Revue Interventions économiques
Papers in Political Economy
54 | 2016
Économie sociale et solidaire : ses écosystèmes
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and
Organizational Composition in Canada: Demand
from Demographics, and Difference through
Diversity
L’avenir de la direction et de la composition organisationnelle de l’économie
sociale au Canada : la demande démographique et la différence par la diversité
Ushnish Sengupta
Electronic version
URL: http://journals.openedition.org/interventionseconomiques/2794
DOI: 10.4000/interventionseconomiques.2794
ISBN: 1710-7377
ISSN: 1710-7377
Publisher
Association d’Économie Politique
Electronic reference
Ushnish Sengupta, « The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in
Canada: Demand from Demographics, and Difference through Diversity », Revue Interventions
économiques [Online], 54 | 2016, Online since 01 March 2016, connection on 15 June 2019. URL :
http://journals.openedition.org/interventionseconomiques/2794 ; DOI : 10.4000/
interventionseconomiques.2794
This text was automatically generated on 15 June 2019.
Les contenus de la revue Interventions économiques sont mis à disposition selon les termes de la
Licence Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International.
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
The Future of Social Economy
Leadership and Organizational
Composition in Canada: Demand
from Demographics, and Difference
through Diversity
L’avenir de la direction et de la composition organisationnelle de l’économie
sociale au Canada : la demande démographique et la différence par la diversité
Ushnish Sengupta
Introduction
1
The purpose of this paper is to describe changes in the leadership and composition of
Social Economy organizations in Canada due to macroeconomic and demographic trends.
The paper argues that a fundamentally different support system is required in order to
enable and to support the future diverse Social Economy in Canada. Diversity of the social
economy is described along two primary parameters, socio-economic diversity and
ethno-racial diversity. Bourdieu’s framework of capital, habitus and field is used as a
theoretical framework for analysis.
2
The first trend to affect the social economy is increasing demand for social services
resulting in an increase in the number and size of social economy organizations
supplying social services. With income inequality increasing across Canada, and
simultaneously different levels of government continuing to reduce services due to fiscal
constraints, social economy organizations will inevitably be providing many social
services previously provided by government. The size of the social economy, including
the number of organizations, will grow and require additional human resources. A
critique of the social economy related to income inequality is Elite Resource Capture,
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
1
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
where elites are able to accrue more benefits from the development and management of
social economy organizations compared to lower socio-economic status clients.
3
The second trend is changes in the demographic makeup of Canada, based on
immigration and Indigenous population growth. First, the majority of immigration to
Canada is now from non-European countries. Second, the Indigenous population is the
fastest growing group in Canada. With these demographic changes there will be a
corresponding growth in the demand for culturally appropriate social economy services
and organizations for immigrants and Indigenous communities. The social economy will
grow not only by expanding the cultural competencies of existing organizations but also
by the formation of new organizations, started by diverse groups of leaders with different
lived experiences and cultural capital. A second critique of the social economy and the
feminist movement comes from women of colour who argue that mainstream feminist
organizations do not challenge hegemonic cultural assumptions and therefore do not
represent their interests.
4
The Social Economy in its current form has organically grown to support existing
organizations, and is not designed to support the growth of new and different
organizations, started by a broader diversity of individuals and groups. Individuals and
groups starting new social economy organizations face multiple barriers in terms of class
and race, barriers that exist broadly in different forms of entrepreneurship. The third
critique of the social economy comes from an anti-racist and Marxist philosophy and
identifies issues at the intersection of race and class in the social economy, where specific
groups are continually disadvantaged in the social economy. In summary, if the Social
Economy as a whole is to support the development of different organizations, many of
which will not essentially emulate current organizations, a different and more diverse
approach supporting transformational social innovation from the margins of the social
economy is required.
Definition of the Social Economy
5
The social economy is known by different names in different countries, such as the
solidarity economy, third sector, nonprofit sector, voluntary sector, and civil society. The
scope of the social economy utilized here includes nonprofit, social enterprise and
cooperative organizations, as described by Quarter, Mook and Armstrong (2009), and
Mook, Whitman, Quarter & Armstrong (2015). The social economy including nonprofits,
cooperatives and other social purpose organizations, is a significant part of the economy
in Canada (Quarter, Mook and Armstrong, 2009), the United States (Mook, Whitman,
Quarter & Armstrong, 2015) and globally (Bouchard & Rousselière, 2015).
6
Quarter, Mook and Armstrong (2009) utilize a broad definition of the social economy,
where the social economy includes Non-Profit Organizations (NPOs) and NonGovernmental organizations (NGOs), unincorporated social organizations, and
cooperatives. The social economy is very diverse in its organizational forms, as described
by Mintzberg (2015). This particular document focuses on social economy organizations
providing social services. Social economy organizations providing social services can be
developed in different forms, including non-profit organizations, social enterprises, and
cooperatives providing housing and childcare services. The common goals across
different organizational forms are presented in the normative description of the social
economy by McMurtry (2009). As many social economy organizations have common
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
2
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
characteristics that are separate from organizational form, implications for the broader
social economy can be derived from an analysis of a subset of social economy
organizations.
Bourdieu’s Framework of Capital, Habitus and Field
7
Bourdieu’s theory of different types of capital (social capital, cultural capital, financial
capital, and symbolic capital), provide a useful framework for analyzing developments in
the social economy (Bourdieu, 1986). Bourdieu’s framework of capital and fields has been
applied to the social economy at the inter-sectoral level (Woolford, 2011), interorganizational level (Gordon, 2008; Greenspan, 2013) as well as at the intra-organizational
level (McGovern, 2014). From a Bourdieusian perspective, the social economy as a sector
is in a struggle for power with public and private sectors. Organizations within the social
economy struggle for position and resources between each other, and within
organizations there is a struggle for power and domination by individuals. The social
economy can therefore be considered to be a field, as described by Bourdieu to include
agents, logic, and rules (Woolford, 2011). The social economy field is a site of a struggle,
where different agents, whether individuals or organizations, compete to gain power and
continually redefine the field to their own benefit. An increasing market orientation of
the social economy provides advantages to agents with economic and cultural capital
(Woolford, 2011). Although the social economy is engaged in economic and social justice
issues, the opportunities for individuals, who are directly facing economic and social
issues to start and develop organizations, are becoming increasingly limited within the
social economy itself. As the social economy has become more professionalized and has
more recently favored marketization and managerialist skills, agents with existing
privilege and skills in the new environment, or habitus as described by Bourdieu, are able
to start up different social economy organizations as well as move into leadership and
management positions of existing social economy organizations. The ongoing changes in
the ability of equity seeking individuals and groups to start and develop social economy
organizations in Canada remains an under-researched area. As the social economy grows
in size and importance, we need to be conscious about who is advantaged, and who is
disadvantaged in the changing dynamics of the social economy.
8
In Bourdieu’s terms, the social economy is involved in the struggle for reproduction of
existing power structures versus change in the distribution of power and resources. If
solutions from equity seeking groups are to be implemented in the form of social
economy organizations, the class, race and gender individuality of founders and leaders
of social economy organizations become more important. Existing social economy
organizations can be considered to be incumbent, whereas new social economy
organizations are challengers to existing models. Christensen (1997) concludes that
incumbent organizations are invested in current technologies, and therefore have less
incentive to change and are unable to innovative as much as newer rivals. Westley,
Zimmerman & Patton (2006) describe the circular process as an “adaptive cycle” of
creative destruction in different sectors. In the social economy, the incumbent
organizations are invested in not supporting radical change, but a creative destruction
process of new organizations gradually replacing existing organizations is necessary.
