Excerpts from an interview conducted by Neal Gorenflo and Michel Bauwens in Shareable magazine.
“Michel Bauwens: What is the Solidarity Economy? How closely is it related to other ‘social economy’ formats such as what is called the ‘social economy’ in France. What are the requirements to be counted as part of that economy?
As defined by the US Solidarity Economy Network, “the Solidarity Economy is an alternative development framework that is grounded in practice and the in the principles of: solidarity, mutualism, and cooperation; equity in all dimensions (race/ethnicity/ nationality, class, gender, LGBTQ); social well-being over profit and the unfettered rule of the market; sustainability; social and economic democracy; and pluralism, allowing for different forms in different contexts, open to continual change and driven from the bottom-up.”
USSEN and the local solidarity economy network I helped develop called JASecon have a open approach that allows organizations to self-identify based on these principles. There seems to be a lot of consensus, except when it comes to organizations that identify as social or green capitalists. I think most solidarity economists, but not all are vehemently anti-capitalist but not anti-business or market (maybe anti-stock market) and they are general not communist, although some are participatory socialists. Actually, they tend to shun political ideology in favor of fluid values and principles as a frame. I would add to their definition that participation is very important – participation in decision-making, governance and in creating economic activity itself. Local, collective decision-making and voluntary action are favored over authoritarian control of the economy.
From a more spiritual perspective, the solidarity economy moves us from a “me” to a “we” economy, recognizing, like the Buddhists do, that we are all interconnected – we including the Earth and all its creatures – which the Bolivian Government recently encoded in law.
NG: Why is the Solidarity Economy so strong in some parts of the world,like the Basque region of Spain where the Mondragon cooperative is based, and weak in others?
It is stronger in areas that have a culture of resistance, community self-sufficiency, and strong communal ties. Latin America is leading the way. Poverty is a strong motivator, but the solutions are only possible because there is fertile ground for change in strong communities, like the Basques, Zapatistas and the MST. On the other hand, government has been helpful in some countries, especially in Latin America, and some local governments. Additionally, our economy in the US is so tied into a centralized power structure, it feels very challenging to escape and survive. In less developed countries there is more room for experimentation without the government cracking down, less commercialization, and more possibilities for economic autonomy. Less of their assets are tied to big banks and more are tied up in local relationships. Relationships and reputation are extremely important to Latin Americans in general so it makes sense that an economy based on relationships would thrive there. In the US, our economy thrives on the severing of relationship ties – to place, to workers, to the Earth, to each other.
NG: What impact has The Great Recession had on the Solidarity Economy? Has it been strengthened or weakened by the crisis of our economic system? Do you see it’s future improving? How big a role would it have in the overall economy?
It definitely has strengthened the solidarity economy. Crisis breeds change and most Americans and Europeans had been riding along too comfortable to rock the boat. There is a growing distrust in government as corruption and deceit become glaringly obvious, especially around the bank bailouts. A global economy and even a national economy seem out of our hands and out of control. So there is a now a strong movement towards localization to gain democratic control back, even if not yet full solidarity economy, which asks for more. As people are out of work and desperate to get their needs met, they search for alternatives that offer a more hopeful future. They are also questioning what the economy is for (if it’s not taking care of our needs), allowing the imagination to envision a whole new economy, and from there many creative possibilities emerge.
NG: What are the most promising new innovations coming out of The Solidarity Economy recently?
Associations of alternative economic projects that pool resources: skills and technical expertise, knowledge, capital and material resources (like mills or butchering facilities), administration, governance and labor either within a specific sector (cooperatives, timebanks, etc) or across sectors within a specific geography. The Evergreen Cooperatives in Ohio and Banco Palmas in Brazil are an example of the former, and Sonoma Go Local is an example of the latter. These projects are very familiar with the Mondragon Cooperative Corporation, which has an impressively integrative model, with its own bank, educational institutions, and participatory self-governance. The Zapatistas are also quietly building a new economy from the bottom up, using mostly their own resources but in intensive collaboration, collective governance, resource sharing, training, and so on. The US Solidarity Economy Network, emulating Brazil, is attempting to map the solidarity economy in the US. Mapping should help people find each other to grow and form stronger networks, facilitate resource and information sharing, trade, collaboration, and associative organizations, as well as connecting solidarity economic producers.
MB: Some people are advocating a convergence between open source thinking, i.e. the sharing of knowledge, code (free software), and designs (Arduino), with the solidarity economy networks? Is this happening, feasible, desirable?
It is of the utmost importance. I think open source tools can help these projects catch fire spreading across the world, by eliminating the initial or limiting barrier to implementation, which is often knowledge or money or both. Solidarity economy projects as I mentioned are intentionally or systemically under-resourced or unfunded. Sharing knowledge, code, etc. is one way to give these projects a leg up against the mainstream economy and give them access to resources they can’t afford to access. Many people with useful skills and knowledge are coming aboard the open source movement, but since they often come without a personal experience of poverty, idealism is usually the main driver for open source innovators. One problem I see with this is that people with knowledge and skills often create solutions without the input of those who will be using their tools, especially the poor, non-English speakers, unplugged, etc. It would be wise to get as much input from the groups you are trying to involve from the very beginning.
The Timebank I coordinate is an open source code project so we share code with communities that want to use our software and we ask that they share new code with us. I see more of this happening in the currency world and as more skilled techies get involved, there is enormous potential for a power shift. As Thomas Jefferson said, which is more true today, “I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a monied aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The issuing power (of money) should be taken away from the banks, and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs.” We need many currencies, all kinds of them run by democratic groups of good reputation or even individual issuing power, which happens in a mutual credit currency model like the timebank, LETS or GETS. Decentralization of knowledge, decision-making power and resources is absolutely necessary to a healthy democracy and a peaceful, relatively egalitarian society. If one group gains more power, they will game the system and shift its rules and structure to to their favor. Open source models are tools that counter this kind of power grab.”