Measuring the Practices of Community and Social-Based Enterprise in Setiu Wetland

Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques

2019, Volume 7, Issue 4, Pages: 747-753

J. Environ. Treat. Tech.

ISSN: 2309-1185

Journal web link: http://www.jett.dormaj.com

Measuring the Practices of Community and Social-

Based Enterprise in Setiu Wetland

Nur Azura Sanusi , Noor Hayati Akma Shafiee, Noor Haslina Mohamad Akhir

School of Social and Economic Development, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, 21030 Kuala Nerus, Terengganu, Malaysia

Received: 27/07/2019

Accepted: 29/08/2019

Published: 03/09/2019

Abstract

This study is in line with the strategies identified in the Eleventh Malaysia Plan which targeting to raise the income and wealth of the

below 40 percent household income group (B40) by developing community and social-based enterprises. Consistent with the strategies,

the Eleventh Malaysia Plan also emphasis on the innovation aspect in expanding Malaysian economy towards a high income nation. In

order to investigate the contributions of innovations to the community and social-based enterprise, this study aims to modeling the social

innovation framework in the community and social-based enterprises. The census involves 84 enterprises in Setiu Wetlands area. However,

after the screening proses, only 45 enterprises fulfill the characteristics of community and social-based enterprise. Our finding shows the

similarity of social innovation and social enterprise as a means of easing social issues are through the fulfilment of the social needs,

engaging in a process of continuous innovation and creating the social values.

Keywords: B40; Social innovation; Social enterprise

form emerges as a counter-action against or an alternative

Introduction

approach of the lack successful paternalistic approach, which is

often implemented to handle communal problems, such as

environmental and poverty problems, in developing countries.

Zografos stated that social enterprises are businesses with

primarily social objectives wider than employment provision

and contribution to public revenue through tax that reinvest their

surplus of their operations in the business or in the community

rather than seeking to maximise profit for shareholders and

owners (27).

Furthermore, this study will focus on the Community and

Social-based Enterprise to empower the B40 in the case of East

Coast Malaysia, the total of Community and Social-based

Enterprise is less than 100 enterprises. Therefore, the aims of

this paper is to identify the level and practice of Community and

Social-based Enterprise in Setiu Wetlands due to the

environmental friendly.

The classification of the Malaysian income group is based

totally on the household income. Therefore, the classification of

the below 40% (B40) group is based on the income below RM

900. The latest report by Khazanah Research Institute, the gap

of income between the top 20% (T20) income group and B40

become wider over time. In 1970, the real mean household

income of B40 was RM 76 compared to the real mean household

income of T20 was RM 735. In 2014 the gap become wider with

the real mean household income of B40 at RM 2,537 and the

real mean household income of T20 at RM 14,305. In 2016, the

real mean household income of B40 was RM 2,848 and for T20

was RM 16,088 (10).

Therefore at the micro level, the national agenda focusing

on the B40 especially in the 11th Malaysian Plan that have been

translated in Budget 2018 and Budget 2019. During the 11th of

Malaysian Plan, government’s focus was given to lifting the

economic opportunities and participation of B40 households to

ensure that Malaysia’s prosperity can be shared by all

Malaysians, regardless of gender, ethnicity, socio-economic

status, and geographic location. There are 2.7 million of bottom

2 Current Status of Social Enterprise in Malaysia

According to Cheah, Amran and Yahya stated that “the

development of social entrepreneurship in Southeast Asian

countries like Malaysia and Singapore is still in its infancy. Most

of them face critical survival and performance challenges:

specifically financial sustainability issues (5). For instance,

more than half (55%) of Malaysian social enterprises are still

unable to break even, even after years of operation. The top

priorities of Singaporean social enterprises are to improve

their financial sustainability (64%) and sourcing for funding

(44%) (raiSE, 2017). On this note, the main contention of this

article is to be the first empirical quantitative study, to

investigate the internal resources that could enhance the

efficiencies and sustainability of social enterprises in emerging

contexts, such as Malaysia and Singapore”.

