The refugee crisis shows how different actors complement each other in tackling social challenges.
In the last months, thousands of refugees have crossed the border to Germany. 800.000 refugees are expected to arrive in 2015 and the state is struggling to provide shelter and support. At the same time, the situation has triggered a strong public response, from civil society, faith-based organizations, NGOs and individuals alike.
The current situation in Germany provides grounds for us to observe and reflect on how different types of actors – state actors, welfare organizations, civil society organizations and social enterprises – mobilize and organize to face emergent and unexpected social challenges and provides us with insights into the potential part social enterprises can play in a country where the state has a particularly strong and pronounced role in social service provision.
Germany: The state is responsible for social security
As discussed in earlier research, Germany is not usually named when examining countries offering substantial support to social enterprises. It is rather well-known for the entrenched role and responsibility of the state in providing social welfare. The history of the modern German welfare system began mid-19th century and builds on a strong emphasis of social service provision by the state and by six major social welfare organizations [i]. In this context, private actors involved in social service provision can be viewed with suspicion and therefore, the reactions that social enterprises generate are diverse: while they are received with excitement by some, others warn not to release the state from its responsibilities and commercialize welfare. The supporters see social enterprises as a way to tackle unresolved social problems in innovative ways, to adapt social service provision to the rapid social changes of the last decades, to foster citizen engagement and to make social service provision more efficient. The skeptics emphasize the importance of not just focusing on “sexy” problems and “niche” beneficiaries and not making social welfare a self-fulfilling project for individualists.
Private initiatives taking action during the refugee crisis
The refugee situation provides an example of how different types of actors can productively complement and coexist in tackling social challenges: while the state and social welfare organizations tend to deliver services that are aligned with and responsive to national policies(such as legal counselling services or providing emergency accommodation), social entrepreneurial initiatives develop their services based on challenges they see surfacing locally and often act on the spot: they provide opportunities for local cultural exchange and integration, complement organized mass accommodation with private hosting, open opportunities for income generation beyond (or before) the formal labor market, provide easily accessible language courses and psychological support. In Berlin, for instance, Cucula supports refugees to build their own professional future, Multitude provides German lessons, Flüchtlinge Willkommen provides private housing for refugees, Kiron University provides university classes and Sharehaus Refugioprovides housing, coaching and support initiatives.
The current developments may be an example of how the German social system may transform into a more flexible, adaptive and responsive one, as different actors with different approaches to solving social problems co-exist and (ideally) complement each other in handling emerging challenges.
Many questions left to be answered
Developments and debates are ongoing and intriguing questions are left to be answered: Do challenges such as the refugee crisis provide an opportunity to rethink our ways to cooperate to solve social problems moving beyond the question of WHO should tackle them but rather HOW we can tackle them best as a society? Are German social enterprises a niche solving problems left unresolved by the state or are they triggering changes in the way welfare is being provided? How do social welfare associations and social enterprises learn from each other and complement each other? What kind of middle ground will the optimists and the skeptics reach and what will this mean for welfare in Germany? And last but not least, how will politics be a part of all of this?