The solidarity economy: an alternative development strategy?

Eric Dacheux and Daniel Goujon

Although it no longer seems unanimous,1 the sphere. Similarly, it seems only logical that a plural “Washington Consensus”2 concerns the implemen- world requires a plural economy (Laville and tation of poverty reduction programmes under the Cattani 2005). The important UNESCO text on the aegis of international financial institutions (World preservation of cultural diversity is unlikely to have Bank, International Monetary Fund, etc.). Now much impact if the same utilitarian vision of devel- these development pro- opment is imposed across the grammes are above all aimed board. A more democratic Eric Dacheux is a University Professor in at sustainable growth, which communication sciences, Director of the world entails the democratisa- is the liberal version of the Communications Department (Blaise tion of the economy. These are concept of “sustainable devel- Pascal University, Clermont Fd, France), the two key points of this opment”. But this “pro-poor and Director of the laboratory “communica- article, which takes the form growth” is essentially aimed tion and solidarity” (Clermont University). of three complementary sec- He is the editor of a series of books which at pursuing the globalisation aim to democratise knowledge (les Essen- tions. The first describes of the economy. This is the tiels, d’Hermès, CNRS éditions). His latest the international reality of sort of globalisation that many books include Vivre ensemble aujourd’hui the solidarity economy. The people oppose precisely in the (l’Harmattan, 2010) and Les sciences de second moves into theory and interests of sustainable devel- l’information et de la communication attempts to rise above the dis- (CNRS éditions, 2009). opment and a humanism that Email: [email protected] ciplinary frameworks that regards degrading levels of separate the economic and the poverty as intolerable. “We Daniel Goujon is Senior Lecturer at the Jean political in order to suggest a Monnet university in St Étienne (IUT de can no longer ignore the phe- Roanne) and is part of the research unit new definition of the economy nomenon of economic glo- Image Société Territoire Homme Mémoire which grasps the specificity of balisation . . . Faced with the Environnement (ISTHME – CNRS, UMR the solidarity economy. The deterritorialisation of certain 5600 Environnement Ville Société). His third, pragmatic, section sug- sectors of an economy which latest books include Réconcilier démocratie gests approaches to the crea- et économie (editor Michel Houdiard, 2010) in some cases is losing its and Principes d’économies solidaires tion of an alternative vision of human scale, the solidarity (Ellipses, 2011, in collaboration with E. sustainable development for economy forms part of a Dacheux). both North and South. project: to put the human Email: [email protected] being back at the centre of the economy”. These remarks by The solidarity Luxembourg’s economy minister Jeannot Krecké3 economy: a reality for North indicate that globalisation has yet to extinguish the and South alike utopian dream of a humanist universality. Having conquered the political sphere, democracy needs to In both North and South, populations aspire to be extended to the very heart of the economic participate in their own development, to define for

ISSJ 203–204 © UNESCO 2012. Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DK, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA. 206 Eric Dacheux and Daniel Goujon themselves the economic programmes that are best pants defined economic solidarity as incorporating suited to their needs and the territories they occupy. “cooperation, collective sharing and action, while By making public debate the privileged mode for putting the human being at the centre of economic the economic regulation of a political community, and social development”.4 Another global network the solidarity economy affords the possibility of with the same aims, the Alliance for a Responsible, renewing our approach to sustainable develop- Plural and United World, produced an enhanced ment. This is a humanist economy which, in the definition: “Production, distribution and consump- interests of reconciling money and value, puts its tion activities which contribute to the democratisa- trust in democratic deliberation. It may be a laud- tion of the economy via citizen engagement at able project, but does it work in practice? One local and global level”. Therefore the solidarity emblematic example is that of the Banco Palmas in economy is not some seductive concept that ferti- Conjunto Palmeiras, a favela of Fortaleza, in north- lises conferences attended by researchers looking east Brazil. In order to combat poverty, this co- for something new; it is a label which campaigners operative bank created a local social currency, the for another kind of globalisation utilise in order to Palmas, which helped the inhabitants to take combine initiatives which take different forms in control of their own destiny. Created in 1998, the different countries but have many points in bank operated according to three principles: it was common. What are these points? managed by the community itself; it focused on The solidarity economy does not concern one improving conditions in local favelas; and finally, it sector of activities, but several. Researchers and introduced a currency that, while complementary actors have yet to agree on exactly how many there to the national currency, could only be used locally. are, but there is general agreement on certain The results of this democratic reappropriation of activities such as savings and solidarity financing the currency were conclusive: wooden houses were (solidarity microcredit), fair trade, local exchange gradually replaced by brick-built homes, crime networks, personal services, etc. These initiatives, rates fell, drug trafficking diminished, jobs were which can range from recycling cooperatives to created, and 1,500 young people received voca- internet sites designed to reduce the digital divide, tional training. possess four common elements which were iden- The Banco Palmas is not an isolated example, tified at the second round of “Globalisation of Soli- for the solidarity economy encompasses a wide darity” meetings5 (GESQ 2002): range of microeconomic initiatives such as re- cycling facilities, local trading schemes, collective 1. They link a productive activity to social needs kitchens, organic farmers’ cooperatives, micro- rather than profitability. credit financing, limited liability companies with a 2. They produce goods and services based on the commitment to the fair trade scheme, and organi- participation of women and men. sations with a focus on solidarity tourism. The 3. They build local, national, and international solidarity economy is neither a charitable economy social networks based on consensus and co- designed to repair the damage caused by globali- operation. sation nor an informal economy that encourages 4. They work towards the democratic regulation of the indiscriminate trafficking of all goods and serv- economic activity. ices. It is implemented by civil society in order to maintain the social fabric in a specific territory and According to the authors of the report on this inter- to enhance democracy in all spheres (political, eco- national meeting of solidarity economy entrepre- nomic, and civil) in all countries. The solidarity neurs, these four elements encompass all activities economy is an underestimated international reality that operate according to the following principles: (point one) which takes different forms in different territories (point two). – An indivisible collective property. – The distribution of wealth to meet the needs of The solidarity economy: a poorly people rather than capital. understood international reality – Freedom of association and democratic management. At an initial series of meetings organised in Lima – Autonomous decision-making and management on the initiative of southern countries, the partici- in relation to the State (GESQ 2002, p.8).