0% household income group (B40 households) with a mean

monthly income of RM2,537. To ensure that all Malaysians are

able to participate in and benefit from this plan, the government

has constructed the programme to raise the income and

wellbeing of the B40 households (13).

One of the government’s plan to uplifting B40 households

towards to a middle-class society by fostering community and

social-based enterprise in B40 community. According to

Soviana , community-based enterprise has similar vibes with

community cooperative, for example, concentrating on citizen

participation and aiming to provide benefits not only for

members but also for local people in a broader sense (21). This

Corresponding author: Nur Azura Sanusi, School of Social and Economic Development, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, 21030 Kuala

Nerus, Terengganu, Malaysia; Email: nurazura@umt.edu.my.

747

Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques

2019, Volume 7, Issue 4, Pages: 747-753

While Zainon et al. explained that the term social

entrepreneurship in Malaysia was still new in the eighties,

nineties and newly branded in the twenty-first century (25).

This term has been widely used in Malaysia recently to

explain the effort of government agencies to change the

economic status of the poor community. The primary purpose of

establishing social entrepreneurship programmes in Malaysia is

to help the government to eradicate hard-core poverty as

targeted in the New Economic Model (NEM). However, there is

no source of information on the full statistics of the social

enterprises in Malaysia. Many still do not understand the

concept of social enterprise until they get themselves involved

with some kind of projects or business to help the poor or the

underprivileged. Malaysia is beginning to see the rise of social

entrepreneurs. Social Enterprise Alliance is a good example of

collaborative network connecting empowered entrepreneurs to

support one another in Malaysia and now expanding their

network to other countries in the Southeast Asian region (16).

Furthermore, Nizam, Bidin and Murshamshul informed that

it can be said concept of social entrepreneurship in Malaysia is

still new and exists in many forms and governed by various legal

frameworks (14). They agreed with Kelly (2009) suggested that

social entrepreneurs need an appropriate business entity and

legal framework to promote their development and

sustainability. Overall, it can be concluded that the social

enterprise in Malaysia is newly growing and need to be studied

more in the future.

generate £18 billion in annual turnover and employ 775,000

people.

Sakarya, Bodur, Yildirim-Öktem and Selekler-Göksen

stated social enterprise in their study are not-for-profit

organizations driven by social mission. They use their resources

to pursue opportunities to catalyse social change and/or address

social needs (19). They have been an expression of the civil

sector's response to local and global challenges and have the

potential of engaging businesses and governments to drive social

change.

According to sociology theory, people are driven by their

natural instincts to engage with others, starting at the individual

and family levels (9), then moving on to connect with various

communities beyond the familial relationship. At the social

level, people are parts of various communities, whether related

to brands (e.g. BMW car club) or not (e.g. work, sports, music),

because of their human need to belong. Members join a group if

it reflects who they are, what they believe, or their likes and

dislikes, as might be manifested in a brand and the related brand

community (2,11,22). Then they combine these groups into

networks of communities, or what we call their social

environment.

While, social environment refers to the social relationships

in which individuals are embedded (3). It is important to study

social relationships in organizational contexts because

employees might exert pressure on co-workers’ behaviour, and

employees might also be influenced by pressure from other

employees. The concept of social environment fundamentally

differs to that of organizational culture because the latter refers

to formal patterns of behaviour that are dictated by the

organization that guides employees’ attitudes, while the former

refers to how employees perceive their relationships with other

employees.

Social environments or informal interpersonal networks

play a critical role in the knowledge transfer process (17). In

particular, the strength of interactions between organizational

members is expected to influence knowledge-sharing behaviour.

The strength of the social network can be measured by

determining strong ties and weak ties. According to (12), strong

ties have affective and friendly characteristics. They are also

frequent and may include reciprocal favours. On the other hand,

weak ties are less frequent and are not necessarily affective.

Literature Review

Nowadays, social enterprise has been more acknowledge

and growing in order to strive economic growth. Based on Gray,

Healy and Crofts stated that social enterprise refers to activities

undertaken in the public interest using entrepreneurial strategies.

