According to the European Research Network – EMES definition of social enterprise[1] (which does not correspond to the definition of social purpose company in Belgium, regulated by a 1996 Law, revised in 2007), the main field of activity of this kind of enterprise is that of work integration (from here the acronym WISEs: work integration social enterprises). WISEs’ aim is to help people excluded from the labour market to get a job in different sectors (Defourny, J. and Nyssens, M. eds., Social Enterprise in Europe: Recent Trends and Development, EMES Working Papers no. 08/01, 2008).
According to Olivier Gregoire’s paper on National Profiles of Work Integration Social Enterprises: Belgium (2003), nowadays regional authorities are in charge of work integration social enterprises (WISEs). Therefore, WISEs can be described according to their belonging region.
In the Flanders there are 4 types of WISE: social workshop (sociale werkplaatsen, for mentally, physically or sensorially handicapped people), work-care centres (arbeidszorgcentra, for people affected by different, serious and serial problems that hinder them in finding a job), work-integration enterprises (invoegbedrijven, involving people who have been inactive for at least 5 years), and sheltered workshops (beschutte werkplaatsen, addressed to people able to reach a certain level of productivity).
In the two region of Wallonia and Brussels, instead, the kinds of WISE are more similar; they are: work-integration enterprises (enterprises d’insertion), on-the-job training enterprises (enterprises de formation par le travail), adapted work enterprises (enterprises de travail adapté), and non recognized work-integration enterprises. All of them provide permanent work for people with handicap, low qualification, psychosocial problems, etc., but they do not provide a stable job to people not physically or mentally handicapped, but still disadvantaged from a social point of view.
According to the same source, another field of activity for social enterprises is proximity services (that is: personal or collective services).
As far as domiciliary care is concerned, for example, a voucher system has been introduced at a federal level: the user can buy the vouchers and give them to the chosen provider, which can be public, private or non-profit. Providers benefit from a 14.30 € subsidy per hour to pay the workers.
At a regional level, schemes combining work integration objectives with a proximity service provision that is not encountered in the national voucher system have also been developed. Promoters of these initiatives could be practically both public institutions and third sector’s organizations.
[1] The EMES definition distinguishes, on the one hand, between criteria that are more economic and, on the other hand, indicators that are predominantly social. The former are:
i) A continuous activity producing goods and/or selling services
ii) A high degree of autonomy
iii) A significant level of economic risk
iv) A minimum amount of paid work
The latter are:
i) An initiative launched by a group of citizens
ii) A decision-making power not based on capital ownership
iii) A participatory nature, which involves the persons affected by the activity
iv) Limited profit distribution
v) An explicit aim to benefit the community.