© UNESCO 2012. The solidarity economy 207

In other words, the solidarity economy is what which the market economy has been developed. Luxembourg, a member of the international Consequently, the solidarity economy assumes French-speaking community, has described as le forms and names that reflect local conditions. troisième pilier de l’écomomie (“the third pillar of Québec, with its strong tradition of cooperative the economy”). The state represents redistribution; enterprises and union pension fund investment in capitalist enterprises represent the pursuit of community businesses, has adopted the term profits; the solidarity economy represents eco- “social economy”. In Latin America, the critique of nomic activity that is governed by the principle of American imperialism and the profound influence reciprocity and initiated by civil society actors of liberation theology on the popular movements (Dacheux and Laville 2003). generated in civil society explain the frequent ref- All these points in common have been iden- erences to a “popular solidarity economy”. In tified by the actors themselves, but we would like Francophone Africa, the term “social and solidarity to emphasise another shared reality: “transition”. economy” is often employed to describe initiatives In our view, the solidarity economy is a transitional which are in most cases designed to reactivate tra- economy. It concerns practices which, in the vast ditional community values.7 But North and South majority of cases,6 are aimed at developing activi- are not homogeneous realities in cultural or eco- ties that belong to what Fernand Braudel (1980) nomic terms, of course. There are areas of great called the “ground floor economy” in order to: poverty in northern countries and pockets of great prosperity in southern countries. The solidarity 1. Make the transition from an informal frame- economy is, initially, a means of linking people in work to a legal framework by obtaining legal a specific place, given that the nature of the social status (association, cooperative, etc.) for infor- fabric varies according to location: town, rural mal activities. area, sparsely populated zone, overpopulated area, 2. Make the transition from a survival to a subsist- etc. The solidarity economy encourages the devel- ence economy, and eventually to a plural opment of the individual by developing the collec- economy. It is not a matter of assuming that a tivity of which he is part. Not only will a French market already exists. More pragmatically, trading network differ radically from its Argen- these activities should ensure that families are tinean counterpart, it will take different forms in able to survive before promoting economic different parts of France in terms of its rules and transactions within the community and, ulti- social regulatory functions (Bayon 1999; Blanc mately, providing access to the plural economy, et al. 2003). Thus it is clear that when implemented the space in which market, public and recipro- in the various territories it seeks to develop, the cal economies co-exist (Laville 2007). solidarity economy necessarily takes different 3. Provide a bridge to the public arena by enabling forms. However, this diversity is not simply the excluded and the banished to rediscover imposed by the local context; it is due to the nature their dignity and reconstruct a collective iden- of the solidarity economy itself. The solidarity tity through mutual support. The solidarity economy is based on the idea that development economy’s focus on common problems and cannot benefit all members of the community interests fosters collective deliberation and the unless the community itself is organised on demo- construction of a community discourse that will cratic lines and sustains the effective participation be heard in the public sphere. Practical activi- of every individual member. This democratic claim ties form the pathway to political citizenship. is of course expressed in different ways according to the nature (pluralist, false democracy, authori- tarian, etc.) of the existing regime. But wherever The solidarity economy: territorial we look, we find its reflection in the day-to-day variations functioning of initiatives which are based on the principle of one person, one vote. The approach is Examples of the solidarity economy can be found pragmatic: the democratic participation of citizens throughout the world, but in many different forms. in development requires the constitution of a col- There are pronounced differences between North lective intelligence that can identify the challenges and South with regard to the influence of the state, that arise in an uncertain world. Participative agricultural issues and, especially, the degree to democracy is by nature open and flexible. There is

