Effective institutional arrangements across all levels of government are essential to unlock the full potential of the social economy in the EU. Clear frameworks and strong co-ordination enable public authorities to work more effectively with social economy actors, supporting inclusive and sustainable local development. This chapter explores how such institutional frameworks are structured in EU Member States, examining the roles and interactions of national, regional, and local authorities. It analyses competencies, responsibilities, and co-ordination mechanisms within and between levels of government, as well as engagement with social economy representatives. Drawing on diverse country examples, it identifies key patterns, challenges, and promising practices, and concludes with policy recommendations to clarify institutional arrangements and strengthen co-ordination mechanisms.
Social Economy in Europe
Abstract
The social economy spans multiple sectors, operating at the intersection of various social, economic, environmental and community interests. To develop, it requires strong policies, including clear legal frameworks, tailored funding and co-ordinated policy support across levels of government. Collaboration between local, regional, national, and EU-level institutions can create the conditions for growth by reducing overlaps, aligning goals, and embedding the social economy within broader economic and development strategies.
The social economy complements existing provision of services by filling gaps that the public and private sectors do not cover. Across EU countries, social economy entities deliver services in health, education, housing, social care, employment, renewable energy and circular economy, particularly recycling and waste management. Their adaptable, community-driven responses to local needs promote inclusive development and help reduce inequalities (OECD, 2022[1]). By reinvesting profits into social goals, they generate lasting benefits and strengthen both social cohesion and local economic resilience.
Institutional arrangements support the adoption of strategies, resource allocation, and policy support tailored to the specific needs of social economy entities. They support co-ordination among public authorities, civil society, and private stakeholders, promoting policy coherence and reducing duplicated or fragmented efforts. Additionally, institutional support at various levels can improve access to funding, capacity-building, and markets, thereby strengthening the resilience and impact of social economy entities (OECD, 2023[2]).
Clarifying institutional arrangements and designating specific authorities for social economy policy contribute positively to implementing better framework conditions for the social economy. A co-ordinated institutional framework that clarifies roles and responsibilities and facilitates dialogue among various national bodies is important for designing and implementing targeted policies and supportive measures. Clear institutional arrangements also enhance the integration of the social economy within public policy and across different sectors.
The social economy often works with different public authorities to advance strategic objectives. Building on strong community ties, organisations can help deliver public policies more effectively through place-based solutions. Their involvement also creates opportunities for institutional arrangements that improve co-ordination and co-operation across levels of government, guided by principles of inclusion, collaboration, transparency, and multi-stakeholder engagement.
The European Union's Social Economy Action Plan emphasises the need for co-ordination among Member States to strengthen social economy entities. It also aims to use the EU's Single Market and financial instruments to encourage intra-EU collaboration for effective cross-border operations. A significant moment was the informal meeting of European Ministers for the Social Economy in Paris in February 2022, attended by 23 ministers, highlighting the importance of integrating the social economy into EU policies for better support and development (Social Economy Europe, 2022[3]). Building on this momentum, the San Sebastián Manifesto (2023) and the Liège Roadmap (2024) reinforced the social economy’s prominence in EU policymaking.
The social economy thrives on place-based approaches to social, economic and environmental challenges. Many initiatives originate within communities themselves, developed in response to social, economic, or environmental challenges. To pursue their social mission, social economy entities usually mobilise local networks and non-market resources such as volunteers and donations and adapt their activities to local priorities. Their local presence enables them to engage directly with communities and stakeholders on needs and priorities. Beyond creating and maintaining economic benefits within communities, social economy entities also promote social cohesion and participatory decision-making through their governance structures, thereby fostering citizen ownership and mutual accountability (OECD, 2020[4]).
While social economy policies need to reflect regional and local contexts, a clear national framework can facilitate public support. Several EU countries recognise the need to mainstream the social economy across sectors, through national policies (e.g. France, Poland, Portugal, Spain) (OECD, 2020[4]). Such a framework guides how resources from the national budget are allocated and encourages innovative approaches to complex social and economic challenges. It also provides a foundation for developing regional and local policies, while supporting the mapping and evaluation of key assets, including physical infrastructure, human capital, social networks, cultural resources, and community strengths such as resilience and capacity for innovation.
The mission-driven nature of the social economy has significant potential to reinforce local and regional development dynamics. It can catalyse territorial cohesion by bridging social divides, supporting marginalised communities, and fostering inclusive participation. Over the past several decades, most OECD countries have moved toward greater decentralisation. In approximately two-thirds of these countries, this shift has enhanced the economic significance of subnational governments (OECD, 2019[5]). As place-based solutions gain increasing importance and decentralisation advances, the social economy emerges as a tool which could create synergies across different levels of government.
Across the European Union, there is a growing trend toward enhancing regional and local governance, with regions typically responsible for broader strategic planning and coordination across multiple localities, and local authorities focusing on service delivery and community-level implementation, not only in federal or quasi-federal systems but also in countries where subnational authorities lack legislative competencies. This reflects a broader shift toward more responsive and place-based policymaking. This is also echoed in the European social economy regions (ESER) initiative, which brings together representatives from regions and cities to raise awareness and build networks for social economy stakeholders at regional and local levels (European Commission, n.d.[6]). Strengthening governance structures at the regional level helps national governments better manage overlaps between policy areas and design interventions that are more aligned with the unique characteristics of different places. As regions take on a more strategic role in the economic, social and territorial development of their areas, they can become pivotal partners in implementing targeted solutions to complex, cross-cutting challenges, to which many social economy entities contribute (OECD, 2022[7]).
Decentralisation, when implemented under conducive conditions, can support effective public sector management. A carefully designed distribution of competencies, responsibilities and resources from the central government to subnational authorities can help address place-based disparities and improve co-ordination across levels of government (OECD, 2019[5]). Designated institutions at different levels can link local social economy initiatives with broader regional and national development strategies, making it easier to replicate successful models and encourage innovation in delivering services.
