EXCI PROJECT Housing/employment –against exclusion

1. EXCI PROJECTHousing/employment –against exclusion Roger Spear, Centre for Complexity and Change, Open University EMES Researcher on Social Enterprise

2. Overview • Approaches to housing/work integration • Exci Project overview • Review of preliminary findings • Work integration and social enterprise • housing against social exclusion • Issues and Models

3. Approaches to housing/work integration • Dimensions of social exclusion • (language,ethnicity,gender, disability) • Poor education • Poor housing • High crime • Lack of work/skill • Poor welfare services • Poor health • Fragmented communities • Address separately, strategically/institutionally

4. Emergence of integrated approaches • Two fundamental bases: housing/work • Focus for support/development • Potential for synergies: eg local labour content principle in housing maintenance, regeneration, cleaning, refurbishment, security. • Social economy role

5. Exci Project overview • Are local policies for inclusion consistent with European and national plans for inclusion? • Are local policies for inclusion consistent with an approach based on rights, mainly right to quality employment and quality housing? • How local policies can be adapted to this approach? • Which kinds of actions have to be put into practice for creating inclusion policies based on the above-mentioned rights? • Which kind of action should be put into practice for achieving participative inclusion strategies?

6. EUOBJECTIVES IN THE FIGHT AGAINST POVERTY AND SOCIAL EXCLUSION • Agreed at the Nice Summit in December 2000 and revised in December 2002. • There are 4 main objectives: • 1. To facilitate participation in employment and access by all to resources, rights, goods and services • 2. To prevent the risks of exclusion • 3. To help the most vulnerable • 4. To mobilise all relevant bodies

7. Project overview • NAPs (indicators) against exclusion – method of open coordination • Vertical/horizontal coordination • Work integration (social enterprise) • Adding value in housing (homeless) • National/international dimensions from Reves/Cecodhas/Cecop (Emes) • Cases from 5 cities/regions

8. Cases • EXCI Case Studies • Brussels • Delphine Huybrecht – Febisp, • Régie AJJA - Régie locale de travaux d'intérêt collectif • 6 associations linked in multi-stakeholder structure for regeneration and insertion • Orebro • Anna Mostrum – Cesam • Baronbackarna – multi-stakeholder partnership for development • Social co-operative for work integration (removal of barriers) • Area Forum for participation/involvement

9. Cases 2 • Messina • Anna Crea – CISME, • Mental Hospital to enterprise - rehabilitation projects: “Gaia” and “Nuova Idea” co-operatives both multi-stakeholder co-ops. • Gaia co-operative is engaged in biological production and in gardening activities. • Nuova Idea co-operative is engaged in cleaning and maintenance activities. • 3 promoting stakeholders plus involvement of other social enterprise • Pordenone • Carlotta Galli – Comune di Pordenone, • Projet “Cerco casa” (Je cherche un logement) • Multi-stakeholder network for migrant housing (mediation services) • Progetto Punto lavoro - Projet Point pour l’emploi • Integration services for wide variety of vulnerable groups

10. Cases 3 • Catalunya • Lara Capel, AEISC • housing: Project “Barcelona Shaks” • multi-stakeholder initiative, where both the public sector and organisations in the field of architecture, urban planning and social assistance are involved for developing knowledge /practices for addressing housing crisis • employment/housing: Project IGLOO-Catalonia • multi-stakeholder project (international) for work integration of disadvantaged via refurbishment of housing (for them)

11. Housing overall comments • housing in general is not felt as a means to combat social exclusion • Knowledge of European and national strategy very scarce, if not absent. • Lack of any strategic approach; actions for housing improvement exists, but inserted in different policies • The importance of improving housing is not felt just as an improvement of housing quality, but also as improvement of community general quality • In those cases where housing is not an emergency, but a limited structural problem, communities take in charge the question, through budgetary decisions (Orebro) • In other cases, there is an interesting intervention of different resources (Pordenone) as for instance banks. • the main approach is the traditional one

12. Work integr. overall comments • At EU level there are at least 42 different political frames of reference for social enterprises • There is very often a confusion in responsibilities among different levels of authorities and low communication • in situations where there is low number of excluded, these people are in hard core exclusion; with low possibility of entering the labour market; in such cases even the social economy can have difficulty intervening • the most advanced cases of inclusion via employment are done using multi-partnership approaches

13. Trends in work integration measures • Passive to active labour market measures • Active labour market strategies improve efficiency of market: • -improving information flow • - improving skill levels through training • - improving access and mobility • - improving the matching

14. Tradn work integration programmes • Matching jobs/vacancies - placement & job search • Improving skills – training • Increasing demand - temporary work and employment subsidies • Promoting equality of opportunity – e.g. youth, older people • Work integration against social exclusion

15. Types of Work Integration

16. Variables • extent of training, • wage subsidies, • other support • (for worker incapacities – temporary or permanent). • sector: mainstream economy vs state markets

17. Work integration & social enterprise • Social enterprise refers to organisations • with enterprise characteristics • (trading in the market or contracting, employing people) • And with social goals • (participation, user involvement, community benefit).

18. Dimensions of Social Enterprise • The EMES criteria are: • Four factors have been applied to define the economic and entrepreneurial nature of the initiatives. • Five indicators have been selected for the social dimensions of the initiatives:

19. Dimensions of Social Enterprise • Four factors have been applied to define the economic and entrepreneurial nature of the initiatives. • a) A continuous activity producing goods and/or selling services • b) A high degree of autonomy (vs dependency) • c) A significant level of economic risk • d) A minimum amount of paid work

20. Dimensions of Social Enterprise • Five indicators for the social dimensions of the initiatives: • i) An initiative launched by a group of citizens • ii) A decision-making power not based on capital ownership • iii) A participatory nature, which involves the persons affected by the activity • iv) Limited profit distribution • v) An explicit aim to benefit the community

21. Characteristics of new social enterprises • 1. Co-operative/mutual and voluntary sector • 2. Multi-stakeholder • 3. Resource mix • 4. Social Capital • - multi-stakeholder • - strong user linkages • - worker involvement. • See www.emes.net • for EMES research projects

22. European Experience of WISE • Mutual aid associations - for Unemployed in Finland • Finnish Labour Co-operatives • Ireland – community busines • Social enterprises in Italy

23. housing against social exclusion • Various bodies involved –public/private/SE • Partnership a developing theme • Increasing moves towards adding value • Home care • Work integration • Homelessness • Self-build/refurbish • Social care (disabled)

24. Emerging themes • Focus: segment vs general/community (assns strengths) • Participation/involvement (SE strengths) • Multi-stakeholder structures • X sector synergies: work and local services • Innovations: not just actions but ideas/knowledge

25. Some project dilemmas • Ownership when helping • Collaboration: municipalities – social econ. • Control of funding – intermediaries, democracy, accountability • Local difference but global measures • Process: involving people but sharing knowledge, giving guidance • Asset base – valuable • Initiatives are embedded • Involvement fatigue – activists and beneficiaries

26. Some problems • Admin bureaucracy • Late payments • Mix of resources: managing risk: diversity vs transaction costs

27. Some suggestions • Long term perspective – Lille 5 yrs + • Good use of volunteers • Multiple projects in one structure vs multi-stakeholder partnerships • Importance of intermediaries • Coordinative • entrepreneurship

28. Summary • Approaches to housing/work integration • Exci Project overview • Review of preliminary findings • Work integration and social enterprise • housing against social exclusion • Issues and Models