© UNESCO 2012. 208 Eric Dacheux and Daniel Goujon no single correct, universal, atemporal, method of derive from religious, political, social, or philo- democratic, collective decision-making. Each sophical motives. Similarly, while competition can political community forges, tests, and questions the be a healthy phenomenon, improving quality and modalities of decision-making which it considers driving down prices, it can also engender a most appropriate. Because the solidarity economy monopoly such as Microsoft, where the relation- is an exercise in participative democracy, it cannot ship between quality and price is hardly in the be reduced to an instant-use package or a “success consumer’s favour. Cooperation is time- guaranteed” formula. consuming and may attract “free riders”. It can also At international level, the solidarity economy have a powerful multiplier effect on the wealth of a is embodied in numerous diverse initiatives. The specific area, as shown by the Basque cooperatives name may vary according to country and continent, in the Mondragon region and Elinor Ostrom’s but at global level the term “social and solidarity- work on the management of natural resources in based economy” is now used by actors from North the countries of the South (Ostrom 1990). Empiri- and South to designate approaches which incorpo- cally, the economy is not exclusively the quest for rate the principles outlined above. The social and the maximisation of individual utility by a selfish solidarity-based economy is an international term; agent, even though this occurs. It is therefore it expresses diverse practices which, while adapted appropriate to broaden the spectrum, to rethink to their context, conform to the universal values of economics in order to achieve a better understand- solidarity and democracy. ing of the scope of the solidarity economy. If future generations are to live at least as well as present generations, we must use the framework of democracy to reduce pollution, reduce inequali- The microeconomic approach ties, create employment, and maintain cultural diversity. The solidarity economy is a constructive When attempting to define the science of econom- critique of sustainable development which stems ics, liberals refer almost exclusively to a microeco- from a simple postulate: there can be no sustain- nomic approach that centres on the problem of able development without sustainable democracy. managing scarce resources. This definition is Thus at the conclusion of this first section, we can deeply ingrained in orthodox economic thinking, define the solidarity economy as an alternative con- as shown by the almost unanimous acceptance of ception of development which enriches the notion the view advanced by Robbins in 1947: economics of sustainable development by the inclusion of a is “a science which studies human behaviour as a universal demand for democracy. relationship between ends and scarce means which have alternative uses” (Robbins 1947). According to this approach, economics encompasses any act The solidarity economy: a involving the considered – economists would say critique of the liberal vision “rational” – use of limited natural resources in of development order to meet the infinity of human needs. This definition facilitates the development of a rational, In certain cases market forces contribute to collec- logical, Cartesian approach which appears to avoid tive enrichment; in others, a Keynesian economic the ideological interpretations found in the other policy can be highly effective; but as economic, social sciences. Economics in the guise of math- political, cultural, and environmental problems ematics is presented as an exact science, rather become increasingly intertwined, the best source than as political science. But there is a striking of economic innovations which respect the en- paradox here, for it draws its legitimacy and moral vironment, cultural values, and local democratic justification from the defence of political values practices would appear to be a territorialised col- inherited from the Enlightenment: individualism, lective intelligence. It should be borne in mind that liberty, and rationality. However, despite the stand- the reasons for taking action, including action in ard definition’s focus (managing scarce resources the economic sphere, are always multiple (Polanyi to meet human needs), economics encompasses all 1983; Weber [1922] 1978). In many cases they are human activity. When seen in this light, the science transformed by selfish interests, but they may also of economics has no reserved domain; it is one way – and far more frequently than one might believe – among others of comprehending human action. For