It embraces the idea that business acumen can be applied to

community causes to achieve a transfer of economic and social

resources to disadvantaged groups and individuals 98).

According to Zappala, ‘Social enterprise is a means for non-

profit agencies to maximise their mission-related performance

through the development of new ventures or by reorganising

activities to improve operational efficiency’ (26). It refers to a

broad range of activities, including community economic

development, profit generating activities undertaken by non-

profits to support service initiatives, cross-sectoral partnerships

and private sector social responsibility programs.

4 Methodology

Furthermore, Cornelius, Todres, Janjuha-Jivraj, Woods and

Wallace stated that a social enterprise is a business with

primarily social objectives whose surpluses are principally

reinvested for that purpose in the business or in the community,

rather than being driven by the need to maximize profit for

shareholders and owners (6). Therefore, social ends and profit

motives do not contradict each other, but rather have

complementary outcomes, and constitute a ‘double bottom line’.

This implies that effective financial management for social

purposes is a key feature of sustainability (i.e. the financial

stability of an organisation to trade over the long term).

Although a policy based definition, it is consistent with more

academic definitions of social enterprise (see for example, (1,4).

Underpinning this argument is the notion of the double bottom

line (of economic and social accountability) and increasingly,

the ‘triple bottom line’ (environmental accountability also).

Thus, the latter term encapsulates how socially responsible

companies aim not only to generate profits and social benefits,

but also positive environmental outcomes. Their study has found

that social enterprises prevail throughout Europe, and are most

notable in the form of social cooperatives, particularly in Italy,

Spain and Corporate Social Responsibility and Social Enterprise

This study involves 6 residences which are Chalok I, Chalok

II, Guntong, Merang, Pantai and Tasek in Setiu Wetlands area.

There are 45 enterprises that were chosen out of 84 enterprises.

A structured interview technique and face-to-face interviews

using a questionnaire were conducted to identify the enterprise

which is fulfil the characteristics of community and social-based

enterprise. The data was analysed using the Statistical Package

for the Social Sciences (SPSS). The type of questionnaire is

structured and open-ended. The questionnaire are divided into 4

sections. Section 1 to evaluate the status-quo of the types and the

characteristics of social enterprise. Section 2 focus on the

information of enterprise and respondent. While the questions

have asked in section 3 are social entrepreneurship practice and

the obstacles and incentives in practising social enterprise.

Lastly, business model, promotion and marketing, financial

capacity, company’s readiness and business opportunity are

discussed in section 4.

Results and Findings

.1 Demographic Analysis

Overall, there are 45 enterprises have been interviewed for

this study. From this total, there are 25 respondents (55.6%) are

male and 20 respondents (44.4%) are female (Table 1).

57 increasingly France. Front line social enterprises in the U.K.

748

Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques

2019, Volume 7, Issue 4, Pages: 747-753

provide skill courses to workers. However, most of respondents

were did not provide other social enterprise services such as

accommodation facilities, counselling services and subsidies

from government.

Meanwhile, for Community-based Social Enterprise

(CBSE) concept, 88.9 percent of respondents did not offer social

services to communities such as health examinations and

environmental awareness. There are only 11.1 percent of

respondents provide those services to their employees in Setiu

Wetlands area. The Table 4 showed the types of enterprise were

operated by the respondents such as housing developers

Table 1: Gender of Respondents

Frequency Percentage (%)

25 55.6

Gender

Male

Female

Total

44.4

100

Based on Table 2, most of the respondents have SPM/SPTM

education level which are 37.8 percent, followed by degree level

31.1%), PMR level (13.3%), diploma and certificate (6.7%).

(

26.7%), foods (8.9%), handicraft (2.2%), services (28.9%),

While for master level and primary school are 2.2 percent.

retailing (28.9%) and tourism (4.4%). Soviana stated that social

enterprise is regarded as something distinct from traditional

business and non-profit activities, where it combines social

purpose, market orientation, and business’ financial-

performance standard. The emergence of social enterprise can

be traced back from two trends (21). The first trend considers

social enterprise as a rediscovery of non-profit organization-

creating a different way of doing business and paving its way to

the social enterprise’s conceptualization by excerpting

innovative component of cooperative movement.

