1. The Third Sector in Italy
Policy development
The Italian third sector today represents a prominent and legally acknowledged reality1 and a
reference point for other countries targeting sustainable social and economic progress. The aim
of this paper is to analyze the policy development that influenced and triggered the emergence
and consolidation of the third sector in Italy, focusing on the welfare system and the specific
legislative evolution, the institutions, stakeholders and advocacy initiatives.
The paper is structured in four parts, the first one consisting in the historical development
of the social policies as fundamentals of the third sector organizations‟ birth. The second part
concentrates on the legislative recognition of the first social enterprises, “social cooperatives”,
and the advocacy processes behind it. The third section aims to give a concise view of the Italian
legislation in the field and the main features of the organizations operating in it. The last part
focuses on the public-private partnership, offering both a normative perspective and one coming
from a regional reality, followed by the conclusion.
The understanding of the “third sector” used in this paper refers to all the private,
autonomous organizations with a social/general and non-profit aim2 that use democratic and
participatory principles of governance and usually have a collective proprietary system
(multistakeholder). The organizations of the so-called third sector can develop different activities
such as advocacy, promotion, participation, redistribution, experimental / pioneering production,
continuous production of new social goods and services or labor insertion of disadvantaged
groups, taking different legal forms.
1
see law 328/2000, where the expression “organizations of the third sector” appears; see also Authority for the
Third Sector, previously named Authority for ONLUS, whose name has recently changed.
2
“non-profit” understood as either complete non-distribution or partial non-distribution of profits, as well as
impossibility to appropriate the patrimony in case of dissolution
1

2. The Third Sector from a Historical Perspective on the Development of the Welfare System
The Italian welfare system was built on a clear division of roles between the state, market, family
and the third sector. Until the XVIIIth century, social protection was delivered by the family and
outside the household, by non-profit organizations (Borzaga, 2004, 48) such as charities based on
volunteering. This activity has always been part of the Italian culture, as Carta Caritas dating
from 1089 proves (Accorinti, 2011). While the traditional family was producing goods and
services for its members, including children and elderly, the charities were taking care of the
needy, excluded citizens, redistributing wealth and increasing the general quality of life. Thus,
modern social policies raised from the private association of citizens in corporations, guilds and
other mutual help societies (1844, Pinerelo, Italy, first such organization) based on the profession
and later the territorial criteria (Borzaga and Fazzi, 2005, 56-57).
There was a logic order in the appearance of social protection rights, starting with
insurance against accidents, then diseases, age, and more recently unemployment and inequality,
transposed and developed in four main directions: social security policies, labor policies, health
policies and social assistance policies (ibidem, 59). While the first two were mostly under the
responsibility of the state and the market, the last two remained for a long time under the auspice
of the family and charities, most of them ecclesiastic, Catholic ones - in 1861, there were
approximately 18000 charities in Italy, offering a markedly superior set of services compared to
the ones offered by the public entities (Borzaga and Ianes, 2006, 6). Thus, the increasing role of
the private associations satisfying basic needs of the poor was in 1862 acknowledged by the state
in the law on the administrative independence of the charitable organizations (called “Opere
Pie”). In the meantime, the changes in the commercial and manufacture sectors brought new
challenges to the craftsmen and farmers, who joined in order to offer reciprocal help and created
Mutual Help Societies - non lucrative associations that were aiming to offer social securities to
the workers and their families in case of disease, accidents, unemployment, death, based on a
long tradition of the XVIIIth century (Borzaga and Ianes, 2006, 8; law 3818/1886). Thus,
between 1873-1885, more than 4000 mutual help societies appeared – especially in the northern
regions –, offering subsidies and services, but also promoting social initiatives, and supporting
2

3. the development of the cooperative movement. Due to this well established reality, in 1886 it
was promulgated law 3818 related to the constitution of the mutual help society.
The specialization and mechanization required by the passage from the subsistence
economy to the scale economy, as well as the relations with and on the market, the new
conservation methods, the quality standards and the overall competition generated the incapacity
of the family to be self-sufficient – they needed capital. Since the traditional banks were not open
for little farmers, supported by the mutualist insurance movement and inspired by the German
experience of social credit houses (Raiffeisen) and later popular banks (Schulze), they united and
created the first credit cooperatives (Cassa Rurale), mutual-help organizations that were
guaranteeing to the banks for each credit taken with the land of all the members (first general
laws on cooperation). By using trust as a main component, the farmers managed to overpass the
industrialization period and continued to cooperate by creating other types of such organizations,
such as consumers‟, agricultural and workers' cooperatives. It was in 1886 when the National
Federation of Cooperatives was founded, transformed later in the National League of the Italian
Cooperative Societies - socialist affiliation - (Borzaga and Ianes, 2006, 17).
In the 1880s, the influence of the Bismarkian compulsory insurance that was covering
more and more of the public needs (the starting of the welfare state), the incapability of the
Italian charities to fight clientelism and the failure to comply to the management and accounting
rules led to a set of reforms, starting with the reorganization of the health care provision in 1888
and transformation of the charities in public institutions, IPABs (Public Institutions of Assistance
and Beneficence) in 1890 (Borzaga and Ianes, 2006, 7-8). The end of the XIXth century
consisted also in the urbanization and industrialization processes that led to a focus on the
worker and the trade unions, together with the emergence of the Socialist Party. The beginning
of the XXth century meant an increase in the welfare coverage3, the appearance of laws for
forbidding under-aged employment and the starting of a process of introducing the public
sanitary system (ibidem, 14-15), together with an act on housing and the creation of a national
maternity fund.
3
IPABs regulated compulsory insurances against work accidents, while another institution was covering voluntary
pensions
3

4. This extension of the public protection meant the creation of a statist welfare system and
the collapse of mutualities, during the fascism this direction being strengthened and most of the
private organizations being eliminated, restricted or transformed in state institutions. The biggest
newly formed Confederation of Italian Cooperatives4 was dissolved in 1927, as well as the
National House for Social Insurance, transformed in the National Fascist Institute for Social
Security. Between 1922 and 1943, the state had direct responsibility for the delivery of welfare5,
repressing almost completely the civil society, dissolving second-level organizations and trade
unions, controlling the cooperative movement and creating new public institutions -e.g. The
National Fascist Entity of Cooperations, 1931 - (Borzaga, 2004; Borzaga and Ianes, 2006, 24).
The only “private” organizations providing welfare were the ecclesiastic charities, in 1929, the
government dividing the tasks with the Catholic Church (Carbone and Kazepov, 2007, 47). The
1942 fascist Civil Code confirmed the residual role of the associations, foundations and
committees (“comitati”), but promoted mostly the development of for-profit companies, the
former dealing with non-economic activities (First Book of the Code).
It was the approval of the 1948 Constitution of the Italian Republic that started to change
the perspective of social policies and the role of the third sector (in theory, enacted after the
1970s). The new constitution recognized the liberty of the civil society, encouraged private
solidarity initiatives, participation and non-lucrative organizations of collective interest (art. 2,
art. 45 etc.). Thus, cooperatives, mutual and non-profit organizations started to reemerge,
stimulated also by the legislative framework and financial provisions enacted by the first law on
cooperation (1947, law no. 1577). Nevertheless, after the Second World War, the social security
system developed on the existing laws and the fascist tradition, in the first 20 years, the political
actors not being able to establish a national, homogenous welfare reform. The public social
security was, and has partially remained so until today, exclusively contributory and linked to
occupation6 and strongly biased towards cash benefits (especially pensions) that the political
parties used in a clientelistic way, working in favor of the middle classes (Borzaga, 2004, 51). As
Carbone and Kazepov argue, a possible reason for this approach could be found in the political
4
ConfCooperative, 1919, created after a long research process initiated and strongly supported by the Church
5
in 1937 the social provisions were extended to all individuals and families in particular needy conditions
6
the social protection received depending on the position in the labor market and therefore, on the amount of
contribution (Carbone and Kazepov, 2007, 71)
4

