This paper aims to provide a qualitative country case study of The Netherlands, adopting the macro-institutional social enterprise (MISE) framework as developed by Kerlin (2009, 2013, 2017). The research question is twofold: How does the institutional context shape the social enterprise country model in The Netherlands, and To what extent can the MISE framework be a useful tool in explaining this dynamic between the institutional context and social enterprise country model?,This research applies the MISE framework developed by Kerlin (2017), which is founded upon the historical institutionalist approach.,The analysis of the institutional context in The Netherlands shows that the country context shares most traits with the autonomous diverse model. Its institutional environment should however be more enabling for the development of social enterprises. This discrepancy is explained through the notion of political will, resulting in the suggestion that the historical institutionalist approach of the MISE framework could be expanded by a greater focus on political will.,To investigate the Dutch social enterprise country model, this paper principally relies on external sources, including surveys (McKinsey, 2016; PwC, 2016; Social Enterprise NL, 2015; 2016; 2018). This is problematic due to its subjective nature, small population size used and potential conceptual misfit with the definitions used in this research.,For academia, this paper enhances the understanding of the relations between the institutional environment and social enterprise by adding a case study of The Netherlands to the body of research around the MISE framework. Furthermore, the paper suggests to enhance the historical institutionalist approach of the MISE framework with a greater focus on political will. For advocates of social enterprises in The Netherlands, including policymakers, this paper may add to their understanding of the current developments around social enterprise in The Netherlands and possibly enhance their effectiveness of advocating for policies that are conducive to the development of social enterprises.,This research is the first in applying a universally applicable theoretical framework to the context of The Netherlands. For scholars of social enterprise in The Netherlands, it provides a comprehensive overview of developments of social enterprise in the country over recent years, as well as a thorough analysis of the current state of affairs. For international scholars of social enterprise, this research provides a case of comparison with other countries, taking into account all main institutions that shape a country and social enterprise in that country. For scholars of the MISE framework, this research offers an additional country case study that further helps improve the framework.

中文翻译：

---

了解荷兰的社会企业

本文旨在通过采用Kerlin（2009、2013、2017）制定的宏观制度社会企业（MISE）框架，对荷兰进行定性的国家案例研究。研究问题是双重的：制度背景如何在荷兰塑造社会企业国家模型，MISE框架在多大程度上可以用来解释制度背景与社会企业国家模型之间的这种动态关系？运用了Kerlin（2017）开发的MISE框架，该框架建立在历史制度主义方法的基础上。荷兰的制度背景分析表明，国家背景与自主多样性模型具有大多数特征。但是，其体制环境应更有利于社会企业的发展。这种差异是通过政治意愿的概念来解释的，因此建议可以通过更多地关注政治意愿来扩展MISE框架的历史制度主义方法。为了研究荷兰的社会企业国家模型，本文主要基于外部资源，包括调查（麦肯锡，2016年;普华永道，2016年;社会企业NL，2015年; 2016年; 2018年）。由于其主观性质，使用的人口规模小以及可能与本研究中使用的定义在概念上不匹配，因此这是有问题的。对于学术界，本文通过围绕MISE框架将荷兰的案例研究添加到研究机构中，从而增强了对制度环境与社会企业之间关系的理解。此外，本文还建议加强MISE框架的历史制度主义方法，而应更多地关注政治意愿。对于包括决策者在内的荷兰社会企业的倡导者，本文可能会加深他们对荷兰社会企业当前发展的了解，并有可能提高他们倡导有利于社会企业发展的政策的有效性。研究是在荷兰范围内应用普遍适用的理论框架的第一项研究。对于荷兰的社会企业学者，它提供了该国近年来社会企业发展的全面概述，并全面分析了当前的状况。对于社会企业的国际学者来说，本研究提供了一个与其他国家进行比较的案例，其中考虑了构成一个国家的所有主要机构和该国的社会企业。对于MISE框架的学者来说，这项研究提供了其他国家案例研究，可以进一步帮助改进框架。考虑到构成一个国家的所有主要机构和该国的社会企业。对于MISE框架的学者来说，这项研究提供了其他国家案例研究，可以进一步帮助改进框架。考虑到构成一个国家的所有主要机构和该国的社会企业。对于MISE框架的学者来说，这项研究提供了其他国家案例研究，可以进一步帮助改进框架。