Community economic development and related activities,

such as microenterprise development, are well established

strategies for achieving social and economic development in

impoverished communities. Examples of initiatives of this type

include microcredit schemes, local employment cooperatives,

city farms, community cafes, restaurants and laundromats.

Despite minimal profits, these initiatives offer increased access

to material and social resources for individuals and communities

(8).

Table 2. Education Level of Respondents

Education

Master

Frequency

Percentage (%)

2.2

Degree

31.1

Diploma

6.7

Certificate

SPM/STPM

PMR/SRP

Primary School

Total

6.7

37.8

13.3

2.2

100

Table 3 showed the types of social enterprises have been

operated in Setiu Wetlands area. For Work Integration Social

Enterprise (WISE) concept, 86.7 percent of the 45 respondents

stated that they provide jobs to B40 community who did not get

a job. Furthermore, 55.6 percent of respondents said that they

Table 3: Types of Social Enterprise

Yes Percentage (%) No

Percentage

Items

Total

(

Provide jobs to B40 community who did 39

not get a job.

86.7

13.3

Work

Integration

Social

Enterprise

Provide accommodation to workers.

Provide skill courses to workers.

Provide counselling services to workers.

Get a government subsidy.

11.1

55.6

20.0

11.1

88.9

44.4

80.0

88.9

Community-

Offer social services to communities

such as: health examinations and

environmental awareness

based

Social

Enterprise

(CBSE)

Table 4: Types of Social Enterprise

Types of Enterprise

Housing developers

Foods

Frequency

Percentage (%)

26.7

8.9

2.2

Handicraft

Services

28.9

Retailing

Tourism

4.4

Total

100

749

Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques

2019, Volume 7, Issue 4, Pages: 747-753

Table 5: Social Entrepreneurship Practice

Choice 1

Item

Choice 2

Choice 3

Frequency

Percentage (%)

Frequency

Percentage (%)

Frequency Percentage (%)

Social value

Economic value

Environmental value

Missing

73.3

22.2

4.4

57.8

8.9

33.3

100.0

91.1

100.0

Total

100.0

Table 6: Increase of Product Selling Through the Usage of ‘Social Enterprise’ Label

Usage of Social Enterprise’s Label

Frequency

Percentage (%)

Yes, in the international level

20.0

60.0

8.9

Yes, in the national level

Do not know

Total

11.1

100

.2 Descriptive Analysis

The descriptive analysis has been conducted to identify the

In addition, resistance from competitors (8.9%), lack of skill and

efficiency (8.9%), did not know (2.2%) and less funds (15.6%)

and lack of support (6.7%) are other forms of barriers faced by

them. While 11.1 percent stated that they have no obstacles in

running their businesses.

community and social-based enterprise in Setiu Wetlands area.

Based on Table 5, the results of the study have found that 73.3

percentage stated that social entrepreneurship practices need to

emphasize social values in their companies. While 22.2

percentage and 4.4 percentage stated that economic value and

environmental value also need to be practise in the social

entrepreneurship. According to Rymsza (18), community-

based social enterprises (CBSEs) generate positive effects not

only for the workers they employ (in the form of social

inclusion), but also for numerous stakeholders outside the

enterprise: A community-based social enterprise is an enterprise

that in the economic sphere (1) capitalizes on local resources

5.3 Crosstab Analysis

The study has conducted the crosstab analysis to identify the

level of community and social-based enterprises in Setiu

Wetlands area. The results of the analysis are as follows.

5.3.1 The relationship of social entrepreneurship practice and

level of product selling

Based on the Table 8, the results of crosstab analysis found

that social entrepreneurship practice is significant with the usage

of ‘social enterprise’ label can increase the products selling. The

chi-square analysis (27.28) successfully rejected the null

hypothesis at one percent significance level (p-value: 0.000).