5. backwardness, instability and short-term view after war and the need of the political parties to
make compromises with different lobby groups in order to reach a political consensus (2007, 72).
From the end of the 1950s, the founding of the European Economic Community
represented the start of a new wave of growth and work demand translated in high employment,
but it also brought the “baby boom” phenomenon. The Italian industry was boosting, the
investments in infrastructure and the cash benefits were augmenting, while the low-interest
credits started to be incentivized (Borzaga and Ianes, 2006, 42). The new center-leftist
government started a set of reforms aimed to change the economic system by nationalizing the
production and distribution of electricity (ENEL) and to implement a fairer tax charging, as well
as to correct the malfunctions of the public services by urging decentralization, territorialization
and introducing a compulsory free schooling system. Moreover, while until 1975 the sanitary
services were offered by each mutuality on the basis of the contribution paid, in 1968, the
government decided to take over and transform again the IPABs in public law organisations,
locally based, extending the coverage to all citizens, as it had been done with the educational
system (Borzaga and Ianes, 2006, 54). However, as the two authors state, the difficulty to
implement such ambitious plans and the lack of regional homogeneity led to an increase of social
discontent and a more active civil society, eager to find local solutions, though closely with
affiliated to political (ARCI, leftist) or ecclesiastic (ACLI) groups. This tight relation between
the political and non-profit world was easily transformed in a mutual interest rapport, while the
former was contributing with financial resources, the latter surrendering part of the control, the
third sector constituting just an intermediary between the political party and its area of interest
(Borzaga, 2004, 52).
At the end of the 1960s, experimenting the perverse effects of the system, the students
and the trade unions (supported by the Church – the Second Vatican Council promoted humanity
and a better integration of the “new poor” through voluntary organizations) started to rebel
against the welfare model unable to fight unemployment and to offer social services adapted to
their needs. Among these, the most important ones were the expansion of elderly population, the
rise of new disadvantaged groups of population unable to be inserted on the labor market, the
increase of female participation that left the family incapable of fulfilling its traditional care
function; thus, a high level of social inequality, a high inflation rate and a growing periphery
5

6. lacking services. In reply to these requests, the public local authorities tried to increase the
supply of services, but the cuts of the public expenditure and the high costs of the services
determined an inappropriate decision: the increase of cash benefits without economic coverage
(Borzaga, 2004) – e.g. the value of the pension was tied to the last salary. This mechanism and
the continuous requests brought diverse anomalies to the system, which accumulated an
enormous and continuously growing pension expenditure and therefore, public debt, paid with
the highest interest rate in the world, 11% (Borzaga and Fazzi, 2005).
Thus, the “start-up phase” of the creation of the third sector was initiated after the
enactment of the democratic constitution and especially from the 1960s, with the rise of a
growing number of small organizations, locally-oriented, aiming at the “new poor” or “post-
materialistic poor” and the rise of the first cooperative of assistance and social solidarity,
Cooperativa Giuseppe Filippini, 1963 (Borzaga and Ianes, 2006, 72, 93). Once the and
occupational crises economic (oil shocks, uncovered benefits) of the '70s and '80s appeared, the
effects of the “baby boom”, the rise of the life expectancy, the globalization and competition of
economic models became intolerable. The system had proved its lack of sustainability and the
state‟s approach towards standardization and bureaucratization of the social services required
civil action. Though started with a lot of voluntary work and a low support for the public
administration, their continuous reorganization as a result of the increase of local public funding
offered the opportunity to establish a stable employed structure. The presence of the Church was
constant, encouraging and promoting private initiatives, converting the Pontificia Opera
Assistenza in Caritas Italiana (1970s) and pleading for the individual‟s responsibility for his own
life. Moreover, during this period, the Church together with the civil society conducted a strong
non-violence campaign intended to open the possibility of choosing between military service and
civil service which concluded with a positive result, law 772/1972.
The non-profit volunteering organizations were in full process of development, appearing
also the first ideas of a united movement and coordination subject, transposed immediately in
national conventions and the constitution of the Movement of the Italian Voluntarism (1978), a
laic, pluralistic, democratic and autonomous organization – formed by regional federations and a
national committee (Borzaga and Ianes, 2006, 96). The founding of this organization represented
an important step in the recognition of voluntarism, the focus on research, professionalization
6

7. and specialization in a complementary manner with the state, leading to the placing of this sector
in the welfare mix and the creation of an initial structure and strategy. However, despite the
positive evolution of the sector, the obstacles were still manifest, one of them referring to the
interpretation of the Civil Code in the sense of interdiction of associations and foundations to
engage in production or in economically significant activities. The only ones that could involve
in economic activities were the cooperatives – recognized by the Constitution to pursue social
aims (article 45). Thus, there was an urgent need for a juridical acknowledgement.
The general European tendency towards an extension of the public welfare and the
continuous discontent with the social services unable to reply to the growing needs brought in
1977 a structural change, basing the new integrated system on the subsidiarity principle (Carbone
and Kazepov, 2007, 74) - reform number 616 offered the regions and local entities a central role
in the organization and administration of the social policies. Despite the initial lack of
recognition of the role of the regions at the operative level, the effects had been seen in another
reform from of 1978 (number 833), when the universal national sanitary system was introduced,
offering free access to all citizens, irrespective of the labor market position. Nevertheless, in
time, the lack of a unique normative system in the provision of care, left space for the local
discretionary offer of services and a fragmented and categorized set of interventions (Carbone
and Kazepov, 2007, 75).
Having proved its inefficiency, in the 1980s, the state started the “marketization” of the
social policies, creating space for the private initiatives to offer customized services for different
disadvantaged groups and individuals. Since the for-profit solution had already partially failed
due to high prices, information asymmetries and opportunism (Borzaga and Ianes, 2006), the
non-profit sector started to grow exponentially, diversifying not only the services provided, but
creating and changing also the juridical form; in 1987 there were 496 cooperatives of assistance
and social solidarity, out of which 50% new and the rest ex voluntary organizations and
associations (Borzaga and Ianes, 2006, 108). This accelerated expansion was triggered also by a
favorable context (i.e. law 482/1968 regarding the compulsory integration of disabled people in
enterprises, the deinstitutionalization of mental hospitals in 1973) and a continuous research and
advocacy activity promoted by Filippini and later together with Scalvini not only within the
7