9
Increasing the organizational plurality enables a greater diversity of individuals to make
meaningful contributions in the social economy. The corollary is also true that enabling a
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
3
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
greater diversity of individuals to start and develop social economy organization results
in a greater plurality of organizations, which are required to solve the increasingly
complex and demanding social problems that remain unsolved. Page (2008) conducted
empirical research to find that the more diverse the groups of people solving complex
problems, the better the solutions. McKinsey & Company (2015) studied gender and racial
diversity across organizations, and concluded there is a significant positive relationship
between an organization’s gender and racial diversity and its financial performance. A
broader diversity in the types of organizations, individuals and groups leading
organizations in the social economy is therefore beneficial to the social economy as a
whole, developing different solutions to complex issues, and “wicked” problems where
solutions have been elusive (Rittel & Webber 1973). As described by the author and
founder of 350.org, Bill McKibben, there are no “silver bullet” solutions to complex
environmental problems; we need lots of “silver buckshot” (McKibben 2006). In other
words, there is no single organizational solution that will solve complex problems. We
need a broad range of organizational solutions simultaneously applying different
approaches to solve these problems.
The Major Economic and Social Trends Affecting the
Social Economy
10
The first trend to affect the social economy is increasing demand for social services
resulting in an increase in the size of the social economy. The second trend is changes in
the demographic makeup of Canada, based on immigration and Indigenous population
growth. These trends are described in additional detail in the following sections,
accompanied by critiques of the direction of the trend with respect to the social economy,
arguing that the social economy is a contested space.
Growth in Demand for Social Services
11
The first trend affecting the size of the social economy in Canada is continuing growth in
demand for social services. There are two macroeconomic trends in turn causing the
growth in demand for social services. First there is a long-term increase in the
unemployment rate and associated income inequality, and second, there is a decrease in
government social spending. The unemployment rate affects the social economy in a
number of different ways. The social economy is a significant employer in Canada, but
more significantly the unemployment rate affects the number and needs of clients served
by the social economy. Increases in long-term unemployment results in an increase in the
long-term demand for social service provision by social economy organizations.
Increased Demand for Social Services From Long-term Unemployment
12
A major macroeconomic trend affecting the growth of social services is the rate of
unemployment. A study completed by Statistics Canada (2015a) indicates a downward
trend in full-time employment in Canada, and an increase in precarious part-time
employment. Statistics Canada (2015a) also indicates that youth aged 17-24 experienced
the greatest long-term decline in full-time employment between the years 1976-2014;
men have experienced decreases in full-time employment across all age groups while
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
4
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
women have gained full-time employment from 1976-2014. The social economy interacts
with the unemployment rate in three different ways. First, social economy organizations
are a major employer in the Canadian economy (Statistics Canada, 2007), and therefore
often hire individuals who would have otherwise been unemployed. Statistics Canada
(2007) reports that the core non-profit sector is larger than Motor Vehicle
Manufacturing, Agriculture, Accommodation and Food Services sectors, and therefore the
social economy has a significant labour “footprint” in the economy. Second, the social
economy provides services to unemployed individuals, including employment readiness
and job training services, and work in employment oriented social enterprises. Third, the
social economy develops and maintains alternative organizations that necessarily
challenge and change the existing economic paradigms, including alternative forms of
ownership and employment.
13
The longer the period of unemployment, the greater the social economy needs of
individuals experiencing unemployment. The unemployment rate in Canada is a
macroeconomic factor that interacts with the social economy at multiple levels, at the
same time it is a macroeconomic factor that is not under the control of the social
economy. A long-term trend in increasing unemployment is one of the factors that have
led to increasing income inequality in Canada (Parliament of Canada, 2013).
Income Inequality and the Social Economy
14
Income inequality, described by the World Economic Forum as the primary challenge for
the year 2015 (World Economic Forum, 2015), has become increasingly important to the
size and scope of the social economy. In an insightful study, Kim (2015) finds a strong
correlation between the level of economic inequality measured by the Gini coefficient,
and the number of non-profit organizations in a county-level study of the United States.
Kim (2015) theorizes that a greater number of people with lower incomes in a
geographical area generate demand for additional services provided by non-profit
organizations, and at the same time a number of individuals at higher incomes are
required as they have the resources to support the supply of additional non-profit
organizations and services. Kim (2015) additionally theorizes that a homogenous local
population has a lower number of non-profit organizations per capita since
homogeneously higher income areas have greater resources and therefore fewer
nonprofit service needs, while homogeneously low income areas have fewer resources
and therefore unable to form a sufficient number of organizations to meet the demand
for greater social needs. One of the primary conclusions by Kim (2015) is that economic
inequality within a county, measured by the Gini coefficient, is an enabling factor in the
formation of non-profit organizations. In other research the number of non-profit
organizations has been determined for poor or wealthy areas using average measures of
income and wealth, while Kim (2015) suggests it is the importance of the spread of wealth
or income inequality that is important for the number of nonprofits in an area.
Elite Resource Capture in the Social Economy
15
Jevtovic (2013) introduces a critique of the interaction of the social economy and income
inequality, in finding evidence of “Elite Resource Capture” related to social enterprise in
Western metropolises in Canada. Jevtovic (2013) utilizes BALTA (British Columbia and
Alberta Social Economy Research Alliance) project data on social enterprises such as the
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
5
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
ability to earn income, age, number of full-time staff (Hall, Elson, Wamucii 2013; Hall,
Elson, Wamucii 2014), and measures of community wealth to point out that elites are able
to benefit more from leading, managing and operating social enterprises in Canada than
members of economically marginalized groups. Jevtovic’s thesis supports previous work
by Wolpert (1993) who indicates the decentralization of social services tends to benefit
elites and reduces services for marginalized communities. McGovern (2014) describes
elite resources capture in leadership for a social economy organization in the UK utilizing
Bordieu’s framework of capital, where the new leadership had higher “funding” capital
compared to the founders who had higher “needs” capital. McGovern (2014) also points to
Bourdieu by describing new leadership who also had the market oriented skills or habitus
which enabled them to navigate the social economy field which now apportions higher
value to these market oriented skills over understanding client needs. Nicholls (2010)
discusses the process of legitimation of social enterprise by resource rich actors. Domhoff
(2009) provides evidence of elite resources capture in the United States describing
connected networks of elite groups of people who maintain power through leadership in
political, corporate and nonprofit organizations. Analysis of elite networks in Canada
involving the social economy is an under-researched area (Reed & Selbee, 2001). As
income inequality has been increasing in Canada (Procyk, 2014) there are additional
opportunities for elite resources capture in the social economy, where a significant
proportion of the financial resources invested in the social economy as a form of income
redistribution is captured by elite actors in the system.
16
Social economy organizations have an important role in addressing social mobility and
income inequality, yet economic research indicates the non-profit sector has had little
overall effect on income redistribution (Clotfelter, 1992). Pratt and McCambridge (2015)
urge social economy organizations, including nonprofits and philanthropic organizations,
to take a more active role in addressing social mobility and income inequality. Palotta
(2008) on the other hand argues that nonprofit executive compensation should not have
any restrictions in order to attract the best talent for leadership. Bourdieu’s framework
can be used to analyze Palotta’s argument. It can be argued that Palotta supports higher
compensation for individuals who have higher economic and social capital. The argument
about making the social economy more equitable for individuals and communities who
don’t possess high levels of capital in this paper, is more congruent with Pratt and
McCambridge (2015) than Palotta (2008).
17
Whereas many social economy organizations were previously developed by the middle
class (Putnam, 2000), the opportunities for creation and management of social economy
organizations is becoming more limited to elites. Supporting the narrative of a
disappearing middle class, Walks (2013) concludes that not only is income inequality
increasing in Canada, but income polarization is also increasing across major Canadian
municipalities with growing “poor” and “rich” classes associated with a declining middle
class. The increase in income inequality is not evenly geographically distributed, creating
homogenous geographical areas of poverty and of wealth which has subsequent results of
the size of the local social economy (Kissane, 2010). A study by Murdie, Maaranen &
Logan (2014) of eight Canadian Metropolitan areas (Calgary, Halifax, Hamilton, Montreal,
Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver, Winnipeg) found that inequality in Canada’s cities is
increasingly spatialized, with low-income areas increasing in proportion to other areas.
