Policy Guideline Sale della Terra March21

POLICY GUIDELINE

Setting up a Consortium of Social Cooperatives: Insights from the Consortium “Sale della Terra” in Italy March 2021

This Guideline explains how to support and promote the setting up of a Consortium of Social Cooperatives in order to pursue an inclusive and sustainable local development strategy. The Guideline draws from the experience of the Consortium “Sale della Terra”, which has been operating since 2016 in the Benevento Municipality and surrounding areas in Campania Region (Italy) and then expanding also to other 3 Italian regions.

Consortium of social cooperatives have the objective of supporting the development of its members (the social cooperatives) by providing them with, generally, support services, such as administrative services, advice, training, facilitation of access to credit, etc.; political representation for the purpose of promoting solidarity and cooperation; and an entrepreneurial function mainly by acting as a general contractor in public service tenders as the Consortium has a greater contractual weight than single cooperatives. Consortium also give the possibility to include, under the same governance structure, different organizations, such as social cooperatives, social enterprises, cooperatives, companies, in order to implement specific local development projects and strategies.

Consortium of social cooperatives can contribute to maximizing territorial social impact as they can potentially leverage greater resources in order to carry out a more overarching and systemic development policy and vision that goes beyond and encompasses the direct social outcomes of a single social cooperative. The ensemble of coordinated and coherent actions of a multitude of territorial organization pursuing a strong and shared social mission generates a potential for a systemic and innovative change in the local economic, social and welfare systems as a whole, while, at the same time, providing context-specific activities and services tailored to territorial needs. The “Sale della Terra” local development strategy based on social inclusion has been indeed endorsed and welcomed also by surrounding municipalities which have adhered to the “Welcoming Small Municipalities” manifesto launched and actively promoted by the Consortium. Hence, its systemic impact is showcased by the fact that the Consortium has gained territorial credibility able to inspire and convince surrounding public bodies to endorse its strategy.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 3 1.

THE MODEL ............................................................................................................................. 5

2.

THE CASE-STUDY ................................................................................................................... 7

3.

THE PROCESS ....................................................................................................................... 11 PHASE 0. TRIGGERING FACTORS .............................................................................................................. 11 PHASE 1. GATHERING KEY ORGANISATIONS.......................................................................................... 12 PHASE 2. INTERCEPTING RESOURCES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR START UP .............................. 14 PHASE 3. FORMALIZING COLLABORATION UNDER A CONSORTIUM MODEL .................................. 17 SUSTAINAIBILITY ............................................................................................................................................ 20

4.

KEY DETERMINANTS FOR EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION AND REPLICABILITY .......... 21

5.

DRAWBACKS AND RISKS ..................................................................................................... 25

6.

FINAL REMARKS.................................................................................................................... 26

USEFUL CONTACTS .................................................................................................................... 28

This Policy Guideline was elaborated by Mario Biggeri, Enrico Testi, Carmela Nitti and Camilla Guasti ( ARCO - Action Research for CO-development c/o PIN Scrl, University of Florence), based on inputs and information provided by Angelo Moretti (Consortium Sale della Terra, President) and under the supervision of Johannes Krassnitzer, Andrea Agostinucci and Raffaella Garutti (UNDP ART Global Initiative c/o UNDP Brussels).

2

INTRODUCTION Experience-sharing and peer-to-peer learning are extremely important for promoting social and solidarity economy and social and territorial cohesion as drivers for SDG localization. The diffusion of good practices has the potential to inspire similar experiences and solutions through a multiplicative global effect on local communities.

In this regard, Italy has a long-lasting experience in implementing integrated local development initiatives concerning social and territorial cohesion and social economy in its own territories, in order to foster sustainable human development at local level. For this reason, UNDP has commissioned a research, namely the “Study on best practices of Social Cohesion and Social and Solidarity Economy in Italy”, to a team of individual consultants belonging to the research centre ARCO – Action Research for CO-development (c/o PIN Scrl, University of Florence). The study [LINK] aimed at investigating on the relevant experiences of social and solidarity economy and social and territorial cohesion in the Italian scenario. Moreover, it led to the identification of 6 case-studies that can potentially inspire similar practices and showcase replicable models to drive SDGs localization in other countries.

Therefore, the objective of the guidelines is to provide concrete policy insights and guidance to inform a multilateral / UN-level strategic visioning and programming perspective (including both UN and UNDP Country Offices as well as national policy-makers and LRGs), to implement similar initiatives in other territories, in order to promote inclusive, equitable and sustainable economic development, thus supporting the localization of the 2030 Agenda.

Against this backdrop, the 6 case studies were identified following 8 selection criteria grounded on a conceptual and interpretative framework based on the Sustainable Human Development paradigm. The latter frames social and solidarity economy and social and territorial cohesion within a territorial ecosystem perspective, leading to a variety of potential outcomes in the four pillars of Sustainable Human Development: “Equity and cohesion”, “Participation and empowerment”, “Sustainability”, “Productivity and efficiency”. Moreover, these outcomes can enhance the transformative resilience of local systems, in the sense of their ability to deal with internal and external stressors and shocks as possible opportunities for their transformative change towards Sustainable Human Development.

The identification of potential case-studies was based primarily on the triangulation of i) the expertise of the research team in these fields, ii) a desk-review of policy documentation, and particularly iii) information and insights collected during the interviews conducted with 16 prominent experts of both social and solidarity economy and social and territorial cohesion in the Italian scenario. Each pre-selected experience was then preliminary analysed on the base of available documents, in order to assess their compliance with the selection criteria.

The following 6 case-studies were selected, each leading to a specific Policy Guideline available here [LINK].

Field

Model

Case-study

CONSORTIUM OF COOPERATIVES Social and Solidarity Economy

WORK INTEGRATION SOCIAL ENTERPRISE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION

Social and Territorial Cohesion

Location

Consortium “Sale della Terra” Social enterprise “Quid” Community foundation “Fondazione di Comunità di Messina”

Benevento, Campania Region (South) Verona, Veneto Region (North)

Messina, Sicily Region (South)

LOCAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY FOR

Strategy “Milk Mountain” – Emilian

Emilian Apennines, Emilia Romagna

INNER AND FRAGILE AREAS

Apennines

Region (Centre)

LOCAL ACTION GROUP FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT TO COMMUNITY REGENERATION

Local Action Group “Maiella Verde” SIBaTer Project

Chieti province, Abruzzo Region (South) Municipalities and Regions in Southern Italy

3

HOW TO READ THIS GUIDELINE? This guideline focuses on the model of Consortium of social cooperatives by drawing key insights from the case study “Consortium Sale della Terra”.

