Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Perceptions of Health and Wellbeing Among Employees in a Work Integration Social Enterprise in Sweden Cover

Perceptions of Health and Wellbeing Among Employees in a Work Integration Social Enterprise in Sweden

Annals of Global Health
Volume 89 (2023): Issue 1
By: Gloria Macassa,  Cormac McGrath,  Michael J. Roy,  Frida Stål,  Anne Sofie Hiswåls,  Mamunur Rashid,  Ulf Karlsson,  Rooney Olsson,  Jose Pedro Silva,  Stig Vinberg and  Anneli Marttila  
Open Access
|May 2023

References

  1. 1European Union Commission (EUC). Social business initiative: creating a favourable climate for social enterprises, key stakeholders in the social economy and innovation. COM. 2011; 682 final.
    Back to article
  2. 2Woo C, Jung H. The impact of social enterprises on individual wellbeing in South Korea: the moderating roles of social capital in multilevel analysis. Social Indicators Research. 2022; 159: 433–454. DOI: 10.1007/s11205-021-02759-8
    Back to article
  3. 3Roy M J, Hackett MT. Polanyi’s ‘substantive approach’ to the economy in action? Conceptualising social enterprise as a public health ‘intervention.’ Review of Social Economy. 2017; 75(2): 89–111. DOI: 10.1080/00346764.2016.1171383
    Back to article
  4. 4Roy MJ, Donaldson C, Baker R, Kay A. Social enterprise: new pathways to health and well-being? Journal of Public Health Policy. 2013; 34(1): 55–68. DOI: 10.1057/jphp.2012.61
    Back to article
  5. 5Thomson H, Atkinson R, Petticrew M, Kearns A. Do urban regeneration programmes improve public health and reduce health inequalities? A synthesis of the evidence from UK policy and practice (1980–2004). Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health. 2006; 60(2): 108–115. DOI: 10.1136/jech.2005.038885
    Back to article
  6. 6Roy MJ, Donaldson C, Baker R, Kerr S. The potential of social enterprise to enhance health and well-being: a model and systematic review. Social Science & Medicine. 2014; 123: 182–193. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.07.031
    Back to article
  7. 7De Ruysscher C, Claes C, Lee T, et al. A systems approach to social entrepreneurship. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Non-profit Organizations. 2017; 28(6): 2530–2545. DOI: 10.1007/s11266-016-9704-5
    Back to article
  8. 8Ferguson KM. Implementing a social enterprise intervention with homeless, street-living youths in Los Angeles. Social Work. 2007; 52(2): 103–112. DOI: 10.1093/sw/52.2.103
    Back to article
  9. 9Ferguson KM, Xie, B. Feasibility study of the social enterprise intervention with homeless youth. Research on Social Work Practice. 2008; 18(1): 5–19. DOI: 10.1177/1049731507303535
    Back to article
  10. 10Ferguson KM, Islam N. Conceptualizing outcomes with street-living young adults: grounded theory approach to evaluating the social enterprise intervention. Qualitative Social Work. 2008; 7(2): 17–237. DOI: 10.1177/1473325008089631
    Back to article
  11. 11Bertotti M, Harden A, Renton A, Sheridan K. The contribution of a social enterprise to the building of social capital in a disadvantaged urban area of London. Community Development Journal. 2012; 47(2): 168–183. DOI: 10.1093/cdj/bsr020
    Back to article
  12. 12Munoz SA, Farmer J, Winterton R, Barraket JO. The social enterprise as a space of well-being: an exploratory case study. Social Enterprise Journal. 2015; 11(3): 281–302. DOI: 10.1108/SEJ-11-2014-0041
    Back to article
  13. 13Farmer J, De Cotta T, McKinnon K, et al. Social enterprise and wellbeing in community life. Social Enterprise Journal. 2016; 12(2): 235–254. DOI: 10.1108/SEJ-05-2016-0017
    Back to article
  14. 14Jang J, Kim TH, Hong H, Yoo CS, Park J. Statistical estimation of the casual effect of social economy on subjective well-being. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Non-profit Organizations. 2018; 29(3): 511–525. DOI: 10.1007/s11266-017-9935-0
    Back to article
  15. 15Calò F, Teasdale S, Donaldson C, Roy MJ, Baglioni S. Collaborator or competitor: assessing the evidence supporting the role of social enterprise in health and social care. Public Management Review. 2018; 20(12): 1790–1814. DOI: 10.1080/14719037.2017.1417467
    Back to article