In agreement with the nonprofit density hypothesis presented by Kim (2015), Murdie,
Maaranen & Logan (2014) find that homogeneously low-income areas have a lower
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
6
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
density of services. Research on the lack of social economy services in low-income areas
of Canadian cities includes lack of necessities such as food (Canadian Environmental
Health Atlas, 2016), and long travel distances for healthcare services (City of Toronto,
2013). The implications of elite resource capture are that the opportunity to start and
grow social economy organizations are increasingly limited for low-income communities,
and elites are able to capture more funding and related opportunities in the social
economy. The result is a reduction in the economic diversity of social economy
entrepreneurs, and a resulting loss of potential for communities to develop solutions to
their own issues.
Intergenerational Mobility and the Social Economy
18
Bourdieu utilizes the concept of life trajectory to describe the difference between an
individual selecting their own path and societal influences on the capital available to
individuals. Corak (2013) describes the negative relationship between economic
inequality and intergenerational mobility in Canada and the United States. Often
described as the “Great Gatsby curve”, intergenerational mobility decreases as income
inequality increases across different countries. The implications for the social economy is
that the opportunities for starting social economy organizations that are dependent on
financial resources, extends across multiple generations for low-income groups. An
earlier study by Corak (2010) finds that although income inequality is lower in Canada
than the US, the economic aspirations are similar, including expectations of social
mobility. Chetty (2015) analyzed the relationship between family backgrounds and
innovation (measured by the number of patents produced by individuals) by studying the
relationship between parental income, neighborhood, and education in the United States.
In a perfectly meritocratic society, parental income, for example, should have limited
effects on the level of innovation by individuals across economic class and race
differences. Chetty (2015) finds that children from a low socio-economic background are
less likely to produce patents as adults, a measure of innovation. Conversely, children of
parents with high economic status are much more likely to produce patents through
cumulative advantages of opportunity. There is a high degree of overlap between the
factors that enable innovation and entrepreneurship in the broader economy, and the
factors that enable social innovation and social entrepreneurship in the social economy.
Based on rising income inequality and corresponding lack of intergenerational social
mobility, there is multi-generational “opportunity gap” in the ability to implement social
innovation and develop social economy organizations by low-income individuals and
groups.
Government Expenditures on Social Services
19
The second macroeconomic trend affecting the size of the social economy is government
expenditures on social services. Elson (2007) describes the changing relationship between
the government and the social economy in Canada, particularly the role of government as
the primary funders of social economy organizations. With different levels of government
continuing to reduce services due to fiscal constraints, social economy organizations
inevitably fill the resulting void. According to Elson, even after downloading a number of
social services to the provinces, the federal government remains the largest social service
funder. Although federal governments have been formed by political parties of different
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
7
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
ideologies, the trend since the 1990s has been a continuing reduction in the funding of
social services (Quarter, Mook and Armstrong 2009). Based on experience in the UK, a
country at the forefront of government devolution to the social economy, Unwin (2004)
classifies the government funding relationship with social economy organizations into
giving, shopping and investing categories. According to Unwin (2004), giving typically
involves transfer of funds from the government to social economy organizations through
grants, shopping typically involves loans to social economy organizations, and investment
involves government investing in equity. In Canada, the availability of grants has been
reduced in favor of performance-based loans and equity investments, which provide
financial and social returns to investors (MARS Centre for Impact Investing & Purpose
Capital, 2014). Therefore the types of funding available to social economy organizations in
Canada have changed significantly over time.
20
As funding from governments is being reduced across the social economy, social economy
organizations are finding ways to grow revenues from alternative sources. Charities, in
particular, continue to be dependent on government funding for the majority of their
revenues (Imagine Canada, 2013). In addition to changes in the type of funding being
available to social economy organizations in Canada, the level of funding has decreased
compared to other Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
countries. A report by the Centre for the Study of Living Standards (2012) compared
public social spending in Canada over 20 years, from 1981-2010, and found that over the
past twenty years, public social spending by Canada has fallen significantly below the
OECD average. The rate of increase of public social spending in Canada was found to be
lower than Germany, United Kingdom, and the United States. The study found that “if
Canada’s redistributive efforts were to be raised to the OECD average, nearly two-thirds of
the increase in after-tax inequality that has taken place in Canada since 1981 would be
eliminated.” (Centre for the Study of Living Standards, 2012). Government social
spending, a form of income redistribution, has direct outcomes on poverty rates, income
inequality and the social economy.
21
Government funding for social economy organizations in particular demonstrates
directional trends. Elson (2007) summarizes the current trends in government funding by
referencing a report by the Canadian Council on Social Development (2003):
22
“This parsimonious funding regime, established since the early 1990s, has embedded
itself across all levels of government and sub-sectors in the voluntary sector (Scott, 2003).
It is characterized by: 1) increased targeting of funds; 2) a shift from the core to projectbased funding; 3) increased and often unjustified demands for accountability and
reporting; 4) funding contingent on compulsory collaboration; 5) an on-going perception
that volunteers are readily available reserve labor pool; and 6) a belief that market
models will automatically lead to greater self-sufficiency (Scott, 2003).”
23
The Satellite Account of Nonprofit Institutions and Volunteering produced by Statistics
Canada (2007) reports that between 1998 and 2007, the core nonprofit sector (excluding
hospitals, universities and colleges) grew faster than GDP. At the same time as
government social spending in decreasing, the size of the social economy is growing due
to growing demand for social services, requiring additional human resources. The
support systems for starting and growing social economy organizations are piecemeal
compared to other industries and sectors, leading to a significant pipeline problem
(Canadian Task Force on Social Finance, 2010).
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
8
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
Demographic Changes in Canada
24
The second trend is changes in the demographic makeup of Canada. First, the majority of
immigration to Canada is now from non-European countries including the Philippines,
China, India, Pakistan, and Iran (Citizenship and Immigration Canada, 2015). In addition
to population growth through immigration, the Indigenous population is the fastest
growing group in Canada (Statistics Canada, 2015c). There is a corresponding growth in
the demand for culturally appropriate social services for immigrants and Indigenous
communities. The need for culturally appropriate services has been expressed most
compellingly by Indigenous communities in Canada, since these communities have
experienced the deepest negative effects of cultural domination. Sinclair & Grekul (2012)
describe the value of culturally appropriate services in reducing Indigenous youth gang
activities. Fallon, Chabot, Fluke, Blackstock, MacLaurin, & Tonmyr (2013) describe the
cultural factors in decisions in placing Indigenous children to other families by child
welfare agencies. Durst, Bluechardt, Morin, & Rezansoff (2001) describe the differential
treatment by the healthcare system of Indigenous individuals who have disabilities. The
social economy will grow not only by expanding the cultural competencies of existing
organizations but also by the formation of new organizations, started by a diverse group
of leaders with different lived experiences and cultural capital.
25
The effects of government policies have had unequal socio-economic results for different
ethnic and racialized communities. Ornstein (2006) analyzed the “vertical mosaic” (p. 82)
or socio-economic profile of various ethno-racial groups in Toronto, and found that the
Indigenous community experiences the greatest level of socio-economic marginalization,
followed by African and West Asian ethno-racial groups. A similar study by Ornstein
(2007) in Montreal and Vancouver indicates that Aboriginal, Caribbean, and South Asian
(Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan) groups are particularly disadvantaged. The
findings by Ornstein (2006) are supported by more recent and in depth research for the
Indigenous population in Toronto, through the Toronto Aboriginal Research Project
(Toronto Aboriginal Support Services Council, 2011). The intersectionality of race, class
and gender have been experienced most acutely by Indigenous communities in Canada
through colonialism, capitalism, and patriarchy (Palmater, 2011). Although there is a
significant quantity of research on issues in Indigenous communities, there is limited
research on solutions to these issues by Indigenous organizations, particularly social
economy organizations that are a critical component of developing community assetbased solutions.