The objective of the guideline is to provide concrete policy insights and guidance in order to implement similar initiatives in other territories. However, an underlying understanding of the readers ’ local and national contexts must be acknowledged to tailor and adapt these the processes and the suggestions here reported. The latter implies that the presence of key actors and institutions, resources, social capital, infrastructures, services and institutional and legal framework which have been identified in the present guideline as determinants for the implementation of this model should be carefully analysed in each context, or, perhaps, need more time and specific actions to be set up and leveraged.

The guideline is structured as follows: 

Presentation of the model: its connection to the general approach to social and solidarity economy and social and territorial cohesion in Italy, its distinctive features and value-added.



Case study presentation: a general description of the experience and its main pursued objectives.



Theory of change: a schematic overview about how inputs, actions, outputs, outcomes and impacts are connected, in order to facilitate the planning and the implementation of similar interventions in other contexts.



The process: a detailed explanation of all the specific and sequenced phases constituting the analysed experience, drawing insights in terms of actors, resources and actions. In order to support the reader in assessing the feasibility of this model in his/her own context, a list of Suggested Actions and SelfAssessment Questions are provided. Hence, the latter are supporting tools in order to abstract key elements from the specific case-study to be applied in other contexts.



Key determinants for effective implementation and replicability: the main enabling system conditions for the applicability of each experience in different contexts.



Drawbacks and risks: a list of possible drawbacks and potential risks that may arise for future implementation, while also presenting possible coping strategies to cope and/or to prevent them.



Final remarks and recommendations: a summary of why this model can be considered as an effective driver for sustainable human development.

4

1. THE MODEL The present guideline draws from an Italian experience belonging to the Consortium of social cooperatives model.

Consortium of social cooperatives have the objective of supporting the development of its members (the social cooperatives) by providing them with qualified services as well as coordinating their actions on specific activities or seizing opportunities. Consortium also give the possibility to include, under the same governance structure, different organizations, such as social cooperatives, social enterprises, cooperatives, companies, in order to implement specific local development projects and strategies. In particular, Consortium of social cooperatives generally provide support services to its member cooperatives, such as administrative services, advice, training, facilitation of access to credit, etc.; political representation for the purpose of promoting solidarity and cooperation; and an entrepreneurial function mainly by acting as a general contractor. In fact, the latter consists in promoting the participation of its member cooperatives in public tendering processes, in which the Consortium has a greater contractual weight than single cooperatives. Another important role that Consortium are increasingly playing concerns the facilitation of the bank credit access process. Hence, Consortium of social cooperatives can allow for economies of scale therefore increasing market opportunities for its member social cooperatives and, consequently, expanding their social/environmental impact in their territories.

In order to frame the model within the Italian legal framework and historical context, first of all, it is necessary to highlight that both social cooperatives and consortium of social cooperatives are both regulated by the Italian law n°381/199. In fact, in the Italian context, the long-lasting tradition of Social and Solidarity Economy (SSE) historically originates from the activities of social cooperatives. The latter, in turn, find their roots in the broader, both catholic and laic-socialist, cooperative movement which, in Italy, began at the end of the XX Century and, since then, ha s developed extensively over time (Borzaga and Ianes, 20061). The 1948 Italian Constitution specifically recognized in art. 45 the social function of cooperation and the need to promote cooperatives. In the 50s, many cooperatives were set up as construction and housing cooperatives engaged in the post-war reconstruction. During the 70s, cooperatives increased in number, became bigger and more professionalized and formed consortium and groups with other companies. In the 80s, many cooperatives started providing health, social and educational services as well as being active in the field of work integration. Finally, the beforementioned law n°381/1991 officially recognized social cooperatives in 1991, hence providing a strong drive to the social cooperative movement (Borzaga and Ianes, 2006). It was, however, the 2016/2017 Third Sector Reform which brought relevant changes to this sector, providing both social cooperatives (and their consortium) and social enterprises with some fiscal and regulatory advantages as well as enlarging their field of activities. Data shows that in 2017 there were 15.770 social cooperatives in Italy which, together with other social economy organization such as social enterprises, association and foundations with market activity, accounted for almost 900.000 paid workers and an annual turnover of over 42.700 M € (Lori, 20192).

The high presence of cooperatives in Italy contributes to fostering an enabling ecosystem for SSE in the country.

Italy is nowadays globally recognized as one of the countries where Social Economy is more developed also thanks to the work done on its legal framework over time. Social cooperatives demonstrated the relevance and feasibility of production models that promote social justice. The reason for such flourishing of social cooperatives as well as their consortium, is due to cultural, historical and economic processes which saw these organizations co-evolve along with the welfare state, as public authorities increasingly outsourced services to SEs/social cooperatives (Testi et al., 20173). The relation between social cooperatives and public authorities at the different administrative levels is 1 2 3

Borzaga, C., & Ianes, A. (2006). L'economia della solidarietà: storia e prospettive della cooperazione sociale. Donzelli.

Lori, M. (2019). Struttura e profili del settore non-profit. Paper presented at the Giornate di Bertinoro Conference, 11 October 2019.

Testi, E., Bellucci, M., Franchi, S., & Biggeri, M. (2017). Italian Social Enterprises at the Crossroads: Their Role in the Evolution of the Welfare

5

important. As Borzaga et al. (20174) show, based on the data collected by ISTAT in 2011, social cooperatives in Italy work mainly with public institutions. In fact, 65% of their aggregate revenue in 2011 came from working with public institutions while 28% from working with private actors (EU Commission, 2020 5). Thanks to their close relation to public authorities and capacity to collaborate with local stakeholders, social cooperatives bring about innovation in public service delivery as well as in the field of work integration. In fact, the beforementioned Italian law n°381/1991 differentiates A-type social cooperatives, which directly offer goods and services for social purposes (i.e., providing health, social and educational services), from B-type social cooperatives which produce and sell goods and services by employing people belonging to disadvantaged social categories. As for the latter, apart from being in many cases highly entrepreneurial and less reliant on public tenders than A-type social cooperatives, some of them evolved from being organizations in which disadvantaged people could find employment (and therefore limiting their impact only to those employed) to becoming an important player into a wider system aimed at active inclusion policies. In fact, B-type social cooperatives are developing both capacity assessment and training skills in order to assess the work capabilities of disadvantaged people, providing them with targeted training that answers to the needs of future employers and creating agreements with the latter in order to enhance their placement. Many Btype social cooperatives have thus developed specific skills and methodologies, focusing on particular sectors of the economy (i.e., the hospitality sector, fashion, food and agriculture, craftsmanship, gardening and many more). In other words, B-type social cooperatives embody one of the most relevant organizational models to actively pursue an inclusive social economy through their activity of job-reinsertion of people belonging to disadvantaged social categories. The latter not only are provided with a job opportunity, but also can find within the social cooperative a personal vocation in becoming, in turn, at the service of others in need. Finally, when operating under an umbrella organization, such as a Consortium, the social impact potential of both B-type and A-type social cooperatives can greatly scale up thanks to economies of scale and greater opportunities (Borzaga and Ianes, 20116).

State. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 28(6), 2403–2422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-017-9875-8 4 Borzaga, C., Poledrini, S. & Galera, G. (2017). Social Enterprise in Italy: Typology, Diffusion and Characteristics, Euricse Working Papers, 96 |17.

5 European Commission (2020) Social enterprises and their ecosystems in Europe. Updated country report: Italy. Author: Carlo Bo rzaga.

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Available at https://europa.eu/!Qq64ny.

6 Borzaga, C., & Ianes, A. (2011). Il Sistema di Imprese della Cooperazione Sociale: Origini e Sviluppo dei Consorzi di Cooperative Sociali (Networking Among Social Cooperatives: Origins and Development of Consortia).

6

2. THE CASE-STUDY

Consortium “Sale della Terra”

LINK

https://consorziosaledellaterra.it/

MODEL

Consortium of social cooperatives Sustainable local development, local regeneration of small municipalities at risk of depopulation and abandonment, social cohesion, social inclusion, job inclusion of

OBJECTIVES

vulnerable people at risk of marginalization (people with disabilities, detained people or people sentenced to alternative measures to prison, refugees, native unemployed people), sustainable recovery of uncultivated and abandoned land.

LOCALIZED SDGs

Social farms, cohesive, inclusive and sustainable agriculture, management of reception facilities for refugees, socialization activities for people experiencing social MAIN ACTIONS

exclusion, welfare services, inclusive craftsmanship, sustainable tourism, community markets, educational projects for children, management of “inclusive” pastry shop, wine bar and hotel, online ethical e-commerce platform and more.

START YEAR

2016

LOCATION

Benevento, Campania Region (South of Italy)

The Consortium “Sale della Terra” was formed in 2016 in Benevento, a small and unpopulated town in the Campania Region, in Southern Italy. The latter is a lower-income region experiencing a poverty rate two times higher than the national level (ISTAT, 20187). Throughout a number of entrepreneurial and social initiatives such as social farms, inclusive and sustainable agriculture, inclusive craftsmanship, sustainable tourism, community markets, pastry shops, as well as a variety of welfare services, the Consortium broadly addresses social exclusion of anyone “left behind” or at risk of marginalization by providing them with job opportunities and placing them at the centre of a local regeneration and development strategy. The Consortium finds its origins from a single local social cooperative which

7

https://www.istat.it/it/files//2020/05/15_Campania_Scheda_DEF.pdf.

7

was founded in 1996 to implement the mission and vocation of the so-called “Democratic Psychiatry”. The latter is an Italian society which triggered an historical national psychiatric reform contrasting the social and economic exclusion of people suffering from mental issues and forced to internment in mental institutions, now illegal in the Italian legislation8.

In line with the reform, the cooperative, founded by a group of labour union members, welfare operators and psychologists, aimed at restoring dignity to the patients of the local public Mental Health Department and providing them with job opportunities for their social and economic reinsertion. Hence, the social cooperative began by offering cleaning services (public services subcontracted by the local municipality) and employing people suffering from mental issues, namely the patients of the Mental Health Department (some of whom became members of the cooperatives along with some of their relatives) but soon started to engage with other experiences and third sector actors/organisations. Together with the latter, efforts to provide job opportunities as well as socialization opportunities also for people with disabilities were put in place. For this purpose, in 2001, a Centre for Disabilities was set up (through a public tendering process) aiming at the socialization and emancipation, first, of people with disabilities and, soon after, also of people subject to alternative measures to prison. A second operational branch originated from the first social cooperative, which eventually, in 2005, became another social cooperative on its own.

The latter started offering welfare services, sustainable agricultural and craftsmanship activities and products as well as recovering ancient crafts and traditions and employing prisoners, former prisoners or people subject to alternative measures to prison. Later, an abandoned plot of land was made available by a local voluntary group linked to a catholic order. The area was then turned by the two cooperatives into a social farm where both prisoners, former prisoners or people subject to alternative measures to prison as well as people with disabilities began socializing and carrying out urban agricultural activities together, then also managing a small kiosk. The success of this social farm sparked the attention of the local pastoral organization which asked the cooperatives to become the managers of all its local charitable activities. This encounter between the third sector world working for economic and social inclusion (the social cooperatives and the local voluntary group) and the pastoral world opened a vast pool of opportunities for the former to carry out numerous and different social and welfare activities ranging from canteens, dormitories, reception services for migrants and needy families in order to respond to any type of social need. Therefore, another social cooperative was subsequently founded to manage these new services. Moreover, another local actor joined forces, namely a cooperative created in 2013 by young graduates who were returning from abroad to carry out social agricultural activities which they defined as “cohesive agriculture”.

In 2016, these four cooperatives which were already carrying out social inclusion activities, first in silos and soon after joining forces, realized they were sharing a common history as well as a shared development model. This awareness triggered their decision to create a consortium having, on the one hand, the objective of giving continuity to these activities pursuing the social and economic inclusion of people at risk of marginalization or belonging to disadvantaged social categories. On the other, the consortium was founded to pursue the local development and local regeneration of the territory. In fact, Benevento and surrounding municipalities are experiencing a strong de-population and ageing trend: 60 out of 78 municipalities belonging to the Benevento province count less than 5000 inhabitants. Therefore, despite the natural richness of these territories, also home to renowned wine productions and other local products, local emigration and ageing phenomena are causing relevant local economic and social challenges. Hence, the chosen name of the Consortium “Sale della Terra” (“salt of the earth”) refers to the Consortium objective to create enabling conditions for a local development strategy stemming from social inclusion ,

8

Namely, the Italian law n°180/ 1978 forcing the closure of mental institutions in Italy. The latter is also called Basaglia Law as it implements the psychiatric reform initiated by Dr. Franco Basaglia, founder of the Democratic Psychiatric Society, which aimed at restoring dignity and civil rights to people suffering from mental issues and forced to invasive medical treatment.

8

metaphorically providing “salt”, hence “flavour” to the local territories and their development. For this purpose, the Consortium has become an active promoter of its local regeneration strategy for small municipalities at risk of depopulation and abandonment. In fact, the latter has been joined by a number of surrounding municipalities forming a network called “The Welcoming Small Municipalities” (namely “Piccoli Comuni del Welcome”- PCW) actively promoting and setting up community cooperatives employing both locals and refugees, people with disabilities, detai ned persons or people sentenced to alternative measures to prison.

The Consortium actively engages different local actors and stakeholders, while leveraging and activating also multi-level territorial resources, such as ministerial-level entities, a national network of municipalities, prefectures and judicial offices, to name a few. In particular, the Consortium collaborates and partners with local public administration entities and institutions, clerical institutions, third sector organisations, universities and training centres.

