Final thoughts on the Social Economy

Day 4Block Teaching – Prague 2014

References Nyssens, M. (1997), ‘Popular economy in

the South, third sector in the North: Are they signs of a germinating economy of solidarity?’, Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 68/2: 171-200.

Westlund, H. (2003), ‘Form or contents? On the concept of social economy’, International Journal of Social Economics, 30/11: 1192-1206.

Anthropology of human societies Side by side with family housekeeping,

there have been three principles of production and distribution:

Reciprocity Redistribution Market Prior to the market revolution,

humanity’s economic relations were subordinate to the social. Now economic relations are now generally superior to social ones.

Nyssens’ definition

Essentially seeing the social economy as filling gaps left by the private and public sectors

Generates three poles of economic activity

Pole of social utility The SE pole of social utility

Potential to generate social added value “SE forms a space that regulates the system

in the interests of achieving a more balanced model of social and economic development (CIRIEC 2007)

Social cohesion, employment, generating and maintaining the social and economic fabric, the development of democracy, social innovation and local development.

CIRIEC – download the report

Evolution of social economy in three stages (Nyssens)

1. Network-based associations with various functions arising to solve specific problems, with both an economic and a political identity.

2. Integration into a modernization project that favoured the market-state synergy: marginalization.

3. A revitalization following the crisis of the market-state relationship

Nyssens on social economy In the South, the popular economy turns

out to be not only a means of survival in the face of economic adversity, but also a means of political, social and cultural resistance, particularly via a rekindling of the associative flame. . . In the North, the burgeoning of nonprofit organizations producing goods and services at the community levels appears as a particular response to the crisis in employment and the welfare state

Social economy as the ‘third way’ ‘In the conflict between capitalism and

socialism which characterized twentieth century Europe, the social economy became a "third" way.’ (Westlund, 2003: 1193).

State involvement in social services ended the multi-functionality of the third sector.

mutual benefit societies specialized in social protection

cooperatives confined their activities to consumption trade unions turned to the ‘workers’ struggle’.

Dissociation between the economic (the sphere of the market) and the social (the sphere of the state). (Nyssens, 1997: 179).

Westlund Like the family economy the social economy is

based on reciprocity; unlike the family economy kinship is not involved;

The market economy and public sector are based on monetary exchange; the social economy is not;

The public sector is based on official legislation, whereas the social economy is based on commonality of interests and values;

The market economy and public sector are based primarily on material capital whereas the social economy is based primarily on social capital.

An economy of solidarity? The projects of an economy of solidarity

have a tendency to reunite that which has long been separated and to question some presuppositions of the market-state synergy: the separation between the economic and the social, the sharp dividing line between paid work and leisure, the state’s monopoly on solidarity, the market-state dichotomy, and so on. Nyssens

An economy of emancipation and co-operation (Nyssens) Why produce only as a function of an unjust

market that depletes and exploits, denying us the chance to manage both the production and the economy for our own service, for the service of all citizens, and of all peoples of the planet, as well as for future generations? Our proposal is a socioeconomy of solidarity as a way of life that encompasses the totality of the human being, that announces a new culture and a new form of producing to fulfill the needs of each human being and of the entire humanity.

Social and ethical issues • Social and ethical issues are of central importance to

members of social enterprise.

• Social capital encompasses numerous ideas including: trust, civic spirit, goodwill, reciprocity, mutuality, shared commitment, solidarity and co-operation.

• Perceived power affects the development of social capital.

• Social capital offers a useful theoretical framework for conceptualising the value of social enterprises in community development and public policy debates.

• Ethical capital offers a useful theoretical framework for conceptualising the motivations and orientation of social entrepreneurs, as well as members of social enterprises.

Social value and capital • What is social value?

• Acting collectively?

• Finding new ways of doing things?

• Social (rather than technical) innovation?

• Not subordinating every decision to the calculus of ‘cost-effectiveness’ or ‘profit’?

• What is social capital?

• A social network?

• The concept of mutuality (looking after each other)?

• A group of people where relationships are based on building trust, rather than the pursuit of economic advantage?

Social capital

Relationships matter Social networks are a valuable

asset Interaction enables people to

Build communities Commit to each other Build the social fabric

Understanding Views of Social Capital

Political spectrum and social capital (Law and Mooney, 2006)

Political Left

Solidarity &Collectives

Political Right

Ethical Values, Community& Family Values

White’s (2002) view of Bourdieu’s approach to social capital

Bourdieu

Social Justice &Empowerment

Putnam & Coleman

Family &Community

Robert Putnam'Whereas physical capital refers to physical objects

and human capital refers to the properties of individuals, social capital refers to connections among individuals – social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them. In that sense social capital is closely related to what some have called “civic virtue.” The difference is that “social capital” calls attention to the fact that civic virtue is most powerful when embedded in a sense network of reciprocal social relations. A society of many virtuous but isolated individuals is not necessarily rich in social capital' Putnam 2000: 19).

World bank and social capital 'Social capital refers to the institutions,

relationships, and norms that shape the quality and quantity of a society's social interactions... Social capital is not just the sum of the institutions which underpin a society – it is the glue that holds them together' (The World Bank (1999) 'What is Social Capital?', PovertyNet http://www.worldbank.org/poverty/scapital/whatsc.htm)

World bank and social capital

Putnam – why social capital is important

Allows citizens to resolve problems more easily

Enables communities to advance smoothly

Widening awareness of how our fates are interconnected Bowling alone 2000

Negative aspects of social capital The attempt by groups to bind together to

exclude outsiders, as in nationalism Distinction between ‘bonding social capital’ and

‘bridging social capital’ In some cases social capital can often be seen a

barrier to economic growth at the macro level Bonding social capital tends to entail

generalised distrust and lack of co-operation between groups

Bonding social capital can be seen as superglue which ‘stiffens society and ultimately makes it a fragmented society’