Introduction
A community is a group of people with common interests. It means a society of people living in one familiar territory at the state level, pursuing common goals, including economic ones (Delanty, 2003). In countries with an economic activity market, the main economic actors are the private enterprise sector, state organizations and enterprises, and the so-called third sector. The third sector of the economy includes all non-governmental, non-profit, voluntary, philanthropic, and charitable organizations and social enterprises specializing in various types of activities, which did not find a place in either the public or the private sector.
The creation of social enterprises most often occurs at the initiative of local voluntary or public organizations that either create their subsidiary social enterprises or buy out existing inefficient enterprises. Highly influential social enterprises are created by the authors of any social innovation idea (Bostock et al., 2020). The third sector of Great Britain includes the broadest range of organizations and enterprises with various ownership, organizational structures, and statuses of legal entities (Chapman and Hunter, 2017).
These are social enterprises and public charitable foundations, volunteer organizations, social movements, unions of entrepreneurs, cooperatives, household associations, boards of trustees of educational and educational institutions, partnerships for the support of athletes, societies for joint leisure activities, and so forth.
The successful implementation of any social innovations largely depends on the solidarization of the joint efforts of many people. They try to solve specific socially significant problems, which previously did not exist at all, were solved, or their solution was ineffective. Social entrepreneurship offers a new way of doing business that is revitalized by a social purpose. The prospects for developing social organizations interested many politicians, business circles, youth, investors, and several existing enterprises from other sectors of the economy (Alcock, 2010, p. 6). This interest is because social enterprises are focused on those areas of activity that are not covered by either the market economy or state institutions and may be very promising in the future.
Community Nowadays
A social project is a complex human activity, but more often a group of people – public funds, associations, communities – which aims to solve specific problems of society, its transformation, and improve the quality of life. Challenges can range from infrastructure development to support for people with disabilities. And yet, the main goal of creating a social project is the development of society.
The current political landscape in Britain has some problems: first, there is a large influx of emigrants, albeit one that has stopped recently. Secondly, it is the global economic crisis, complicated by the pandemic. The consequence of the first problem is the decline in the welfare of society. Therefore, social projects are significant now in modern Britain. However, they require the development of more detailed approaches.
Community development based on assets is one way to develop society, based on identifying potential among available resources, on finding the strengths of each component of society. (Asset Based Community Development (ABCD), no date). There is also a needs-based approach that targets local deficits and targets them (Blickem et al., 2018, p. 3). In contrast, asset-based community development does not come from missing resources. This method asserts that the community assets contain everything needed to solve the problems that arise.
In the current political and economic situation, complicated by world problems, it is more necessary than ever to pay attention to the already existing assets of society. Highlighting their strengths can provide not only economic support with the right development strategy but also psychological. Since community considers only its strengths – each person can demonstrate them, each person has something to contribute to the common mite (Asset-Based Community Development â 5 Core Principles, no date). Moreover, with this approach, the actions of citizens are aimed at such events that representatives of society in their community can do.
The high rates of depression in BAME only confirm the need to pay more attention to society’s strengths. Socio-economic activities are aimed at eliminating inequalities – one of the leading indicators of the impact on the psychological health of BAME. As a result, mental health directly affects physical health. The health problem is also a problem that cannot be relegated to the background. Consequently, the activities of the third sector concerning social issues are crucial.
Non-profit and non-governmental organizations in the third sector are often called upon to unite the activities of people with social goals. Typical examples of such non-profit organizations are neighborhood associations, faith-based organizations, interest societies, private schools, hospitals, and organizations providing multiple social services, which are often not offered by public and private enterprises.
Some of the most influential organizations are those that regulate public relations with health care. Such organizations provide an opportunity to receive treatment for those who do not have the financial ability. Moreover, they draw attention to the main social issues in many country regions. Unfortunately, social assistance, help with health and well-being, is often provided only by activists of the third sector and is ignored at higher levels. Therefore, one of the secondary but primary tasks of the third sector is to stop the state and private companies from neglecting the community’s problems.
The problem of unequal access to medical services is acute today. Since, in general, the vector of development of social organizations has already been determined and is moving in this direction, it still requires a lot of resources to achieve the goals. Certain foundations and associations are being created, among which there is one aimed directly at eliminating inequality. The necessary resources for socially significant problems are contained in the public sector. The state should be highly interested in maintaining citizens’ welfare, health, and social security, without delegating these powers in full to the third sector.