Today, the Consortium has grown up to 16 cooperatives, mainly social cooperatives, employing 260 people and encompassing a wide range of social entrepreneurial activities, an e-commerce platform, locally branded quality products and social initiatives. Moreover, the Consortium growth also entailed its geographical expansion: nowadays its member cooperatives operate in four different neighbouring regions in the South of Italy, hence sharing similar social and economic features, including lower income levels compared to the average national level.

9

THEORY OF CHANGE TRIGGERING ELEMENT (UNMET NEED/VISION): Initially sparked by the aim to solve the social and economic exclusion of people suffering from mental issues and forced to internment in mental institutions, the Consortium now broadly addresses social and economic exclusion of anyone “left behind” or at risk of marginalization by providing them with job opportunities and placing them at the centre of its local regeneration strategy. In fact, the Consortium was set up to give continuity and increasing impact to the efforts of already existing social cooperatives working for social and economic inclusion, understanding the latter as the milestone of a local development model.

10

3. THE PROCESS PHASE 0. TRIGGERING FACTORS

Insights from the case study

Self-assessment questions

The reason for setting-up the Consortium stands in the willingness of its founding organisations to respond to the needs of people experiencing hardship and social exclusion. At the beginning, target beneficiaries were specifically people suffering from mental illness, but soon the social vocation addressed all people experiencing social exclusion.



Who are those living a condition of social exclusion in your context?



What kind of social exclusion are they experiencing? What are the causes of their social exclusion?



Do they have the resources and means to access the workforce? Do they have job opportunities?



Which are the objectives your territory in terms of sustainability? Are they linakble and in line to the SDGs for the territory/community? Are they potentially generating cohesion for the territory/community?

Moreover, the four founding social cooperatives of the Consortium were also aware that social inclusion couldn’t and cannot be pursued without a broader discussion and reflection encompassing a wider local regeneration and development strategy. Hence, joint and coordinated efforts were understood to be fundamental to achieve this purpose

11

PHASE 1. GATHERING KEY ORGANISATIONS Insights from the case study

Suggested actions

Self-assessment questions

MAIN ACTORS The Consortium finds its origins from a single local B-type  social cooperative which was founded in 1996 by a group of labour union members, social operators and psychologists 9 employing people suffering from mental issues, namely the patients of the local Mental Health Department (some of whom soon became members of the cooperatives along with some of their relatives).

Map your local context to identify, if any, social enterprise or similar organizations already active in employing people experiencing social exclusion and/or in delivering social/welfare programs and/or in valorising the local territory (i.e., sustainable agriculture)



Are there local social enterprises or similar organizations already active in employing people experiencing social exclusion and/or in delivering social/welfare programs and/or in valorising the local territory in your context?





Who are those people experiencing or at risk of social exclusion in your context?

Map your local context to identify who are those people experiencing or at risk of social exclusion.



 The social cooperative soon started to engage with a local association of a volunteers linked to a catholic order devoted to a “social Catholicism” idea and carrying out charitable  activities.

Map your local context to identify if there are other actors working for the same social purpose and vocation.

What are their main barriers to social inclusion? (i.e., resources, institutions, asymmetric power relation, conflictual relations, low participation, lack of cooperatives or community associations, …)



Are there local third sector actors working for the same social purpose and vocation?



Can local public bodies support the servicedemand for these work-integration social enterprises (or similar organization), i.e., by subcontracting public services? If not, is there a local demand for specific services/goods which the work integration social enterprises can satisfy?

Patients of the local public Mental Health Department.

The local municipality which subcontracted the provision of public welfare services and the management of the Centre for Disabilities (see section Activities below) to the social cooperative.

Investigate if local public bodies offer tendering processes to subcontract public service delivery in order to secure a source of revenue. If absent, carry out a market analysis in order to identify potential clients for the offered services/products.

MAIN RESOURCES During the planning stage, the main resources were not economic, rather human resources. In fact, a key ingredient was the willingness of these first actors to join forces and act together for a common purpose.



Make sure these local actors and organizations have a strong common understanding of the social inclusion and local development strategy as well as shared core values and mission. Most importantly,



Are these actors sharing a common social purpose willing to cooperate and to join forces and strategies?

9

This group of people followed the mission and vocation of the so-called “Democratic Psychiatry”. The latter is an Italian society which triggered a historical national psychiatric reform contrasting the social and economic exclusion of people suffering from mental issues and forced to internment in mental institutions, now illegal in the Italian legislation.

12

Subcontracted public services on the part of the municipality to the first social cooperative for the provision of cleaning services (namely, public funds).

makes sure these actors are willing to cooperate to pursue them. 



Is there a demand for the offered services/products coming from the public or private sector which can secure sources of revenue?



Are these actors sharing a common social purpose willing to cooperate and to join forces and strategies?

Adapt your offered goods/services to the real public or private demand in order to secure sources of revenue for the work-integration strategy.

MAIN ACTIVITIES

The first social cooperative began by offering public cleaning  services (subcontracted public services) and employing people suffering from mental issues coming from the local public Mental Health Department (some of whom became members of the cooperatives along with some of their relatives) but soon started to engage with other third sector actors, namely the local association of a volunteers linked to a catholic order.

When beginning to collaborate with other local actors and organizations, make sure the latter have a strong common understanding of the social inclusion and local development strategy as well as shared core values and mission. Most importantly, makes sure these actors are willing to cooperate to pursue them.

Together with the latter, efforts to provide job opportunities as  well as socialization opportunities also for people with disabilities were put in place. For this purpose, a Centre for Disabilities was set up (through public tendering process) aiming at the socialization and emancipation of people with disabilities.

Consider if the work-integration/social inclusion pursued strategy could also target other kinds of social exclusion than originally envisaged.



Can these already active local social enterprises or similar organizations expand their target and include people experiencing also other kinds of social exclusion?

13

PHASE 2. INTERCEPTING RESOURCES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR START UP Insights from the case study

Suggested actions

Self-assessment questions

MAIN ACTORS People experiencing social and economic exclusion such as  people suffering from mental health issues, people subject to prison or alternative measures to prison, people suffering from drug addiction.  The local External Criminal Enforcement Office, a peripheral office belonging to the Ministry of Justice dealing with social reintegration of people sentenced to prison or alternative measures to prison.

Intercept and engage people experiencing or at risk of social exclusion in your context and which can be targeted by the work-integration strategy.



Who are those people experiencing or at risk of social exclusion in your context and which can be targeted by the work-integration strategy?

Reach out to public /judicial bodies and advocate for their approval/support in carrying out the work-integration strategy when tackling specific types of social exclusion which require their decision-making.



If some particular types of social exclusion (i.e., experience of prison) entail the decisionmaking of public/judicial bodies, can the latter be engaged in the work-integration strategy?

An important external funder focused on social economy  projects in the South of Italy (“Con il Sud Foundation”).



Intercept and engage relevant local, national or international funders willing to fund innovative social economy programs in your territory and to share a common vocation and human development vision.