  16. 16Macaulay B, Mazzei M, Roy MJ, Teasdale S, Donaldson C. Differentiating the effect of social enterprise activities on health. Social Science & Medicine. 2018; 200: 211–217. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.01.042
    Back to article
  17. 17Song J, Fry R, Mizen A, et al. Association between blue and green space availability with mental health and wellbeing. International Journal of Population Data Science. 2018; 3(4): 921–922. DOI: 10.23889/ijpds.v3i4.921
    Back to article
  18. 18Poveda S, Gill M, Junio DR, Thinyane H, Catan V. Should social enterprises complement or supplement public health provision? Social Enterprise Journal. 2019; 15(4): 496–518. DOI: 10.1108/SEJ-12-2018-0083
    Back to article
  19. 19Barraket J. Fostering wellbeing of immigrants and refugees? Evaluating the outcomes of work integration social enterprise. In: Denny S, Seddon F, (eds.), Social Enterprise: Accountability and Evaluation around the World. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge; 2014: 102–120.
    Back to article
  20. 20Elmes AI. Work integration social enterprise (WISE) effects on economic participation, social inclusion, health and wellbeing: evaluation of Vanguard Laundry Services. Swinborn: Center for Social Impact Suinburne. Faculty of Business and Law; 2020: 1–140.
    Back to article
  21. 21Krupa T, Sabetti J, Lysaght R. How work integration social enterprises impact the stigma of mental illness. Social Enterprise Journal. 2019; 15(4): 475–494. DOI: 10.1108/SEJ-12-2018-0075
    Back to article
  22. 22Henderson F, Steiner A, Mazzei M, Docherty C. Social enterprises’ impact on older people’s health and wellbeing: exploring Scottish experiences. Health Promotion International. 2019: daz102. DOI: 10.1093/heapro/daz102
    Back to article
  23. 23Barraket J, Moussa B, Suchowerska R, et al. Improving health equity for young people? The role of social enterprise: final report. Melbourne: Center for Social Impact Swinburne; 2021. DOI: 10.25916/5f604d4e94b31.
    Back to article
  24. 24McKinnon K, Kennedy M, De Cotta T. Social enterprises and community well-being in regional Australia. Journal of Sociology. 2021: 1–17. DOI: 10.1177/14407833211035839
    Back to article
  25. 25Farmer J, Kamstra P, Brennan-Horley C, et al. Using micro-geography to understand the realisation of wellbeing: a qualitative GIS study of three social enterprises. Health & Place. 2020: 62. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2020.102293
    Back to article
  26. 26Roy MJ. Towards a ‘wellbeing economy’: what can we learn from social enterprise? In: Gidron B, Domaradzka A, (eds.), The New Social and Impact Economy: An International Perspective, Nonprofit and Civil Society Studies. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2021: 269–284. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-68295-8_13
    Back to article
  27. 27Suchowerska R, Barraket J, Qian J, et al. An organizational approach to understanding how social enterprises address health inequities: a scoping review. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship. 2020; 11(3): 257–281. DOI: 10.1080/19420676.2019.1640771
    Back to article
  28. 28Joyce A, Elmes A, Campbell P, et al. The health and well-being impacts of a work integration social enterprise from a systems perspective. Health Promotion International. 2022: daab052. DOI: 10.1093/heapro/daab052
    Back to article
  29. 29Bilbijat T, Rendal JS. Exploring eudaimonia through meaningful work narratives within work integration social enterprises. Social Enterprise Journal. 2017; l17(4): 513–126. DOI: 10.1108/SEJ-02-2021-0013
    Back to article
  30. 30Defourny J, Nyssens M, Adam S. Documenting, theorizing, mapping and testing the plurality of SE models in Western Europe. In: Defourny J, Nyssens M, (eds.), Social enterprise in Western Europe: Theories, models and practice. New York: Routledge; 2021: 1–17. DOI: 10.4324/9780429055140-101
    Back to article
  31. 31Gawell M, European Union Commission (EUC). Social enterprises and their ecosystems in Europe. Updated country report: Sweden. Luxemburg: Publications Office of the European Union; 2019. Available at http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?advSearchKey=socenterfiches&mode=advancedSubmit&catId=22.
