwen en de resultaten uit dit onderzoek te kunnen weerleggen/ bevestigen.
Daarnaast kan vervolgonderzoek zich richten op de twee beleidslijnen binnen de gemeenten,
waarbij onderzocht moet worden in hoeverre beide beleidslijnen binnen één gemeente
aanwezig zijn. In dit onderzoek zijn vijf rollen onderzocht. Om preciezere resultaten te
kunnen krijgen zou onderzoek zich moeten focussen op de individuele rollen.
116
6. Reflectie
In de gesprekken met de ambtenaren liepen de verschillende rollen sterk door elkaar heen. Het
afstaan van taken aan de samenleving is geïnitieerd vanuit de overheid, terwijl de
maatschappelijke initiatieven vanuit burgers geïnitieerd worden. Gemeenten spraken
tegelijkertijd over het afstaan van taken aan de samenleving en het loslaten van initiatieven,
wat het in sommigen gevallen moeilijk maakte om onderscheid te kunnen maken tussen de
rollen.
Daarnaast was het in het onderzoek moeilijk om rollen van de overheidsparticipatietrap te
onderscheiden die door de ROB (2012) zeer beknopt zijn omschreven. De ROB (2012) heeft
de rollen gedefinieerd maar niet toegelicht, waardoor de precieze opvatting van de rollen
onduidelijk was. In dit onderzoek is dit opgelost door op basis van de definitiecriteria te
herleiden waaraan een bepaalde rol ten minste moet voldoen.
Het relatief kleine aantal respondenten zorgde ervoor dat het in sommige gevallen lastig
was de invulling van de rollen te onderscheiden. Zo waren er weinig gemeenten die de
regisserende rol toepasten, wat het moeilijk maakte deze rol te omschrijven. Er is dus meer
onderzoek nodig om de toepassing van de rollen te bevestigen/weerleggen.
Ook kwam het verschil tussen grote en kleine gemeenten in de interviews sterk naar voren.
In de kleine gemeenten zijn de lijnen van de ambtenaren naar de burgers korter. Ook gaf de
respondent in Berkelland aan dat de cultuur van het dorp bepalend was voor de relatie tussen
de gemeente en de burgers. De gemeente is van oudsher een Noaber-gemeenschap. In deze
gemeenschappen is het een plicht om de andere Noabers bij te staan waar nodig. Deze
gemeenschap is van oudsher dus zeer hecht en onderneemt zelf veel activiteiten. Er wordt
relatief weinig naar de gemeente gekeken voor oplossingen. In Rotterdam gaf men aan dat de
gemeente zich relatief veel in moet zetten om de burgers actief te krijgen, ook kunnen er in
een grote stad geen mislukkingen worden toegestaan omdat er veel belangen spelen. Er lijken
dus meerdere factoren van invloed op de rolbepaling van de gemeenten. Factoren zoals de
geschiedenis, de grootte en de context van de gemeente kunnen dus van invloed zijn op de
rolbepaling.
117
Bronnen
Acheson, N. (2001). Service delivery and civic engagement: disability organizations in
Northern Ireland. Volutas. 12 (3). P. 279-293.
Ansell, C. & Gash, A. (2007). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of
public administrative research and theory. 18. P. 543-571.
Bakker, J., Denters, B., Oude Vrielink, M. & Klok, P-J. Citizens’ initiatives: how local
governments fill in their facilitative role. Local government studies. 38 (4). P. 395-414
Bang, H.P. & Sorensen, E. (1999). The everyday maker: a new challenge to democratic
governance. Administrative theory & Praxis. 21 (3). P. 325- 342.
Barlzelay, M. (2001). The new public management. Berkely: University of California Press
Beiner, R. (1995). Introduction: why citizenship constitutes a theoretical problem in the last
decade of the twentieth century. In R. Beiner (ed.), Theorizing citizenship. Albany, NY: State
University of New York.
Bloom, R. & Kilgore, D. (2003). The volunteer citizen after welfare reform in the United