Ethno-Racial Diversity and the Social Economy
26
Statistics Canada (2015b) indicates that Canadian communities large and small are
becoming more ethno-racially diverse primarily due to immigration. The conditions that
have led to the growth of the social economy, such as income inequality, now need to
take into account growing ethno-racial diversity. The central argument made in this
manuscript is that there are systematic changes required in the way the social economy
addresses ethno-racial diversity in Canada. Intergenerational mobility is limited not only
by class, but also by race in Canada. Corak (2008) for example, concludes that
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
9
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
intergenerational mobility in Canada is limited to immigrants from particular ethnic
groups, namely Caribbean, African and Latin American immigrants.
27
If there are no structural adjustments, the result can be similar to the outcomes in the
United States where increased ethno-racial diversity in an area has been related to
decreased social capital (Putnam, 2007) and a smaller number of non-profit organizations
(Kim, 2015). The Human Resources (HR) Council for the Non-Profit Sector (2013) research
indicates 6% of employees in the non-profit sector are visible minorities, compared to
20% of the general population. The disproportionally lower percentage of visible
minorities in the social economy is not due to lack of interest in social and environmental
causes, as immigrants and visible minorities have the same level of interest in social and
environmental issues as other Canadians. Earth Day Canada (2012) surveyed interest in
environmental issues for immigrants and found a strong level of interest in
environmental issues, but the issues identified by immigrants were different from those
focused on by mainstream environmental movement. Toronto Workforce Innovation
Group (2011) found a difference in over-representation of Black individuals in worker
roles, and under representation as managers in non-profit organizations in Toronto. A
report by the Mowat Centre (2014) on the social economy in Ontario indicates there is a
demographic gap in ethno-racial diversity between leadership in the Social Economy in
Ontario and its client population. An earlier report on nonprofit sector diversity in
Toronto echoes this finding (DiverseCity, 2012). Diversity has become a significant focus
for the organization representing social entrepreneurs in the United States, the Social
Enterprise Alliance (Lynch, 2014). The HR Council for the Non-Profit Sector (2013)
indicates the benefits of diversity on non-profit boards include ability to access
community resources, ability to respond to external changes, and better decision making
identifying the full range of opportunities and risks.
28
A broader diversity in the types of organizations, individuals and groups leading
organizations in the social economy is beneficial to the social economy as a whole,
developing different solutions to complex issues and wicked problems where solutions
have been elusive. Loh (2014) provides a critique of the current composition of the “New
Economy”, a coalition of social economy organizations in North America, indicating it
should be more diverse: “For the movement to succeed, it must be led by the dispossessed
—those for whom the mainstream economy has never worked.” The term “new
economy” is a broad term positioning social economy organizations in the form of an
alternative futurity, a future where organizations are socially responsible,
environmentally sustainable, and democratic. One of the impetuses for the New Economy
has been the Occupy movement (Breau, 2014). Chetty, Hendren, Kline & Saez (2014)
conclude that where a person is born, and to which parents they are born, limits intergenerational mobility by geography, class and race in the United States. There are strong
signals that Canada is heading in the direction of the United States in terms of higher
income inequality, lower intergenerational mobility and lower socio-economic
opportunity by geography, class and race (United Way of Greater Toronto, 2015).
29
Meinhard, Faridi, O’Connor & Randhawa (2011) describe two different ways in which
visible minorities participate in the leadership of the social economy in Canada. First,
participation as leaders, managers and volunteers in mainstream organizations. Second,
formation of ethno-specific voluntary organizations that represent their specific
interests. In Ontario a number of organizations are demonstrating promising human
resources oriented diversity practices based on recommendations of previous reports
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
10
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
(McIsaac & Moody, 2014; DiverseCity, 2012). The Ontario Nonprofit Network, has
partnered with the Toronto Region Immigrant Employment Council (TRIEC) to offer
diversity training. This initiative addresses the first form of participation described by
Meinhard et al. (2011), participation as leaders, managers and volunteers in mainstream
organizations, but fails to address Meinhard et al.’s second method of participation, ability
to form new organizations. Meinhard et al. (2011), finds an inverse relationship between
the number of ethno-specific charitable organizations representing visible minority
groups, and the participation of visible minorities on the boards of mainstream charitable
organizations. The research by Meinhard et al. (2011) conducted across Toronto,
Vancouver, Calgary, Montreal indicates that when ethnic communities do create their
own institutions, individuals have a greater choice in organizations they can contribute
to, and often choose ethnic institutions that reflect their community. Conversely, when
fewer ethnic institutions exist, individuals compete for the limited number of board
positions in mainstream organizations. Intergenerational mobility in Canada is limited
across second and third generations of immigrants, even for individuals who are born in
Canada, based on Corak (2008) finding that inter-generational mobility in Canada is
limited to immigrants from particular ethnic groups.
30
The United Way of Greater Toronto’s Strong Neighborhood Strategy provides a different
place based example. Based on the ground-breaking report, Poverty by Postal Code
(United Way of Greater Toronto, 2004), the United Way of Greater Toronto has developed
a Strong Neighborhoods Strategy that invests specifically in designated Neighborhood
Improvement Areas in Toronto, including setting up hubs that support co-working spaces
for non-profit organizations. Although this strategy is geographically based, and geared
towards provision of new services in low income, racialized neighborhoods, and therefore
will alleviate some of the service deficit issues in low-income areas, outcomes for
organization level ethno-racial diversity are yet to be determined.
31
Efforts to increase economic and ethno-racial diversity in social economy organizations
through human resource practices, for example, promotion of members of equity seeking
groups to leadership positions in existing organizations have significant limitations. The
problem a social economy organization addresses and the solution direction is primarily
determined by the founders of the organization. Different groups and individuals will find
different problems to be salient, and different solutions to be appropriate. It is therefore
the founding and startup stage of social economy organizations where the effort to
increase diversity has to be focused. The barriers faced by equity seeking groups in
entrepreneurship in the broader economy, such as class, race and gender issue, apply to
starting up organizations in the social economy. Meinhard et al. (2011) find that even
though Toronto has the largest visible minority population it has the lowest number of
ethno-specific charities per thousand visible minorities among the four large Canadian
metropolitan cities studied. More broadly, the two most ethnically diverse cities in
Canada, Toronto and Vancouver, have the lowest percentage of ethnic charities. As
charities are a type of “pinnacle” organization in the social economy, trends in charities
tend to reflect trends in the broader social economy.
32
Kim (2015) makes an important finding that ethno-racial diversity is negatively
correlated with the number of non-profit organizations in an area, in line with Putnam’s
(2007) theory of “hunkering down” or that communities with higher ethno-cultural
diversity have a lower level of social capital due to lower social cohesiveness. Based on
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
11
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
survey data from the US, Putnam found that in areas of greater ethno-racial diversity,
there is:
• “Less expectation that others will cooperate to solve dilemmas of collective action.
• Less likelihood of working on a community project.
• Lower likelihood of giving to charity or volunteering.” (Putnam, 2007:150)
33
Therefore Putnam (2007) provides evidence that the building blocks of social economy
organizations are weaker in more ethno-racially diverse communities, and Kim (2015)
subsequently confirms that the resultant density of nonprofit organizations is lower in
areas of greater ethno-racial diversity.
34
Garrow (2015) completed a longitudinal study on the relationship between changing
racial composition and the size of the social economy in Los Angeles County. Garrow
found that an increasing percentage of Blacks and Latinos in Los Angeles County was
associated with a greater number of disbanded (closed or abandoned) non-profit
organizations, while an increasing percentage of Whites reduced the number of
disbanded non-profit organizations. Bourdieu indicates that fields, including the field of
the social economy, is not a level playing field. White communities who have historically
had more economic and social capital are able to sustain organizations which serve local
interests, whereas Black and Latino communities having lower levels of economic and
social capital are unable to sustain all existing organizations. The inability of increasing
Black and Latino communities to start new organizations that would replace disbanded
organizations can be explained in Bourdieu’s terms, the ability to reproduce existing
power structures is more prevalent than the ability to change the distribution of power
and resources.