8. cooperative movement, which was already well organized, but also through partnerships with
other non-profit organizations.
The 1990s started with the transformation of the saving houses and the bank institutions
(initially public) into private bank foundations (non-profit, of social utility), proprietary of the
public company (“società per azioni”) administrating the bank activity. Moreover, a judgment of
the Constitutional Court on IPABs qualified as unconstitutional their metamorphosis into public
bodies, reasserting the freedom of private care (Borzaga, 2004). Thus, the new context required
also the reformation of the health care, introducing the National Health Fund and the mixt
financing (instead of the previous centralized one) and continuing the implementation of the
vertical subsidiarity - the Regions were responsible for creating local health companies funded in
proportion of maximum 80% by the public administration, the rest coming from the market
exchanges and individual contributions (Borzaga and Fazzi, 2005). The pension system changed
also, the retirement age being increased and the private and the public contributions being
harmonizing.
Besides, this decade brought the official recognition of many third sector organizations,
in 1991 being regulated both the Voluntary Organizations and the Social Cooperatives while in
1997 the law on non-lucrative organizations of social utility was enacted; furthermore, voluntary
organizations were allowed to use a small number of paid employees and were offered tax
benefits for them and for their donors (Borzaga, 2004, 54). Also, the legitimation of these
organizations represented also the inclusion of the needs they were responding to as needs the
welfare state was responsible for. This led to a reform of the public administration and opened
new opportunities in the form of public funds and contracts (grant subsidies, economic aid).
However, the new rules proved difficult to be implemented, the collaboration between the state
and the third sector being differently transposed in the regional practices (Borzaga, 2005, 56).
While some regions followed the national regulations and financed the third sector in order to
avoid the costs of creating new public units, others were slow or lacked interest.
The new millennium continued to foster the development of the third sector (first, second
and third level organizations – e.g. The Third Sector Forum) by including in the legislation the
social promotion associations (law 383/2000) and by insisting on the creation of an integrated
8

9. system of intervention and social services (law 328/2000). Besides the recognition of the third
sector, this reform represented the acknowledgment of the need to boost the provision of social
services in order to homogenize the access to social rights, established the creation of a national
fund and the expressly inclusion of the third sector in the designing and management of the
policies (Borzaga, 2004). “Essential and uniform levels of social services” guaranteed for all
citizens on all the national territory were set – this way avoiding fragmentation-, while both
vertical and horizontal subsidiarity were explained in terms of clear tasks. As Carbone and
Kazepov show (2007, 79), these changes were meant to determine the spread of joint-planning of
the “social plan of the area” and the contracting-out techniques, but in reality the unclear levels
set by the norm, the difficult coordination and organization of the sector at the regional level and
the ill-defined competition criteria maintained as prevalent the cost minimization in the detriment
of the quality.
Regardless, the Italian third sector continued its development along the years, increasing
its negotiating power with the public entities due to specialization, research activities and strong
advocacy movements. Furthermore, new juridical forms of third sector organizations appeared,
in 2006 being enacted the law on social enterprises which proved the continuous liberalization of
the national welfare system (Fazzi and Longhi, 2009, 108).
In conclusion, the emergence of the third sector in Italy was connected to the
industrialization and incapacity of the public administration to provide sufficient and efficient
social services for the urbanized and peripheral disadvantaged groups. Therefore, the recognition
as a main actor of the welfare mix was brought about by the reaction of the civil society against
the crisis (1970s-1980s) and the progressive incorporation of legal acts attesting their
fundamental role for the general wellbeing. Two great examples of this are the article 45 from
the Constitution referring to the social function of the cooperation based on mutuality and
without profit aims and article 118, introduced in 2001, stating the principle of subsidiarity, both
vertical (state - regions - metropolitan cities - provinces – municipalities) and horizontal (local
administration – civil society), used for developing general interest activities. Ergo, the strength
of the Italian third sector resides in the private, democratic, autonomous structure, solidarity,
strong communitarian roots and in many cases multistakeholder feature, which were augmented
by the power of well-organized advocacy initiatives and networks.
9

10. Recognition and Consolidation of the “Social Cooperatives” in Italy. From advocacy to policy
As we have noticed from the first chapter, the growth of the Italian third sector was based less on
the “strengthening of already existing organizations” and more on “the birth of completely new
ones”, due to the “institutional creativity” of the promoters which was later incorporated in the
legislation (Borzaga, 2004, 45). However, an existing informal practice existed from the
Medieval times, promoted usually by the Catholic Church.
The Italian experience makes a very interesting case study not only from the point of
view of the rise and development of the sector or the advocacy initiatives, but also from the legal
forms adopted and the general incorporation in the legislation, being the first country in the
world to have a law on “social cooperatives” and the reference point for many others.
A first consideration of the Italian third sector regards its cooperation model based on
three levels: cooperative, consortium and federation (though this last one is mostly seen as a
representative body, interconnecting the first two and having as members both coops and
consortia). Consortia, as secondary cooperatives or cooperatives made up of cooperatives, are
responsible for the coordination of the activity of the members, the commercial exchanges,
contracts, part of the representation function (especially in the federations). They were
constituted also in the attempt to expand the market power that each individual cooperative had,
in this way fighting together in the competitive system, establishing rules, investing in specific
research, equipment and stabilizing their own production. A consortium could also develop its
own private mutualistic activity, having all the rights as a normal cooperative – for example,
wine consortia usually buy the grapes from the member cooperatives (cantina) and produce the
wine, pack it, distribute it and sell it. The role of the federations is to supervise the members,
develop auditing processes and social reporting, offer support (administrative, legal and fiscal),
conduct studies and reports in different areas of interest to the members7, establish the common
values and principles, develop international partnerships and collaborations, conduct advocacy
initiatives and offer trainings to the members.
7
most of the times pure research is conducted by institutes or academics supported by the federation
10

11. The Italian model is characterized by strong solidaristic movements started in the end of
the XIXth century with the national federations of cooperatives, the consortia and associations of
mutualities, blocked by the fascism and reemerged after the Second World War. Though the
mutualities‟ function was considerably diminished by the expansion of the public health system,
the cooperation boosted following the traditional ideologies; in 1945 two national associations of
representation, protection and assistance for the cooperative movement appeared more exactly,
they were re-built after the fascist period, Confederazione di Cooperative Italiane (democratic-
Christian orientation) and Lega nazionale delle cooperative e mutue (leftist orientation). To
these, other private non-profit organizations appeared, promoting the interests of workers and
sometimes disadvantaged categories (disabled), such as ARCI (leftist), ACLI (Catholic) and
other trade unions, as well as ecclesiastic charities like Caritas (in 1971, after the support of the
students‟ movement) and later more and more laic associations and foundations. All in all, the
main advocacy power was held by the organizations supporting and supported the Church and
the leftist political orientation, which, in time, led to difficulty in reaching consensus and
enacting legal documents – e.g. law 381/1991. The development of the third sector in Italy was
strongly related also to the voluntary movement – promoted by the Church -, materialized in a
structured organization based on regional federations and a national committee formed in 1978
(Borzaga and Ianes, 2006, 95) which conducted different advocacy initiatives, national
conventions and forming partnerships with training and research centers. The aim of this
organization was to remove the causes of disadvantage and to reply to social needs in
complementarity with the state (pluralist approach).
The first social enterprises appeared in the context of a spread of organizations pursuing
social aims, various requests for less involvement of the Church and more autonomy of the
private initiatives and a low level of support from the state. This determined the citizens to find
innovative, self-financing ways of replying to the needs of the hapless. Since the cooperation and
mutualism represented deep cultural principles and the cooperative was the only organization
recognized to accomplish a social function and simultaneously allowed to undergo economic
activity, there was a natural tendency towards using this juridical form. However, according to
Basevi law from 1947, the cooperatives were allowed to operate mainly or only with and for the
members, rule that constituted an obstacle for those aiming at revolving around the whole
11