Based on Thompson and Doherty, social enterprises are defined

simply as are organisations seeking business solutions to social

problems (23). They need to be distinguished from other

socially-oriented organisation and initiatives that bring benefits

to communities but which are not wanting or seeking to be

“businesses”. The characteristics for a social enterprise are have

a social purpose, assets and wealth are used to create community

benefit, they pursue this with (at least in part) trade in a market

place, profits and surpluses are not distributed to shareholders,

as is the case with a profit-seeking business, “Members” or

employees have some role in decision making and/or

governance, “members” or employees have some role in

decision making and/or governance and the enterprise is seen as

accountable to both its members and a wider community. Lastly,

there is either a double- or triple-bottom line paradigm.

(

human, natural, cultural, etc.) and (2) stimulates the local

economic exchange, while in the social sphere (3) it is tied into

the local social networks, (4) is involved in the matters relevant

to the community, and (5) is considered by the community to be

‘

their own’. In other words, the success of a community-based

social enterprise is beneficial to the community in which it

operates, and the community recognizes and appreciates this

fact. This, in turn, gives the enterprise a strong hold on the local

market. However, there are 60 percent of respondents stated that

the usage of ‘social enterprise’ label can increase the selling of

their products in the national level and 20 percent expressed that

it can help their selling’s products in the international level.

Conversely, 11.1 percent of respondents did not know the usage

of label can help their products’ selling and 8.9 percent were

excluded due to the nature of their business did not related to the

question measurement (e,g construction) (Table 6). Like other

business enterprises, social enterprises also have their own

barriers and challenges. From Table 7, a total of 46.7 percent

stated that less awareness of social impact was a major obstacle

factor in promoting innovative social enterprises in Terengganu.

Table 7: Barriers in Developing Innovative Social Enterprise in Terengganu

Type of Barriers

Frequency

Percentage (%)

Less awareness of social impact

Resistance from business competitors

Less skill and efficiency

Do not know

46.7

8.9

2.2

Insufficient fund

Lack of supportive atmosphere

No barrier

15.6

6.7

11.1

Total

100

750

Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques

2019, Volume 7, Issue 4, Pages: 747-753

Table 8: The relationship of social entrepreneurship practice and level of product selling

Do you think the usage of ‘social enterprise’ label can increase the

Total

products selling

Yes, in the

international level

Yes, in the national

Do not know

level

In your view, social

entrepreneurship practice

should be produced from

decisions (Choice 1)

Social value

Economic value

Environmental value

Total

Chi-Square Tests

Value

25.279

26.352

17.966

Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square

Likelihood Ratio

Linear-by-Linear Association

N of Valid Cases

.000

a. 9 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .18.

Table 9: The relationship of social enterprise incentives and the risks to fulfil the needs of the B40 group

Is a Social Enterprise Conducted By Your

Total

Organization is Risking For Failure To Meet

the Needs of the B40 Group?

Yes

Establishing a Clear Description of Social

Enterprise Sector

Building Capacity in National And

Regional Administration To Promote

Social Entrepreneurship

Developing an Integrated Strategy and

Action Plan to Support Social Enterprises,

Mainly Through Funds

What Types of

Incentives Need To

Improve Social

Enterprise Sector?

Establishing a Platform and Network for

Social Investors and Entrepreneurs to

Share Good Practices

Total

Chi-Square Tests

Nilai

1.642^a

2.527

.034

Asymp. Sig. (2-Sided)

Pearson Chi-Square

Likelihood Ratio

Linear-By-Linear Association

N of Valid Cases

.650

.470

.853

A. 6 Cells (75.0%) Have Expected Count Less Than 5. The Minimum Expected Count Is .48.

The assumption is that the most effective social enterprises

demonstrate healthy financial and social returns – rather than

high returns in one and lower returns in the other.

analysis (9.65) successfully rejected the null hypothesis at 1

percent significance level.

Diversity in commons institutions seems to be related to the

diversity in forms or ownership, organization and operation of

social enterprises. Rather than following the prescriptions of

conventional top-down management, local managers need to be

encouraged to generate a diversity of experiments (15).