© UNESCO 2012. The solidarity economy 209 example, culture, friendship, and love are far right to pollute is a striking example of a mentality removed from the domain of economics, but it is that exploits environmental restrictions and the still possible to take a reasoned approach to such scarcity of natural resources in order to justify the needs, which are by definition unfathomable, in creation of a new market. The concept of sustain- order to examine how they can best be met. able development, which simply reflects the In the context of liberal thought, the fight concern to manage scarce resources appropriately, against exclusion is by nature economic for it thus becomes (in its liberal version) a major com- includes all individual and social action undertaken ponent of the approach it is (supposedly) designed to meet the requirements of social inclusion and to oppose. cohesion. The development of personal services, Thus the microeconomic approach, which for example, is in keeping with the political logic tends to justify the commodification of all goods of the solidarity economy (the social fabric), but it (including land and money), all human activity also justifies the commodification of such services (work, social relations), and indeed the entire and, ultimately, of the social fabric itself. Com- planet (all living organisms) in the name of a modification assists the birth of a market society, rational struggle against scarcity, eventually infil- which the solidarity economy claims to oppose. If trates and perverts alternative solutions to the pre- the prevailing definition of economics is implicitly vailing system. In addition, it naturalises the accepted, the solidarity economy is at best a com- decision-making process by banishing the notion plement to the market economy, a means of endow- of democratic choice. Scarcity is perceived as ing its operation with “social coherence”; it natural, as an economic matter rather than the becomes a kind of “economy for the poor”. At result of choices made by human beings or of worst, the solidarity economy could be seen as a political decisions that can be challenged. Sustain- trailblazer, opening up new areas of profitability able development is presented as a growth driver and justifying the commodification of the social which is compatible with natural resources rather fabric. than a political project that raises questions about The tendency to transform criticism of the the concept of growth itself. The general good, prevailing economic system into effective support which relates to the definition of people as citizens, for that system is also pronounced in the context of is confused with GDP. However, there is a non- sustainable development, which the Brundtland liberal approach to the economy which enables us Report defines as “development that meets the to reconceptualise sustainable development. needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”.8 In other words, sustainable development Adopting a macroeconomic means creating a virtuous circle between an effi- definition cient economy, an equitable society, and environ- mentally sustainable growth. In reality, the broad According to advocates of a macroeconomic acceptance of this definition blurs the existence of approach,9 the economy concerns the creation many different interpretations ranging from a criti- (production), distribution, and collective expendi- cal radical vision which sees sustainable develop- ture of economic value (economic wealth, in clas- ment as an alternative to the capitalist system, and sical terms). The notion of value, a source of an adaptive liberal vision which sees it as a growth intense debate throughout the history of economic driver and a means of perpetuating the current thought, is inseparable from the concept of money, system. for money is the nominal form of the product, an In the liberal vision, sustainable development economic measurement that transforms goods and signifies the need to improve (sustainably) the services into figures. Thus the concept of money is management of a scarce resource (the ecosystem) the precondition for any definition and delimitation without having to worry about the origins of this of economics. This definition of the economy scarcity (the damage inflicted by the capitalist (monetary transactions) may not have gained wide system of production). Rather than pose a chal- acceptance, but it is certainly not isolated. For lenge to the capitalist mode of production, sustain- example, Schmitt (1984) argues that the flow able development is seen as crucial to its survival, (emission) of monetary units which remunerates for it opens the way to new sources of profit. The the productive involvement of wage-earners (the

© UNESCO 2012. 210 Eric Dacheux and Daniel Goujon labour factor) enables the global measurement of science which focuses on a clearly circumscribed the economic value created by production. Simi- subject: all monetarised activities. Moreover, such larly, members of the Regulation School such as a definition makes it possible to re-embed econom- Lordon and Orléan argue that money is the cri- ics in society, in what Braudel (1980) called the terion for the economy’s existence: ensemble des ensembles or “set of sets”. In effect, monetarisation implies that self-regulating market the monetary relationship is paramount. It is the means by mechanisms are not necessarily responsible for the which the market economy achieves its existence . . . Instead expansion (or contraction) of the economic sphere; of regarding money as a conventional tool which indirectly such movements can also result from a decision expresses a pre-existing value, money and value should, on the taken collectively. The commodification of human contrary, be regarded as a single reality . . . money is not a good or a tool that facilitates transactions but the institution beings and the social fabric is therefore not inevi- which bestows collective meaning on transactional activities table, a matter of fate, but is the consequence of by representing the common goal which everybody unrelent- economic and political decisions which should ingly strives to achieve. (Orléan and Lordon 2007, pp.3–5) reflect a democratic choice (current debates on the patenting of genetic material and free software This approach claims affinity with the arguments show that activities do not become “economic” of Simmel (1999), and in certain formulations,10 it spontaneously). Moreover, the suggested definition is close to Habermas’ view that the economic enables us to distinguish between wealth and eco- system is steered by money (Habermas 1997). nomic wealth. If, as we have seen, the monetisation To delimit the economic system as being the of production endows goods with an economic “sphere of monetary transactions” (Dacheux and value and thus delimits the economic sphere, it still Goujon 2007) is not the same as saying it operates tells us nothing about the degree of social utility in an autonomous, “disembedded” way. On the linked to this production of value. Money is not a contrary, in our view the way in which the produc- measure of the social utility that may stem from the tion of economic goods and services is organised production of goods; it measures their economic will depend on decisions taken in the public space value, i.e. their ability to be exchanged. Given the (at least in democratic societies) between the three existence of many other forms of wealth – social, fundamental orders (the economic, the political, cultural, natural, etc. – which elude the production and the symbolic). In other words, the economy process and monetary measurements, we cannot can no longer escape the mode of regulation that and should not reduce the wealth of a society to its characterises democracy: deliberation (Dacheux ability to create economic value.13 and Goujon 2010). Finally, this definition of the economy does By the economic order, we mean both the not naturalise scarcity. It does not accept that it prevailing mode of production (capitalist, statist, triggers poverty, which is seen as the product or community, familial) and the economic decision- by-product of a form of economic organisation that making system.11 The political order encompasses does not pursue its eradication. On the contrary, the all the laws and regulations established to regulate subjection of human activities to the endless quest the economic sphere. The symbolic order is com- for profitability and the accumulation of capital posed of the beliefs, habits, social rules, tacit simply creates new sources of exclusion and assumptions, and religious values that economic poverty. References to the scarcity of resources decision-making takes into consideration.12 The help to mask the exclusion inherent to the existing economic system maintained by the collectivity is economic system. People who are denied partici- therefore shaped by the confluence of these three pation in the production process because their con- criteria and evolves constantly. tribution is insufficiently profitable find it In terms of the solidarity economy, it is clear impossible to gain access to collective production. that this definition of macroeconomics presents Lacking the right to extract anything from the several advantages. It helps to mark out the system (the income obtained by producing value), boundaries of the economic domain. It rejects the they are in no position to spend anything either. idea that economics is a matter of rational calcula- Economic exclusion of this sort has nothing to do tion that naturally applies to all human activity with supposedly natural avarice; it is the result of (including cultural and social links); a pure science an economic system which retains only the most which lacks an identifiable subject. It is a social profitable individuals and disqualifies the rest.