12. community. Nevertheless, in 1963, in Tormini, Brescia, the first cooperative of “assistance and
social solidarity” was founded, aiming to reach not necessarily “those who have less, but mostly
those who are less” (Filippini, 1997 apud Borzaga and Ianes, 2006, 100). It was for the first time
that a cooperative was targeting not only the members, but also their families, relatives and
neighbors, the members constituting a mix of volunteers and paid workers. Despite the lack of
prevalent mutuality, the judges appreciated the social function of the cooperative and approved
the statute, decision that led to the rapid multiplication of the model in the following years,
Filippini promoting and sustaining the new initiatives. Moreover, his dedication to the diffusion
of solidarity cooperatives was expressed in the regional and national Catholic federation,
ConfCooperative, where he presented the characteristics of the new type of cooperative, the
results and the legislative limits, asking for support.
The following years meant a continuous fight to develop a systematic movement by
creating the “Secretary of social solidarity and assistance cooperatives” (1980), designing the
first law proposal (1981) and establishing the advocacy strategy based on a common identity,
promotion through conferences and cultural activities and on the obtaining of legitimation for the
contingent organizations, such as the voluntary ones (Borzaga and Ianes, 2006, 122-127). The
high increase in number of these innovative cooperatives (owed to both transformation and
creation of new ones through intense support and consulting programmes) led to the constitution
in 1983 of the first consortium, Sol.Co, aiming at integrating and developing the cooperatives of
solidarity in Lombardia, offering consultancy, formation and creating links with the public
authorities. Two years later, the first National Assembly of Social Solidarity and Assistance
Cooperatives was created, born from the need to express in one voice their social function and to
raise attention from the public authorities in the attempt to determine legal recognition. In 1987
appeared the National Consortium Gino Mattarelli and the first National Federation of Social
Solidarity and Assistance Cooperatives, Federsolidarieta‟, having 669 members to represent from
a political and institutional point of view (ibidem, 148). This rapid growth was visible also in the
writings, appearing a plethora of journals or integrating the specific topics of volunteering and
solidarity cooperatives (e.g. “Animazione Sociale”, later “Impresa sociale”).
In the world of Legacoop, the leftist federation of cooperatives, the new types of
cooperatives were differently understood and created, focusing on the needs of the workers,
12

13. especially on the disadvantaged ones that after 1970 and the deinstitutionalization of mental
hospitals remained outside of a protective environment. While the Catholic side was focusing on
solidarity, volunteering and an enlarged mutuality, the leftist one was oriented towards self-
administered, self-help workers‟ cooperatives, perceiving volunteering as a source of
competition to others organizations in the sense of anti-occupational policy (Borzaga and Ianes,
2006, 152-155).
These two views reflected also different organizational practices, the leftist work
integration cooperatives adopting a multi-specialization model, while the Catholic (“white”)
cooperatives voting (in consortia) for a set of norms they needed to respect: territoriality (close
bond with the local community, trust and reputation), internal specialization and intersectoriality
inside the consortium, innovative promotion (shared vision) and small dimension (interpersonal
relations among the members, participation and strong organizational culture). The consortium
was playing the role of a general contractor, representing the interest of the whole and
negotiating individual contracts in the same time, using the “strawberry field strategy” (Scalvini,
apud Borzaga and Ianes, 2006, 158) – i.e. a simultaneous development of each of the members in
an interdependent way, establishing networks and contracting each others‟ services.
This conflict between the two movements led to a long debate and to the delay of the
legislative procedure from 1981 to 1991. Meanwhile, the Autonomous Region of Trento,
renowned for its cooperatist tradition, advance and development of the sector, promulgated in
1988 law No 24 recognizing three types of new cooperatives involved in producing and
supplying social services: cooperatives of social solidarity, cooperatives of production and work
integration and cooperatives of social services (Borzaga and Ianes, 2006, 212). This decision was
influenced by the local civil society and the involvement, support and advocacy promoted by
researchers, especially by Carlo Borzaga and Stefano Lepri, proposing from 1987 a unification
of all the organizations in a more general concept, “the third sector” (Second National Assembly
of Social Solidarity and Assistance Cooperatives). In 1990, at the Third National Assembly,
Felice Scalvini, the successor of Mattarelli in the CGM, discussed about the role of the new
cooperatives in the designing of social policies and from a transformation of the relations with
the public administration from “doing for” to “doing with”, in an approach in which the
“disadvantaged persons are subjects and not objects of the social policies” (Scalvini, 1991 apud
13

14. Borzaga and Ianes, 2006, 191-192). Supported by the contribution of Borzaga on the “Third
system”, Scalvini concluded that recognition for the public authorities would have been achieved
only if the two Central Cooperatives had reached consensus on the proposal of law. The Social
Affairs Minister added that a bad law is undesirable, but an equilibrated one can be acceptable,
while the Minister of Work and Social Welfare constrained the two parts by linking the
agreement on the new cooperatives with the promulgation of the changing of the general law on
cooperatives (152/1992). Thus, it would have been either both or none (ibidem, 195-196). Since
both sides were interested in the passing of this law, offering benefits and clarification on
cooperation, the consensus needed to be reached.
The compromises regarded among others, the number of volunteers, while
ConfCooperative, influenced by the Catholics, argued for a minimum of 50%, Legacoop asking
for a limit of maximum 40%. As Borzaga and Ianes show (2006, 217-221), the middle solution
found by the legislator (two years later) indicated a facultative involvement of volunteers with a
maximum of 50% (law 381/1991). Since the leftist perspective had in center the worker, they
were defending minimum number of 50% disadvantaged workers, the final decision of ‟91
differentiating between the two types of “social cooperatives” (neutral, short name) and setting a
limit of a minimum 30% of the ones targeting work integration. The activities separated between
two types of social cooperatives: type a, providing some social services established by the law
(and without inserting disadvantaged people) and type b, whose aim is labor insertion of
disadvantaged, with clarification of who is considered part of the target group. One cooperative
could not develop both activities, having to choose one, though later, in 1996, a ministerial
document permitted it on the condition of separate accounting. Briefly, social cooperatives
should develop activities of general interest, human promotion and integration of citizens (art 1,
law 381/1991). The effects of having a national law, followed by regional ones, were a higher
homogeneity of the phenomenon and an increase in the number of public-private partnerships,
encouraged also by law 241/1990 (subsidiarity and civic participation article), 328/2000 (social
interventions and public-private partnerships) and some European Community directives (eg.
50/1992 regarding the obligation to create a public competition for contracts with a value higher
than 200000 Euro, 2204/2002 and 1976/2006 regarding the employment of disadvantaged and
disabled people).
14

15. In conclusion, the development of the third sector was supported by different factors,
among which the endogenous ones, especially the advocacy promoted, were essential - the
coordination and representation structures constituted the core of their recognition and evolution,
materialized in visibility campaigns, congresses, meetings and seminars, but also in consulting
sessions and trainings.
The Third Sector Organizations in the Civil Law
As shown in the previous chapter, in a context defined by the lack of well-defined non-profit
legal forms, the third sector itself contributed to the creation of social policy by bringing
“neglected situations of need to light, proposing and experimenting with new services and
encouraging changes in the social expenditure” (Borzaga, 2004, 46). Despite the difficulty and
bureaucracy, in the past twenty years, six new laws constituting new types of organizations were
enacted and at least other ten establish norms and application rules or modify different articles.
The considerable increase in the production of goods and social services of general interest
supplied by the new organizations in the last years demonstrate the efficiency of their activity,
but also a favorable legislative framework that is worth studying and maybe adapted in other
countries.
Before 1987, the private non-profit organizations in Italy were represented by
foundations, associations, committees and partly cooperatives, due to their cap on profit
distribution. Moreover, the laws regulating these private organizations were not updated since
the new Civil Code of 1942. Thus, the arising social organizations met serious problems when
needing to register, their aims, objectives and instruments not being accepted neither under the
private non-profit organizations umbrella due to the impossibility to develop productive,
commercial activity (First Book of the Civil Code), nor under the one of cooperatives, due to the
social solidarity principle materialized in general interest, conflicting with the mutual nature of
these organizations. By 1986, the interpretation of the Civil Code regarding the commercial
activities of the non-profit organizations changed, allowing such practices, but without
15