Are there relevant funders financing innovative social economy programs in your territory?



Are there strategic actors in your local context pursuing the same social vocation and mission which you can engage?



When the activities scale up and increase in number and variety, can you provide a suited internal organization?



Is there the possibility to negotiate with public bodies in order to unlock new sources of funding to finance social and work-integration activities and programs?



Can funding be obtained from external funders/programs supporting socially oriented initiatives in your territory?



Can other types of support be obtained from

A local pastoral organization (local diocese).

Two additional “operational branches” originating from the first social cooperative soon gave life to two other social  cooperatives working in strong synergy.



Make sure you identify and engage all possible strategic actors in your local context pursuing the same social vocation and mission.

Make sure your internal organization is fit for the variety of services and goods you offer.

MAIN RESOURCES

Ministerial public funds obtained through public tendering process for the social reintegration of people sentenced to prison or alternative measures to prison.

560.000 euro fund awarded by an important external funder focused on social economy projects in the South of Italy (“Con il Sud Foundation”) to the social cooperatives for a project aiming at the social inclusion and work integration of people suffering from mental health issues.





Raise the necessary funds to carry out the social and work-integration programs and strategies, i.e.: public funds through tendering processes, funds provided by external funders or programs supporting socially oriented initiatives in your territory.

Seek also for other types of support, apart from direct funding, such as available/unused/abandoned premises and land

14

Funds originated by the Rural Development Program (a national application of an EU-funded rural development policy10 ) allowing for the renovation and regeneration of a large ancient farm.

which you can transform into assets to carry out your activities. Strategic partnerships and collaborations are usually necessary for this purpose (i.e., with the municipality or other public bodies, pastoral organizations, private citizens, third sector organizations, private companies).

Funds provided by the pastoral organization (in turn obtained by the national public funds destined to social, charitable and cultural projects by civil society/third sector organizations or religious organizations)11 to carry out a wide range of local projects and activities aimed at social inclusion.

other actors/supporters/funders premises, buildings)? 

(i.e.,

land,

Can you access unsused resources (abandoned land, premises, buildings, discarded materials and by-products from local production chains, etc.) in your local context which can be an opportunity to boost the local economy and create employment?

Abandoned and uncultivated land and unused premises provided by the pastoral organization to carry out the social inclusion activities and programmes.

An abandoned village entrusted by the Municipality to the pastoral organization and, in turn, to the social cooperatives.

MAIN ACTIVITIES Thanks to the collaboration with the local External Criminal Enforcement Office, the Centre for Disabilities which was set up in the previous phase and aiming at the socialization and emancipation of people with disabilities soon began to host also people sentenced to prison and alternative measures to prison.



Map and actively identify opportunities to establish strategic collaborations with other organizations/public bodies in order to reach out to and engage with other people experiencing or at risk of social exclusion (also different types of social exclusion).



Are there opportunities to establish strategic collaborations with other organizations/public bodies in order to reach out to and engage with other people experiencing or at risk of social exclusion (also different types of social exclusion)?

The consistent fund awarded by the external funder (the Con il Sud Foundation) was strategic in order to carry out the necessary investments to deliver several projects for the socialization, emancipation and work integration of people suffering from social exclusion (i.e., people with disabilities, people sentenced to prison or alternative measures to prison, people suffering from drug addiction). A wide range of welfare services, agricultural and craftsmanship activities, as well as the management of a social farm, a social village, residential and reception centres for people suffering from drug addiction required the set-up of a second operational branch originated from the first social cooperative, which eventually, in 2005, became another social cooperative on its own.



Once funds are secured, carry out your actions/programs engaging and collaborating with all the necessary organizations.





As the number and variety of offered goods and services increase, be ready to make appropriate internal organizational changes: i.e., perhaps differentiate the organization in more than one operational branch or create/engage with other complimentary organizations sharing the same purpose but each delivering specific services.

Once funds are secured, are you able to carry out concrete activities and programs for the social and work-integration of people experiencing or at risk of social exclusion and/or the valorisation of the territory?



As the number and variety of offered goods and services increase, can you ensure the best internal organization fit for your purpose?



When carrying out successful experiences, external actors/organizations might become interested in joining forces/partnering/replicating your initiative. When such proposals arise, are you able to promptly seize the opportunity and expand/differentiate your service/product offer

10 11



Be open and flexible when new opportunities arise, even if coming from totally different sectors. Strategic partners, in fact, can potentially unlock new sources of funding and resources,

https://ec.europa.eu/info/food-farming-fisheries/key-policies/common-agricultural-policy/rural-development_it.

The so-called 8x1000 funds.

15

The success of the social farm where both prisoners, former prisoners or people subject to alternative measures to prison as well as people with disabilities began socializing and carrying out urban agricultural activities sparked the attention of the local pastoral organization (the local diocese) which asked the cooperatives to become the managers of all its local charitable activities. This encounter between the third sector world working for economic and social inclusion (the social cooperatives and the voluntary group) and the pastoral world opened a vast pool of opportunities for the former to carry out numerous and different activities ranging from canteens, dormitories, reception services for migrants and needy families, in order to respond to any type of social need. Therefore, a third social cooperative set up as another operational branch originating from the first one was subsequently founded to manage these activities.

new clients and market opportunities, new needs to be satisfied and beneficiaries to target.

Make sure your internal organization is fit to respond to these new opportunities.

accordingly? 

Can you adapt your internal organization (i.e., opening another branch or creating another similar organization) in order to adequately respond to the new service/product demand?

16

PHASE 3. FORMALIZING COLLABORATION UNDER A CONSORTIUM MODEL Insights from the case study

Suggested actions

Self-assessment questions

MAIN ACTORS 

Connect active and motivated key organizations (i.e., social cooperatives) in order to understand the possible benefits of collaborating and structuring their activities under an umbrella organization (i.e., a Consortium of social cooperatives) pursuing a common local development strategy and maximizing territorial impact.



Who are those key organizations (i.e., social cooperatives, social enterprises) able and willing to cooperate under an umbrella organization, such as a Consortium of social enterprises? Can this type of overarching organization help them to carry out a more holistic and integrated local development approach?

The local public health service provider approving the so-called Health Budgets (see section Activities below).





Surrounding local entities and municipalities adhering to “The Welcoming Small Municipalities” network (see section Activities below).

Engage with actors/organizations/public bodies which can support and/or scale the social impact.

Who are those actors/organizations/public bodies which can support and/or scale the social impact?



If the pursued local development strategy centred on social inclusion proves to be successful, there are good chances that surrounding territories, if sharing similar contexts, could also benefit from the same strategy. In that case, promote the strategy perhaps through the launch of a common manifesto/network in order to spark more interest and to formalize the engagement of local public entities.



Can the carried out local development strategy be promoted and applied to surrounding municipalities/territories? Could they benefit from the same strategy? Can the strategy be “branded” under a common manifesto/network to spark more interest and engagement?