States: an ethnographic study of volunteerism in action. Voluntas. 14 (4). P. 431-453.
Boeije, H. (2010). Analysis in qualitative research. London: SAGE publications Ltd.
Borgi, V. & Berkel, R. Van. (2007). Individualized service provision in an era of activation
and new governance. International journal of sociology and social policy. 27 (9/10). P. 413424.
Bornstein, D. & Davis, S. (2010). Social entrepreneurship: what everyone needs to know.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bovens, M.A.P., & Wille, A. (2011). Diplomademocratie. Over de spanning tussen
meritocratie en democratie. Amsterdam: Uitgeverij Bert Bakker.
Bovens, M.A.P., Hart, P.’t. & Twist, M. van. (2012). Openbaar bestuur: beleid, organisatie
en politiek. Deventer: Kluwer.
Brannan, T., John, P. & Stoker, G. (2006). Active citizenship and effective services and
programmes: how we can know what really works? Urban studies. Vol. 43 (5/6). P. 993-1008
Brink, G. van den. (2007). Moderniteit als opgave. Een antwoord aan relativisme en
conservatisme. Amsterdam: SUN.
Cook, B.J. (2007). Woodrow Wilson’s Idea about local government reform: A regime
perspective on the new push for citizen engagement in public administration. Administration
and Society. 39 (2). P. 596-624.
118
Dekker, P. & Hart, J. de. (2002). Burgers over burgerschap. In R.P. Hortulanus & J.E.M.
Machielse (eds), modern burgerschap. Den Haag. Elsevier.
Denters, S.A.H., Tonkens, E.H., Verhoeven, I. & Bakker, J.H.M. (2013). Burgers maken hun
buurt. Den Haag: platform 31.
Farrelly, M. (2009). Citizen participation and neighbourhood governance: analysing
democratic practice. Local government studies. 35 (4). P. 237- 400.
Field, U. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research. Edition 4. London: SAGE.
Fuller, S., Kershaw, P. & Pulkingham, J. (2008). Constructing active citizenship: single
mother, welfare and the logics of voluntarism. Citizenship studies. 12 (2). P. 157-176.
Gunsteren, H.R., van. (1998). A theory of citizenship. Organizing plurality in contemporary
democracies. Boulder, Colorado: Westview press.
Hajer, M. (2011). De energieke samenleving. Op zoek naar een sturingsfilosofie voor een
schonen economie. Den Haag. Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving.
Hannan, M.T., Polos, L. & Carroll, G. (2007). Logics of organization theory: audiences,
codes and ecologies. Oxford: Princeton university press.
Hendriks, F. & Tops, P.W. (2002). Het sloeg in als een BOM: vitaal stadsbestuur en modern
burgerschap in een Haagse stadsbuurt. Tilburg: Universiteit van Tilburg.
Huysmans, F. (2006). De betere bibliotheek. Over de normatieve grondslagen van het
openbaar bibliotheek in het internettijdperk. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press
Ilcan, S. & Basok, T. (2004). Community government: voluntary agencies, social justice and
the responsibility of citizens. Citizenship studies. 8 (4). P.129-144.
Kuiper, M., Velde, B. van de. & Zuydam, S. van. (2012). Leren van vermaatschappelijking in
het Verenigd Koninkrijk, Australië en Scandinavië. Raad voor Openbaar Bestuur.
Lenos, S., Sturm, P. & Vis, R. Burgeparticipatie in gemeenteland. Quick scan van 34
coalitieakkoorden en raadsprogramma’s voor de periode 2006-2010. Amsterdam: instituut
voor Publiek en Politiek.
Lownes, V. Pratchett, L. & Stoker, G. (2006). Locality matters: making participation count in
local politics. London: institute for public policy research.
Lundstorm, T. (1996). The state and voluntary social work in Sweden. Voluntas. 7 (2). P.123146.
Marinetto, M. (2003). Who wants to be an active citizen? The politics and practice of