© UNESCO 2012. The solidarity economy 211

In its strongest sense, the solidarity economy creates between grassroots initiatives and a power- therefore represents a kind of utopia, a global ful global project: the attempt to shape democracy project in which democratic debate constitutes the so that economic development (the monetary cornerstone of society, the social bond. In terms of sphere) is subject to collective rules which respect the symbolic order, it disputes the orthodox defini- the cultural, social, and environmental specificities tion of the economy which is used to justify capi- defined by collective deliberation in local public talism. The solidarity economy acknowledges a arenas. This is where the solidarity economy range of methods for exchanging goods and serv- assumes its systemic dimension: in addition to ices (the market, redistribution, reciprocity), thus market and state regulation, it seeks citizen regu- exposing the gulf between wealth and economic lation, a process which uses participative delibera- wealth and revealing the role that ideology has tion as the guiding principle of political economy. played in the construction of the orthodox defini- Both the framework of liberal microeconomic tion of economics. Above all, by combating liberal thought (a market-based quest for individual good ideology, by contesting the domination of the eco- and harmonisation) and the framework of Keyne- nomic order and by attempting to enrich and sian macroeconomic thought (state intervention to expand democracy, it offers the prospect of an obtain economic equilibrium through full employ- alternative society, the possibility of a better world, ment) should be subsumed into the analytical a utopian endeavour that combats the tendency framework of the solidarity economy, which towards xenophobic nostalgia found amongst the employs democratic arbitration to renew the links losers that economic globalisation has created. between the social, the economic, and the environ- Defined in this way, the solidarity economy is no mental. Because it connects microeconomic initia- longer a meaningless oxymoron, but a challenge to tives to a global project, the analytical framework the liberal representation of the economy. This of the solidarity economy enables us to rethink the premise enables us to adopt a more empirical view issue of sustainable development. In other words, and examine the ways in which the solidarity the focus shifts from market and state regulation to economy can foster an innovative approach to sus- citizen involvement in the form of democratic tainable development. deliberation.

The solidarity economy as The solidarity economy: a different an alternative to pathway to sustainable development development

Thus by changing the focus, by shifting from the The solidarity economy has three dimensions, the liberal microeconomic approach to a neo- first of which is political. It should be borne in institutionalist macroeconomic framework,14 we mind that the solidarity economy is above all a find that the nature of sustainable development matter of political militancy. The singularity of this changes as well: instead of the pursuit of sustain- militancy stems from the fact that it combines an able growth, it becomes the search for a new eco- anti-liberal discourse with pragmatic action in the nomic model in which the general good is defined economic sphere. Moreover, a macroeconomic by territorial, democratic intelligence. Now this is approach does not necessarily require the interven- not a purely theoretical model for, as we have seen, tion of a coercive regulatory body to oversee col- it can be found in various parts of the world and lective interests. Indeed, the increasing demand for goes by different names (popular economy, social participation emanating from European democra- and solidarity-based economy, new social cies underlines the need for public policy reform economy, etc.). In the interests of clarity and con- (Laville and Magnen 2005). The term “govern- sistency, we have confined ourselves to the use of ance” expresses this demand imperfectly, for it pri- one particular term: the solidarity economy. But oritises the introduction of entrepreneurial and this is more than a simple collection of disparate instrumental rationality into the conduct of collec- initiatives aimed at the survival of the most tive affairs (Eme 2003). The solidarity economy, deprived. Quite the contrary, the strength of the on the other hand, aims to develop communicative solidarity economy project lies in the links it action (Habermas 1981) in the state sphere. This