Regional and local governance can be particularly relevant for the social economy given its local anchorage. Because these initiatives operate at the intersection of social, economic, and environmental objectives, they can benefit from co-ordination across different government levels. Regional and local authorities can create supportive environments through funding, regulation, and partnerships. When multi-level governance is well-aligned and flexible, it can help integrate social economy activities into regional development strategies while allowing local initiatives to respond to community needs. Infographic 3.1
Infographic 3.1 provides an overview of how institutional arrangements on social economy policy are structured across national, subnational and municipal levels in the EU member states.
Many EU-level initiatives focus on establishing conducive framework conditions for the social economy. The 2021 Social Economy Action Plan has put forward policies and programmes to support policymakers in building enabling ecosystems (European Commission, 2021[8]). Following the Action Plan, the 2023 Council Recommendation on developing social economy framework conditions recommends Member States to review their institutional and administrative set-ups to designate social economy co-ordinators in national public institutions.
The European Commission’s drive to advance the social economy is also reflected at the international level. Internationally, various frameworks have been established to promote the growth of the social and solidarity economy in alignment with the EU Action Plan and the Council Recommendation. These include the OECD Recommendation on the Social and Solidarity Economy and Social Innovation adopted in 2022, the ILO Resolution “Concerning decent work and the social and solidarity economy”, and the UN Resolution “Promoting the social and solidarity economy for sustainable development” adopted in 2024.
A clear mandate within national authorities is encouraged to monitor the implementation of the EU Council Recommendation on framework conditions. Such contact points at national level are essential not only to promote the growth of the social economy but also to align policies at national, regional and local level, while piloting and assessing policy progress at different levels of government. A clear set of responsibilities, complemented with sufficient financial and human resources, can contribute to effective co-ordination both across different levels of government and across different EU institutions (Council of the European Union, 2023[9]). To date, 11 Member States already have official definitions on the social economy, framework or specific legal frameworks to define its principles or characteristics, and a designated institution to hold social economy competence (i.e. Bulgaria, France, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovak Republic, Slovenia and Spain). Countries with subnational legislative power such as Italy and Spain have laws at subnational level that can specify the scope of the social economy in the region. In Belgium, the definitions and legal frameworks are at regional level, while no nation-wide definition exists.
Dedicated social economy competence is often established at ministry level, either under a particular one or shared by multiple ministries. The Ministry of Labour (the competence can be broader in some Member States to include family, social affairs and other related policy areas) is the most common institution observed across the EU (in 14 Member States) to hold primary jurisdiction over social economy policy. In several Member States, this competence is also placed with or followed by ministries responsible for the economy. In other Member States where there is no direct competence of the Ministries, state employment agencies also provide indirect support to the social economy entities. Table 3.1 provides an overview of the national arrangements around the social economy in each Member State.
In Member States with a clear social economy policy mandate, there are often dedicated departments or directorates-general for the social economy under the relevant ministries. Examples include the Delegation on the social and solidarity economy and the Directorate General of the Treasury of the Ministry of Economy, Finance, Industrial and Digital Sovereignty in France, the Department of Social and Solidarity Economy under the Ministry of Labour in Luxembourg and the Social Economy Department under the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family of the Slovak Republic. In Spain, the General Directorate of Social Economy and Social Responsibility Companies and the Special Commissioner for the Social Economy sit under the Secretary of State for Social Economy under the Ministry of Labour and Social Economy.
Note: The primary authorities include those institutions with official or de-facto primary competence over social economy. In many Member States, other ministries and government agencies are involved in social economy development based on the policy area. Refer to the country notes in the addendum of this report to see all institutions involved in social economy policy and their specific responsibility area.
Source: Refer to the OECD country fact sheets on the social economy to read the official definition in each Member State (OECD, 2023[10]).
In Member States where the social economy is relatively more institutionalised (that is, where it has a formal recognition within the governmental and legal frameworks, dedicated strategies, clear regulatory structures, and established co-ordination mechanisms), additional offices could complement ministries in overseeing and co-ordinating social economy policy. These often include commissioners, state secretariats or other dedicated government offices to oversee and/or co-ordinate the social economy mandate in line with other policy areas and priorities. These dedicated offices play an important role in mainstreaming social economy across a wide range of government policies, which may fall under different ministries. In contexts where ministries tend to work in silos based on their particular mandate, these offices are helpful to promote a whole-of-government approach to social economy policy. Box 3.1 summarises such structures from the Member States.
The increasing importance of the social economy at the policy level has resulted in the emergence of dedicated public authorities responsible for social economy development. Such dedicated institutions could significantly contribute to increasing the visibility of the social economy, while aligning public policies with international frameworks (e.g. EU Council Recommendation on developing social economy framework conditions, OECD Recommendation on the social and solidarity economy and social innovation, UN Resolution for promoting the social and solidarity economy for sustainable development and ILO Resolution concerning decent work and the social and solidarity economy).
Dedicated governmental structures can foster collaboration and innovation across multiple policy areas and sectors, increase the participation and engagement of national social economy stakeholders, and signal the prioritisation of the social economy at the political level. Some EU Member States have appointed a special office or authority to the social economy or social innovation:
Germany: A Commissioner for Social Innovation was appointed at the Federal Ministry of Research and Education in April 2022. The Commissioner is responsible for supporting social innovation development and chairs the International Advisory Council for Social Innovation, which convenes experts to advise the Federal Ministry on the implementation and further development of the German National Strategy for Social Innovation and Enterprises for the Common Good.
Spain: Operating under the Ministry of Labour and Social Economy, the State Secretary for Social Economy is responsible for developing the national government's policy on the social economy and corporate social responsibility. Under the State Secretary, a Special Commissioner for the Social Economy is appointed to disseminate and promote policies and plans that transform value chains in the care and social economy sectors. The Commissioner also works to implement the Strategic Plan for Economic Recovery and Transformation (PERTE) for the Social Economy and Care.
