Torbjörn Einarsson

Vid såväl mindre som mer omfattande samhällsstörningar (i dagligt tal ”kriser”) bidrar ideella organisationer, trossamfund, folkrörelser och andra delar av civilsamhället ofta med insatser i de olika faserna av en kris där den offentliga sektorns resurser, kompetenser, tempo eller sätt att arbeta inte räcker till. Det gör man till exempel genom att mobilisera och koordinera volontärer, ordna med sovplatser, boende och tak över huvudet för utsatta grupper, bidra med transporter, hjälpa till med matinköp, ge röst åt och stöd för de mest sårbara och utsatta i vårt samhälle. Dessa insatser sker inte sällan i samverkan med andra idéburna organisationer och med offentliga aktörer som kommuner, sjukhus, skolor eller statliga myndigheter samt med näringslivets företag.

Previous research has often focused on the board of directors as the primary actor in the governance of membership-based organizations (MBOs). This chapter aims at a broader approach to MBOs’ internal democratic governance systems by casting the rank-and-file members as the main actors. Drawing on two models, one dealing with member influence and the other portraying single- and multilevel MBOs, the chapter discusses key elements in these organizations’ governance systems, including statutes, the board of directors, nomination committees, lay auditors, modes of member influence, appointment of elected representatives, annual meetings and general assemblies. The intent of the chapter is to raise awareness regarding the scope and complexity of governance in MBOs and to suggest some directions for future research. © Editors and Contributors Severally 2021.

This article deals with the policy discourse on social innovation at the European Union (EU) level as well as across nine European countries. We perform an exploratory analysis of relevant policy documents focusing on articulated policy authority, suggested actors, and key outcomes of social innovation. We also conduct an explanatory testing of the applicability of the varieties of capitalism as a traditional innovation classification system to social innovation. We find that the policy discourse across Europe lacks systemization and that EU agendas are only incompletely replicated at the individual country level. We also find that social innovation policies largely defy the principles governing traditional innovation policy regimes, which necessitates new or revised classification frames.

Building on theories from different fields, we discuss the roles that volunteers can play in the generation, implementation, and diffusion of social innovations. We present a study relying on 26 interviews with volunteer managers, other professionals, volunteers, and one former volunteer in 17 (branches of) third sector organizations in eight European countries. We identify organizational factors that help and hinder volunteer contributions to social innovation. While volunteer contributions to social innovations are encouraged by decentralized organizational structures, systematic “scaling up” of ideas, providing training, and giving a sense of ownership, they are hindered by a reluctant attitude and a lack of resources. This rich, explorative study makes it a fruitful start for further research on the relationship between volunteering and social innovation.

På hösten 2008 undertecknades Överenskommelsen mellan regeringen, idéburna organisationer inom det sociala området och Sveriges Kommuner och Landsting. Under de tio år som denna nationella Överenskommelse har funnits på plats så har åtminstone ett 20-tal lokala (kommunala) och regionala överenskommelser med likartad inriktning och lydelse tecknats. Baserat på tidigare forskning utgår vi i rapporten ifrån tanken att Överenskommelsen är en central komponent i den ’omförhandling av samhällskontraktet’ som vi menar pågår. I denna studie undersöker vi därmed frågan om hur den svenska Överenskommelsen på nationell nivå har påverkat förutsättningarna för det civila samhällets organisationer i det lokala. Studien är i huvudsak kvantitativ och försöker primärt besvara följande frågor om de lokala överenskommelser som har undertecknats på det sociala området under perioden 2009–2017: • Vad karakteriserar samverkan mellan civilsamhälle och ofentlig sektor inom ramen för de lokala överenskommelserna? • Vilka delar av den ideella sektorn är det som deltar i dessa lokala överenskommelser? • Leder överenskommelser på det lokala planet till någon ekonomisk eller organisatorisk tillväxt för det redan existerande civilsamhället? • Startas det fer nya ideella organisationer i samband med de lokala överenskommelserna?Sammanfattningsvis framträder några viktiga resultat både vad gäller civilsamhället inom Överenskommelsekommuner samt för de organisationer som själva anger att de deltar i lokala eller regionala överenskommelser.

Published in August 2018 by the United Nations Statistics Division, the new handbook Satellite Account on Nonprofit and Related Institutions and Volunteer Work calls on national statistical agencies to produce statistics for civil society. The handbook provides guidelines for producing statistics as part of the agencies’ regular official economic data-gathering and reporting. The handbook also provides guidelines for the development of a satellite account that presents data on nonprofit organizations within the framework of the System of National Accounts (SNA). The handbook is an update of a previous handbook so we will start our review from the original handbook.

During the last couple of decades interest in the role of nonprofit and civil society organizations and their role in society has grown increasingly stronger in different parts of the world. Lester Salamon, one of the architects behind the statistics gathering initiative, has labeled this “a global associational revolution” (Salamon 1994). Policy makers, researchers and civil society leaders alike had a similar need for current knowledge with a pronounced need for internationally comparable data.
Despite the new and developing interest, civil society organizations have remained poorly understood. Even basic knowledge of the size and structure of civil society has been lacking. One underlying reason for this lacuna was the fact that the SNA did not report separately on nonprofit or civil society organizations (CSOs). Rather, most data on these organizations are merged with data on others sectors in the SNA. This practice made civil society practically invisible in official national economic statistics.

The innovation stream that is the focus of this chapter is the new gover-nance of social services systems. By new governance of social services systems , we refer to the new ways of formulating and implementing policies and organising and controlling social services provision, which are becoming more decentralised and involve a network of interdependent, cooperative , and diverse actors from the different socioeconomic sectors (Hodges, 2005; Newman, 2004; Rhodes, 1997, 2007). These actors share goals and may, or may not, have formally prescribed responsibilities (Rosenau, 2000). Innovative governance of social services has appeared in the context of a generalised perception that the existing models of provision are unsustain-able in the long run, given the socioeconomic and demographic changes occurring across Europe for the few last decades. The ageing of the population , the integration of women in the labour market, new family models, immigration flows, new policy and regulatory frameworks and the gener-alised economic crisis starting in 2008 have affected both the demand and the supply of social services. In a context of escalating needs and shrinking public budgets, the gap between citizens' needs and expectations about the scope of social services and about the role of actors in the field, on the one hand; and the actual resources, capabilities and roles of funders, providers and beneficiaries, on the other hand, has broadened (Rey-Garcia & Felguei-ras, 2015a). This resource–needs gap is clearly patent in the case of social services needed by population segments that are the most vulnerable, because they depend on other people's care and/or on technical assistance to perform basic daily-life activities (mainly dependent elders, people with dementia, dependent people with chronic illnesses, and/or dependent people with disabilities). Hence, changes are taking place in the ways the systems of social services are governed, so that such resource–needs gap may be bridged for the most