Periodic Reporting for period 1 - COPERNICUS (SoCial Finance for SOcial EnterPrisEs: TheoRy aNd PractICe to bUild a more incluSive society)
Période du rapport: 2020-11-01 au 2022-10-31
In recent years, many actions of the EC have highlighted the interest in promoting and funding social innovation (SI) and social enterprises (SEs). The purpose of COPERNICUS is to analyze the approaches, methods and instruments of social finance (SF) – also through the analysis of the more advanced experiences in this field (such as Canada) – with the aim of proposing theoretical and practical solutions helpful to support SEs localized in some marginal territory of the EU, especially in Sardinia. In detail, COPERNICUS aims to contribute to the international academic debate on SF, with a focus on the role of SF for SEs through the analysis of the best practices useful for the improvement of economic wellbeing; 2) to provide better theoretical and practical solutions by designing tailored financial instruments for SEs located in Sardinia with the aim of developing and testing efficient ways to reduce social exclusion and to promote social innovation (that could potentially be expanded to other “Objective 1” regions in the EU); and 3) to promote a permanent network between the involved parties that is useful for encouraging new financial approaches for a more inclusive society.
During the first part of COPERNICUS (from month 1 to month 24), the PI focused on the following aspects: a) identification of the boundaries of the SF research landscape; b) exploration of SIBs as new financial instruments able to provide solutions for the new and most pressing social issues; c) exploration of the role of crowdfunding as a potentially alternative and complementary funding option for SEs; and d) exploration of the role of technology – with a deep focus on fintech companies – in the achievement of SDGs.
The first work published since the beginning of COPERNICUS has been entitled “How Many Shades Are There in Sustainable Finance? A Bibliometric Review”, and it has been published in the “Handbook of Research on Global Aspects of Sustainable Finance in Times of Crises”. This work provides a deep overview of the concept of sustainable finance, in which SF emerges as its “social dimention” that aims at stimulating social inclusion, quality of life and employability (through social impact investment, social banking, social entrepreneurship, and crowdfunding). The second work has been entitled “What’s in a name: Exploring the intellectual structure of Social Finance” (article under review). The work offers a bibliometric overview of the scientific production on social finance. It provides an overview of the research field by identifying gaps in the existing academic literature and presenting future research directions. Overall, the article shows that the social finance research field is composed of five main research clusters and four main research hotspots - including impact investing, social entrepreneurship, social impact bonds, and social innovation - which represent the core of this research domain” (Carè & Weber, forthcoming). Once the SF landscape was clarified, the PI started to explore the field of SIBs. In these veins, the first article has been entitled “From New Public Management to Social Impact Bonds: The European experience” and published in the book “The Anglo-American Model of Neo-Liberalism of the 1980s: Construction, Development and Dissemination" (Palgrave MacMillan). This chapter described the theoretical development of SIBs from NPM to present implementations in solving the societal needs that are arising in the post-COVID age. By concentrating on (1) the excessive rigidity of contractual schemes and the underestimation of the role of transaction costs, (2) the ideas of the privatization, marketization, and financialization of the social sector, and (3) the role of this new financial model in encouraging social innovation in the delivery of public services, the work has highlighted the main criticisms of SIBs. Even in the field of SIBs, other work is still under review. Entitled “Social impact bonds: a bibliometric overview of the conceptual and intellectual structures between past and future research directions”, this work presents a bibliometric analysis of works on social impact bonds published between 2011 and 2022. (SIBs). It identifies five research strands, including studies that situate the development of SIBs within the context of neo-liberalism; (ii) views SIBs as an evolution of the new public management approach; (iii) concentrates on conceptualizing SIBs as an impact investment approach rooted in the social finance landscape; (iv) examines SIBs as a source of funding for social entrepreneurship; and (v) identifies an emerging phenomenon referred to as sustainable financial partnerships for the SDGs. The findings indicate that there is still little "finance-based" research in this area and that the literature now in use is heavily influenced by what has been defined as “the UK model”, which is influencing the current use of SIBs. The theoretical and practical implications of this work (under review) show that the SIB market should be improved by removing some barriers – such as the exclusive focus on the public side of the partnership – and introducing more “finance-based” considerations. In addition to SF and SIBs, the fields of crowdfunding and fintech have also been explored. Finally, during the first period (from month 1 to month 24), 10 conferences were attended, 4 outreach activities were undertaken, 5 invited seminars/speeches were delivered, and 62 specialization courses were attended.