community involvement. Sociology, 37 (1). P. 103-120.
Marshall, T.H. & Bottomore, T. (1950). Citizenship and social class. Londen: Pluto press.
119
Niskanen, W.A. (1973). Bureaucracy, servant or master? Lessons from America. London:
institute of economic affairs.
Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton University Press.
Oude Vrielink, M. & Verhoeven, I. (2011). Burgerinitiatieven en de bescheiden overheid.
Beleid en maatschappij 38 (4).
Oude Vrielink, M. & Wijdeven, T. van de. (2011). Ondersteuning in vieren. Zichtlijnen in het
faciliteren van burger initiatieven in de buurt. Beleid en maatschappij. (38) 4.
Peters, G. (2010). The politics of bureaucracy: an introduction to comparative public
administration. London: Routlegde.
Perry, J.L. (1996). Handbook of public administration. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Raad voor Openbaar Bestuur (2012). Loslaten in vertrouwen. Naar een nieuwe verhouding
tussen overheid, markt én samenleving.
Raad voor Maatschappelijke Ontwikkeling. Terugtreden is vooruitzien. Maatschappelijke
veerkracht in het publieke domein.
Rainey, H.G. (2009). Understanding and managing public organizations. San Francisco:
Jossey- bass.
Rosenthal, U. (2002). Het democratisch tekort. Tekortkomingen en remedies. Den Haag:
Elsevier.
Schelcher, C. (2007). Public- private partnerships and hybridity. In Ferlie, E., Lynn, L.E. &
Pollitt, C. (2007). The Oxford handbook of public management. Oxford University Press.
SCP (2009). Vrijwilligers vanuit de civil society. In Dekker, P. & Hart, J. De.
Vrijwilligerswerk in meervoud, civil society en vrijwilligerswerk. Den Haag: Sociaal en
Cultureel Planbureau.
Silverman, D. (2006). Interpreting qualitative data. SAGE: Londen.
Snellen, I. (2002). Conciliations of rationalities: the essence of public administration.
Administrative of public administration. Vol. 24. No. 2. P. 323- 346.
Specht, M. (2012). De pragmatiek van burgerparticipatie. Hoe burgers omgaan met complexe
vraagstukken omtrent veiligheid. Leefbaarheid en stedelijke ontwikkeling in drie Europese
steden. Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Steen, M. Van der., Bruijn, H. de. & Schillemans, T. (2013). De grote samenleving. Over
vitaliteit en nieuwe verhoudingen tussen overheid en burgers. Bestuurskunde (22) 1. P. 5- 12.
Thiel, S. Van. (2001). Quango’s: Trends, Causes and Consequences, Ashgate, Aldershot etc.
120
Trommel, W.A. (2010). De activerende staat: in de schermerzone tussen verheffen en
vernederen. In Verhoeven, I. & Ham, M. (red.) Brave burgers gezocht! De grenzen van de
activerende overheid. Amsterdam, van Gennep.
Twist, M. van., Steen, M. van der. & Karré, P.M. (2009). Als burgers het heft in eigen handen
nemen: van representatieve naar doe-het-zelf democratie. Res Publica 2009 (4) p.521- 534
Uitermark, J. & Van Beek, K. (2010). Gesmoorde participatie. Over de schaduwkant van
‘meedoen’ as staatsproject. In Verhoeven, I. & Ham, M. (red) Brave burgers gezocht. De
grenzen van de activerende overheid. Amsterdam: Van Gennep.
Uyterlinde, M. Neefjes, K. & Engbersen, R. (2007). Welzijn versterkt burgerschap. Utrecht:
Movisie.
Verba, S., Schlozmann, K.L. & Brady.H.E. (1995). Voice and equality: civic voluntarism in
American politics. Harvard: Harvard University press.
Verhoeven, I. (2010). Ruimte geven aan initiatieven van burgers. De actieve burger wil
eerder zeggenschap dan mee beslissen. Rooilijn. 43 (4).
Wal, Z. Van der. (2010) The content and context of organizational ethics. Blackwell
publishing.
Walle, S. Van de., Roosbroek, S. Van. & Bouckaert. (2008). Trust in the public sector: is