Source: Refer to the country notes in the supporting material of this report for more details per country. (French Republic, 2025[11]) (Ministry of Labour and Social Economy, 2025[12]) (Federal Ministry of Education and Research, n.d.[13]).
In countries with no comprehensive social economy framework, there is often a dedicated focus on social enterprise or social entrepreneurship policy. There are 7 Member States that already introduced either definitions and/or strategies on social enterprises or social entrepreneurship, which are overseen by designated institutions (i.e. Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Latvia, Malta). When policy focuses on social enterprises or social entrepreneurship, institutions and agencies around business, economy and innovation could be more involved.
At the national level, governments can allocate portions of their budgets to create an enabling environment for the social economy, including through legal recognition, financial support programmes, capacity-building, and nationwide social enterprise schemes. National budgets may fund dedicated ministries, commissioners, or agencies tasked with co-ordinating social economy policy. These funds can be used to provide grants, low-interest loans, or equity funding for social enterprises, support national social procurement policies, and invest in research, monitoring, and evaluation of social impact. By allocating national resources strategically, governments can facilitate access to finance across regions, create economies of scale for national programs, and stimulate cross-sectoral partnerships that strengthen the social economy ecosystem.
Subnational frameworks for the social economy play an important role in reflecting national policy priorities into local contexts. They promote policies that are based on local realities and needs to support the development of the social economy. The EU Council Recommendation on developing framework conditions for the social economy underlines the importance of acknowledging the core principles and the scope of the social economy across national, regional and local laws and practices (Council of the European Union, 2023[9]).
Such regional arrangements are particularly prominent in Member States with legislative competences at subnational level (European Committee of the Regions, n.d.[14]). Across the EU, four Member States have examples of designated social economy institutions and legal frameworks at regional level: Belgium, Italy, Portugal and Spain. Regional assemblies can legislate on the social economy, and there could be dedicated ministries or departments responsible for social economy policy at subnational level. Box 3.2 presents an overview of the available legislative competence on the social economy across EU Member States.
Developed institutional and legal frameworks at subnational level can help base social economy policies on regional strengths and needs. The power to legislate on the social economy at subnational level can be especially useful in federal and highly decentralised states where social economy national frameworks and policies are implemented through a multi-level governance approach.
Belgium: Social economy is mostly overseen at regional level while the federal government holds a supporting role. Regions can enact their own social economy legislation and strategies such as the Ordinance of 23 July 2018 on the approval and support of social enterprises (Brussels-capital region), the Flemish Social Economy Act (Flanders) and the Social Economy Framework Decree (Wallonia). In addition, there are dedicated councils on the social economy or social enterprises such as the Advisory Council for Social Entrepreneurship (Brussels-Capital Region). In Flanders and Wallonia, social economy councils operate under broader Social and Economic Councils such as the Committee on Social Economy (Flanders) and the Walloon Council of the Social Economy (Wallonia).
Italy: Several regions have enacted their own social economy legislation (e.g. Emilia-Romagna, Friuli Venezia Giulia and Trentino). Other regions have approved legislation indirectly including social economy entities such as the Law on Social Agriculture in Umbria, integrating social and solidarity economy principles into rural development. Italian regions with social economy legislation often adopt their own social economy strategies. Social economy advisory bodies are also present at the subnational level such as the Round Table for the Solidarity Economy in Trentino.
Spain: Regions can enact social economy legislation. To date, Aragón, Canary Islands, Galicia and La Rioja have enacted their own social economy laws. Social economy is also promoted through regional plans (e.g Castile and León, Castilla-La Mancha) and funding support (e.g. Support Fund for Aragonese Social Economy Companies).
Source: Refer to the country notes in the supporting material of this report for more details per country.
Subnational institutional arrangements for the social economy can also be established in unitary countries or in countries where regions do not hold legislative autonomy. In such cases, regional structures show variation across Member States depending on the level of maturity of their social economy policy and ecosystem. Notwithstanding, many Member States are introducing authorities at subnational level to help national social economy policy translate into the regional context and target local needs more effectively. These structures could come in the form of regional governments, regional chambers, centres, social economy unions, regional assemblies, and so on. Table 3.2 provides an overview of the various regional structures overseeing social economy in Member States where there is a clear policy emphasis on the social economy at subnational level.
Source: Refer to the country notes in the supporting material of this report for more details per country.
Subnational authorities can engage in policy areas related to the social economy even without an explicit mandate. In the majority of Member States, subnational structures dedicated to the social economy are not established, while regional authorities and agencies with mandates on socio-economic development can occasionally provide support to social economy and social innovation. For example, in upper Austria, the state government provides support to social organisations and commercial enterprises working on the inclusion of people with disabilities through a prize, which recognises and rewards innovative projects, raises public awareness of best practices, and encourages the replication of successful initiatives across the region. In Romania, the Iași County and Bucharest-Ilfov regions develop partnerships with the social economy entities under projects aimed to help people at risk of exclusion. Regions can also incorporate social innovation, social entrepreneurship, and civil society collaboration within their regional development strategies such as Skåne, Västra Götaland, Jönköping County and Östergötland in Sweden.
National frameworks often precede subnational frameworks for the social economy across EU Member States. Belgium is the only exception to this as there is no national framework for the social economy, while social economy competence falls under regional jurisdictions. In other Member States with legislative powers at subnational level, Italy and Spain have regional laws on the social economy, while Portugal shows examples of regional support mechanisms.
In Member States without legislative powers at the subnational level, various regional authorities can collaborate with the national government to co-ordinate and support social economy policies. In unitary countries with higher degrees of decentralisation, regions can introduce their own social economy strategies (such as regions in France). Member States can also establish or collaborate with regional chambers or social economy centres to bridge national policy priorities with local implementation (e.g. Regional Chambers of Social and Solidarity Economy (France), Regional Social and Solidarity Economy Unions (Greece), Social Economy Support Centres (Poland) and Regional Social Economy Centres (Slovak Republic)).
