ENHANCING SOCIAL COHESION: A STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP THROUGH THE PARTICIPATORY MODEL
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Abstract
The purpose of the article is to formulate a strategic framework that emphasises the interdependence between social cohesion and social entrepreneurship as a tool for reintegrating servicemen, veterans and their families based on an assessment of the level of social cohesion in the local hromada (territorial community) affected by the conflict and the identification of levers that will facilitate the development of social entrepreneurship initiatives driven by the level of social cohesion in the hromada. Methodology. The survey instrument was structured around five conceptual blocks, each probing distinct aspects of social cohesion: sense of belonging and hromada identity, shared challenges and collective problem-solving, interaction and communication patterns, common social and cultural practices, mutual assistance and support networks. The study sample included 150 residents of Chernihiv hromada. The study used a purposive sampling strategy to ensure representation of different segments of the Chernihiv hromada, with a particular focus on groups relevant to social cohesion and reintegration efforts. The survey results are broken down by components of social cohesion. A significant number of respondents rated their sense of belonging to the hromada as "very important", emphasising the strong collective identity based on the hromada's rich historical heritage. Heritage not only promotes social cohesion, but also creates opportunities for social entrepreneurship, and initiatives such as heritage tourism and traditional crafts bring economic benefits. Collective resilience, especially in the context of post-insurgency recovery, has become a powerful unifying force, reinforcing the social values of collective support. Respondents identified local economic development as a crucial factor, emphasising their commitment to supporting small businesses. The survey also showed that responsible governance plays a vital role in hromada engagement: 80% of participants recognised successful co-operation between citizens and local authorities. Civic engagement and hromada involvement were identified as key pillars of belonging to the hromada (67% of respondents value active participation in hromada affairs). The commitment to inclusive social integration of internally displaced persons and veterans further illustrates the hromada's commitment to social cohesion. Priorities include economic development, infrastructure restoration and security, reflecting the hromada's focus on recovery. Communication patterns indicate a satisfactory level of interaction between residents, and shared cultural practices and mutual support networks are considered vital to strengthening social cohesion. Practical implications. The results of the study can be used for further research and practical application to develop a strategy for the development of social entrepreneurship at all taxonomic levels. Value / Originality. The original approach to developing a strategic framework, which emphasises the interdependence between social cohesion and social entrepreneurship as a tool for reintegrating military personnel, veterans and their families, is based on the study of the components of social cohesion from the perspective of residents, and contributes to the conceptualisation of a social entrepreneurship development strategy.
How to Cite
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
social cohesion, social entrepreneurship, veterans' reintegration, hromada development, participatory models
Bansal, S., Garg, I., Vasa, L. Can social enterprises aid sustainable development? Evidence from multi-stage investigations. PLoS One. 2023 Feb 13;18(2):e0281273. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281273. PMID: 36780465; PMCID: PMC9925014.
Besharov, M. (2022). Organizational Hybridity, Social Enterprise, and Social Innovation: Disentangling Concepts to Advance Theory and Practice. In Social Innovation and Social Enterprises: Toward a Holistic Perspective (pp. 15–33). Springer International Publishing.
Borzaga, et al. (2020). Social enterprises and their ecosystems in Europe: Comparative synthesis report. Publications Office. Available at: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2767/567551
Cardella, G. M., Hernández-Sánchez, B. R., Monteiro, A. A., & Sánchez-García, J. C. (2021). Social Entrepreneurship Research: Intellectual Structures and Future Perspectives. Sustainability, Vol. 13(14), 7532. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147532
Dees, J. G. (2018). The Meaning of ‘Social Entrepreneurship’. In J. Hamschmidt & M. Pirson (Eds.), Case Studies in Social Entrepreneurship and Sustainability (1st ed., pp. 22–30). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351278560-5
Dolacis, V., Gūtmane, S., & Rode, D. D. (2022). Social Entrepreneurship as a Form of Social Work for the Social Cohesion of Society. Tiltai, Vol. 87(2), p. 80–97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15181/tbb.v87i2.2319
Dutta, S., Lanvin, B., Rivera León, L., & Wunsch-Vincent, S. (2024). Global Innovation Index 2024: Innovation in the face of uncertainty. World Intellectual Property Organization. DOI: https://doi.org/10.34667/TIND.50062
Forrest, R., & Kearns, A. (2001). Social Cohesion, Social Capital and the Neighbourhood. Urban Studies, Vol. 38(12), p. 2125–2143. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980120087081
Godinho, M. A., Ashraf, M. M., Narasimhan, P., & Liaw, S. T. Understanding the convergence of social enterprise, digital health, and citizen engagement for co-producing integrated Person-Centred health services: A critical review and theoretical framework. Int J Med Inform. 2023 Oct;178:105174. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2023.105174. Epub 2023 Aug 6. PMID: 37573637.
Kuckertz, A., Bernhard, A., Berger, E. S. C., Dvouletý, O., Harms, R., Jack, S. & Kibler, E. (2023). Scaling the right answers – Creating and maintaining hope through social entrepreneurship in light of humanitarian crises. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, vol. 19, e00356. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbvi.2022.e00356
Macassa, G. Social Enterprise, Population Health and Sustainable Development Goal 3: A Public Health Viewpoint. Ann Glob Health. 2021 Jun 24;87(1):52. doi: https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.3231. PMID: 34221905; PMCID: PMC8231463.
Nahorna, N., & Maksom, K. (2022) Social entrepreneurship as a determinant of reintegration of military personnel, veterans of the ATO/OOS and their family members. Habitus Scientific journal of sociology and psychology, Vol. 36, pp. 272–276. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32843/2663-5208.2022.36.45
Palatna, D., & Semigina, T. (2024). Community Cohesion: Social Dimension. Tallinn: Teadmus. 315 p.
Revko, A., Verbytska, A., Zaharina, T., & Marks‑Krzyszkowska, M. (2023). The Financial Dimension of Developing Social Entrepreneurship: Polish and Ukrainian Experiences. Comparative Economic Research. Central and Eastern Europe, Vol. 26(4), p. 105–122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18778/1508-2008.26.33
Seiko, N., & Zakharina, Т. (2023). Civil Society as a Subject of the Formation of the Veterans Reintegration System. Social Work and Education, Vol. 10 (2), p. 167–177. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25128/2520-6230.23.2.2
Sivers, Z. (2023). Analysis of Theoretical Studies on Social Cohesion in Foreign Academic Literature. Problems of Political Psychology, Vol. 14(28), p. 36–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33120/popp-Vol14-Year2023-139
Verbytska, A., Nahorna, N., & Dyvnych, H. (2024). Participatory model of social entrepreneurship development as a determinant of veterans’ and their family members’ reintegration: theoretical framework. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, Vol. 10(2), p. 51–59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2024-10-2-51-59
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.