16. incentivizing them. Decree number 917/1986 referring to non-commercial entities of associative
type allowed associations to develop marginal productive activity considered in this case not
commercial, since it did not have a systematic base, with the interdiction to distribute profits and
the obligation of reinvestment. Moreover, these new entities gained specific tax incentives and
were encouraged to increase their number of members, since the exchanges with the members
were not included in the productive activity, therefore having no limit. Thus, today, the level of
entrepreneurialism varies from representing the core (the aim itself) of the organization
(cooperatives, social enterprises), to an instrumental one (bank foundations), or a subsidiary,
accessory or marginal one (eg. voluntary organizations). In addition, the orientation of the Italian
civil society towards other developing nations and the lack of financial reliefs offered to the
organizations developing social activities led the legislator to rethink the sector by creating new
norms and categories of organizations mostly based on the traditional juridical forms (except for
social cooperatives and social enterprises) and offering specific tax breaks and financing lines.
The first legislative recognition referred to non-governative organizations, though
understood differently from the Anglo-Saxon approach and was adopted in 1987 (law 49). The
Italian NGOs aim to undergo activities of cooperation and development in favor of the third
world countries‟ population, by satisfying primary needs such as safety of human life, food
sufficiency, valorization of human resources, conservation of environmental patrimony,
consolidation of processes of endogenous development and economic, social and cultural growth
of the developing countries, improvement of the feminine and children condition, support for the
promotion of women ( art. 1.2). The non-profit organizations allowed to become NGOs were the
associations, foundations and committees which developed specific activities mentioned in art. 2,
par. 3 of the same law. This law initiated also a long series of institutions, providing the creation
of different Offices with specific responsibilities (Interministerial Committee for Economic
Planning, General Office for Cooperation for Development from the Foreign Affairs Ministry,
Directional Committee, Technical Central Unit for Cooperation and Development) and a
financing pluriannual line, grants, credits and a rotation fund for cooperation for development.
Finally, the duties and rights of the volunteers were determined, being the first time when the
legislator takes into consideration this aspect of the voluntary work.
16

17. The second law was adopted in 1991 (no. 266) and established the voluntary
organizations, recognizing in art. 1 the social value and the function of volunteering as
participation, solidarity and pluralism. Volunteering was defined in art. 2 as an “activity done in
a personal, spontaneous, voluntary way through the organization of which the volunteer is part
of, non-profit and having an exclusive solidaristic, democratic structure”. In order to become a
volunteering organization, one should prove that the governance is based on democracy, that the
labor is predominantly generated by volunteers and that the aim of the activity is a solidaristic
one (no profit distribution). Another novelty was the written permission to develop productive
activity as long as there was no intermediary and the commercial activity was in relation to the
mission and remained marginal (art. 5). The new institutions created regulated the constitution of
a register in which registration represented a necessary condition for ulterior request for public
funds, the creation of the National Observatory of Volunteering responsible of research and
annual censuses, reports, bulletins, a triannual National Conference of Volunteering and a
Volunteering Fund. Besides, the regions and local administration was urged to promote the
development and autonomy of these organizations, organize service centers and provide specific
funds.
In the same year the law on social cooperatives was enacted (no. 381), establishing as
aim of these organizations (art. 1) the pursue of “the general interest of the community for the
human promotion and social integration of citizens through: a) the management of social-
care and educational services and b) the performance of agricultural, industrial, commercial,
service or other activities for the working integration of disadvantaged persons” (as defined
by art. 4). Thus, the new organizations differ from the traditional cooperatives due to the social,
public aim and the regulation of specific activities that can be developed. The law enforces the
regions to create special registers and develop regional norms in support of these organizations
(art. 9), create partnerships and externalize services (only to those registered, art. 5). The
consortia is limited to a minimum of 70% of members having the form of social cooperative.
Thus, this is the case of a clear entrepreneurial activity and a democratic governance, the non-
profit principle being understood in the same way as for the other cooperatives (see below, p 19).
In 1997, the legislative decree number 460 introduced another label, “non-profit
organizations of social utility” (ONLUS), aiming to offer tax reliefs to those organizations
17

18. included in the category. There are automatically ONLUS the previously three newly recognized
organizations (ONG, social cooperatives and associations of social promotion), while
associations, foundations, committees, cooperatives and other private organizations need to
prove with their statute the right to receive the label. The conditions refer to the activity
undergone (as written in the law, art. 10), the exclusive social solidarity aim (oriented
exclusively towards disadvantaged people), the absolute non-distribution of profits (full
reinvestment) and patrimony in case of dissolution. Besides, the candidates should prove their
democratic administration and submit the annual accounts in a special register.
The social promotion associations were legally recognized in 2000 (law no. 383), when
the Italian Republic acknowledged the social value of associations as expression of participation,
solidarity and pluralism and it promoted the development of all its territorial articulations with
the aim of maintaining its autonomy. Art. 2 defined social promotion associations the recognized
associations, movements, groups and their federations or coordination groups organized with the
aim of developing social utility activities in the favor of associates or third parts, without
profitable aims and with respect for the liberty and dignity of the associates. The law excluded
political parties, trade unions, worker associations and professional associations that reflect
economic interests of their associates. Moreover, it also (respectively, art 7, 11, 13) enacted the
constitution of a national register, an observatory, as well as a special fund (7,5 mil euros).
Collaborations between the Observatory and ISTAT were instituted, the access to grants is
opened also to social promotion and volunteering organizations, not only cooperatives (art. 24),
while the local authorities were suggested to support their development with tax reductions and
by fostering their access to the European Social Funds.
Finally, in 2006, the legislator, in the attempt to create a more inclusive label,
promulgated law 155 on social enterprises, including all private organizations that develop
economic activities with the aim of producing or exchanging goods and services of social utility.
In order to receive the label, the candidates need to prove in written (statute) that their activities
correspond to those established in art. 2 a) or that they employ at least 30% of disadvantaged or
disabled people. Both the industries and the definition of “disadvantage” are broader than in law
381/1991, though structured in the same way. Nevertheless, the enterprise is not allowed to
distribute profits (directly or indirectly – salaries no higher than 20% of the average salary in the
18