Are there opportunities to secure more stable sources of funding (whether public or private) in order to carry out the social and work-integration programs and activities?



Can the selling of your goods and services guarantee a source of revenue covering

The three key social cooperatives carrying out the activities mentioned in previous phases and an additional fourth agricultural cooperative. Together, these four cooperatives combined under an umbrella organization, namely a Consortium, sharing the same development strategy, the same social mission, and each delivering specific services.

The local pastoral organization.

MAIN RESOURCES Public Health Budgets 12 which allowed the social cooperatives to secure individual three-year budgets for each person with disability, hence guaranteeing a more stable and personalized fund revenue for their social and work re-integration projects.



Seek for more stable sources of funding (whether public or private) in order to carry out the social and work-integration programs and activities

Public national funds destined to public entities and third sector organization in order to carry out three-year projects aimed at the 12

Public funds allocated for the implementation of individualized therapeutic rehabilitation projects.

17

social inclusion and work integration programs for migrants (the so-called SPRAR system).

production/service delivery costs?

Revenues coming from the productive activities carried out by the cooperatives such as hotel services, agricultural productions and value chains, shops, restaurants, craftsmanship and more.

MAIN ACTIVITIES At this stage, a fourth key cooperative joined forces with the other three. The latter was founded in 2013 by young graduates returning from abroad to carry out social agricultural activities which they defined as “cohesive agriculture”. Together, these four key cooperatives which had been building over time a strong common history as well as a shared development model through their social inclusion activities, decided to create the Consortium “Sale della Terra”. The latter has, on the one hand, the objective of giving continuity to these activities pursuing the social and economic inclusion of people at risk of marginalization or belonging to disadvantaged social categories. On the other, the consortium pursues a broader local development and local regeneration of the territory centred on social inclusion.

The social cooperatives together with the families of the patients of Mental Health Department and the local pastoral organization advocated and carried out a legal process to demand the local public health service provider to apply the reform recognizing the Health Budgets 13 approved by the regional law since 2012 but still not operating at the local level. This allowed the social cooperatives to secure individual three-year Health Budgets for each person with disability, hence guaranteeing a more stable and personalized fund for their re-integration projects. These funds allowed the social cooperatives to manage additional activities such as a “dispersed” hotel and a social residence, urban gardens and more.

The social cooperatives managed to access the public national fund destined to public entities and third sector organization in order to carry out three-year projects aimed at the social inclusion and work integration programs for migrants (the so-called SPRAR system).

Thanks to the combined funds coming from the Health Budgets and the SPRAR system, the social cooperatives (soon to become a Consortium) triggered a local regeneration strategy for the 13



Formalise the collaboration of key  organizations (i.e., social enterprises) under an umbrella organization (i.e., a Consortium of social enterprises) pursuing a common local development strategy and maximizing territorial impact. A Consortium can have different institutional and organizational set up according to its functions. The latter are mainly identifiable in provision of support  services to its member cooperatives, (i.e., administrative services, advice, training, facilitation of access to credit, etc.); political representation; and an entrepreneurial function mainly by acting as a general contractor. 



Seek for more stable sources of funding (whether public or private) in order to carry out the social and work-integration programs and activities. If not available, assess whether an advocacy activity is feasible in order to obtain them.



If the pursued local regeneration and development strategy centred on social inclusion proves to be successful, there are good chances that surrounding territories, if sharing similar contexts, could also benefit from the same strategy. In that case, promote the strategy perhaps through the launch of a common manifesto/network in order to spark more interest and to formalize the engagement of local public entities.

Are key organizations (i.e., social enterprises) able and willing to cooperate under an umbrella organization, such as a Consortium of social enterprises? Can this type of overarching organization help them to carry out a more holistic and integrated local development approach?

Are there opportunities to secure more stable sources of funding (whether public or private) in order to carry out the social and work-integration programs and activities? If not available, is an advocacy activity feasible in order to obtain them?

Can the carried out local development strategy be promoted and applied to surrounding municipalities/territories? Could they benefit from the same strategy? Can the strategy be “branded” under a common manifesto/network to spark more interest and engagement?

Public funds allocated for the implementation of individualized therapeutic rehabilitation projects.

18

surrounding small municipalities at risk of depopulation and abandonment precisely based on social inclusion projects. This strategy was soon joined by a number of surrounding municipalities forming the network called “The Welcoming Small Municipalities” (namely “Piccoli Comuni del Welcome”- PCW) and actively began promoting the set-up of community cooperatives employing both locals and refugees, people with disabilities, detained persons or people sentenced to alternative measures to prison, thanks to the beforementioned sources of funding. The aim of this strategy is to inspire and “contaminate” surrounding territories in adopting the Consortium’s local development vision and strategy.

19

SUSTAINAIBILITY Insights from the case study The sustainability dimension is intrinsic to the Consortium chosen strategy: each awarded project carried out first by the social cooperatives and then by the Consortium was intended to trigger the set-up of self-sustainable activities operating in the local territory, i.e., new community cooperatives which today amount to 6, while other 4 are planned in the near future.

In fact, while the Consortium experience began with a 100% reliance on public funds destined to welfare services, at present it has reached a relevant economic autonomy. In fact, its investment in productive activities such as hotels, agricultural productions and value chains, shops, restaurants, craftsmanship and more now allows the Consortium to rely, at least for 50%, on its own revenues, while the other half still intercepts public welfare funding to carry out its social inclusion projects (i.e., health budgets and SPRAR for the community cooperatives).

The Consortium aims at maintaining a collaborative, “balanced” and not over-reliant relationship with the public bodies. The latter entails the co-design and co-managing of social inclusion and work integration projects.

Suggested actions

Self-assessment questions



Design, implement and invest in activities and projects which are able to self-sustain over time: i.e., entrepreneurial activities pursued with fitted organizational models such as social enterprises, community cooperatives.



Can the sustainability dimension be integrated in all activities’ design and implementation? Is it possible to escape from a project-oriented approach to a more entrepreneurial approach generating selfsustainable activities operating in the local territory?



As much as possible, maintain a “balanced” and not over-reliant relationship with the public bodies and funds. Prefer the co-design and co-management approach rather than mere execution of social inclusion projects.



Are key actors able to maintain a “balanced” and not over-reliant relationship with the public bodies they collaborate with? Can they dialogue in a position of co-designers and co-managers of social inclusion projects?





Future perspectives may not simply be those of growing in terms of activities, products and services, staff or revenues, but also in sharing one’s own best practice and success in order to inspire other territories to imitate and replicate the same development strategy although tailored to local needs.

Which are the future perspectives? Are they geared more towards internal growth or towards inspiring other territories with a common local development strategy?

The Consortium future perspective is geared more towards sharing and inspiring other territories rather than just growing in terms of activities, products and services, staff or revenues.