there any evidence for a long-term decline? International review of administrative sciences.
Vol. 74 (1). P. 47-64.
Wijdevan, T. van de. (2009). Betrokkenheid en verbonden verantwoordelijkheden in de
Smederijen van Hoogeveen. In H. Van Duivenboden., E. Van Hout, van Montfort, C. &
Vermaas, J. (2009). Verbonden verantwoordelijkheden in het publieke domein. P. 185-312.
Den Haag. Uitgeverij Lemma.
Wijdeven, T. van de. (2012). Doe democratie. Over actief burgerschap in stadswijken. Delft:
Eburon.
Wijdeven, T. van de., Graaf, L. van de. & Hendriks, F. (2013) Actief burgerschap. Lijnen in
de literatuur. Tilburgse school voor politiek en bestuur.
WRR (2012). Vertrouwen in burgers. Amsterdam University Press.
Aanvullende beleidsdocumenten
De Doe -Democratie. Kabinetsnota ter stimulering van een vitale samenleving (2013).
Ministerie van binnenlandse zaken en koninkrijksrelaties.
Bijlage I: Vragenlijst
Vragen voor gemeenten
121
-
Op welke manier is uw gemeente bezig met de beweging van minder overheid naar
meer burger? Vb. Reguleren, regisseren, stimuleren, faciliteren, loslaten.
Welke afdelingen of onderdelen binnen de gemeente zijn bij deze beweging
betrokken? Op welke manier?
Welke partijen / organisaties zijn in uw gemeente betrokken bij deze beweging? Op
welke manier?
Zijn het al. leen lokale partijen / organisaties? Of ook regionale? Welke? Op welke
manier?
Waar ligt het initiatief? Bij de gemeente? Bij organisaties, zoals het welzijnswerk? Bij
burgers zelf? In welke vorm?
De beweging van minder overheid naar meer burger komt tot uiting in een veelheid van
initiatieven. Sommige initiatieven komen van bewoners, andere van gemeenten of
organisaties.
-
-
Welk initiatief springt er uit in uw gemeente? Waarom? Wat maakt het tot een goed
voorbeeld?
Op welke manieren is de gemeente betrokken bij dit initiatief?
Doorvragen op welke partijen binnen gemeente. Politiek? Bestuur? Ambtelijk
apparaat?
Op welke manier zijn andere partijen bij dit initiatief betrokken? Welke andere
partijen?
Wordt het initiatief actief ondersteund? Door wie?
De transformatie vraagt een andere houding en een andere werkwijze van alle betrokken
partijen.
-
-
Wat vind u in uw gemeente lastig aan de verandering? Wat verloopt moeizaam?
Waarover bent u tevreden? Wat loopt goed? Waar bent u trots op?
Wat is er vooral niet nodig om de verandering gestalte te geven?
En wat helpt juist?
Welke hulpbronnen zijn nodig?
Ev. als voorbeeld noemen: financiën, de juiste competenties, vaardigheden, visie van
B&W, steun van de raad, voldoende deskundigheid, bereidheid van partners om
samen te werken en om te veranderen, goede voorbeelden, best persons, steun van de
rijksoverheid, maatschappelijk betrokken ondernemers, etc.
Zijn er voldoende hulpbronnen beschikbaar?
Verbondenheid wordt wel gezien als een voorwaarde voor samenwerking. Vind u dat
mensen en organisaties in uw gemeente zich met elkaar verbonden voelen? Waaraan
merkt u dat?
Bijlagen II: Respondenten
Gemeente Schijndel - Frank van Geffen
Gemeente Amersfoort - Nico Paap
Gemeente Enschede - Ypkje Grimm
Gemeente Peel & Maas - Geert Schmitz
Gemeente Zeist - Arno Schepers
Gemeente Berkelland - Judith Harmsen
122
Gemeente Rotterdam - Wim Reijierse
Gemeente Amsterdam – Rob van Veelen (Amsterdam- Oost) en Hettie Politiek
123

We are BDP. An extended family of nearly 4000 talented

TOM nr 4 2014 Career moves

Basistraining People Inc

Mr. Maarten Struijvenberg (Leefbaar Rotterdam)

Hands-on HR-adviseur/manager die weet te overtuigen

Link naar vacaturetekst

New Logic II blinkt - Habeon Architecten

Save - The Gazette

datasheet_arduino - vm205.indd

Flyer 07 The Zen Company