Regional strategies for the social economy in the EU complement national frameworks by adapting broad objectives to local needs and contexts. For instance, in Spain, while the national strategy sets out legal recognition and general support mechanisms for social economy entities, the Basque Country developed its own regional strategy focusing on sector-specific support, local networks, and training programmes tailored to regional strengths. Similarly, in France, regional authorities implement programmes that link social economy development to local employment and territorial cohesion priorities, translating national policies into actionable, place-based initiatives. In Poland, the Mazovia region aligned its regional social economy programmes with national objectives but emphasised partnerships with local actors and integration with regional development plans. These examples illustrate how regional strategies make social economy policies more operational and context-sensitive, while reinforcing and complementing national-level goals (OECD, 2020[4]).
Regional or subnational authorities can complement national funding by tailoring budget allocations to local contexts and priorities. In federated or quasi-federal systems, regions often have control over economic development, employment, or social inclusion programmes, allowing them to invest in social economy initiatives aligned with regional development goals. For example, regions can implement social economy programmes that leverage both regional and EU structural funds to support training, innovation, and sectoral development. Regional budgets can fund regional social economy centres, networks, incubators, and regional procurement schemes, aiming for social economy initiatives to respond to local assets, labour market needs, and demographic challenges. By aligning regional funding with national frameworks, subnational governments can act as bridges between local actors and national policy objectives.
Social economy entities are inherently place-based, emerging directly from the communities they serve. Their embeddedness within local contexts enables them to develop tailored responses to pressing issues such as social exclusion, unemployment, and environmental degradation, often in close collaboration with municipalities.
Municipalities are often uniquely positioned to support and scale the social economy, even in the absence of comprehensive national policy frameworks. As the closest level of government to citizens, local authorities are often the first institutions that residents approach for support with critical needs, ranging from housing and education to healthcare and social services. This proximity provides municipalities with a nuanced understanding of local challenges, making them natural allies to social economy actors that operate on the ground. By enabling, supporting, and investing in these community-driven initiatives, cities cultivate inclusive and responsive ecosystems that strengthen social cohesion, promote innovative solutions, and foster active citizen participation.
In Member States with developed multi-level institutional arrangements on the social economy, municipalities and city councils play a significant role in reflecting national policy priorities in the local context. They may also be supported by other special local agencies on employment, business, investment or development. In some Member States, some local government roles could oversee social economy initiatives (e.g. deputy mayors or executives in France and Portugal), while in others there could be dedicated departments within municipalities to co-ordinate collaboration with the social economy (e.g. community and economic development units in Ireland, third sector liaison offices in Italy). Box 3.3 provides examples from Member States where particular structures collaborate with regional and/or national authorities on implementing social economy policy priorities in the local context.
Social economy priorities are anchored in national plans and strategies that can be further developed at the municipal level. Local governments adapt national priorities into local actions to promote alignment with the existing local needs and particularities.
France: Municipalities can actively support social economy initiatives with many deputy mayors overseeing social economy portfolios. The city of Paris fosters several activities focused on the social economy such as the Start in ESS’ and the House of Solidarity and Innovative Economies, aiming to promote social economy development. Lyon supports social enterprise creation through educational programmes and funding programmes in collaboration with third entities (e.g. Foundation to Support Social Innovation). Other municipalities such as Nantes or Grenoble prioritise social economy in their local development plans.
Greece: Local authorities target the provision of physical spaces and infrastructure as well as increased awareness and capacity for social economy entities. Municipalities promote social economy initiatives through specific projects (e.g. municipal social entrepreneurship market in Kypseli, Athens). Other local entities which involve local authorities can also introduce initiatives to promote social cohesion and solidarity (e.g. the Development Agency of Karditsa).
Ireland: Local authorities include social enterprises to recognise them as key actors in local development, economic growth, and social inclusion in their Local Economic and Community Plans, which are carried out by Community and Economic Development units. Other local bodies, like Local Development Companies (LDCs) and Local Enterprise Offices (LEOs), may also provide support to social enterprises. City councils can introduce dedicated initiatives for social enterprises (e.g. Social Enterprise Grant Scheme in Dublin; funding programmes in Cork and Limerick).
Italy: Italian municipalities can have Third Sector Liaison Offices to co-ordinate with third sector organisations particularly around service delivery. Some municipalities may create their own departments to co-ordinate social economy development (e.g. Rome’s Social Policies Department’s Autopromozione Sociale Unit and Bologna’s International Relations Department). In addition, municipalities develop their own local departmental initiatives focused on the social economy. For example, Bologna created Salus Space, a space dedicated to workshops and trainings on sustainability and social innovation. The city has also hosted events such as the Social Innovation Lab 2022. The municipality of Torino fosters the network Torino Social Impact, which develops their own social economy activities (e.g. municipal exchange visits, networking and knowledge sharing).
Portugal: Portuguese municipalities are active in the promotion of the social economy through câmaras municipais. Several city councils have developed local strategies focused on social innovation and inclusive development (e.g. Braga, Coimbra, Lisbon and Porto). Some municipalities have started their own activities to support social economy entities (e.g. Social Innovation Lab in Lisbon and dedicated municipal funds in the City of Porto). Local authorities collaborate with local institutions in the design and implementation of EU funded programmes (e.g. Food Corridors (URBACT III) in Coimbra; Human Power Hub in Braga and CityLoops in Porto).
Slovak Republic: Municipalities can integrate social economy principles into their local development plans (e.g. Bratislava 2030, focusing on creating inclusive communities; Košice 2020 Development Strategy, aiming to foster a better ecosystem for social enterprises). Local authorities also fund social economy projects through municipal grants (e.g. Bratislava) or include social clauses in public procurement to favour social economy entities (e.g. Košice and Bratislava). Slovak municipalities also support social entrepreneurship through mentoring and networking services (Bratislava and Košice) or through the creation of municipal social enterprises (e.g. Raslavice).
