206
also embody social and solidarity values, including notions of participative governance, limited profi t-making, a focus on employee benefi ts, among others; considering certain forms of crowdfunding as an opportunity for abating economy-wide
rebound effects through more socially just and environmentally sound investments;
and fi nally, the potential for complementary currencies to work towards industrial
ecology aims. One of the weaknesses of the social and solidarity economy has been
that of scale, as SSE activities tend to take place on a micro-scale, with some notable exceptions. That being said, the SSE is well underway and expanding, in
research and practice, presenting interesting synergies with IE and opportunities for
further research and action. Bringing together IE and SSE ultimately brings to the
fore a discussion around paradigms and associated values, including societal and
environmental priorities which are not always aligned – raising questions around
what values we wish to put forward in our economy, workplaces and society.
Keywords Community currencies • Crowd-funding • Reciprocity • Solidarity
economy • Sharing economy
1 Introduction
In the past decade, a slew of terms have emerged to describe new economic models:
the people-fi rst or human economy (Ransom and Baird 2010 ; Hart et al. 2010 ), the
new economy (Schor and Thompson 2014 ), the green economy (UNEP 2011 ), the
sharing economy (Botsman and Rogers 2010 ; Gansky 2010 ), diverse economies
(Gibson-Graham 2006 ; Gibson-Graham 2008 ) and the varying defi nitions of the
circular economy (Yuan et al. 2006 ; Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2013 ), to name
but a few. In some cases, these terms represent alternatives to the dominant market
economy, understood here as being based on competition and private ownership; in
most cases, what plays out in practice are economic activities that are at best complementary to and on the fringes of the market economy. Their emergence suggests
a growing interest in fi nding new ways to engage in production, consumption,
exchanges and fi nancing, to better manage resources, and strive for greater prosperity than what is currently being achieved with the dominant economic model. More
specifi cally, all of these approaches share the ambition of tackling the question of
how economic systems can better serve – rather than be severed from – environmental or social aims. The goal of this contribution is to assess whether these models can bring new fi elds of refl ection and action to the industrial ecology
community.
One reason for this renewed interest in economic models is the heightened concern around recurring fi nancial crises, the destabilization of natural cycles and widening inequalities. Particularly in times of economic depression, people look for
alternative ways to access products and services, including fi nancial services. In
Switzerland in 1934, in the wake of the Great Depression and facing a credit crunch,
M. Sahakian
also embody social and solidarity values, including notions of participative governance, limited profi t-making, a focus on employee benefi ts, among others; considering certain forms of crowdfunding as an opportunity for abating economy-wide
rebound effects through more socially just and environmentally sound investments;
and fi nally, the potential for complementary currencies to work towards industrial
ecology aims. One of the weaknesses of the social and solidarity economy has been
that of scale, as SSE activities tend to take place on a micro-scale, with some notable exceptions. That being said, the SSE is well underway and expanding, in
research and practice, presenting interesting synergies with IE and opportunities for
further research and action. Bringing together IE and SSE ultimately brings to the
fore a discussion around paradigms and associated values, including societal and
environmental priorities which are not always aligned – raising questions around
what values we wish to put forward in our economy, workplaces and society.
Keywords Community currencies • Crowd-funding • Reciprocity • Solidarity
economy • Sharing economy
1 Introduction
In the past decade, a slew of terms have emerged to describe new economic models:
the people-fi rst or human economy (Ransom and Baird 2010 ; Hart et al. 2010 ), the
new economy (Schor and Thompson 2014 ), the green economy (UNEP 2011 ), the
sharing economy (Botsman and Rogers 2010 ; Gansky 2010 ), diverse economies
(Gibson-Graham 2006 ; Gibson-Graham 2008 ) and the varying defi nitions of the
circular economy (Yuan et al. 2006 ; Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2013 ), to name
but a few. In some cases, these terms represent alternatives to the dominant market
economy, understood here as being based on competition and private ownership; in
most cases, what plays out in practice are economic activities that are at best complementary to and on the fringes of the market economy. Their emergence suggests
a growing interest in fi nding new ways to engage in production, consumption,
exchanges and fi nancing, to better manage resources, and strive for greater prosperity than what is currently being achieved with the dominant economic model. More
specifi cally, all of these approaches share the ambition of tackling the question of
how economic systems can better serve – rather than be severed from – environmental or social aims. The goal of this contribution is to assess whether these models can bring new fi elds of refl ection and action to the industrial ecology
community.
One reason for this renewed interest in economic models is the heightened concern around recurring fi nancial crises, the destabilization of natural cycles and widening inequalities. Particularly in times of economic depression, people look for
alternative ways to access products and services, including fi nancial services. In
Switzerland in 1934, in the wake of the Great Depression and facing a credit crunch,
M. Sahakian