The first work published since the beginning of COPERNICUS has been entitled “How Many Shades Are There in Sustainable Finance? A Bibliometric Review”, and it has been published in the “Handbook of Research on Global Aspects of Sustainable Finance in Times of Crises”. This work provides a deep overview of the concept of sustainable finance, in which SF emerges as its “social dimention” that aims at stimulating social inclusion, quality of life and employability (through social impact investment, social banking, social entrepreneurship, and crowdfunding). The second work has been entitled “What’s in a name: Exploring the intellectual structure of Social Finance” (article under review). The work offers a bibliometric overview of the scientific production on social finance. It provides an overview of the research field by identifying gaps in the existing academic literature and presenting future research directions. Overall, the article shows that the social finance research field is composed of five main research clusters and four main research hotspots - including impact investing, social entrepreneurship, social impact bonds, and social innovation - which represent the core of this research domain” (Carè & Weber, forthcoming). Once the SF landscape was clarified, the PI started to explore the field of SIBs. In these veins, the first article has been entitled “From New Public Management to Social Impact Bonds: The European experience” and published in the book “The Anglo-American Model of Neo-Liberalism of the 1980s: Construction, Development and Dissemination" (Palgrave MacMillan). This chapter described the theoretical development of SIBs from NPM to present implementations in solving the societal needs that are arising in the post-COVID age. By concentrating on (1) the excessive rigidity of contractual schemes and the underestimation of the role of transaction costs, (2) the ideas of the privatization, marketization, and financialization of the social sector, and (3) the role of this new financial model in encouraging social innovation in the delivery of public services, the work has highlighted the main criticisms of SIBs. Even in the field of SIBs, other work is still under review. Entitled “Social impact bonds: a bibliometric overview of the conceptual and intellectual structures between past and future research directions”, this work presents a bibliometric analysis of works on social impact bonds published between 2011 and 2022. (SIBs). It identifies five research strands, including studies that situate the development of SIBs within the context of neo-liberalism; (ii) views SIBs as an evolution of the new public management approach; (iii) concentrates on conceptualizing SIBs as an impact investment approach rooted in the social finance landscape; (iv) examines SIBs as a source of funding for social entrepreneurship; and (v) identifies an emerging phenomenon referred to as sustainable financial partnerships for the SDGs. The findings indicate that there is still little "finance-based" research in this area and that the literature now in use is heavily influenced by what has been defined as “the UK model”, which is influencing the current use of SIBs. The theoretical and practical implications of this work (under review) show that the SIB market should be improved by removing some barriers – such as the exclusive focus on the public side of the partnership – and introducing more “finance-based” considerations. In addition to SF and SIBs, the fields of crowdfunding and fintech have also been explored. Finally, during the first period (from month 1 to month 24), 10 conferences were attended, 4 outreach activities were undertaken, 5 invited seminars/speeches were delivered, and 62 specialization courses were attended.
COPERNICUS aims to 1) contribute to the international academic debate on SF, with a focus on the role of SF for SEs through the analysis of the best practices useful for the improvement of economic wellbeing; 2) provide better theoretical and practical solutions by designing tailored financial instruments for the SEs located in Sardinia to develop and test efficient ways to reduce social exclusion and to promote social innovation (that could potentially be expanded to other “Objective 1” regions in the EU); and 3) promote a permanent network between the involved parties that is useful to encourage new financial approaches for a more inclusive society. To address this, COPERNICUS has explored, during the first part, the overall landscape of SF by also focusing on some potential financial approaches that could be used to improve social inclusion and social innovation with a particular focus on crowdfunding, social impact bonds, and fintech companies. Using these financial approaches in “Objective 1” regions in the EU will be highly beneficial in terms of sustainable development, achievement of the SDGs, and, overall, social innovation and social inclusion.