Spain: City and provincial councils can have their own social economy programmes (e.g. the Barcelona City Council (L'Ajuntament de Barcelona); Madrid City Council (Ayuntamiento de Madrid); Provincial Council of Valencia (Diputación de Valencia). City councils can also fund specific projects and actions focused on the social economy (e.g. Catalonia municipalities include social clauses in public procurement contracts and allow the transfer of public land). Furthermore, the Ministry of Labour and Social Economy promotes social economy activities at the local level through the “Spanish capital of the social economy” initiative.
Source: Refer to the country notes in the supporting material of this report for more details per country.
Competence of municipal authorities on the social economy is largely delivered through direct or indirect support. In a survey circulated by the OECD in 2024 among policymakers and social economy representatives1, funding and financing emerged as the most prominent type of municipal competence over social economy entities. Funding or financial support is provided either explicitly for social economy entities or indirectly through non-governmental organisations and non-profits which may overlap with some social economy entities. This is followed by strategy and/or action plan setting whereby local authorities can incorporate social economy elements into their local development strategies. Another common type of competence included procurement. Many municipalities across the EU already demonstrate examples of socially responsible public procurement and procuring services from social economy entities. Infographic 3.2 presents an overview of how most municipalities provide direct or indirect support to social economy entities.
While most municipalities across EU Member States do not have dedicated offices, there is a strong bottom-up momentum for the social economy, innovation and entrepreneurship development. In Denmark, the municipality of Silkeborg formulated a “Strategy for Establishing Social Enterprises in Silkeborg” to increase the number of social enterprises and jobs for vulnerable people (Nielsen and Hulgård, 2019[15]). In the Netherlands, for example, cities like Amsterdam and Rotterdam introduced programmes to support social enterprise development and social procurement despite a lack of a dedicated national framework (e.g. The “Amsterdam Impact” programme, the “CityLab010” support programme from Rotterdam). Table 3.3 provides an overview of the roles of municipalities and other local authorities from Member States in supporting social economy development with examples.
Municipalities and local authorities are often closest to communities and can deploy budgetary resources in a highly targeted way to stimulate social economy activity. Local budgets can support small-scale grants, capacity-building initiatives, mentorship programmes, and social procurement schemes that favour local social enterprises. Local authorities can also fund partnerships between social enterprises and public services, co-fund community-led projects, and integrate social economy objectives into local economic plans. By strategically using municipal budgets, local governments can encourage innovation, enhance social inclusion, and create tangible impact at the community level, while complementing regional and national efforts.
Source: Refer to the country notes in the supporting material of this report for more details per country.
The social economy intersects with a wide range of policy areas, including social inclusion, well-being, employment, resilience, community cohesion, and environmental sustainability. As such, social economy policy is of relevance to multiple public authorities and government ministries/agencies. To promote coherent and effective policymaking, co-ordination structures are needed to facilitate collaboration across different public authorities, levels of government, and social economy stakeholders. Such co-ordination is particularly important because the successful local implementation of national priorities depends on strong alignment and communication between national, regional, and local actors.
Building synergies across levels of government
Member States establish dedicated structures, such as councils, committees, working groups, or commissions, to oversee and support the development of social economy policy. In many cases, existing national bodies like social and economic councils can also take on a role in addressing social economy topics. These structures often serve as platforms that bring together various public authorities as well as social economy representatives to facilitate better co-ordination and coherence in the design and implementation of social economy policies.
Many Member States (13 out of 27) have established co-ordination bodies that are either explicitly dedicated to the social economy or consist of social and economic councils overseeing social economy policy. Member States with established national frameworks on the social economy also often dedicate specific co-ordination structures (i.e. France, Italy, Latvia, Poland, Portugal, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain and Romania). In Belgium, Bulgaria and Luxembourg, economic and social councils co-ordinate topics related to the social economy. Their members are often appointed to represent different stakeholders and groups, including employers, workers, producers, social welfare providers and so on. Box 3.4 provides an overview of such dedicated structures from Member States.
Co-ordination structures can also have regional branches in different places. In Belgium, regions have their own economic and social councils, while Wallonia has a Council of the Social Economy (CWES) under the Economic, Social and Environmental Council. In France, Réseau des collectivités Territoriales pour une Économie Solidaire (RTES) is a network of local authorities including regional councils, departmental councils, intermunicipal authorities and municipalities. It serves as a platform for exchange and co-ordination to develop the social economy in regions. In Italy, regional round tables can be dedicated to the social economy such as the Round Table for the Solidarity Economy, which advises the provincial council of Autonomous Province of Trentino. In Spain, regional governments can also establish their own co-operation structures such as the Regional Council of Social Economy of Castilla-La Mancha.
Member States can create national bodies and structures to co-ordinate social economy policy. The creation of these type of bodies helps to align policy development across different ministries and levels of government.
France: At the national level, the Higher Council for the SSE (CSESS), chaired by the Ministry in charge of the social and solidarity economy, provides co-operation and dialogue between national authorities and social economy actors. It gathers national and local public authorities, social economy representatives, networks of local actors, employee and employer unions. At the regional level, the Réseau des collectivités Territoriales pour une Économie Solidaire (RTES) is a platform for exchange and co-ordination between local authorities interested in the development of the social economy.
Italy: The National Third Sector Council is chaired by the Ministry of Labor and Social Policies to bring together representatives of third sector bodies with government authorities. It acts as a national advisory body to promote third sector development. The Working Group on Social Economy operates under the Ministry of Economy and Finance. It is responsible for adapting the European Commission’s Social Economy Action Plan to the Italian context. The Working Group includes national governmental authorities, social economy representatives, non-profit organisations and research institutions.
Latvia: The Commission for Social Enterprises oversees and monitors the registration of social enterprises. It is composed by government representatives from the Ministry of Welfare, the Ministry of Economics, the Ministry of Culture, the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional Development, social enterprise experts, NGOs, and business associations.
Poland: The National Committee for the Development of the Social Economy is the advisory body of the Minister of Family, Labour and Social Policy. The committee was designed as a mechanism of co-ordination tasked with social economy policy development. It is composed of representatives of national and local administration, social partners, the world of science, Bank Gospodarstwa Krajowego and representatives of the social economy.