35
Couton (2013) studied the relationship between Canadian ethnic communities and
immigrant serving charities and employment factors and found a negative relationship
between the density of charities and employment and income, and a positive relationship
with self-employment. In other words, ethnic and immigrant serving charities were
located in low-income areas where unemployment is high, and where self-employment is
seen as a solution to lack of unemployment. A report on immigrant entrepreneurship in
Toronto by Newcomer Women’s Services Toronto, Social Planning Toronto, Toronto
Womens City Alliance (2014) supports this finding, indicating that immigrant selfemployment is strongly based on entrepreneurship of necessity rather than
entrepreneurship of opportunity. In summary, the research indicates that ethno-racial
diversity is negatively correlated with the density of social economy organizations.
Where ethnic community related charities exist, they do not have a positive effect on
unemployment, but there is a positive correlation with self-employment. Selfemployment as studied by Couton (2013) and Toronto by Newcomer Women’s Services
Toronto (2014) includes private for profit business, rather than social economy
organizations. The enablers and barriers for the formation of social economy
organizations by ethno-racial groups, remains an under-researched area.
Barriers to Social Economy Organization Formation by Ethno-Racial
Groups
36
In order to direct efforts towards a desirable future where everyone from different
communities has the same opportunities to start up social economic organizations, we
must understand historical restrictions on social economy organizations. In Bourdieu’s
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
12
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
framework, the social economy as a field has resisted the formation of organizations by
ethno-racially diverse groups.
37
A significant critique of the social economy and its ethno-racial diversity is provided by
the feminist movement, particularly women of colour. In the acclaimed book, The
Revolution Will Not be Funded: Beyond the Non-Profit Industrial Complex (Incite! Women of
Color Against Violence, 2007), the authors make the case that the mainstream civil sector
organizations often act against the interests of grassroots organizations, particularly
since the societal changes demanded by grassroots require genuine changes in power
structures. Incite (2007), emphasizes the efforts of racialized feminist groups and the
suppression of efforts by mainstream feminist organizations. Incite (2007) suggests that
mainstream feminist organizations essentially do not want to alter power structures. In
Bourdieu’s analysis, mainstream feminist social economy organizations have been able to
gain power though the use of different forms of capital, while women of colour do not
have the capital to gain proportional levels of power. Woolford (2012) uses Bourdieu’s
framework to analyze the social service sector in Manitoba, and concludes that
Indigenous organizations are able to reflexively identify and counter neoliberal direction,
while other mainstream social economy organizations are unable to engage in the same
level of reflexivity. Wolch (1999) provides a broader critique of the non-profit sector
indicating the sector has lost its advocacy role by becoming closer to the government and
private sectors.
Entrepreneurship Suppression and the Social Economy
38
Light and Dana (2013) describe suppression of entrepreneurship when the social capital of
a dominant group inhibits entrepreneurship of other groups. Light and Dana (2013)
indicate there are two types of entrepreneurship suppression, malevolent and
inadvertent entrepreneurship suppression. Historically, malevolent entrepreneurship
suppression was experienced by Indigenous, Black and Immigrant communities in the
United States and in Canada.
39
The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) studies are the broadest survey based on
studies of entrepreneurship across countries (www.gemconsortium.org), including social
entrepreneurship. GEM separates entrepreneurship in different countries by factors
driven, efficiency driven, and innovation driven categories, placing Canada and the UK in
the innovation driven category. Harding (2006) completed one of the main GEM studies
specifically surveying Social Enterprise, and indicates there is a higher intention for
starting social enterprise among minorities, but a lower number of owner managers are
minorities, particularly Black Africans and Black Caribbeans. The Toronto Workforce
Innovation Group (2011) provides evidence that the non-profit sector has a higher than
population proportion of Black workers in the social economy, versus lower than
population proportion of Black leaders in the social economy. These two reports indicate
that the Black community has both intention to start organizations and employment in
the social economy, but has limited leadership and management opportunities.
40
One of the sharpest critiques of the intersection of class and race in the social economy
comes from Allen (1969) and his contemporaries (Chrisman, 2010), who describe social
economy organizations as instruments of neo-colonial policies. As described by Graefe
(2006), social economy organizations, can “flank” (work with) neoliberal economies, and
simultaneously work in opposition to neoliberal economies. In a related Marxist critique,
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
13
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
Roelofs (1995) describes the social economy or the third sector as a protective layer of
capitalism, where social economy organizations are a form of pacification of more radical
racialized movements that would realign power and economic structures. Allen (1969)
describes the treatment of Black communities in the US as a form of domestic
colonialism. Allen (1969) characterizes the racialized urban areas of American cities as
part of the ghetto infrastructure and the existence of a ghetto buffer class of small Black
business owners and Black social service organization managers. Allen (1969) describes
Black capitalists as a form of social control, and educated and trained Blacks who are
managers of social economy organizations to be new managers of the ghetto. Allen
therefore implicates not only the state, but the private sector, as well as the social
economy in maintaining racial inequalities. Allen (1969) describes a class of racialized
unemployed and precariously employed people who are part of the internal colonies who
serve as repositories for a reserve supply of labour. In other words, Allen indicates there
is a strong intentionality to limit opportunities for low-income, racialized individuals to
only employees in the social economy, rather than creators and founders. Given the
findings from the social economy labor force survey (Toronto Workforce Innovation
Group, 2011) that demonstrate a higher than population proportion of Black workers in
the social economy, versus lower than population proportion of Black leaders, the
theories described by Allen warrant further examination.
The Social Economy and Indigenous Communities in Canada
41
Indigenous communities in Canada include First Nations, Métis and Inuit communities.
The Indigenous population of Canada consists of 4.3% of the total population and is the
fastest growing population group in Canada (Statistics Canada, 2011). A number of broad
provincially based social enterprise surveys by the British Columbia and Alberta Social
Economy Research Alliance project (BALTA) highlight the interactions between social
enterprise and Indigenous communities in Canada. In the BALTA surveys, Hall, Elson, &
Wamucii (2013) indicate that 37% of Alberta’s and 33% of British Columbia’s social
enterprises served Indigenous clients. Related surveys indicate the following percentages
of surveyed social enterprises which served Indigenous communities in other provinces:
29% in Manitoba (Canadian CED Network, 2012), 28% in New Brunswick (Hall, Elson, &
Wamucii, 2014), 16% in Nova Scotia (Tarr & Karaphylis, 2011), and 22% in Ontario
(Canadian CED Network, 2013). The survey results indicate a pattern of engagement
between Indigenous communities and social enterprise in Canada that is proportionally
much greater than the Indigenous population. Sengupta, Vieta & McMurtry (2015)
indicate that although Indigenous communities are overrepresented as clients of social
economy organizations, Indigenous communities led organizations are underrepresented
in the social economy. Indigenous communities led social economy organizations in
Canada are shaped by the population, geographic distribution, history of colonization,
and local and global contexts. In Bourdieu’s framework, Indigenous organizations are in a
struggle with non-Indigenous organizations in the social economy field for the legitimacy
of Indigenous knowledge. Indigenous knowledge is often suppressed by the hegemony of
Eurocentric knowledge in the Social Economy in Canada. Battiste and Henderson (2000)
argue for the benefits the Western world can gain from Indigenous knowledge.
42
Woolford (2012) uses Bourdieu’s framework to conclude that Indigenous organizations
are more reflexive than other mainstream social economy organizations, as these
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
14
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
organizations are engaged in countering a long history of racism and colonialism. There
are three basic types of social economy organizations engaged with Indigenous
communities in the struggle for legitimacy of Indigenous knowledge.
1. Organizations developed by Indigenous communities, utilizing Indigenous knowledge and
philosophy, primarily serving Indigenous clients.
2. Organizations developed by non-Indigenous communities, utilizing Euro-centric knowledge,
serving Indigenous and non-Indigenous clients.
3. Organizations developed by non-Indigenous communities, utilizing both Euro-centric and
Indigenous knowledge (usually through the employment of Indigenous personnel) serving
Indigenous and non-Indigenous clients.