Its vocation is that of permeating surrounding localities which share or have the potential of sharing the same welcoming and inclusive culture. In fact, nowadays the Consortium member cooperatives operate in four different Italian regions. Although sharing the same vision and culture, the latter have developed somewhat different experiences as they build on contextualized local needs and motivations. For example, in one case activities are mainly focused on the social integration of migrants, while, in others towards, on the regeneration of abandoned and uncultivated land.

20

4. KEY DETERMINANTS FOR EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION AND REPLICABILITY

Categories ACTORS AND INSTITUTIONS

Description 

People experiencing social and economic exclusion.



Organizations which can carry out social and welfare programs and/or entrepreneurial activities aimed valorising the territory and/or at employing people experiencing social and economic exclusion (such as work integration social enterprises/social cooperatives) able and willing to work under a common umbrella organization (i.e., a consortium), hence sharing a common vision and local development strategy.



Who are those living a condition of social exclusion in your context? Do they have the resources and means to access the workforce? Do they have job opportunities?



Are there work-integration social enterprises or similar organizations in your local context carrying out an entrepreneurial activity aimed at valorising the territory and/or employing people experiencing social and economic exclusion, able and willing to work under a common umbrella organization (i.e., a Consortium)?

Clients of the abovementioned organisations (i.e., WorkIntegration Social Enterprises, cooperatives or similar organizations), whether private consumers, public or private subcontractors (such as, for example, the local municipality subcontracting public services), hence constituting a market demand.



Are there clients, whether private or public consumers/subcontractors willing to purchase your offered products and services in your local context?





Are there private companies/organizations which can be strategic business partners/suppliers in the local value chain in your local context?

Private companies as business partners in the local value chain.





Third sector actors and organizations working for the same social purpose and vocation, hence social inclusion and local development (i.e., groups of volunteers, citizen associations, religious entities carrying out charitable initiatives and more).

Are there third sector actors and organizations in your local context working for the same social purpose and vocation, hence social inclusion and local development (i.e., groups of volunteers, citizen associations, religious entities carrying out charitable initiatives) which can potentially be strategic partners?





Public entities and bodies at various levels (i.e., municipal level, regional level, ministerial level) supporting, through tendering processes, the entrusting of public and welfare services to third sector organizations working for social inclusion.

Are there public entities and bodies at various levels (i.e., municipal level, regional level, ministerial level) in your context which can entrust you the delivery of public services and welfare services (i.e., through public tendering processes)?



Are there external funders devoted to supporting initiatives and projects with a social purpose which could be willing to provide you with the necessary funding?



Can the Consortium count on a collaborative, trusted and supported multi-stakeholder territorial local network (i.e., business partners, welfare service providers, suppliers, third sector



SOCIAL CAPITAL

Self-assessment questions



External funders devoted to supporting initiatives and projects with a social purpose.



Solid and collaborative territorial network encompassing a wide range of stakeholders, such as clients, business partners, welfare service providers, suppliers, third sector organizations building on mutual trust, collaboration, credibility and strong

21

engagement with the social/environmental vocation and mission.

HUMAN CAPITAL

GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK



The presence of a social culture which is inclusive and welcoming towards all citizens, regardless of their social and economic condition, country of origin, background history or any other physical, sensorial or cognitive impairment. In other words, the presence of a culture which acknowledges that centring a local development strategy on social inclusion can unlock new opportunities for multi-dimensional wellbeing for all.



Strong social vocation, motivation and engagement



Strong willingness to collaborate and to join forces in order to achieve a greater social impact.



Strong entrepreneurial mindset and skills able to set up selfsustaining and revenue-generating activities.



Strong sector-specific competence, expertise and know-how.



A Consortium of social enterprises (or similar organizations) builds, first of all, on a shared objective and social mission, on a strong collaboration and coordination among its members and the core willingness to join forces in order to maximize the social impact.



A Consortium can have different institutional and organizational set up according to its functions. The latter are mainly identifiable in provision of support services to its member cooperatives, (i.e., administrative services, advice, training, facilitation of access to credit, etc.); political representation; and an entrepreneurial function mainly by acting as a general contractor. To this purpose, the Consortium defines:

organizations)? 

Is there an inclusive and welcoming social culture in your context which can acknowledge that centring a local development strategy on social inclusion can unlock new opportunities for multi-dimensional wellbeing for all?



Are the Consortium members strongly motivated and engaged with the social mission? Are they willing and able to effectively collaborate to achieve a greater social impact? Do they have the technical, sector-specific and entrepreneurial capability and expertise?



Is the social mission strongly shared by all the organizations members of the Consortium? Are the latter willing to collaborate and coordinate with each other to achieve the social mission and to maximize the social impact?



Can the organizations members of the Consortium agree on a functional and structured organizational and institutional set up defining its governance model?

- the ensemble of activities to be carried out by the central body of the Consortium on behalf of its member organi zations; - the organizational set-up entailing the central body and the set of rules and procedures governing the HR management systems as well as the management of the strategic planning and monitoring, and the information system; - the Consortium staff; - the Consortium assets and management.

22

- the set-up of internal regulations in regard to the methods of access, withdrawal or exclusion from the Consortium; the contributions each Consortium member ought to pay for the services and activities carried out for them; the regulation of internal competition among members. 



Is there a legal form in your context recognizing an entrepreneurial organization’s social/environmental mission (i.e., social enterprise, social cooperative or other forms of enterprise which can benefit from an ad hoc fiscal and regulatory regime and recognition for their social mission)? Does it also recognize their formal collaboration in the form of a Consortium? If not, which legal form in your local context is the best suited to carry out entrepreneurial activities by a coordinated group of organizations with a social inclusion mission?



Is there a public welfare system and relative tools (i.e., dedicated funding mechanisms) in your context recognizing and supporting the social inclusion of people belonging to fragile and vulnerable social categories? If yes, can you access these tools and mechanisms in support to your social inclusion projects and activities? If not, are there other similar support systems and frameworks set up by private, third sector, or international cooperation actors and organizations?



Is there a market demand for the produced goods/offered services by the Consortium in your local context?



The demand for produced goods and/or offered services may also come from public bodies and institutions at different levels, hence providing public funds through tendering processes entrusting subcontracted public or welfare services.

Is there a public demand for the produced goods/offered services by the Consortium in your local context? Hence, are there public funds that can be intercepted to finance your work-integration activities?





Are there available external funds coming from organizations supporting initiatives and programs with social purposes in your context?

Funds can also be obtained from external funders supporting initiatives and programs with social purposes.





Tangible assets such as available/unused/abandoned premises and land which are free-of-charge and/or conditional to carrying out initiatives with social purposes provided by, for example, public bodies, pastoral organizations, private citizens, third sector organizations, private companies.