Portugal: The National Council for the Social Economy is an advisory and monitoring body for the development of the social economy sector. The Council gathers national government authorities, regional government authorities from Azores and Madeira and representatives from social economy entities.
Slovak Republic: The Working Group for Employment, Active Labor Market Policy, Youth Guarantee, and Social Economy operates under the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family. It focuses on facilitating co-operation with stakeholders in the design, implementation, monitoring and review of employment policies and the social economy. It is composed of national authorities, the association of municipalities and towns, employers’ unions, academic institutions, the youth council and social economy associations.
Slovenia: The Council for Social Economy is tasked to facilitate the co-ordination of policies in the field of social entrepreneurship and economics. It gathers representatives of ministries and government departments, social economy entities, associations of local communities, social partners, and professional institutions in the field of social economy.
Spain: The Council for the Promotion of the Social Economy (Consejo de Fomento de la Economía Social) is an advisory and consultative body within the Ministry of Labour and Social Economy. It fosters collaboration and dialogue between the representatives of the social economy and the general administration of the state. It includes representatives from the national government, the regional and local government, workers’ organisations and the social economy sector.
Trentino (Italy): The Round Table for the Solidarity Economy provides advisory, guidance functions and technical support to social economy policies. It comprises governmental representatives from departments responsible for industry, trade, tourism and agriculture and representatives from social economy sectors.
Wallonia (Belgium): The Walloon Council of the Social Economy (CWES) operates under the Economic, Social and Environmental Council of Wallonia (CESE Wallonie). It advises the government on social economy matters and prepares the annual evaluation report on the implementation of the decree on social economy. Its members include employers and workers organisations, social economy enterprises, experts on the social economy and Walloon government representatives.
Source: Refer to the country notes in the supporting material of this report for more details per country.
Engaging with the social economy
Engaging in regular dialogue with social economy representatives, such as federations of co-operatives, social economy chambers, non-profit networks or associations of social economy entities and other umbrella organisations, is promoted in many EU Member States. The design and implementation of social economy policy is inherently grounded in real-world application, making it important to understand the needs and priorities of social economy entities. In this regard, all Member States host many representative umbrella networks for social economy entities. In many countries, these networks focus on particular legal forms or constituents of the social economy such as social enterprises or co-operatives. In some countries, organisations may represent the entire social economy (e.g. French Chamber of the Social and Solidarity Economy (ESS France), the Panhellenic Confederation of Unions of Social and Solidarity Economy (PASE KALO) in Greece, the António Sérgio Co-operative for the Social Economy (CASES) in Portugal, the Spanish Business Confederation of Social Economy (CEPES)). Box 3.5 provides examples from Member States on prominent representatives of the social economy.
In all Member States, there are representative organisations on the social economy or its specific constituents. Their main purpose is to represent the interests of their members to inform public policy for more effective social economy development. These bodies often receive public funding and focus on establishing collaboration networks with social economy representatives.
France: The French Chamber of the Social and Solidarity Economy (ESS France) represents and promotes the interests of social economy actors under the form of a federation. It gathers national SSE entities, regional SSE chambers and other legal entities within the social economy ecosystem. Its main goal is to co-ordinate and unify social economy stakeholders across the country.
Hungary: The Federation of Social Co-operatives and Coalition (SzoSzöv) represents the interests of social co-operatives. Its main objective is to promote the activities of social co-operatives and support the development of a co-operative network. The Coalition of Hungarian Social Enterprises advocates for the interests of social enterprises. It is composed by all organisations engaged in commercial activities with a social goal. They have established a partnership with national policymakers to advance in the development of social enterprises.
Luxembourg: Luxembourg Social and Solidarity Economy Union (ULESS) represents social economy actors in policy discussions and advocates for the interest of social economy entities with policymakers. Additionally, ULESS is responsible for the management and award of the “Impact Luxembourg – Societal Impact Company” label.
Portugal: The António Sérgio Co-operative for the Social Economy (CASES) operates under the Ministry of Labour, Solidarity and Social Security. It is a public co-operative tasked to develop the social economy ecosystem and enhance collaboration between public authorities and social economy entities.
Spain: The Spanish Business Confederation of Social Economy (CEPES) is the main representative of social economy entities. It gathers national, regional confederations and specific business groups to advocate for the interests of co-operatives, worker-owned enterprises, mutual societies, insertion companies, special employment centres, fishing guilds, and associations in the disability industry. It includes over 200 regional support structures.
Source: Refer to the country notes in the supporting material of this report for more details per country.
Collaborative structures contribute to social economy policy through multiple ways. “Policy design and implementation” were identified as the most common way through which representative structures contribute to the social economy. Indeed, these networks offer valuable insights and serve as key partners in shaping policies for the social economy that are relevant and effective. Policy advice is followed by “advocacy and awareness raising” activities and “networking and partnership building”. Many networks also provide support on “capacity building and training” and “advisory and business support services” for social economy entities. 2
Many Member States are increasingly looking to promote the social economy through public policies, but its features and constituents can present complexities in establishing institutional arrangements. For example, legal frameworks on the social economy are increasing at national level. However, social economy policies do not always effectively trickle down to subnational and local levels. The variety of policy areas that social economy entities contribute to underscores the importance of structures and/or mechanisms that can effectively support and co-ordinate the mainstreaming of the social economy across social and economic policymaking.
Diversity of legal forms and sectors
Social economy policy mandates frequently fall under multiple ministries, in part due to the diversity of legal forms of the social economy. Associations, co-operatives, mutual societies, foundations, and social enterprises each operate under different legal and regulatory frameworks, which are often associated with specific government bodies. When a national coordinating framework is lacking, this variance can become even more pronounced. However, even in cases where such a framework is in place, the legal diversity typically continues to involve multiple government ministries.