19. industry, no remuneration of financial instruments) and is obliged to deposit a social and an
economic balance sheet annually. A social enterprise cannot be controlled by a for-profit or
public organization and should apply participatory, democratic methods and should involve the
workers and beneficiaries of the activities in the governance processes by means of
consultations, information or others (art. 12). In case of transformation, the new enterprise is
obliged to keep the non-profit aim and general interest. Though similar to the law on social
cooperatives, this one does not include any kind of financial benefits or incentives, reason for a
very slow growth of the number of such enterprises, many of which, especially those coming
from the non-profit world, blaming also the lack of information and promotion of the law.
The other two traditional organizations that are part of the third sector, the mutual help
societies (mutualities) and the cooperatives are regulated by the Civil Code of 1942 and other
specific laws, such as law 3818/1886 (mutualities) or 59/1992 (cooperatives), both types of
organizations taking the juridical personality of cooperatives. A distinct feature of this
organizational form - besides the mutuality principle (though not fully compulsory – i.e. there are
predominantly mutual cooperatives and other cooperatives), democratic governance and “open
door” principle - is the social aim, understood not only in the predominance of transactions with
members, but also in the distribution of profits. Thus, the Civil Code (art. 2514; Fici, 2010)
establishes clear rules regarding the profits of the cooperative, this being also a criteria for tax
benefits. Shortly, a mainly mutual cooperative cannot: distribute dividends on the subscribed
capital superior to the maximum interest of postal bonds increased by 2.5 points, distribute
reserves to user-members, remunerate the financial instruments subscribed by user-members
more than the maximum interest of postal bonds increased by 4.5 points or distribute the assets
in case of dissolution (except from the paid-up capital) – the patrimony is invested in a mutual
fund for the promotion and development of cooperation. Moreover, the cooperative is obliged to
invest at least 30% of the profits in the patrimony and direct 3% to the mutual fund, only after
being permitted to remunerate the members proportionally to the transactions developed with the
cooperative and eventually pay dividends (Fici, 2010).
The legislation regulating the functioning of the third sector organizations has an
important role in establishing benefits and incentivizing their activity. The two approaches focus
19

20. on either tax reliefs, or on favorable relations between the public administration and these
organizations.
The tax reliefs can be of different nature, either deducting a part of the revenue tax of the
organization (max 10% up to 70.000 euros for ONLUS – 460/1997), or deducting a part of the
revenue tax of the sponsor (max 19% for physical person and max 2% for enterprises, up to
2.065,83/1.549,37 – ONLUS / social promotion associations). Other benefits consist in not
considering as part of the revenue the goods received from donors for free (especially food and
medicines and only those whose production represent the main activity of the donor) or the
surpluses created through transactions with the members (non-commercial entities of associative
type) and exempting from VAT the goods offered to ONLUS from producers (up to 1000 euros).
Besides, if one enterprise decides to direct part of the personnel‟s tasks to the benefice of an
ONLUS, 5 per thousand of the general cost of the personnel declared can be deduced. Another
incentive regards a 5 per thousand of the tax on revenue that every person can decide to direct
towards ONLUS, research institutes, universities or health research centers. A special VAT rate
of only 4% and in some cases 0% is applied to social cooperatives and other non-profit
organizations of social utility, incentivizing their activity, even though sometimes as a marginal
one. Other incentives directed towards these organizations refer to the exemption from VAT in
case of renting and foods and service transfers and a reduction to ¼ of the interest rate for
cadastral and mortgage loans (social cooperatives). In addition, the labor insertion social
cooperatives are exempted from paying the health insurances and other taxes for the disabled
employees, reducing the personnel costs. Concerning the cooperatives, the legal indivisible
reserve (that constitutes minimum 30% of the profit) is not included in the taxed sum, as well as
the amounts given to the cooperators for the mutualistic exchanges with the cooperative (seen as
part of the costs, not of the profits).
The second approach of incentivizing the third sector is by creating targeted opportunities
and strengthening the relations with the public administration. Not only that the regions can
decide and are encouraged to exempt these organizations from the regional taxes, but also to
create specific funds, offer loans and grants. Moreover, as provided by law 381, art. 5, the public
entities are allowed to establish conventions with type b social cooperatives notwithstanding the
communitary directives (but only up to a certain extent: when the price is higher than 200.000
20

21. the directives apply), due to the labor insertion of disadvantaged people. The same article,
paragraph 4, empowers the public bodies to include the criteria of work integration of vulnerable
people in the competitions for public contracts, in this way privileging the social cooperatives
(type b).
In conclusion, the new laws had a double function, not only recognizing the social
function of these organizations, but also incentivizing their activity and creating space inside the
welfare structure for them to integrate. Though very successful, this model needs to be
considered in its entire complexity and uniqueness, its development and path following specific
values and principles rooted in the culture and benefiting from a period of social change and
from a certain openness from the public bodies to respond to the new needs in a new, more
efficient way, though externalization and collaboration with the private sector. Nevertheless, this
model is not perfect, putting serious questions regarding the self-sustainability of the new
enterprises in crisis situations, when the state cannot afford to finance their services. Another
question marks refer to the taxation benefits and their misusage by hidden for-profit companies,
the contracts established on a predominantly lowest-price base and the real integration of
disadvantage people when labor insertion cooperatives employ mostly or mainly this category.
Finally, one should acknowledge that as any other model, the Italian one cannot be replicated
exactly, but it does represent a powerful source of inspiration and learning.
Private-Public partnership – a speech on horizontal subsidiarity
The expansion of the third sector as supplier of social welfare (27.6% of the total), health
(22.8%), education and research (18.9%, Borzaga, 2004) determined the change of the public-
private partnership, starting from a local and regional level, which received in 2000 a national
confirmation with law 328. Most of the times, this partnership was understood as externalization
of services. This meant a change from a bipolar structure in which the third sector had an
instrumental, passive role – clearly distinct from the one of the public administration- , to a
multipolar structure of relations in which every organization was a leading/active actor in the
21

22. management of the services (Bombardelli, 2009, 180-1). Nonetheless, this pluralist model
required new instruments for regulating the relations once based on an exchange of services and
compensations. Interaction, exchange of resources, collaboration and negotiation ruled the new
public-private relations meant to pursue social utility.
Until 1992, the most common contracting method was the one of direct commitment,
being a non-competitive practice, locally-based and centered on mutual adaptation. The non-
profit nature of the two parts was for that time a good justification of the practice. However, with
the communitary directive 50/1992, the transparency criteria was introduced in the
externalization process, especially in the contracts with a value higher of 200.000 euros, where it
was compulsory to organize a competition (Fazzi and Longhi, 2009 in Borzaga and Zandonai,
2009, 105). As Fazzi and Longhi (2009, 106) show, the increase in the number of organizations
of the third sector and the public expenditure used for satisfying the social needs of especially
non-self-sufficient citizens determined the local administrations to introduce more competitive
selection criteria, helped also by the new public executives coming from a more managerial
culture of the '90s reform. Later, to the direct commitment and competition, a third instrument is
added, the publicist one, stipulating that the contract was offering the total responsibility for the
administration of those services to the social enterprise, in the name of the public administration.
More explicitly, the administration is not buying a service that is then offered to the citizen, but
the social enterprise is responsible for all the phases of satisfying the social needs of the citizen
(Bombardelli, 2009, 177).
On the one hand, according to Borzaga and Fazzi (in C.Gori, 2004, 129), law 328/2000
clarified the relations between the public and third sectors, established complementarity as a
guiding principle, valorized the competences of each part and cleared the externalization
practices able to insure the reaching of the final goal (i.e. rapports, contracting-out norms).
Despite the instrumental position of the third sector, due to the knowledge of the field this law
entitled the “social private” to have a proactive role in the planning of the local systems of social
services, administration and in the representation of the beneficiaries” (Accorinti, 2011, 301). On
the other hand, the critics illustrate the focus on a distinction, rather than on integration of tasks,
while the juridical instruments do not aim to unite the two actors, but to clarify their demands
and obligations (Bombardelli, 2009, 175). Others interpret law 328 as the passage from a
22

