by Piergaetano Marchetti from Corriere.it
I do not intend to deal with social enterprises, alternative business activities to typical capitalist enterprises. I would like to focus precisely on large and medium-sized capitalist enterprises, on companies, listed and unlisted, of significant size to point out that good news comes from here too: good news in the sense of greater space and attention to the profiles of sustainability, social responsibility, but also in the sense of greater space for donations to charitable or non-profit activities.
This turning point is based on legislative innovations, but, and this is an interesting point, the “culture”, the preferences of institutional investors themselves (mutual funds, pension funds, financial institutions in general) appear increasingly oriented towards giving importance to sustainability and social responsibility for one’s investment choices. Until a few years ago all this was unthinkable. The objective of sustainable development from a political issue that engages states and international organizations also becomes a rule of “good governance” for the company.
But let’s see what the legislative bases of this process are, having regard to Italy which, moreover, aligns itself with trends that are widespread in all economically advanced countries. First of all, it is worth remembering the Community Directive 95/2014, implemented into Italian legislation with the Legislative Decree of 30 December 2016, on non-financial information. Listed companies, banks and insurance companies must include a report in the financial statements which must inform on how the company operates with regard to environmental, social and personnel-related issues relating to respect for human rights and the fight against active and passive corruption. If an obligation to report on these issues is imposed, it means, we observe, that the objectives underlying these issues are purposes that the large company must reconcile with the pursuit of profit. Some legislation, such as the English one, expressly states this principle. Secondly, it should be remembered the appearance in our system (also in the wake of foreign experiences) of benefit companies.
The 2016 stability law in fact contains some provisions dedicated to regulating and encouraging the establishment and diffusion of companies which «in the exercise of an economic activity, in addition to the aim of dividing profits, pursue one or more purposes of common benefit and operate in responsible, sustainable and transparent manner towards people, communities, territories and the environment, cultural assets and activities, bodies and associations and other stakeholders”. In these companies (there are already more than two hundred of them) profit is not eliminated, but it is not the only and perhaps not even the prevailing objective. The applications of this institute are still in their infancy, but if there is good will the prospects are interesting. Of course, we need to be careful about the “exploitation and disguise” of the classic ruthlessly lucrative purposes. However, it is by no means certain that this is the fate of benefit companies. Social monitoring of their activity is, to this end, essential. Thirdly and finally, the regulation of the Third Sector, about which there is much discussion. The most interesting aspect of the reform from the perspective under examination is the fact that business organisation, even large businesses, can be aimed at profit, without however distributing the profit. The profit must be used to self-finance activities that have characteristics of general utility or also used for charitable purposes.
The non-profit enterprise is no longer, as was believed for many years, a “poor but beautiful” enterprise. Today it can be a company that produces wealth used to develop research, to create new services or products of general utility. The discussion on this rapprochement between the non-profit world and the traditional world of capitalist businesses could continue on various levels. And so we can recall the numerous companies that create or support foundations with “altruistic” purposes, as well as the case of entrepreneurs who prefer to leave their business to trusts or foundations with the burden of allocating part of the profits to altruistic activities. A story, I repeat, at the beginning, to be explored, but also to be monitored as a possible and desirable source of good news.