Although different ministries may be responsible for specific legal forms, one ministry could be designated to oversee the overall social economy policy. Across EU Member States, associations and foundations are often involved in civil society policies and are therefore mostly overseen by Ministries of Interior or Justice and sometimes Ministries of Citizenship or Social Affairs. Co-operatives often fall under the jurisdiction of Ministries of Economy, Commerce and/or Agriculture. Social enterprises, especially work integration social enterprises, may fall under Ministries of Labour or Economy. In Croatia, for example, the Ministry of Labour, Pension System, Family and Social Policy oversees social economy policy while specific ministries are responsible for various legal forms (i.e. co-operatives by the Ministry of Economy, associations and foundations by the Ministry of Justice, Public Administration and Digital Transformation).
Beyond their legal forms, social economy entities operate across a wide array of sectors, including education, health, employment, culture, and social services. This sectoral reach means that ministries often engage with the social economy through the lens of their own thematic mandates. As a result, policymaking responsibilities are often distributed based on sectoral relevance, further reinforcing the need for coherent co-ordination mechanisms across government levels to promote integrated and effective support for the social economy.
Limited or no recognition of the social economy
Although many EU Member States have created their definitions or concepts of the social economy, there are still countries where the term is not well understood or lacks clear recognition. In these contexts, the term "social economy" may not resonate with policymakers or may lack visibility in public discourse. The lack of pre-defined criteria or principles to define the perimeter of the social economy makes it difficult to assign a specific policy mandate. As a result, policy competence in this area tends to be fragmented, which may further complicate the development and implementation of coherent social economy strategies.
In countries where there is no national framework or recognition of the social economy, different institutions oversee various activities of the social economy depending on their mandate. For example, in Estonia, there is no legal framework on the social economy or social enterprises. The Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of Social Affairs and the Ministry of Financial Affairs design and enforce frameworks relevant to social economy activity. Their mandate is based on different acts that regulate the activities of particular organisations such as foundations and non-profit associations. As social economy entities are also involved in providing goods and services, countries’ commercial codes and trade authorities are also involved to oversee commercial activity. Local actors can also be the driving force behind social economy development especially in the absence of framework laws or strategies at the national level, as can be seen with cities such as Amsterdam and Rotterdam in the Netherlands, or regional initiatives in Sweden.
Limited engagement and competence of subnational and local authorities on the social economy
Legislation and policymaking related to the social economy are still predominantly driven at the national level in most EU Member States. However, this approach often overlooks the fact that social economy initiatives are deeply rooted in local communities and play a critical role in territorial development, social cohesion, and access to essential services by communities.
Given their proximity to citizens and their understanding of local needs, subnational and municipal authorities could be key actors in fostering and sustaining social economy ecosystems. Engaging local authorities in social economy policy can also provide a check mechanism to see if available policies are relevant and effective in the local context. Therefore, embracing a multi-level governance approach would allow policy priorities to be shaped and implemented in a way that reflects the realities and contributions of all levels of government, from the national to the local.
Fragmented co-ordination and co-operation efforts
In many EU Member States, there is no designated co-ordination mechanism responsible for overseeing social economy policy across different ministries and levels of government. This lack of centralised co-ordination often leads to fragmentation, with various initiatives being developed in isolation by different departments or levels of administration. Without a clear focal point to align strategies and promote consistency, policies related to the social economy typically lack coherence and do not address the social economy’s needs effectively. This is particularly evident when co-ordination is required between national, regional, and local levels, where responsibilities may overlap or be inconsistently applied.
While the diversity of representative networks is a sign of the sector’s richness and inclusivity, the absence of comprehensive umbrella organisations weakens the social economy’s collective voice. Numerous actors and networks advocate for the interests of social economy entities, but without a unified platform, their influence on policymaking can be diluted. This fragmentation makes it more difficult to present a coherent position to policymakers, limiting the ability to shape relevant legislation or strategic priorities. A more co-ordinated representation could enhance visibility and strengthen dialogue with public authorities at all levels.
The social economy is a trusted partner for policymakers. To fully harness its potential, it is important that institutional arrangements go beyond scattered initiatives and take a comprehensive, joined-up approach, facilitating coherence across sectors and levels of governance. Policymakers can be guided by clear roles, strong co-ordination, and effective stakeholder involvement to build a policy environment where the social economy can thrive and make a lasting impact. Infographic 3.3 summarises the considerations that policymakers can have when designing institutional arrangements around social economy policy.
Developing a common definition of the social economy and institutionalising policy leadership through a designated authority
Establishing institutional arrangements around the social economy begins with building a shared national understanding of what the social economy is and who its key actors are in alignment with the EU Council Recommendation while reflecting national specificities. While the cross-cutting nature of the social economy means that multiple ministries and agencies may have relevant responsibilities, ranging from employment and social affairs to regional development and enterprise, it is important to appoint a lead ministry to steer the overall policy direction. A focal point within government not only enhances co-ordination across departments but also strengthens dialogue with stakeholders and long-term strategic commitment.
Some Member States may prefer to represent the social economy at the highest level by incorporating the area as the main mandate of a ministry. In Spain, the Ministry of Labour and Social Economy oversees government policy on the social economy. In Luxembourg, the Ministry of Labour, Employment and Social and Solidarity Economy was later renamed as the Ministry of Labour; however, it still keeps the specific remit on the social and solidarity economy through a dedicated department. In France, a Minister Delegate is responsible for the social and solidarity economy in addition to trade, crafts and SMEs, attached to the Ministry of Economy, Finance, Industrial and Digital Sovereignty.
Establishing dedicated units within regional and municipal governments to foster a multi-level governance framework for the social economy
Dedicated units within subnational and municipal governments are of high importance for fostering effective multi-level governance for the social economy. These teams play a critical role in co-ordinating local efforts and facilitating that the unique needs and realities of their communities are clearly communicated during national policy design processes. By acting as a bridge between local stakeholders and national authorities, they help shape policies that are better tailored and more responsive to diverse territorial contexts. Additionally, these dedicated units enable regions and municipalities to more effectively access and implement national initiatives, maximising the impact of social economy programs on the ground.
