| Notes |
A useful starting point for considering the definition of SEs is to consider the space
they occupy between the public and private sectors, ‘…in most ways like any other
private sector businesses, but are geared toward social regeneration and help rather
than simply the generation of profits… as such social enterprises do not fall within the
standard definition of private or public sector enterprises’ (HM Treasury, 1999). Two
widely used definitions of SEs have emerged; the EMES definition first published in
2001 (Borzaga and Defourny, 2001) and the definition first used in the UK
Governments’ Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) 2002 paper, ‘Social
Enterprise: A Strategy for Success’ (DTI, 2002).
5. The UK definition of a social enterprise
The UK definition originated in the UK Government document ‘A Progress Report on
Social Enterprise: A strategy for success’ which reported on the progress of its new
SE strategy (DTI, 2002). The report defines an SE as ‘…a business with primarily
social objectives whose surpluses are principally reinvested for that purpose in that
business or in the community, rather than being driven by the need to maximise profit
for shareholders and owners’ (DTI, 2002). The definition was a result of a
consultation process with sector leaders and facilitated by the DTI (DTI, 2002).
UK government reports and several researchers in the field use this definition in
research (IFF Research, 2005). This definition is considered to be the one most
widely used in the UK (Doherty et al., 2009). Jones and Keogh (2006) describe this
definition as distinct to others in its insistence of the social enterprise as a business.
A report commissioned by the UK government’s Social Enterprise Unit in 2003
synthesised research undertaken using the Department of Trade and Industry’s 2002
definition and identified numerous challenges with consistency and comparability
(Ecotec, 2003). The definition has been identified as being intentionally ‘broad’
making ‘this commonly accepted definition … hard to put into practice’ (Lyon et al,
2010).
Discussion relating to the operational challenges of the DTI’s 2002 definition has
continued (Lyon et al. 2010; Defourny et al, 2014). Lyon et al (2010) examine four
government studies and identify the challenges of using the definitions. Lyon et al
(2010) identifies numerous instances of ambiguity in the defining of SEs using the |