23. “mutual agreement” to a “functional interdependency” (Ranci, 1999 apud Accorinti, 2011, 304),
causing a certain loss of autonomy and a possible decrease of the quality of the services offered
by the non-profit organizations. Such a relation between the two sectors leads to the surrender to
search for other financing solutions which, in crisis, increases the negotiating power of the
private for-profit sector and a second risk for the non-profit one, that of losing also its social,
public value.
Despite this polemic, the novelty of this law (328/2000) is to be found not only in the
clarification of rapports between the bodies involved in the supply of social services, but also in
the authorization and accreditation systems that permit the organizations to operate and get
public funding (art 11). The regions should establish the quality requirements (in accordance
with the national levels) and the authorization system and organize the registers of accredited
suppliers. The authorization and accreditation is given by the municipality, under the regional
requirements (art. 11). For this, the suppliers need to create a book of services, publishing their
offer to the citizens and offering them the possibility to decide and define the quality (art. 13).
Moreover, the municipalities are allowed to offer vouchers to the citizens, letting them decide
from which accredited organization to get the service, in this way focusing more on their
evaluation of the service and needs (art 17).
Irrespective of these innovative instruments, the competitive tenders have become the
most used instrument of externalization, asking for the development and specialization of the
social cooperatives and encouraging joint-actions (Borzaga, 2004, 121). Moreover, the recent
tendency of the north and central regions to organize competitions of integrated packages of
services closes the possibility for many small cooperatives to participate due to economic and
administrative limits. Thus, new second level consortia and inter-regional aggregates are
appearing that apply a collaborative and competitive approach (Fazzi and Loghin, 2009, 129). In
addition, the growing presence of for-profit companies in the competitions for social service
supply constitute a fierce competition to the “traditional” third sector organizations, determining
also an increase in the entrepreneurial capacity of the third sector and therefore social innovation.
The economic crisis and the historical context that brought many cooperatives to close
down determined some regions to adopt new norms and policy. For example, in Emilia
23

24. Romagna, in 2009 was adopted a regulation that launches the accreditation of structures
operating in the domiciliary socio-sanitary sector for old people and children to become para-
public entities, once accredited, being ensured a stable position in the system (ibidem, 130). This
regulation could also have perverse effects specific to public bodies, such as decrease of the
quality, bureaucracy, change of the objectives and lack of client-orientation. In order to combat
these externalities, Lombardia used another approach, the practice of voucher for the family.
According to a regional directive, at least 70% of the public expense should be done through this
instrument covering only a part of the cost, the rest being covered by the family (ibidem, 119).
The vouchers‟ method encourages the competition and increase of quality of the services among
the social cooperatives, offers the possibility to choose to the client and maintains a clear
autonomy of the third sector, separating tasks in an interdependent relation and assuring a certain
essential level through accreditation, authorization and co-participation in the development of the
local plans.
Lombardia represents an interesting case of public-private partnership, besides the
vouchers‟ system, initiating new funds aimed to support the cooperation: a rotation fund
stimulating the creation of self-sustainable organizations by offering subsidized loans, a warranty
fund aimed at supporting the cooperatives in the process of getting a credit and a fund directed at
financing the constitution of new social cooperatives (legge regionale 21/2003, apud DGIPMIC,
2008, 16). Regarding the competitive tenders, in order to avoid the disadvantages of the “lowest
price” practice, the region established specific criteria for evaluating projects applying for public
contracts, taking into consideration the quality of the project, the organizational capacity, the
experience and the professionals involved, but also by creating specific competitions revolved
only to social cooperatives and for organizations inserting disadvantaged people into the labor
market (DGIPMIC, 2008, 76-7). This way, at the end of 2007, for 1.362 cooperatives registered,
there were 6525 contracts with the public entities, out of which most of them (5002) were done
with type a cooperatives. Such an achievement is possible also due to the multi specialization of
the cooperatives, the same organization having different contracts for services targeting for
example elderly, youth and unemployed (ibidem). In addition to these forms of support, the
region oriented itself towards European funds that could help promote social cooperatives such
as JEREMIE (Joint European Resources for Micro to Medium Enterprises) fund through which
24

25. the warranty fund of 20 million euros was created. Though this fund, each social cooperative or
work cooperative inserting at least 30% disadvantaged workers could receive 4.000 euros for
each member (up to 50, no tax, for 60 months), in this way increasing the capital and being able
to receive bank loans (Finlombarda, 2011, 97-98).
In conclusion, Lombardia represents a model of good practice concerning the public-
private partnership, the involvement of the regional authorities and the interpretation of the
national law. However, the results of the new relations between the two sectors have been
discussed by scholars from many points of view, from geographical differences, to diverse
interpretation of the levels, difficulty to adapt and a certain informal persistence of the “lowest-
price” criteria - though Dpcm 30 March 2001 (following the EC regulations in the field)
regulates as adjudication criteria of the externalization of the social services to the third sector
organization the most economically advantageous offer (art. 4), in practice, the social servants
are tempted to use the more objective criterion of the lowest price offer-. Besides, the general
belief that the consulting and the co-planning sessions do not work (IRS data apud Fazzi and
Longhi, 2009, 136), or that the book of services is still unknown in practice generated serious
doubts regarding the efficiency of law 328. The way the regions dealt with these criticism varied,
some regions proved to be very innovative (eg. Lombardia), while others lacked the ability to
handle the relations with the third sector in a coherent manner, according to the law. Where the
contracting-out functioned, new problems raised, evaluating the state as the main source of
financing of these organizations (especially type a social cooperatives) that could disappear as
soon as crisis erupts. Thus, new solutions start to appear, both from the third sector, looking
towards the market and rethinking its strategy, but also from the public administration. The latter
tries to “disburden” itself by linking the citizen to the organizations of the third sector directly,
taxing the citizen (eg. for non self-sufficiency), approaching or promoting European alternatives
(EQUAL funds for start-ups – see Friuli) or by creating new instruments of guarantee that can
help the third sector orient towards other economic actors (credit warrant).
25

26. Conclusions
As we noticed along the chapters, the public-private partnership and the externalization of social
services in Italy have their roots in the evolution of the welfare system and its limits. Failing to
respond to the increasing needs of socio-sanitary, assistential and educational services, the only
actor willing to involve in an activity whose economic efficiency was negative was the third
sector.
Though initially the promoters were mostly the ecclesiastic charities, the expansion of
non-profit associations and cooperatives and the institutionalization of their relation with the
public bodies in the attempt to satisfy the social demand made the third sector play a central role
in the production and “commercialization” of welfare in the contemporary society (Carbone and
Kazepov, 2007, 98). Later, the inclusion of the third sector in the welfare mix was tied to the
subsidiarity principle, a considerable part of its financing coming from the state. Consequently,
the discovery of the third sector as a main actor of the welfare system coincided with the welfare
state crisis from the mid „70s and with the heavy critics of the pervasive dominance of the state
in the private life. This way, the third sector changed its position from a complementary of the
state in some areas, to an active subject of the public policy in a pluralistic, interdependent
approach (Ranci, 2005 apud Carbone and Kazepov, 2007, 99). Finally, once these organizations
were part of the system, new challenges arose. The trajectory of the third sector is in a
continuous movement and change, struggling to define and achieve efficiency from both a social,
but also economic standpoint. Nevertheless, its path will always be tied to the one of the welfare
system in which it develops, to the demographic and social evolution and to the globalization.
My final remark regards the challenge that the Italian third sector is now facing, the
diminishing of public funds for social services and the new orientation towards the market, the
private for-profit actors and the new trade-offs implied in these partnerships. The entire history
of these organizations is strongly connected to the chase for recognition from the state, seen as
the main actor and the only responsible (though inefficient) for provision of social services and
indirectly, for their growth. However, too few has been asked about the effects of this chase, of
26