The development of methods in this direction is also a topical topic in the scientific literature. A prerequisite for any action taken for the benefit of society must be an understanding of how these methods work. Knowledge also needs to be achieved on citizens to provide the necessary support (South et al., 2019, p. 356). The enterprise in the mentioned work-family of approaches is recommended to use a flexible planning tool for health promotion practices.
Thus, the problem can be addressed by local authorities. There are two ways to solve this problem – either direct regulation of higher powers or financing specific social organizations responsible for this problem. In the UK, the second approach is more common, in which not only the authority to solve this problem is delegated but often also funding. The authorities supply influential social organizations, such as the Charity Commission, which, in turn, establish or help more precisely.
Some organizations implicitly contribute to the improvement of the psychological and physical health of BAME citizens. Social organizations that fight racial discrimination and mental health stigma are equally crucial in tackling high rates of depression in society (Community Development and Health, 2012). Even with a bit of support by conversation, the opportunity to share your problems can save a person from adverse consequences.
The primary sources of funds for the third sector are government support, including grants and contracts and donations from citizens. The legislation regulates not only the requirements of public participation but also the mechanisms for ensuring it. However, in the current situation, when the state is forced to revise its economic strategy amid a pandemic, to support the public and private sectors, the third sector is especially in need of assistance. Funding has become more competitive than ever. Moreover, one has to compete not only for state support, but for the support of citizens.
A certain percentage of social organizations received donations, including from abroad. Now that communication between countries is not available, the share of this kind of income has decreased. Moreover, in the current conditions, each citizen is cutting his expenses, and as a result, donations are reduced. Thus, we can conclude that the crisis has contributed to competition among social organizations, partly contradicting the asset-based community development approach (Macmillan, 2020). The struggle to survive leads to a lack of agreement and poor asset allocation.
Theoretical Perspectives
The theoretical perspective depends on several factors. First, these are the initial data – British society, its problems, goals and objectives, strengths and weaknesses, assets. Secondly, it is the community’s point of view, i.e., with the help of which social theory we will consider society as a unit. The ways of solving the problems mentioned above also depend on different views, i.e., what funds to use in the first place and what activities to direct them.
Social organizations pursue meaningful goals that will be relevant regardless of the current situation in society. These are goals such as ensuring health care for every citizen, social well-being, and environmental protection. Because of the high competition of financing, it is crucial to correctly redistribute the costs of the economy, given that the reduction of resources and assets in the most urgent tasks is highly discouraged. Strong physical health is a consequence of stable psychological health, therefore the working capacity for the benefit of the country and society.
The communicative action theory aims to achieve mutual understanding between social subjects, find social structures that fail, and correct this failure. An essential role in this theory is morality and norms, generally accepted human values (Baianstovu and Ablett, 2020). It is the violation of these values that dictate the main problems that the third sector of the UK economy is trying to solve. These include eliminating inequalities and building synergies across the entire economic structure between different sectors.
The ways of solutions in this theory lie in the idea of the public sphere, where system of power and the social subjects interact or oppose each other. This concept implies a search for agreement between its participants in organizing a mutually exciting dialogue. Often, a public talk turns into a public conversation in the interests of the state and the market, implicitly ignoring the counterarguments of the discussion (Ray, 2019, pp. 33-39). In this regard, the solution itself should be sought precisely in communication, during which the foundation of the conversation issue and understanding of common interests and problems are created.
Mutual orientation towards a particular vector of development contributes to better mutual understanding between the state and society, hence satisfying both sides’ actions. What is more, the public sphere is not necessarily a whole indivisible unit of a society of one nation (Habermas Theory of Communicative Action Explained, no date). This concept can be applied to communities taken separately on an individual basis. And each such community has its own goals, as well as localized authorities. Social organizations facilitate and catalyze this dialogue in every public domain. However, this conversation is often conducted by the government and not by a specific community.