Some Member States have already incorporated comprehensive social economy mandates across regional and local authorities such as France, Italy and Spain. In these countries, the contribution of the social economy to territorial cohesion is highly recognised and therefore encouraged by authorities at all levels of government, often facilitated by effective decentralisation efforts. In France, for example, the Law on the new territorial organisation of the Republic (“Loi NOTRe”) adopted in 2015 clarified the competences of communes, departments and regions, reinforcing the powers of regions in economic development. Given the increasing decentralisation efforts across Member States, relatively more centralised countries are also introducing local structures to support social economy development (OECD, 2019[5]). Examples include Bulgaria’s Regional Centres for the Social Economy, Poland’s Social Economy Support Centres (OWES) and Slovak Republic’s Regional Social Economy Centres.
Creating collaborative structures to maintain policy momentum and continuity
Social economy policy often faces challenges of inconsistency and disruption, as shifts in political priorities or changes in government can lead to sudden changes or even discontinuation of initiatives. To safeguard against such volatility, it is crucial to develop a well-functioning co-ordination mechanism that operates across different levels of government, from national to regional and local, and which actively involves stakeholders from the social economy sector itself. By institutionalising regular communication and collaboration through such a system, policy continuity can be strengthened so that social economy strategies remain resilient and adaptive despite changing political dynamics.
Some Member States demonstrated varying degrees of policy interest around the social economy over time. For example, Croatia adopted the 2015-2020 Strategy for the Development of Social Entrepreneurship, which faced challenges in its implementation while recent initiatives are emerging to foster social economy development (European Commission, n.d.[16]). In Finland, the Act of Social Enterprises was adopted in 2003 and was later repealed in 2023 due to low effectiveness and registration numbers (European Commission, 2024[17]). Portugal hosts a good practice on effective collaboration between state authorities and social economy representatives through continuous partnership. The António Sérgio Co-operative for the Social Economy (CASES) is a public interest co-operative under the Ministry of Labour, Solidarity and Social Security, whose mission is to develop the social economy. It operates as a collaboration between the state and social economy entities, co-operating often also with local authorities to support social economy development across the country.
References
[9] Council of the European Union (2023), Council Recommendation of 27 November 2023 on developing social economy framework conditions (C/2023/1344), Official Journal of the European Union.
[17] European Commission (2024), The Social Enterprise Strategy in Finland - Discussion Paper, https://social-economy-gateway.ec.europa.eu/document/download/009d0f8c-4f7b-46e3-86d8-e1f87bf28085_en?filename=WS2_Discussion_Paper_Finland.pdf.
[8] European Commission (2021), EU action plan for social economy.
[16] European Commission (n.d.), EU Social Economy Gateway - Croatia, https://social-economy-gateway.ec.europa.eu/my-country/croatia_en.
[6] European Commission (n.d.), European social economy regions (ESER) initiative, https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/proximity-and-social-economy/social-economy-eu/european-social-economy-regions-eser_en.
[14] European Committee of the Regions (n.d.), Division of powers, https://portal.cor.europa.eu/divisionpowers/Pages/All-countries.aspx.
[13] Federal Ministry of Education and Research (n.d.), Social Innovations, https://www.bmbf.de/EN/Research/Society/SocialInnovations/socialinnovations_node.html#:~:text=Social%20entrepreneur%20and%20start%2Dup,Research%20on%201%20April%202022.
[11] French Republic (2025), Décret n° 2025-91 du 31 janvier 2025 relatif aux attributions de la ministre déléguée auprès du ministre de l’économie, des finances et de la souveraineté industrielle et numérique, chargée du commerce, de l’artisanat, des petites et moyennes entreprises, https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/jorf/id/JORFTEXT000051106270#:~:text=Mme%20V%C3%A9ronique%20LOUWAGIE%2C%20ministre%20d%C3%A9l%C3%A9gu%C3%A9e,%C3%A9conomie%2C%20des%20finances%20et%20de.
[12] Ministry of Labour and Social Economy (2025), Comisionado Especial para la Economía Social, https://www.mites.gob.es/es/organizacion/organigrama/economia-social/contenido/OM41.htm.
[15] Nielsen, E. and E. Hulgård (2019), Network and Partnerships in a Local Eco-system for Social Enterprise. Paper presented at 7th EMES International Research Conference on Social Enterprise, https://www.ucviden.dk/en/publications/network-and-partnerships-in-a-local-eco-system-for-social-enterpr.
[10] OECD (2023), Country fact sheets on the social economy, https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/insights-from-social-and-solidarity-economy-data_71d212f3-en/support-materials.html.
[2] OECD (2023), Policy Guide on Legal Frameworks for the Social and Solidarity Economy, Local Economic and Employment Development (LEED), OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9c228f62-en.
[1] OECD (2022), “Legal frameworks for the social and solidarity economy: OECD Global Action “Promoting Social and Solidarity Economy Ecosystems””, OECD Local Economic and Employment Development (LEED) Papers, No. 2022/04, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/480a47fd-en.
[7] OECD (2022), Regional Governance in OECD Countries: Trends, Typology and Tools, OECD Multi-level Governance Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/4d7c6483-en.
[4] OECD (2020), “Regional Strategies for the Social Economy: Examples from France, Spain, Sweden and Poland”, OECD Local Economic and Employment Development (LEED) Papers, No. 2020/03, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/76995b39-en.
[5] OECD (2019), Making Decentralisation Work: A Handbook for Policy-Makers, OECD Multi-level Governance Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/g2g9faa7-en.
[3] Social Economy Europe (2022), 23 Member States Call for an Ambitious SEAP Implementation, https://www.socialeconomy.eu.org/2022/02/18/unprecedented-council-of-eu-ministers-dedicated-to-the-social-economy/.
← 1. The survey was circulated in September 2024 with national, regional and city authorities working on social economy as well as social economy representatives, which received 70 full or partial responses.
← 2. The results are based on a survey circulated by the OECD to national, regional and local authorities from EU Member States in 2024.