Nurturing social and institutional memory requires the creation

of flexible multi-level governance systems that can learn from

experience (adaptive management), and generate knowledge to

cope with change by combining different kinds of knowledge

(7,20). By emphasizing uncertainty and constant change, and by

looking at change as opportunity, resilience thinking challenges

the widely held notions about stability and resistance to change.

In conclusion, community-based focus and social enterprises are

perhaps paradoxically, key to the survival of rural economies

even in a world in which enterprises are increasingly driven by

global forces. Rural communities are vulnerable to pressures and

.3.2 The relationship of social enterprise incentives and the

risks to fulfil the needs of the B40 group

The crosstab analysis found that the encouragement of social

enterprise has no relationship with the risks to meet the needs of

the B40 group. The chi-square analysis (1.64) is failed to reject

the null hypothesis (Table 9).

.3.3 The relationship between challenges of new staff

recruitment and ineffective management of social enterprise

organizations

According to Table 10, the results of crosstab analysis found

that the challenges in hiring new staff has a relationship with the

inefficiency of the management of organization. The chi-square

751

Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques

2019, Volume 7, Issue 4, Pages: 747-753

incentives that originate at higher levels of political and

economic organization. This vulnerability can be reduced by

keeping a community focus, with attention to complex systems

phenomena such as scale, self-organization, linkages and

drivers. In cross-scale commons management, dealing with the

two fundamental problems of commons, exclusion (control of

access of potential users) and subtractability (exploitation by

each user reducing resource availability for others), also requires

an understanding of complex systems.

philanthropic and government resources. Furthermore,

Thompson and Doherty stated that entrepreneurship is a way of

thinking and behaving that has opportunity as its heart.

Entrepreneurs recognise, create, engage and exploit

opportunities (23). Creativity and innovation are fundamental.

Entrepreneurs know how and know where to secure the

resources they will need, and they frequently accomplish this

with effective networking. Risks have to be understood and/or

managed – and inevitable setbacks have to be overcome. The

outcome is new value for customers and clients – whether it be

financial, social, aesthetic or environmental capital, or a

combination of more than one. In this respect social “capital” is

defined as something of perceived benefit to individuals and

communities, which others might term “social value”. Given

this, the value of social networks – sometimes itself a definition

of social capital – might be termed human capital.

.3.4 The relationship between capital source and the

percentages profit of social enterprise organizations

The results of crosstab has identified that the source of capital

financing to run a social enterprise is related to the percentage

of profits earned by the social enterprise organization. The value

of chi-square analysis (15.11) successfully rejected the null

hypothesis at 1 percent significance level (Table 11). According

to Young and Kim stated that market survival of a social

enterprise is often a puzzle requiring that all the pieces of income

support, monetary or in-kind, fit together so that as a whole the

enterprise remains viable (24). The financial incentives

surrounding a given venture or form of enterprise seem likely to

be an important determinant of social enterprise stability. To a

certain extent, this factor can be controlled through the choice of

legal form and the design of public policies that influence the

nature of external resources available for venture sustainability

and growth, or which affect competition for scarce market,

Conclusion

Overall, the implementation and socialization of social

enterprises in Setiu Wetlands is still new and has not been

implemented extensively and comprehensively. Out of the total,

only 11 percent provide social services to communities such as

health checks and environmental awareness. In fact, most

respondents stated that there were obstacles in their efforts to

develop innovative social enterprises in Terengganu.

Table 10: The relationship between challenges of new staff recruitment and ineffective management of social enterprise organizations

Are there any inefficiencies in management within the

organization while managing this social enterprise?

Total

Yes

Is your organization experiencing challenges in hiring

new highly skilled staff in managing social enterprises?

Yes

Total

Chi-Square Tests

Value

Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Exact Sig. (2-sided) Exact Sig. (1-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square

Continuity Correction

Likelihood Ratio

9.652

7.523

9.229

.002

.006

.002

Fisher's Exact Test

.004

Linear-by-Linear Association

N of Valid Cases

9.438

.002

a. 1 cells (25.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 3.73.

b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

Table 11: The relationship between capital source and the percentages profit of social enterprise organizations

What percentage of (%) organizational profits are spent on social services?