© UNESCO 2012. 212 Eric Dacheux and Daniel Goujon requires creating a balance between representation end in itself, rather than as a facilitator of eco- and the active participation of citizens. The repub- nomic transactions. Money thus becomes a lican conception of democracy seeks to ensure that medium which strengthens the ties within a politi- public deliberation becomes a central element of cal community; it loses its power as an object of all regulation. Collective political and economic infinite desire which, as Aristotle noted so long interests should be defined democratically through ago, destroys the social fabric. The goal of subor- a process of public debate to which all actors can dinating money to the good of the community is contribute. The political, economic, and cultural naturally accompanied by a desire to ensure that quality of life for all citizens should be determined everyone has access to it. Money is no longer seen through a process of deliberation. as a factor of exclusion (the gulf between “haves” The second dimension is that of economics. and “have nots”), but as a factor of inclusion The solidarity economy is an alternative economic (every member of the community is guaranteed practice. Its initiatives are designed to adjust access to it). Thus in our view, the solidarity supply and demand through the political mecha- economy represents an economy in which the nisms of deliberation rather than leave them to the functions of money are restricted and the use of it mysterious whims of the market’s “invisible is democratised. hand”. Based on the principle of one person one The third dimension is the symbolic. The vote, solidarity organisations, the heirs of the 1848 solidarity economy is not simply an umbrella associationist movement (Ferraton 2006; Frere term for a cluster of diverse activities which share 2009; Laville 2010) are striving to put democracy the goal of developing economic activities in at the centre of the productive act. It is no longer a order to strengthen the social tissue. It is a project matter of curbing or containing an economy that is designed to reinforce democracy by increasing destroying democracy, but of developing an participation in civil society, by involving citizens economy that strengthens and extends it. Further- in the political decision-making process and by more, the solidarity economy seeks to subordinate embedding democracy in the economic system the product to the social fabric, to reweave the itself. Political logic therefore governs economic social fabric through economic practice. It there- logic. This is a radical departure from the present fore stands in opposition to the contractual, indi- form of capitalism, which draws its legitimacy vidualist view of this fabric. It also differs from the from a dominant liberal ideology while creating views advanced by solidarity theorists such as monopolies which contradict the tenets of that Bourgeois and Durkheim in that it does not accept ideology. that the social fabric is a systemic product of the operation of the state. According to its advocates, social ties are the result of a legislative framework, Alternative approaches to market transactions, and a specific symbolic development horizon: the search for equality in a situation of radical alterity. Finally, the solidarity economy is a In France, the post-Second World War economic response to unbridled speculation. Collective boom known as les trente glorieuses conditioned deliberation on what falls within the province of political and economic elites into believing that the monetary transactions and what should escape it strength of the social fabric depended on economic (genetic discoveries, for example) makes it possi- development. In a service economy, however, the ble to mark out the boundaries of the economic opposite is true. Trust and the weaving of social sphere. Therefore the extent of this sphere is not links are the only means of developing sustainable established by market forces and individual services that actually serve the entire community. interests – although these are taken into considera- A territory optimises its regulatory regime through tion – but is subordinated to democratic choices. debate and discussion in the public sphere Moreover, the solidarity economy, as various prac- (Habermas 1962). And debate in local public tices such as local trading systems demonstrate, arenas is a central element of the solidarity seeks to restrict money to its functions as an incen- economy (Dacheux and Laville 2003). This is why tive, a measure of production and an intermediary it can offer a development model which differs of exchange. Once again, this is a matter of oppos- radically from the liberal conception imposed by ing speculative practices which use money as an international financial institutions. The liberal

© UNESCO 2012. The solidarity economy 213 model has, with justification, attracted strong criti- the collectivity a service for which it has a need cism from thinkers such as Alfred Sauvy, François (cleaning, security, food, construction, etc.); the Perroux, and René Passet, whose observations community thus offers the individual a chance have been described by Claude Albagli (2004) as to improve his quality of life and enhance his the “Francophone concept of development”. The sense of wellbeing. At grass roots level, the idea description resonates strongly with the solidarity is not to facilitate the acquisition of wealth by economy. To be sure, the Anglo-Saxon model is the most outstanding individuals, but to now somewhat different to the one attacked by improve everyone’s quality of life by giving Francophone development specialists in the past. them the chance to participate. The peculiar combination of Keynesianism and 2. Strengthen the state’s capacity for action. At the neoclassicism which regarded the financing of macroeconomic level, the solidarity economy state infrastructure as the best way to provide coun- does not oppose the state but it seeks to encour- tries with access to the global market has run its age social assistance and public services. Why? course. However, having witnessed the blockage Because in today’s service economy, economic and failure of Marxist “endogenous growth” wealth is the fruit of social cohesion. As the models, international financial institutions are local social fabric is strengthened, more and now attempting to impose a neoliberal economic more actors will acquire the collective confi- programme. More specifically, state-advocated dence needed to launch social innovations that programmes which require ratification by interna- benefit both the promoters and the community tional financial institutions (therefore leaving very which supports them. little room for manoeuvre) – “Poverty Reduction 3. Contest the vision offered by international Strategy Papers” (PRSPs) in the technocratic financial institutions. While such institutions jargon of the World Bank – are being used to mask may now be focusing on combating poverty, the ideology of the “Washington consensus”. In they have a blinkered view of economics. When other words, financial stabilisation measures considering how to help countries to emerge (public deficit reduction, control of the money from poverty, they put more faith in the exper- supply, etc.) and structural adjustments (liberalisa- tise of graduates of the great American insti- tion, privatisation, etc.), are supposed to ensure tutes and universities than in the knowledge of “pro-poor growth” (Lautier 2001). local people. Proponents of the solidarity The present article is not concerned with pre- economy argue that these institutions should senting an informed critique of this new model. abandon the single solution, and also adopt the But it should be borne in mind that while it has rules of good governance (transparency, democ- been relatively successful in some countries, its racy, consultation with NGOs, etc.) they are so consequences in many others have been disastrous. eager to impose on the states which appeal for Moreover, all United Nations Development Pro- their services. gramme (UNDP) reports point to a worldwide increase in inequality. It is therefore appropriate to As Dominique Wolton (2004, p.372) has bluntly suggest an alternative, a more efficient develop- stated, “Cultural diversity is a condition of eco- ment model. The solidarity economy offers three nomic development”. Symmetrically, a diversity of potentially fruitful approaches to the construction economic development models is the only guaran- of a new model: tee of cultural diversity. The solidarity economy seeks to combine the universality of values with a 1. Develop the collective (i.e. non-individual) sub- diversity of practices. In the North, it actively pro- sistence economy. This means recognising that motes the reform of public services so that they in many countries the market economy is at best link up with local social forums. In the South, it rudimentary; in reality much of the population aims to strengthen the role of the state as a social will depend on the informal economy. In this regulator in order to guarantee social cohesion. configuration, the solidarity economy proposes Current development strategies attempt to improve a transition from individualised informal activi- governance by involving populations in an eco- ties to formal subsistence economy activities so nomic project that reflects the norms of the Wash- that everyone contributes to collective well- ington consensus. The solidarity economy wants being. The individual earns money by offering citizens to participate in the construction of the