For these reasons, this theory challenges the concept of rationality. As in the specific situation with British society and its problems, the goals and objectives of communities and the state can be irrational. In this case, they may be guided by moral and ethical standards, which sometimes run counter to the law (Tuomela, 2020, pp. 42-44). Therefore, this theory emphasizes the importance of a sincere dialogue that will reveal the true motives and create the basis for finding the necessary solutions. Thus, using this theory, a theoretical perspective best implies more straightforward communication between the public and the third sector.
There is another way of looking at this problem – this is the theory of structural functionalism. According to a particular structure, this approach interprets society as a system in which the components function according to a specific mechanism (Ritzer and Stepnisky, 2017). Ideologically, this theory strives for social balance – when the system functions without failures and all interactions lead to agreement.
Through the prism of this theory, one can immediately designate the above problems as dysfunctions, i.e., disruption of activity. The only question is which part of the system is responsible for these violations. It is important to note that structural-functionalism, in contrast to the theory of communicative action, considers moral norms accepted in society to be significant and institutions and social roles (Sovacool and Hess, 2017, p. 714). Altogether, as a single system, it can develop if four functional requirements are taken into account: adaptation, goal achievement, integration, and maintenance.
In the case of British society, the way to solve problems, according to this theory, lies in changing the mechanisms of interaction between the institution of power and communities. The idea implies the adaptation of the corresponding components of the system to each other. From this point of view, this approach has points of contact with the idea of the public sphere. Goal achievement is a new agreement between the parties to update their functions in the overall structure, leading to problems. Fulfillment of its new obligations and operations is the integration of the solution, and if this scheme pays off, then the fourth stage of maintenance begins.
Conclusion
Although it is possible to draw up a more specific plan for the prospects for solving the problems of British society with this theory, it has several disadvantages. First, this theory does not provide methods or algorithms for eliminating dysfunctions and conflicts. Second, it does not guarantee that fixing one mechanism will not cause a failure elsewhere in the system. Finally, this theory does not take into account the dynamics within society and outside. In other words, time and circumstances leave their marks on the activity and functioning of individual components. It is complicated to take these factors into account when developing a solution to problems.
Thus, considering the functions of social organizations and the current situation of the global crisis and internal problems, the third sector needs an open dialogue with other sectors, primarily with the state. The search for solutions to problems should be carried out precisely in the process of communication, as evidenced by the theory of communicative action.
Reference List
Alcock, P. (2010) âA strategic unity: defining the third sector in the UKâ, Voluntary Sector Review, 1(1), pp. 5-24.
Asset Based Community Development (ABCD) (no date). Web.
Asset-Based Community Development â 5 Core Principles (no date). Web.
Baianstovu, R.I. and Ablett, P. (2020) âThe Transformation and Integration of Society: Developing Social Work Pedagogy through JĂŒrgen Habermasâ Theory of Communicative Actionâ in C. Morley et al. (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Critical Pedagogies for Social Work, London: Routledge, pp. 450â464.
Blickem, C. et al. (2018) âWhat is asset-based community development and how might it improve the health of people with long-term conditions? A realist synthesisâ, Sage Open, 8(3), pp. 1-13.
Bostock, J. et al. (2020) âChallenges for third sector organisations in cutback management: a sporting case study of the implications of publicnessâ, Public Management Review, 22(2), pp. 184-205.
Chapman, T., and Hunter, J. (2017) Third Sector trends in the North of England. Manchester: IPPR North.
Community Development and Health (2012). Web.
Delanty, G. (2003) Community. New York: Routledge.
Habermas Theory of Communicative Action Explained (no date). Web.
Macmillan, R. (2020) âSomewhere over the rainbowâthird sector research in and beyond coronavirusâ, Voluntary Sector Review, 11(2), pp. 129-136.
Ray, V. (2019). âA theory of racialized organizationsâ, American Sociological Review, 84(1), pp. 26-53.
Ritzer, G., and Stepnisky, J. (2017) Modern sociological theory. New York: Sage publications.
South, J. et al. (2019) âAn evidence-based framework on community-centred approaches for health: England, UKâ, Health Promotion International, 34(2), pp. 356-366.
Sovacool, B. K., and Hess, D. J. (2017) âOrdering theories: Typologies and conceptual frameworks for sociotechnical changeâ, Social studies of science, 47(5), pp. 703-750.
Tuomela, R. (2020) âCollective goals and communicative actionâ, Social Ontology in the Making, 27, pp. 29-64.