Entrepreneurship in Society: A Review and Definition of Community-Based Entrepreneurship Research

Pierre, Anne; Friedrichs, Yvonne von; Wincent, Joakim

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-01396-1_11

Cited by 19 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Compared to the literature on SEs, the volume of work on CEs and their definitions is still relatively limited. Based on the work of Pearce (2003), Peredo and Chrisman (2006), Teasdale (2010), Somerville andMcElwee (2011), Bailey (2012), Pierre et al (2014) and Healey (2015), CEs are defined as businesses which are:…”

Section: Community Enterprisesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Second, giving full room to self-organization may result in increasing differences between community groups' resources and success, and hence issues of social inclusion and exclusion of weaker groups, which is highly unacceptable for politicians. Finally, the lack of empirical research on community-based entrepreneurship in Western Europe leaves scientists, policymakers, and citizens with open questions regarding the added value of CEs in terms of delivered benefits to deprived communities (Bailey 2012;Pierre et al 2014;Varady et al 2015) and the durability of this type of self-organization (Edelenbos, Van Meerkerk, and Schenk 2016;see also Pestoff 2014). These are clear challenges for further research in the burgeoning field of community-based entrepreneurship and public management.…”

Section: Conclusion and Directions For Further Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite the scientific and societal relevance of CEs, there is surprisingly little empirical research on community-based entrepreneurship in Western Europe (Bailey 2012;Pierre et al 2014). The available research consistently shows that CEs (need to) co-operate with various stakeholders, including local governments, to achieve better outcomes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

False promises of co-production in neighbourhood regeneration: the case of Dutch community enterprises

Kleinhans

2017

Public Management Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many European countries are implementing austerity measures alongside trends of welfare state retrenchment. Entrepreneurial forms of active citizenship are considered as a new form of public management to fill gaps left by spending cuts and to continue neighbourhood regeneration. Inspired by British practices, Dutch citizens are trying to set up community enterprises (CEs) to provide services or other benefits for residents in deprived neighbourhoods. Based on a qualitative panel study, this article reveals supportive responses but also resistance from local governments and housing associations. Within a positive policy discourse on co-production, institutional responses often encompass forms of 'counter-production' that hold CEs in full uncertainty about crucial conditions for their business.

show abstract

Section: Community Enterprisesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Conclusion and Directions For Further Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

False promises of co-production in neighbourhood regeneration: the case of Dutch community enterprises

Kleinhans

2017

Public Management Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many CEs arise in (former) urban regeneration target areas, where regeneration programs have come to a stop, creating both challenges and opportunities for CEs (Carpenter, 2013;Varady et al, 2015). Despite the scientific and societal relevance of CEs, there is surprisingly little empirical research on community-based entrepreneurship in Western Europe (Bailey, 2012;Pierre et al, 2014;Fortunato and Alter, 2015). Bailey (2012) analysed five case studies in multiple localities while others focus on one specific CE case study (Teasdale, 2010;Smith, 2012;Van Meerkerk et al, 2013;Healey, 2015).…”

Section: 1mentioning

confidence: 99%

The support paradox in community enterprise experiments in the Netherlands

Kleinhans

Ham

2017

IJESB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In many European countries, community entrepreneurship is increasingly considered as a means to initiate small-scale urban regeneration in the context of austerity policies and welfare state retrenchment. However, residents in deprived neighbourhoods are often viewed to lack key entrepreneurial attributes and skills. While there is research on community entrepreneurship support, most evidence is based on cross-sectional studies and overly focussed on support provided through government policies. This paper extends the current body of knowledge by reporting a unique national experiment in the Netherlands with nascent community enterprises which received start-up support from a private foundation. The paper aims is to investigate how active citizens perceive the benefits and drawbacks of this support. The approached used is unique because of its longitudinal nature right from the start of the experiment. The paper provides an in-depth analysis of transcriptions of repeated semi-structured interviews with the same respondents (panel design) from nascent community enterprises in a number of Dutch deprived neighbourhoods. While positive feedback on the support is found, the study provides strong evidence for a 'support paradox': the support that was intended to overcome a number of entry barriers and difficulties on the road to community entrepreneurship has in fact significantly hampered progress among several of the studied community enterprises.Keywords: community entrepreneurship, active citizenship, urban regeneration, selforganisation, The Netherlands. AcknowledgementsThis work was supported by the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom relations [Grant Number VP 7284] and LSA (the National Association of Active Residents). Our special thanks go to Wenda Doff and Arie Romein who conducted the interviews and site visits for this project. We are also indebted to Raymond Lunes and Floor Langendijk (Ministry of the Interior) as well as Henk Cornelissen, Ties de Ruijter and Marieke Boeije (LSA) for their constructive comments during the research project and completion of the final report. We are also thankful to all CE representatives who happily co-operated multiple times with the interviews.

show abstract

“…Community enterprises are often supported by local governments and other institutions, partly because they seek to be inclusive and work for the common good (Peredo and Chrisman, 2006;Somerville and McElwee, 2011;Bailey, 2012). However, there is little empirical and policy-related understanding of community enterprises (Teasdale, 2010;Pierre et al, 2014). Hence, the ways in which entrepreneurship can benefit, shape and transform neighbourhoods, particularly those areas affected by social deprivation and poverty, is an open and timely research question that will be addressed in this book.…”

Section: How Entrepreneurship Influences Neighbourhoods and Communitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unravelling the nexus between entrepreneurship, neighbourhoods and communities – introduction

Kleinhans¹,

Reuschke

Ham³

et al. 2017

Entrepreneurial Neighbourhoods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Entrepreneurship in Society: A Review and Definition of Community-Based Entrepreneurship Research

Cited by 19 publications

References 48 publications

False promises of co-production in neighbourhood regeneration: the case of Dutch community enterprises

False promises of co-production in neighbourhood regeneration: the case of Dutch community enterprises

The support paradox in community enterprise experiments in the Netherlands

Unravelling the nexus between entrepreneurship, neighbourhoods and communities – introduction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About