    Back to article
  32. 32Gawell M, Sundin E, Tillmar M. Entrepreneurship invited into the (social) welfare arena. In: Andersen LL, Gawell M, Spear R, (eds.), Social Entrepreneurship and Social Enterprises. Nordic Perspectives. New York and London: Routledge; 2016: 215–231.
    Back to article
  33. 33Wijkström F, Lundström, T. Den ideella sektorn. Organisationerna i det civila samhället, Stockholm: Sober Förlag; 2002.
    Back to article
  34. 34Esping-Andersen G. The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1990. DOI: 10.1177/095892879100100108
    Back to article
  35. 35Svedberg G. Bedömningstillfället, mer än en grund för betygsättning. I Per-OlofErixon (red.), Forskningsarbete pågår. Nationella Forskarskolan i Pedagogiskt Arbete (NaPa). Umeå: Umeå universitet (Umeå University); 2005.
    Back to article
  36. 36Gawell M. Soci(et)al entrepreneurship and different forms of social enterprise. In: Lundström A, Zhou C, von Fridrichs Y, Sundin E, (eds.), Social Entrepreneurship. Leveraging Economic, Political and Cultural Dimensions. Heidelberg, New York and London: Springer; 2014: 23–41. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-01396-1_2
    Back to article
  37. 37Gawell M. Social enterprises in Sweden: intertextual consequences and hidden paradoxes. In: Defourny J, Nyssens M, (eds.), Social Entrepreneurship: Leveraging Economic, Political, and Cultural Entrepreneurship. New York: Routledge; 2021: 218–234. DOI: 10.4324/9780429055140-13-15
    Back to article
  38. 38Andrews R, Van de Walle S. New public management and citizen’s perceptions of local service efficiency, responsiveness, equity and effectiveness. Public Management Review. 2013; 5: 762–783. DOI: 10.1080/14719037.2012.725757
    Back to article
  39. 39Wilkinson RG, Marmot MG, (eds.), Social Determinants of Health: The Solid Facts, second ed. Copenhagen: World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe; 2003.
    Back to article
  40. 40WHO. Closing the gap in a generation: health equity through action on the social determinants of health. Commission on Social Determinants of Health. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2008.
    Back to article
  41. 41Swedish Government. Swedish Companies Registration Office; 2018. Retrieved from www.bolagsverket.se (Accessed 24 January 2023).
    Back to article
  42. 42Kvale S, Brinkmann S. Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. SAGE Publications Inc.; 2009.
    Back to article
  43. 43Patton MQ. Qualitative research & evaluation methods: integrating theory and practice. SAGE publications Inc.; 2014.
    Back to article
  44. 44Yin RK. Case study research: design and Methods, fourth ed. Sage, Thousand Oaks; 2009.
    Back to article
  45. 45SCB (Statistics Sweden). 2021. Available at https://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/statistik-efter-amne/befolkning/befolkningens-sammansattning/befolkningsstatistik/pong/tabell-och-diagram/kvartals--och-halvarsstatistik--kommun-lan-och-riket/kvartal-2-2021/.
    Back to article
  46. 46SCB (Statistics Sweden). Norrlandsfondens Konjunkturbarometer [Norrlandsfonden’s Business Tendency Survey]. 2019. Available at https://www.scb.se/contentassets/3e08e3f84db74e0ca1523855586015e1/norrlandsbarometern19.pdf (accessed 30 August 2022).