43
The second type of organization is the most prevalent type of social economy
organization interacting with Indigenous communities in Canada (Diamantopoulos &
Findlay, 2007). Eurocentric and non-Indigenous knowledge is utilized to address
Indigenous client needs of the majority of social economy organizations, often resulting
in additional risks rather than benefits. As the Indigenous population of Canada grows,
there will be a growing need for culturally appropriate services provided by social
economy organizations. Culturally appropriate services can be provided by social
economy organizations that genuinely implement Indigenous knowledge and values into
its mission, long-term strategy and day-to-day operations. The appropriate adoption and
utilization of Indigenous organizational principles and philosophies, such as planning for
the next seven generations, are beneficial to Canadian society as a whole, not just
Indigenous communities. Although there is a substantial volume of research on
Indigenous populations, the relationship of Indigenous communities and social enterprise
within the broader social economy is an under-researched area (Wuttunee, 2009).
Conclusion
44
This paper has described socio-economic and demographic trends precipitating changes
in the leadership of the social economy in Canada. The trends affecting the growth of the
social economy include a growing income inequality and a long-term period of fiscal
restraint by different levels of government in Canada. Another trend affecting the social
economy is the changing demographics in Canada, particularly population growth from
immigration and Indigenous communities. One of the key conclusions is that the agency
and leadership opportunities of marginalized and equity seeking groups in starting and
maintaining social economy organizations is limited by current system structures.
45
An analysis utilizing Bourdieu’s framework of capital, habitus and field indicate existing
support systems for starting and developing social economy organizations are designed
to maintain existing power structures. The important subtlety of Bourdieu’s framework
can be reiterated through comparison with Putnam’s theories of social capital. Social
capital has been described as a base upon which social economy organizations are
developed (Putnam, 2001). In more recent research, Putnam (2015) describes the decrease
of social capital in ethno-racially diverse communities, and differential social capital and
opportunity due to income inequality. Bourdieu’s framework of analysis can be
differentiated from Putnam’s analysis on two aspects. First Bourdieu stresses the
importance of conflict between agents, where the social capital gained by a dominant
group can be utilized to gain advantages over non-dominant groups. Putnam considers
an increase in social capital for a community to be good for the whole community, where
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
15
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
a rising tide lifts all boats, whereas Bourdieu raises the issue of the gain of social capital
by one group, which can be at the expense or loss of capital by another group. Second,
Putnam puts greater emphasis on the role of economic class and underestimates the role
of race, particularly in the leadership and formation of organizations in the social
economy. Bourdieu’s framework has been applied here to the intersection of class and
race in the social economy, differentiating different types of capital (economic, social,
cultural), and the ability to gain advantage through the ability to play the game or
habitus in the field of the social economy. Bourdieu’s framework is used as a basis in this
manuscript to highlight three primary critiques of the social economy, including elite
resource capture, exclusion of women of colour, and control of racialized communities.
46
One potential avenue for addressing the critiques and ongoing conflict in the social
economy is addressing the support systems for the formation and leadership of social
economy organization in the form of social economy education. Social economy
education has to be diversified in two related directions. First, social economy education
has to consciously increase the diversity in types of organizations that are taught and
supported. The social economy education field is highly siloed between educators who
teach cooperatives, social enterprises, and community economic development. Current
trends in social economy education is towards institutional isomorphism, and this trend
can only be countered by including different worldviews which relate to different forms
of organizations. Second, social economy education has to be consciously inclusive of
diversity of individual backgrounds, including economic class and race, in the case
studies, philosophies, and educators themselves. These two challenges are related;
providing a greater range of organizational options will enable a greater diversity of
individuals to start and lead social economy organizations.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Allen, Robert Loring (1969). Black awakening in capitalist America; an analytic history.
Garden City, N.Y., Doubleday, 251 pages.
Battiste, Marie & Henderson, James (Sa'ke'j) Youngblood (2000). Protecting Indigenous
Knowledge and Heritage: A Global Challenge. Saskatoon: Purich, 336 pages.
Bouchard, Marie J. & Damien Rousselière (2015). The weight of the social economy: An
international perspective. Bruxelles: P.I.E. Peter Lang, 334 pages.
Bourdieu, Pierre. (1986) The Forms of Capital. In: John G. Richardson (editor). Handbook of
Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. Greenwood Press, New York, pp. 241-258.
Breau, Sebastien. (2014). The Occupy Movement and the top 1% in Canada. Antipode, Vol. 46, No.
1, pp. 13-33.
Canadian CED Network, Mount Royal University, Simon Fraser University (2012). Measuring the
Size, Scope and Scale of the Social Enterprise Sector in Manitoba. Ryan O'Connor, Peter Elson,
Peter Hall, Brendan Riemer.
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
16
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
Canadian CED Network, Simon Fraser University and the Institute of Nonprofit Studies, Mount
Royal University (2013). Inspiring Innovation: The Size, Scope and Socioeconomic Impact of
Nonprofit Social Enterprise in Ontario. Joanna Flat, Kate Daly, Peter Elson, Peter Hall, Matthew
Thompson, Paul Chamberlain.
Canadian Council on Social Development. (2003). Funding matters: The impact of Canada’s new
funding regime on nonprofit and voluntary organizations. Ottawa.
Katherine Scott.
Canadian Environmental Health Atlas (2016). Food Deserts. Retrieved from: http://
www.ehatlas.ca/built-environments/food-deserts
Canadian Task Force on Social Finance (2010) Mobilizing Private Capital for Public Good.
Retrieved from: http://www.marsdd.com/wpcontent/uploads/2012/06/
socialfinance_taskforcereport_2010.pdf
Centre for the Study of Living Standards (2012). The Impact of Redistribution on Income
Inequality In Canada And The Provinces: 1981-2010. CSLS Research Report 2010-08. Ottawa:
Ontario. Andrew Sharpe and Evan Capeluck.
Chetty, Raj (2015) Personal Communication. Presentation at The National Bureau of Economic
Research. Productivity, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship Program.
Chetty, Raj, Nathaniel Hendren, Patrick Kline, & Emmanuel Saez (2014). Where is the land of
opportunity? The geography of intergenerational mobility in the United States (No. w19843).
National Bureau of Economic Research.
Chrisman, Robert (2010). On Robert Allen’s Black Awakening in Capitalist America: “The Black
Middle Class, Forty Years After”. The Black Scholar. Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 49-53.
Christensen, Clayton M. (1997). The innovator's dilemma: When new technologies cause great
firms to fail. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press, 288 pages.
Citizenship and Immigration Canada (2015). Facts and figures 2014 – Immigration overview:
Permanent residents Canada – Permanent residents by source country. Ottawa, Ontario:
Government of Canada. Retrieved from: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/statistics/
facts2014/permanent/10.asp
City of Toronto (2013). Next Stop Health: Transit Access and Health Inequities in Toronto.
Medical Officer of Health. Staff report, City of Toronto. Toronto: Ontario.
Clotfelter, Charles. T. (1992). Who benefits from the nonprofit sector? Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 296 pages.
Corak, Miles (2008). Immigration In the Long Run: The Education and Earnings Mobility of
Second Generation Canadians. Choices, Vol. 14, No. 13, pp. 1-32.
Corak, Miles (2010). Chasing the Same Dream, Climbing Different Ladders: Economic Mobility in
the United States and Canada.
Retrieved from: http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/reports/0001/01/01/
chasing-the-same-dream-climbing-different-ladders
Corak, Miles (2013). Income Inequality, Equality of Opportunity, and Intergenerational Mobility.
Institute for the Study of Labor, Bonn: Germany.
Couton, Philippe (2013). The impact of communal organization density on the labor market
integration of immigrants in Canada. International Migration. Vol. 51, No. 1, pp. 92-114.
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
17
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
Diamantopoulos, Mitch & Findlay, Isobel. M. (2007). Growing pains: Social enterprise in
Saskatoon’s core neighbourhoods. Social enterprises Knowledgeable Economies And Sustainable
Communities.
Domhoff, G. William (2009). "The Power Elite and Their Challengers: The Role of Nonprofits in
American Social Conflict." American Behavioral Scientist Vol. 52, No. 7, pp. 955-973.