27. their ulterior dependency on the Italian state and its effects, of their loss of autonomy and even
transformation into para-public organizations. Born as communitary, bottom-up initiatives based
on values such as voluntarism, democracy, solidarity, quality, some of these organizations face
serious problems in maintaining these features and values. I believe the current socio-economic
situation is changing the common idea of the state as the only responsible of the provision of
social services and with this, the third sector organizations should consider new ways of reaching
their target groups, involving and returning to the families and communities and establishing
other expectations and procurement rules.
Bibliography
Accorinti, Marco. (2011). “Terzo settore: dall'integrazione alla sostituzione del pubblico?” in
Rivista delle Politiche Sociali, numero 2, 2011, pp. 299-308
Avincola, Massimo, Di Diego, Sebastiano, Gentili, Giorgio and Turina, Sandra. (2009). “Le
società di mutuo soccorso. Aspetti giuridici, fiscali e contabili” in Cooperative e Consorzi.
Supplemento al numero 11.
Bombardelli, Marco. (2009). “Dal <contracting out> alle forme di amministrazione condivisa” in
C. Borzaga and F. Zandonai. (2009). L'impresa sociale in Italia. Donzelli Editore, Roma.
Borzaga, Carlo and Fazzi, Luca. (2004). “Il ruolo del terzo settore”, in C. Gori (a cura di).
(2004). La riforma dei servizi sociali in Italia: l'attuazione della legge 328 e le sfide future.
Carocci, Roma. pp. 128-139.
Borzaga, Carlo and Fazzi, Luca. (2005). Manuale di politica sociale. Milano. FrancoAngeli
Borzaga, Carlo and Ianes, Alberto. (2006). L'economia della solidarieta'. Storia e prospettive
della cooperazione sociale. Donzelli Editore, Roma.
27

28. Borzaga, Carlo. (2004). “From suffocation to re-emergence: the evolution of the Italian third
sector” in Evers, Adalbert and Laville, Jean-Luis. (2004). The third sector in Europe. UK,
Chealthenham, US, Northampton.
Borzaga, Carlo and Zandonai, Flaviano. (2009). L'impresa sociale in Italia. Donzelli Editore,
Roma.
Carbone, Domenico and Kazepov, Yuri. (2007). Che cos'e il welfare state. Carocci editore.
Direzione Generale Industria, Piccola e Media Impresa e Cooperazione (DGIPMIC), Regione
Lombardia. (2008). 6° Rapporto sulle cooperative sociali in Lombardia. Vignate (MI), Machi
Graf s.r.l.
Fazzi, Luca and Longhi, Sara. (2009). Lo sviluppo dell'impresa sociale nel settore dei servizi
sociali in C. Borzaga and F. Zandonai. (2009). L'impresa sociale in Italia. Donzelli Editore,
Roma.
Fici, Antonio and Strano, Chiara. (2010) “Italy” in Study on the implementation of the
Regulation 1435/2003 on the Statute for European Cooperative Society (SCE). Report drawn up
following call for tender no. ENTR/2009/021 of 23 April 2009 from the European Commission.
Contract No SI2.ACPROCE029211200 of 8 October 2009. Contractors: Cooperatives Europe,
EURICSE, EKAI Center.
Fici, Antonio. (2009). “Cooperatives and social enterprises: comparative and legal profile” in
Roelants, Bruno (ed.). (2009). Cooperatives and social enterprises. Governance and normative
frameworks. pp.77-101.
Fici, Antonio. (2010). Italian co-operative law reform and co-operative principles. Euricse
Working Papers. N. 002
Finlombarda. (2011). Guida alle agevolazioni gestite da Finlombarda. Milano.
28

29. Legal documents
Codice civile. Con la Costituzione, i trattati U.E. e le principali norme complementari (Adolfo Di
Majo). 2011. Giuffre.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1976/2006 of 20 December 2006 amending Regulations (EC)
No 2204/2002, (EC) No 70/2001 and (EC) No 68/2001 as regards the extension of the periods of
application (Text with EEA relevance). OJ L 368, 23.12.2006.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2204/2002 of 12 December 2002 on the application of
Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid for employment. OJ L 337, 13.12.2002.
Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for
the award of public service contracts. OJ L 209, 24.7.1992.
Decreto Legislativo 24 marzo 2006, n.155. Disciplina dell'impresa sociale, a norma della legge
13 giugno 2005, n. 118. Gazzetta Ufficiale, 27 aprile, n. 97.
Decreto legislativo 4 dicembre 1997, n. 460. Riordino della disciplina tributaria degli enti non
commerciali e delle organizzazioni non lucrative di utilità sociale. Suppl. ordinario alla Gazzetta
Ufficiale, 2 gennaio, nr. 1.
D.P.C.M. 30 marzo 2001 Recante: "Atto di indirizzo e coordinamento sui sistemi di affidamento
servizi alla persona previsti dall‟art. 5 della legge 8 novembre 2000, n. 328". Gazzetta Ufficiale,
14 agosto 2001, n..
D.P.R. 22 dicembre 1986, n. 917. Approvazione del testo unico delle imposte sui redditi.
Articolo 111. Enti di tipo associativo. Suppl. ordinario alla Gazzetta Ufficiale 31 dicembre 1986,
n. 302.
Legge 11 agosto 1991, n. 266. Legge-quadro sul volontariato. Gazzetta Ufficiale, 22 agosto
1986, n. 196.
Legge 26 febbraio 1987, n. 49. Nuova disciplina della cooperazione dell'Italia con i Paesi in via
di sviluppo. Suppl. ordinario alla Gazzetta Ufficiale, 28 febbraio, n. 49.
29

30. Legge 31 gennaio 1992, nr. 59. Nuove norme in materia di società cooperative. Suppl. ordinario
alla Gazzetta Ufficiale, 7 febbraio 1992.
Legge 7 dicembre 2000, n. 383. Disciplina delle associazioni di promozione sociale. Gazzetta
Ufficiale, 27 dicembre, n. 300.
Legge 8 novembre 1991, n. 381. Disciplina delle cooperative sociali. Gazzetta Ufficiale, 3
dicembre, n. 283.
Legge 15 aprile 1886, n. 3818. Costituzione legale delle società di mutuo soccorso. Gazzetta
Ufficiale, 29 aprile 1886, n. 100.
Legge 12 marzo 1999, n. 68. Norme per il diritto al lavoro dei disabili. Supplemento Ordinario n.
57/L alla Gazzetta Ufficiale 23 marzo 1999.
Legge 8 giugno 1990, n. 142. Ordinamento delle autonomie locali. Gazzetta Ufficiale 12 giugno
1990, n. 135.
Senato della Repubblica. (2003). Costituzione della Repubblica Italiana. Entrata in vigore il 1°
gennaio 1948.
30