Total

Less than 5%

5% - 10%

11% - 15%

16% - 20% More than 20%

Own capital

Others

What is the source of

financing to run a

social enterprise?

Total

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig.

Value

(

2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square

Likelihood Ratio

Linear-by-Linear Association

N of Valid Cases

15.113^a

15.215

7.923

.004

.005

a. 8 cells (80.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .20.

752

Journal of Environmental Treatment Techniques

2019, Volume 7, Issue 4, Pages: 747-753

Especially in terms of awareness of social impacts, as well

as government funds / donations from government or Non-

Government Organizations (NGOs). In addition, the findings of

the study also found that social enterprise practices have had

links to increased sales, improving organizational management

efficiency and the percentage of profits earned by them.

Accordingly, based on the findings of this study, it can be

concluded that social enterprises should be empowered by the

government, the private sector and NGOs to help improve B40's

living standards especially in the rural areas. Next, it will

minimize the income distribution gap and reduce the poverty

burden of the B40s in Malaysia especially in Setiu Wetlands.

Malaysia. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities.

017

http://www.pertanika.upm.edu.my/Pertanika PAPERS/JSSH Vol.

5 (S) Oct. 2017/JSSH(S)-0542-2017.pdf.

5. Ostrom, E. Understanding Institutional Diversity. Motivation and

Emotion. 2005; Vol.5 Retrieved from

http://wtf.tw/ref/ostrom_2005.pdf.

October;

25:

129–134.

Retrieved

from

16. Razavi, S. M., Nasirian, M., & Afkhami, I. The effectiveness sleep

hygiene training on the job performance of employees Shift or

rotating shifts parvadeh tabas coal companies in. UCT Journal of

Management and Accounting Studies. 2015; 3(1): 5-7.

7. Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. Network Structure and Knowledge

Transfer: The Effects of Cohesion and Range. Administrative

Science

Quarterly.

2003;

48(2):

240–267.

https://doi.org/10.2307/3556658.

Acknowledgement

18. Rymsza, M. The role of social enterprises in shaping social bonds.

International Journal of Social Economics. 2015; 42(9): 830–840.

https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSE-03-2015-0059.

This research work is supported by the Niche Research

Grant Scheme (53131) sponsored by Univesiti Malaysia

Terengganu, Terengganu, Malaysia.

9. Sakarya, S., Bodur, M., Yildirim-Öktem, Ö., & Selekler-Göksen, N.

Social alliances: Business and social enterprise collaboration for

social transformation. Journal of Business Research. 2012; 65(12):

710–1720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.02.012.

References

0. Sears, R. R., Padoch, C., & Pinedo-Vasquez, M. Amazon forestry

tranformed: Integrating knowledge for smallholder timber

managemet in eastern Brazil. Human Ecology. 2007; 35(6): 697–

Akkuzova, A., Mankeyev, Z., Akkuzov, A., Kaiyrbekova, U., &

Baiymbetova, R. Some features of the meaning “literary text” in the

pragmalinguistic aspect. Opción. 2018; 34(85-2): 20-34.

07. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-006-9109-y.

Bagozzi, R. P., & Dholakia, U. M. Open Source Software User

Communities: A Study of Participation in Linux User Groups.

1. Soviana, S. Cooperative, Social Enterprise, and Community-Based

Enterprise: Competing, Substituting, or Complementing?

Management and Organizational Studies. 2015; 2(2):

https://doi.org/10.5430/mos.v2n2p1.

2. Suleri, J., & Cavagnaro, E. Promoting pro-environmental printing

behavior: The role of ICT barriers and sustainable values.

International Journal of Education and Development using ICT.

Management

Science.

2006;

52(7): 1099–1115.

https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0545

Boissevain, J. Network Analysisꢀ: A

Anthropology. 1979; 20(2): 392–394.