Durst, Douglas, Mary Bluechart, Georgina Morin, Melissa Rezansoff (2001). Urban aboriginal
persons with disabilities: triple jeopardy! Regina: Social Policy Research Unit, University of
Regina, 236 pages.
Earth Day Canada (2012). Diversity Research Report. Toronto: Earth Day Canada.
Elson, Peter (2007). A Short History of Voluntary Sector-Government Relations in Canada. The
Philanthropist, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 36-74.
Etmanski, A. (2014). Impact: Six patterns to Spread your Social Innovation. Orwell Cove, 474
pages.
Fallon, Barbara, Martin Chabot, John Fluke, Cindy Blackstock, Bruce MacLaurin & Lil Tonmyr
(2013). Placement decisions and disparities among Aboriginal children: Further analysis of the
Canadian incidence study of reported child abuse and neglect part A: Comparisons of the 1998
and 2003 surveys. Child Abuse & Neglect, Vol. 37, No. 1, pp. 47-60.
DiverseCity (2012). Leadership Diversity in the Nonprofit Sector: Baby Steps, Big Strides, and Bold
Stances. Christopher Fredette. Retrieved from: http://diversecitytoronto.ca/wp-content/
uploads/DiverseCity-Counts-Report-Final.pdf
Garrow, Eve E. (2015). Racial And Ethnic Composition Of The Neighborhood And The Disbanding
Of Nonprofit Human Service Organizations. Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race, Vol.
12, No.1, pp. 161-185.
Gordon, Neve (2008). Human rights, social space and power: why do some NGOs exert more
influence than others?. International Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 23-39.
Graefe, Peter (2006). Social economy policies as flanking for Neoliberalism: Transnational policy
solutions, emergent contradictions, local alternatives. Policy and Society, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp.
69-86.
Greenspan, Itay (2013). How Can Bourdieu’s Theory of Capital Benefit the Understanding of
Advocacy NGOs? Theoretical Framework and Empirical Illustration. Nonprofit and Voluntary
Sector Quarterly, Vol. 43, No. pp. 99-120.
Hall, Peter, Elson, Peter Elson & Priscilla Wamucii (2014). 2014 New Brunswick Social Enterprise
Sector Survey. Mount Royal University, Simon Fraser University, Cooperative Enterprise Council
of New Brunswick
Harding, Rebecca (2006). Social Entrepreneurship Monitor: United Kingdom 2005
HR Council for the Non-Profit Sector (2013). Recruitment and Retention of New Immigrants and
Members of Visible Minorities in the non-profit Sectors Workforce. Ottawa: Ontario
Retrieved from: http://www.hrcouncil.ca/documents/recruitment_newimmigrants.pdf
Imagine Canada. (2013). Earned Income-Generating Activities Among Canadian Charities. A
summary of Findings from Imagine Canada’s Sector Monitor. Toronto, ON: David M. Lasby.
Incite! Women of Color Against Violence. (2007). The revolution will not be funded: beyond the
non-profit industrial complex. South End Press, 256 pages.
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
18
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
Jevtovic, Nemanja (2013). Elite Capture in the Social Enterprise Sector. Retrieved from
www.sess.ca/english/wp-content/.../Jevtovic-MRP-Social-Enterprises.pdf
Kim, Mirae (2015). Socioeconomic Diversity, Political Engagement, and the Density of Nonprofit
Organizations in US Counties. The American Review of Public Administration, Vol. 45, No. 4, pp.
402-416.
Kissane, Rebecca Joyce (2010).“We call it the badlands”: How Social‐Spatial Geographies Influence
Social Service Use. Social Service Review. Vol. 84, No. 1, pp. 3-28.
Light, Ivan & Leo-Paul Dana (2013). Boundaries of social capital in entrepreneurship.
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 37, No. 3, pp. 603-624.
Loh, Penn (2014) What’s the Role of Race in the New Economy Movement?. Yes Magazine.
Retrieved from: http://www.yesmagazine.org/commonomics/race-and-the-new-economy?
utm_source=YTW&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=20140613
Lynch, K. (2014) Social Enterprise and the Privilege Economy. Huffington Post.
Retrieved From: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-lynch/social-enterprise-andthe_b_5646091.html
MARS Centre for Impact Investing & Purpose Capital. (2014). State of The Nation: Impact Investing in
Canada. Toronto, Ontario: Karim Harji, Joanna Reynolds, Hilary Best, Mathu Jeyaloganathan, Ellen
Martin, Lexi Rose, Muska Ulhaq.
McGovern, Pauline (2014). Small Voluntary Organisations in Britain’s ‘Big Society’: A
Bourdieusian Approach. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit
Organizations, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 636-656.
McKibben, Bill (2006). Welcome to the Climate Crisis. Washington Post. Retrieved from: http://
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/26/AR2006052601549.html
McKinsey & Company (2015). Diversity Matters. Vivian Hunt, Dennis Layton, Sara Prince.
Retrieved from: http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/whydiversity-matters.
McMurtry, John Justin (2009). Living Economics. Emond Montgomery Publications, 279 pages.
Meinhard, Agnes, Farhat Faridi, Pauline O’Connor, & Manveer Randhawa (2011). Civic
Participation of Visible Minorities in Canadian Society: The Role of Nonprofit Organizations in
Canada’s Four Most Diverse Cities. Toronto, ON: Centre for Voluntary Sector Studies, Ryerson
University.
Mintzberg, Henry (2015). Rebalancing society: Radical renewal beyond left, right, and center.
Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 160 pages.
Mook, Laurie, John R. Whitman, Jack Quarter, & Ann Armstrong (2015). Understanding the Social
Economy of the United States. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 416 pages.
Mowat Centre (2014). Diversity and Inclusion: Valuing The Opportunity. Mowat NFP. Elizabeth
McIsaac & Moody, C Retrieved from mowatcentre.ca/diversity-and-inclusion/.
Murdie, Robert, Richard Maaranen, & Jennifer Logan (2014). Eight Canadian Metropolitan Areas:
Spatial Patterns of Neighborhood Change, 1981-2006. A Typology Based on Combined Statistical
Analysis of Census Tract Data. Research Paper 234. Neighborhood Change Research Partnership.
Retrieved from www.neighborhoodchange.ca
New Economy Coalition (2016). Retrieved from: Neweconomy.net
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
19
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
Newcomer Women’s Services Toronto, Social Planning Toronto, Toronto Womens City Alliance
(2014). The Economy and Resilience of Newcomers (EARN). Exploring Newcomer
Entrepreneurship. Maya Roy, Navjeet Sidhu and Beth Wilson. Toronto: Ontario
Nicholls, Alex (2010). The legitimacy of social entrepreneurship: reflexive isomorphism in a pre‐
paradigmatic field. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 611-633.
Ornstein, Michael (2006). Ethno-Racial Groups in Toronto, 1971-2001: A Demographic and SocioEconomic profile. York University: Institute for Social Research.
Ornstein, Michael (2007). Ethno-Racial Groups in Montreal and Vancouver, 1971-2001: A
Demographic and Socio-Economic profile. York University: Institute for Social Research.
Page, Scott (2008). The difference: how the power of diversity creates better groups, firms,
schools, and societies. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 424 pages.
Pallotta, Dan (2008). Uncharitable: How restraints on nonprofits undermine their potential. Tufts
University Press, 336 pages.
Palmater, Pamela D. (2011). Stretched beyond human limits: Death by poverty in first nations.
Canadian Review of Social Policy, Vol. 65, pp. 112-127.
Parliament of Canada (2013). Income Inequality in Canada, An Overview. Report of the Standing
Committee on Finance. Ottawa: Ontario. Retrieved from www.parl.gc.ca
Pratt, Jon and Ruth McCambridge (2015). Not Adding to the Problem: Seven Ways Your Nonprofit
Can Avoid Mirroring Practices That Perpetuate Inequality. Non-Profit Quarterly, Spring 2015.