© UNESCO 2012. 214 Eric Dacheux and Daniel Goujon most appropriate economic model, one that project: the extension of democracy to the eco- ensures that the territory they inhabit will be devel- nomic sphere. oped sustainably. In effect, sustainable develop- ment is a continuation of the Enlightenment Translated from French

Notes

*This article is the revised text of 6. Of course there are exceptions, reciprocal transactions, and “Sustainable development strategies solidarity finance being one Braudel as the ground-floor for North and South measured example. economy, a sphere far larger than against the solidarity economy”, a that of monetary transactions (the paper presented at the VIII Interna- 7. The cooperative model that economy). tional Meeting of the Inter- colonial powers introduced in Sub- University Network on the Social Saharan Africa has often been dis- 12. Orléan and Lordon also empha- and Solidarity Economy, Barce- credited, and post-colonial African sise the symbolic dimension: “Thus lona, 2008. states have done little to promote if money has anything to do with mutual associations. Consequently, the communitarian in a very deep 1. The World Bank’s annual devel- in Africa “multiple traditional sense, we can then spontaneously opment report 2007 acknowledged forms of mutual assistance and attempt to shape the intuition that it that agricultural development is solidarity are being created and has some affinity with the religious “highly dependent” on public- developed in local communities, phenomenon”. In effect, these sector support. particularly in order to cover the authors offer a definition of the reli- costs of specific social events such gious that is very close to our con- 2. The term first appeared in an as funerals, marriages, the birth of ception of the symbolic: “Therefore article by the economist John a child, etc”. (Defourny et al. 1999, there is something like a formal Williamson, whose ten recommen- p.17). religious phenomenon; it is inde- dations, defined in 1989, were pendent and pre-exists whatever 8. The report, Our Common approved by the world’s richest may be invested in it. We might Future, was submitted to the UN countries (the G7): define this formal religious presence Assembly General in 1986 by Gro as all the production mechanisms – Fiscal policy discipline Harlem Brundtland, chair of the that produce a community cemented – Redirection of public spending World Commission on the Environ- by collective beliefs and emotions – Tax reform ment and Development and a or, conversely, as all the production – Market-determined interest rates former environment minister and mechanisms that produce the col- – Competitive exchange rates prime minister of Norway. – Trade liberalisation lective beliefs and emotions which – Liberalisation of inward foreign 9. This approach is common to constitute a community. When direct investment many heterodox theorists from defined in this way, this – Privatisation of state enterprises Marx to Keynes to Polanyi. generalised religious presence can – Deregulation of markets be found in the various domains – Legal security for property rights. 10. As, for example, in the follow- that make up the collective: the ing quotation: “the unit of account theological, the state, moral values 3. Preface to Ecosol Review, No. creates a common language and and also – in our view – the mon- 1, Editions Le Phare, Luxembourg, makes it easier to coordinate sepa- etary” (Orléan and Lordon 2007, 2007. rate activities” (Orléan and Lordon p.27). 2007, p.20). 4. Lima Declaration, first “Globali- 13. See, on this point, Harribey sation of Solidarity” meeting. 11. Following the example of the (2004). classical distinction between the 5. These meetings took place in political and politics, we can distin- 14. Term suggested by Caillé Québec in the autumn of 2001. The guish between economics and the (2008, p.12): “To say that we prac- definition owes much to the work economy: economics encompasses tice political economy rather than of J.L. Laville and CRIDA all resource-development activities economic science is a way of (Dacheux and Laville and includes what Polanyi refers to renewing the link with the histori- 2003). as the domestic economy and cal origins of the discipline and

© UNESCO 2012. The solidarity economy 215 indicating that we fully assume the Moreover, by advocating the economy cannot and should not be actual political and moral dimen- concept of institutionalism, we reduced to the market’s spontan- sions and issues of economic affirm that institutions matter, insti- eous (and miraculous) ability to analysis instead of denying them. tutions count, and that therefore the regulate itself”.