Reappraisal. Current

Borzaga, C.,

& Defourny, J. CONCLUSIONS: SOCIAL

ENTERPRISES IN EUROPE, A DIVERSITY OF INITIATIVES

AND PROSPECTS. 2001; 350–370. Retrieved from

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.469.831

016; 12(2).

3. Thompson, J.,

Doherty, B. The diverse world of social

enterprise:A collection of social enterprise stories. International

Journal of Social Economics. 2006; 33(5–6): 361–375.

https://doi.org/10.1108/03068290610660643

&rep=rep1&type=pdf.

Cheah, J., Amran, A., & Yahya, S. Internal oriented resources and

social enterprises’ Performance: How can social enterprises help

themselves before helping others? Journal of Cleaner Production.

4. Young, D. R., & Kim, C. Can social enterprises remain sustainable

and mission-focused? Applying resiliency theory. Social Enterprise

Journal. 2015; 11(3): 233–259. https://doi.org/10.1108/SEJ-02-

018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.203

Cornelius, N., Todres, M., Janjuha-Jivraj, S., Woods, A., &

Wallace, J. Corporate Social Responsibility and the Social

Enterprise. Journal of Business Ethics. 2008; 81: 355–370.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9500-7.

015-0005.

5. Zainon, S., Ahmad, S. A., Atan, R., Wah, Y. B., Abu Bakar, Z., &

Sarman, Si. R. Legitimacy and sustainability of social enterprise:

governance and accountability. Procedia - Social and Behavioral

Folke, C., Carpenter, S., Elmqvist, T., Gunderson, L., Holling, C.,

Sciences.

2014;

145:

152–157.

Walker, B. Resilience and Sustainable Development: Building

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.06.022

Adaptive Capacity in a World of Transformations. AMBIO: A

Journal of the Human Environment. 2002; 31(5): 437.

https://doi.org/10.1639/0044-

6. Zappala, G. From" Charity" to" Social Enterprise": Managing

Volunteers in Public-Serving Nonprofits. Australian Journal on

Volunteering.

2001;

6(1):

41–49.

Retrieved

from

447(2002)031[0437:RASDBA]2.0.CO;2.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234715811_From_Charit

y_to_Social_Enterprise_Managing_Volunteers_in_Public-

Serving_Nonprofits.

Gray, M., Healy, K., & Crofts, P. Social enterprise: is it the business

of social work? Australian Social Work. 2003; 56(2): 141–154.

https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0312-407X.2003.00060.x.

Homans, G. C. (1958). Social Behavior as Exchange Author ( s ):

George C . Homans Sourceꢀ: American Journal of Sociology, Vol .

7. Zografos, C. Rurality discourses and the role of the social enterprise

in regenerating rural Scotland. Journal of Rural Studies. 2007;

3(1): 38–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2006.04.002.

3 , No . 6 , Emile Durkheim-Georg Simmel , Published byꢀ: The

University of Chicago Press. American Journal of Sociology. 1958;

3(6): 597–606. Retrieved from

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2772990 REFEREN.

0. Khazanah Research Institute. The State of Households. Khazanah

Research Institute . Retrieved from. 2018.

http://www.krinstitute.org/assets/contentMS/img/template/editor/2

181127_Full Report KRI SOH2018.pdf.

1. Mambile, C., & Machuve, D. Web based Approach to overcome the

Market Information Gap between poultry farmers and potential

buyers in Tanzania. 2018.

2. Nelson, R. E. The Strength of Strong Tiesꢀ: Social Networks and

Intergroup Conflict in Organizations Author ( s ): Reed E . Nelson

Sourceꢀ: The Academy of Management Journal. 1989 Jan; 32(2):

77-401.

3. Niranjan, D. S. W.T.O. AND SUGAR TRADE OF

INDIA. Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews. 2016; 4(1): 41-48.

https://doi.org/10.18510/hssr.2016.415.

4. Nizam, S. M., Bidin, A., & Murshamshul, M. K. Public interest

corporation: A new business platform for social entrepreneurship in

753