Retrieved from: http://nonprofitquarterly.org/2015/03/21/not-adding-to-the-problem-sevenways-your-nonprofit-can-avoid-mirroring-practices-that-perpetuate-inequality/
Procyk, Stephanie (2014), Understanding Income Inequality in Canada:1980-2014. Research paper
232. United Way Toronto and Neighborhood Change Research Partnership, Factor-Interwash
Faculty of Social Work, University of Toronto.
Putnam, Robert D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New
York: Simon & Schuster, 544 pages.
Putnam, Robert D. (2007) E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first
Century. The John Skytte Prize Lecture. Scandanavian Political Studies. Vol. 30, No 2, pp. 137-174.
Putnam, Robert D. (2015). Our kids: The American Dream in Crisis. New York: Simon & Schuster,
400 pages.
Quarter, Jack, Laurie Mook, & Ann Armstrong (2009). Understanding the Social Economy: A
Canadian perspective. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 344 pages.
Reed, Paul B., Kevin L. Selbee (2001). The civic core in Canada: Disproportionality in charitable
giving, volunteering, and civic participation. Nonprofit and voluntary sector quarterly, Vol. 30,
No. 4, pp. 761-780.
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy
Sciences, Vol. 4. No. 2, pp. 155–169.
Roelofs, Joan (1995). The third sector as a protective layer for capitalism. Monthly Review, Vol.
47, No. 4, pp 16-22.
Rogers, W. S. (2009). The African American Entrepreneur: Then and Now. ABC-CLIO, 316 pages.
Schneiberg, M., (2010). Toward an Organizationally Diverse American Capitalism-Cooperative,
Mutual, and Local, State-Owned Enterprise. Seattle University Law Review, Vol. 34, pp.1409-1434.
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
20
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
Sengupta, Ushnish, Marcelo Vieta, & John Justin McMurtry (2015). Indigenous Communities and
Social Enterprise in Canada. Canadian Journal of Nonprofit and Social Economy Research, Vol. 6,
No. 1, pp. 104-123.
Sinclair, Raven & Jana Grekul (2012). Aboriginal Youth Gangs in Canada:(de) constructing an
epidemic. First Peoples Child & Family Review, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 8-28.
Statistics Canada. (2007). Satellite Account of Nonprofit Institutions and Volunteering (Catalogue No.
13-015-X). Ottawa, Ontario: Social Analysis and Modelling Division, Statistics Canada.
Statistics Canada. (2011). Population Projections by Aboriginal Identity in Canada. 2006 to 2013.
(Catalogue No. 91-552-X). Ottawa, Ontario: Demography Division, Statistics Canada. Eric Caron
Malenfant & Jean-Dominque Morency
Statistics Canada. (2015a). Full Time Employment: 1976-2014 (Catalogue No. 11-626-X-049). Ottawa,
Ontario: Social Analysis and Modelling Division, Statistics Canada.
Statistics Canada. (2015b). Changes in the Distribution of New Immigrants to Canada. (Catalogue
No.11F0019M – No. 366). Ottawa, Ontario: Minister of Industry.
Statistics Canada. (2015c). Aboriginal Statistics at a Glance: Second Edition. (Catalogue No.89-645X2015001). Ottawa, Ontario: Minister of Industry.
Tarr, Amanda & George Karaphylis (2011). Research Findings: Social Enterprise in Nova Scotia.
CED Institute. Cape Breton University.
Toronto Workforce Innovation Group (2011). Not Working for Profit: A Labour Market
Description of the Nonprofit Sector In Toronto. Toronto: Ontario, Tom Zizys.
United Way of Grater Toronto (2004). Poverty by Postal Code: The Geography of Neighborhood
Poverty 1981-2001. Toronto: United Way of Greater Toronto and The Canadian Council on Social
Development. Retrieved from: http://www.unitedwaytyr.com/document.doc?id=59
United Way of Greater Toronto (2015). The Opportunity Equation: Building opportunity in the
face of growing income inequality. Retrieved from: http://www.unitedwaytyr.com/
document.doc?id=285
Unwin, Julia (2004). The Grantmaking Tango: Issues for Funders. London: The Baring Foundation.
Retrieved from: http://www.baringfoundation.org.uk/
Walks, Alan (2013). Income Inequality and Polarization in Canada’s Cities. An Examination and
New Form of Measurement. Research Paper 227. Cities Centre, University of Toronto. Retrieved
from www.neighborhoodchange.ca
Westley, Frances, Brenda Zimmerman, & Michael Quinn Patton (2006). Getting to maybe: How the
world is changed. Toronto: Vintage Canada, 272 pages.
Wolch, Jennifer (1999). Decentering America's nonprofit sector: Reflections on Salamon's crises
analysis. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, Vol. 10, No.
1, pp. 25-35.
Wolpert, Julian (1993). Decentralization and equity in public and nonprofit sectors. Nonprofit and
Voluntary Sector Quarterly, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 281-296.
Woolford, Andrew & Amelia Curran (2011). Neoliberal restructuring, limited autonomy, and
relational distance in Manitoba’s nonprofit field. Critical Social Policy, Vol. 31, No. 4, pp. 583-606.
Woolford, Andrew & Amelia Curran (2013). Community positions, neoliberal dispositions:
managing nonprofit social services within the bureaucratic field. Critical Sociology, Vol. 39, No. 1,
pp. 45-63.
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
21
The Future of Social Economy Leadership and Organizational Composition in Can...
World Economic Forum (2015). Retrieved from http://reports.wefo\um.org/outlook-globalagenda-2015/top-10-trends-of-2015/1-deepening-income-inequality/
Wuttunee, Wanda (2009). Aboriginal Perspectives on the Social economy. In John Justin
McMurtry (editor). Living economics: Canadian perspectives on the social economy, cooperatives, and community economic development. Toronto, Canada: Edmond Montgomery
Publications, 279 pages.
ABSTRACTS
This paper describes the necessary and inevitable changes in the leadership of the Social
Economy in Canada due to socio-economic and demographic trends. The first macroeconomic
trend affecting the growing size of the social economy in Canada is growing income inequality.
The second macroeconomic trend is a long-term period of fiscal restraint by different levels of
government in Canada. Another trend is the changing demographics in Canada, which has two
components, population growth from immigration and population growth in Indigenous
communities. The trends are accompanied by critiques of the direction of the trend with respect
to the social economy, arguing that the social economy is a contested space. One of the key
conclusions is that the agency and leadership opportunities of marginalized and equity seeking
groups in starting and maintaining social economy organizations is limited by current system
structures. Bourdieu’s framework of capital, habitus and field are used as theoretical frameworks
for analysis to argue that the existing support systems for starting and developing social
economy organizations are designed to maintain existing power structures.
L’article qui suit décrit les changements nécessaires et inévitables qui devraient être introduits
dans la direction de l’économie sociale au Canada en raison des tendances démographiques et
socioéconomiques actuelles. Les deux premières tendances sont macroéconomiques. Il s’agit,
respectivement, de l’inégalité croissante des revenus et des restrictions budgétaires de longue
durée aux différents paliers de gouvernement. La modification de la réalité démographique au
Canada, en particulier la croissance de la population des communautés immigrantes et
autochtones, est l’une des tendances socioculturelles majeures. L’économie sociale est un espace
contesté et l’une des principales conclusions tirées de l’étude est que les occasions de pouvoir et
de direction offerte aux groupes marginalisés et en quête d’équité, se trouvent limitées par les
structures du système actuel. Les concepts de capital, d’habitus et de champ de Bourdieu servent
de cadres théoriques pour montrer que les systèmes d’appui actuels au démarrage et à
l’établissement d’organisations dans le champ de l’économie sociale sont conçus pour maintenir
les structures de pouvoir existantes. Des structures de soutien distinctes devraient dès lors être
établies.
INDEX
Mots-clés: autochtone, économie sociale, immigration, inégalité, sans but lucratif
Keywords: Immigration, Indigenous, Inequality, Nonprofit, Social Economy
Revue Interventions économiques, 54 | 2016
22