References

Albagli, C., 2004. Francophonie et Ferraton, C., 2006. Associations et Laville, J. L., 2010. La politique de mondialisation. Hermes, 40. coopératives: une autre histoire de l’association. Paris: Seuil. l’économie. Ramon-Ville-St Agne: Bayon, D., 1999. Les systèmes Erès. Laville, J. L. and Cattani, A. D., d’échanges locaux, pour un vrai 2005. Dictionnaire de l’autre écon- débat. Levallois-Perret: Yves Michel. Frere, B., 2009. Le nouvel esprit omie. Paris: Desclée de Brouwer. solidaire. Paris: Desclée de Brouwer. Blanc, J., Ferraton, C. and Laville, J. L. and Magnen, J. P., Malandrin, G., 2003. Les systèmes GESQ, 2002. L’économie sociale et 2005. Action publique et économie d’échange local. Hermès, No. 36. solidaire une perspective Nord-Sud, solidaire: une perspective interna- deuxième rencontre sur la globalisa- tionale. Ramonville Saint-Agne: Erès. Braudel, F., 1980. Civilisation tion de la solidarité, synthèse et con- matérielle, Economie et capitalisme. clusion. Québec: GESQ. Orléan, A. and Lordon, F., 2007. 2nd edn, 3 vols. Paris: Armand Colin Genèse de l’Etat et genèse de la [Civilization and capitalism 15th– Habermas, J., 1962. Strukturwandel monnaie: le modèle de la potentia 18th century, University of California der Öffentlichkeit [The structural multitudinis. Revue du MAUSS per- Press, 1992]. transformation of the public sphere: manente, 29 April 2007 (available at http://www.journaldumauss.net/ Caillé, A., 2008. Présentation, an inquiry into a category of bour- spip.php?article80). Mauss, No. 30. geois society. Cambridge: Polity, 1989]. Ostrom, E., 1990. Governing the Dacheux, E. and Goujon, D., commons: the evolution of institu- 2007. Définir l’économie: la respon- Habermas, J., 1981. Theorie des tions for collective action. London: sabilité épistémologique de kommunikativen Handelns, 2 t. [The Cambridge University Press. l’économie solidaire. Paper presented theory of communicative action. Cambridge: Polity, 1984–1987). at the VIII International Meeting of Polanyi, K., 1983. La grande trans- the Inter-University Network on the Habermas, J., 1997. Droit et formation. Paris: Gallimard. Social and Solidarity Economy, démocratie. Entre faits et normes. Robbins, L., 1947. Essai sur La Rennes. Paris: Gallimard, nrf essais. nature et la signification de la Dacheux, E. and Goujon, D., Harribey, J. M., 2004. Une concep- science économique. Trans. Igor 2010. La délibération démocratique tion de la richesse non marchande Krestowski. Paris: Librairie Medicis. concept clé du paradigme de l’ESS. pour sortir du faux dilemme Paper presented at the Tenth Meeting Schmitt, B., 1984. Inflation, croissance-décroissance. Paper pre- of the Inter-University Network on chômage et malformations du capital. sented at the “Concept de développe- the Social and Solidarity Economy Paris and Albeuve: Economica and ment en débat” symposium, (RIUESS), Luxembourg. Castella. université de Bordeaux IV (available Dacheux, E. and Laville, J.L., at http://harribey.u-bordeaux4.fr). Simmel, G., 1999. Philosophie de 2003. Economie solidaire et l’argent (1st edn 1901). Paris: PUF. Lautier, B., 2001. Pourquoi faut-il démocratie. Hermès, No. 36, aider les pauvres? [online] Available Weber, M., 1922. Wirtschaft und Defourny, J., Develtere P. and at http://matisse.univ-paris1.fr/doc2/ Gesellschaft. Tübingen: Mohr Fonteneau, B., eds, 1999. ID0118b.PDF [accessed March [Society and economy. Berkeley and L’économie sociale au Nord et au 2008]. Los Angeles: University of California Sud. Brussels: Deboeck. Press, 1978]. Laville, J. L., ed., 2007. L’économie Eme, B., 2003. Agir solidaire et pub- solidaire, une perspective interna- Wolton, D., 2004. Il faut sauver la licité des conflits. Hermès, No. 36. tionale. Paris: Hachette. communication. Paris: Flammarion.

© UNESCO 2012.