    Back to article
  47. 47Health on Equal Terms. Regional Report, 2018. Available at https://www.regiongavleborg.se/globalassets/regional-utveckling/forskning-och-samhallsmedicin/samhallsmedicin/hur_mar_gavleborg/nationell_folkhalsoenkat/presentation-allmant_halsotillstand.pdf (accessed 29 June, 2022).
    Back to article
  48. 48Björk J. 2019. Sammanställning av handlingsplaner och genomförandeansökningar för regional utveckling av socialt företagande och socialt entreprenörskap [Overview of action plans and implementations for regional development of social enterprise and social entrepreneurship]. Tillväxtverket [Swedish Agency for Economic and Regional Growth] Available at https://tillvaxtverket.se/download/18.3f46dbe516a53b54a2f103f5/1556279085523/Sam (Accessed 31 October 2022).
    Back to article
  49. 49Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today. 2004; 24(2), 105–12. DOI: 10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001
    Back to article
  50. 50Hsieh H-F, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005; 15(9): 1277–88. DOI: 10.1177/1049732305276687
    Back to article
  51. 51Elo S, Kyngäs H. The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs. 2008; 62(1): 107–15. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x
    Back to article
  52. 52Chandler J. A study to explore the impact of working in a social enterprise on employee health and wellbeing in Greater Manchester. Salford: School of health Sciences College of Health and social care. 2016; 1–368 (PhD dissertation).
    Back to article
  53. 53Gidron B, Hasenfeld Y. Social enterprises: an organizational perspective. New York: Palgrave Macmillan; 2012. DOI: 10.1057/9781137035301
    Back to article
  54. 54McKinnon K, Kennedy M, Barraket J, De Cotta T. Is being in work good for wellbeing? Work Integration social enterprises in Australia. Australian Geographer. 2020; 51(3): 361–375. DOI: 10.1080/00049182.2020.1781322
    Back to article
  55. 55Forslund A. Employment outcomes and policies in Sweden during recent decades. Uppsala: Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy (IFAU). 2019. Available at https://www.ifau.se/globalassets/pdf/se/2019/wp-2019-15-employment-outcomes-and-policies-forslund.pdf.
    Back to article
  56. 56Pudak J, Simlesa D. Is social entrepreneurship better for workers? The influence of work experience in Croatian social cooperatives on perceived well-being. Croatian Sociological Review. 2020; 50(1): 7–30. DOI: 10.5613/rzs.50.1.1
    Back to article
  57. 57Ho P-Y, Chan K-T. The social impact of work-integration social enterprise in Hongkong. International Social Work. 2010; 53(1): 33–45. DOI: 10.1177/0020872809348950
    Back to article
  58. 58Efimov I, Lengen JC, Kordsmeyer A-C, Harth V, Mache S. Capturing and analysing the working conditions of employees with disabilities in German social firms using focus groups. BMC Public Health. 2020; 22: 43. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-022-12689-w
    Back to article
  59. 59Diener E, Oishi S, Tay L. Advances in subjective well-being research. Nat Hum Behav. 2018; 2: 253–260. DOI: 10.1038/s41562-018-0307-6
    Back to article
  60. 60Waterman AS. Reconsidering happiness: a eudaimonist’s perspective. The Journal of Positive Psychology. 2008; 3: 234–252. DOI: 10.1080/17439760802303002
    Back to article
  61. 61Corden A, Millar J. Qualitative longitudinal research for social policy – introduction to themed section. Social Policy and Society. 2007; 6(4): 529–532. DOI: 10.1017/S1474746407003867
    Back to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.4065 | Journal eISSN: 2214-9996
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Submitted on: Jan 25, 2023
Accepted on: Apr 29, 2023
Published on: May 12, 2023
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year
Keywords:
work integration social enterprise,
Sweden,
employee health and wellbeing

© 2023 Gloria Macassa, Cormac McGrath, Michael J. Roy, Frida Stål, Anne Sofie Hiswåls, Mamunur Rashid, Ulf Karlsson, Rooney Olsson, Jose Pedro Silva, Stig Vinberg, Anneli Marttila, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 89 (2023): Issue 1Next article