Are there tangible assets which you can intercept, such as available/unused/abandoned premises and land provided by, for example, public bodies, pastoral organizations, private citizens, third sector organizations, private, which can be strategic to carry out your initiatives? Are there intangible assets which can be recovered, for example local ancient crafts and traditions?

INSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK 

 ECONOMIC RESOURCES 

A legal framework recognizing the legal form of work-integration social enterprises (and their Consortium).

A public welfare system providing funds for personalized projects aiming at the social re-integration of particular categories of socially excluded people.

The existence of a market demand for the produced goods/offered services is the most fundamental condition for any entrepreneurial organization, especially if having the vocation to provide job opportunities for socially and economically excluded people.

23



Intangible assets such as the recovery of local ancient crafts and traditions.

BASIC INFRASTRUCTURES



At least basic infrastructure needed to carry out the entrepreneurial activity and service provision on the part of the members of the Consortium (i.e., social enterprises, agricultural cooperatives, or similar organizations).



Is your local context furnished with the basic infrastructures allowing to carry out the work-integration/entrepreneurial activities?

SERVICES



Technical support to constitute and run the Consortium (i.e., legal, fiscal support).



Are there organizations/individuals that can provide technical support to constitute and run the Consortium?

24

5. DRAWBACKS AND RISKS

DRAWBACKS AND RISKS

COPING STRATEGIES

Which are the main risks that may arise?

Which are the best strategies that could be implemented in order to cope with and/or prevent these risks?

When activities scale up and day-to-day management and implementation demand growing energies and work, there is a potential risk of losing sight of the pursued social vision and mission over time.

When collaborating or accessing public funds/support there is a risk of becoming over dependant on the public sector and of losing decisional and operational autonomy.

One of the greatest challenges in the growth phase of a social cooperatives/consortium of social cooperatives is building a brand identity and a strong credibility. This entails being able to meet a market demand and market performance.



It is crucial that the organization’s overarching vision continues to be actively pursued and strongly shared among the Consortium members and staff.



As much as possible, it is necessary to maintain a “balanced” and not over-reliant relationship with the public bodies and funds. This entails preferring the co-design and comanagement rather than mere execution of social inclusion projects.



To face the market credibility challenge a constant high-quality service provision/ production performance is necessary.

25

6. FINAL REMARKS 

Value-added of this model and case-study as a driver for sustainable human development and SDG localization

Consortium of social cooperatives can, indeed, represent a potential driving force for sustainable human development. In fact, as each of its member organisations actively addresses social needs and social inclusion, the Consortium model potentially allows them to coordinate their single efforts, scale their impact and promote a systemic effect on the territory. In other words, the Consortium of social cooperatives enables “social” economies of scale, in the sense that it can cut costs by centralizing strategic planning and management, external communication and internal information system, HR management, administration, facilitate credit access and other core entrepreneurial activities. Moreover, it allows for a greater contractual weight than single cooperatives when participating to tendering processes, whether public or opened by other types of organizations. In turn, this enables to access a greater pool of opportunities in terms of increased, more differentiated and higher quality service delivery and project implementation as well as increased marke t opportunities for work-integration social cooperatives. Consequently, more beneficiaries can be targeted and reached, more people experiencing social and economic exclusion can be trained and employed. In addition, Consortiums also give the possibility to include, under the same governance structure, different organizations, such as social cooperatives, social enterprises, cooperatives, companies, in order to implement specific local development projects and strategies.

In broader terms, Consortium of social cooperatives can contribute to maximizing territorial social impact as they can leverage more resources in order to carry out a more overarching and systematic development policy and vision that goes beyond and encompasses the direct social outcomes of a single social cooperative.

The ensemble of coordinated and coherent actions of a multitude of territorial organization pursuing a strong and shared social mission and vision generates a potential for a systemic and innovative change in the local economic, social and welfare systems as a whole. The analysed case study is an illustrative example in this regard as the “Sale della Terra” local development strategy based on social inclusion has been indeed endorsed and welcomed by surrounding municipalities which have adhered to the Welcoming Small Municipalities manifesto launched by the Consortium. Hence, the latter has gained territorial credibility able to inspire and convince surrounding public bodies to endorse its strategy. In addition, the Consortium was able, together with other territorial stakeholders as well as the families of people with disabilities, to advocate for the advancement and implementation of the Health Budget reform on the part of the local public service provider. This means that the Consortium gained credibility and successful experience has the potential to bring about change, to accelerate reforms and social transformations also the public institutions. Moreover, new cooperatives have joined the Consortium while operating in different neighbouring Italian regions and addressing local needs and offering tailored services. This is emblematic of the suitability of the Consortium of social cooperatives model which allows pursuing systemic and coherent local development policies while providing context-specific activities and services tailored to specific territorial needs. 

Final determinants to be considered when implementing this model in other contexts.

The organizational model of a Consortium of social cooperatives (or similar organizations) allows for a flexible and adaptable response to localized territorial needs, hence showcases a high potential for successful application in different contexts. In other words, it is a versatile and suitable model that provides an

26

organizational umbrella to local organizations pursuing a common human development vision. However, an underlying and fundamental assumption for the implementation of this model is that these territorial actors and organizations (i.e., social cooperatives, cooperatives, social enterprises, companies) share the same understanding of human development as well the same strategy to achieve it (i.e., through social inclusion and social cohesion). Moreover, these actors should be willing to collaborate and join forces to achieve this social vision. As the analysed case study shows, it was the founding social cooperatives ’ decision to form the Consortium once realized that they were sharing a common history, a common purpose and a common strategy.

In addition, these actors were already carrying out activities in strong coordination and synergy and acknowledged that formalizing this coordination under a formal umbrella organization could bring about more benefits and allow them to achieve a greater impact. Other relevant determinants for the implementation of this model are the building of territorial social cohesion and social capital, as well as the capacity building of main stakeholders. Also, for the model to generate local impact, it is important to develop the capacity to dialogue, collaborate and partner with multi-level and multi-actor territorial stakeholders.

In a way, creating a Consortium is, indeed, a bottom-up process stemming from local, active and motivated organization, rather than a top-down set-up. For this reason, in our process analysis, the creation of the Consortium comes somewhat at the final stage (Phase 3) of the process instead of the beginning (Phase 1 or Phase 2) as it built from pre-existing and active organizations (social cooperatives) which, eventually, came together and joined forces.

27

USEFUL CONTACTS

UNDP ART GLOBAL INITIATIVE Contact person: Andrea Agostinucci; Raffaella Garutti Email: andrea.agostinucci@undp.org; raffaella.garutti@undp.org Website: www.undp.org

ARCO (Action Research for CO-development) Contact person: Enrico Testi Email: enrico.testi@pin.unifi.it Website: www.arcolab.org

Consortium Sale della Terra: Contact person: Gabriella Debora Giorgione Email: presidente@consorziosaledellaterra.it Website: https://consorziosaledellaterra.it/

28