208
2 Conceptual Links
2.1 What Is the Social and Solidarity Economy?
The social and solidarity economy fi nds its roots in the social economy, which
emerged in the early period of Western industrialization, in the nineteenth century,
when poverty in urban centres was a central concern. The Welsh social reformer
Robert Owen founded the cooperative movement at this time, and cooperatives and
associations became ‘the fi rst line of defence’ in rallying to address social ails
(Lewis 1997 in Laville 2011 ). The social economy was relegated to the status of a
‘third sector’ in the post-war period, when the market economy was seen as responsible for regulating property and currencies, and where the welfare state was considered the primary vector for social action through the redistribution of wealth (Laville
1994 ). The social economy cast in this role of a ‘third sector’ represented all other
forms of organization, including non-profi t and non-governmental activities.
Neoliberal policies, recurring fi nancial crises, as well as the failure of the welfare
state to address social issues, all contributed to a rebirth of the social economy in the
1990s. As inequalities widened and environmental issues expanded to a local and
global scale, the ‘sustainable development’ paradigm was brought into question in
what has been called a ‘crisis of values’, leading to a renewed interest in the social
economy (Laville and Cattani 2006 ). Almost 10 years after the fi rst Earth Summit,
the participants at the fi rst World Social Forum in 2001 (Porto Alegre, Brazil) rallied around the phrase ‘Another world is possible’; the social economy was seen as
playing a prominent role in this new world order. For some, the notion of the ‘social
economy’ was insuffi cient, as this term was too closely associated with the third
sector at that time. Arguments were put forward to challenge a defi nition of the
social economy solely based on the type of entity or legal status.
2 From this effort,
the term ‘civil and solidarity economy’ was coined to account for numerous other
initiatives that had emerged, particularly in Europe, that were neither non-for-profi t
nor non-governmental (Laville 2011 ). Private enterprises, for example, can be built
on social values and have their place in what came to be known as the ‘social and
solidarity economy’ (SSE), primarily in French, Spanish, Italian and Portuguesespeaking countries, in Europe and in the Americas.
As Fraisse ( 2003 ) rightly notes, the SSE is being interpreted in different ways
around the world. In the United States, members of the SSE aim towards the sys2 Historically in France, the defi nition of the social and solidarity economy had been based on
organizational type: all mutual companies and cooperatives fall under this defi nition. In Western
Switzerland, however, another defi nition is upheld, that of guiding principles and key criteria. A
for-profi t company can be part of the SSE, as long as it is aligned with the principles of the SSE
and profi t-making is not the primary goal. The debate about structure versus content of such organizations (Kawano 2009 ) has been focused on the distinction between theory and practice: some
cooperatives may be seeking the economic benefi t for their members above all, while some forprofi ts may be working towards greater social and environmental aims. Simply put, adopting a
legal form does not guarantee that an entity becomes part of the social and solidarity economy
(Swaton 2011 ; Defourny et al. 2000 ).
M. Sahakian
2 Conceptual Links
2.1 What Is the Social and Solidarity Economy?
The social and solidarity economy fi nds its roots in the social economy, which
emerged in the early period of Western industrialization, in the nineteenth century,
when poverty in urban centres was a central concern. The Welsh social reformer
Robert Owen founded the cooperative movement at this time, and cooperatives and
associations became ‘the fi rst line of defence’ in rallying to address social ails
(Lewis 1997 in Laville 2011 ). The social economy was relegated to the status of a
‘third sector’ in the post-war period, when the market economy was seen as responsible for regulating property and currencies, and where the welfare state was considered the primary vector for social action through the redistribution of wealth (Laville
1994 ). The social economy cast in this role of a ‘third sector’ represented all other
forms of organization, including non-profi t and non-governmental activities.
Neoliberal policies, recurring fi nancial crises, as well as the failure of the welfare
state to address social issues, all contributed to a rebirth of the social economy in the
1990s. As inequalities widened and environmental issues expanded to a local and
global scale, the ‘sustainable development’ paradigm was brought into question in
what has been called a ‘crisis of values’, leading to a renewed interest in the social
economy (Laville and Cattani 2006 ). Almost 10 years after the fi rst Earth Summit,
the participants at the fi rst World Social Forum in 2001 (Porto Alegre, Brazil) rallied around the phrase ‘Another world is possible’; the social economy was seen as
playing a prominent role in this new world order. For some, the notion of the ‘social
economy’ was insuffi cient, as this term was too closely associated with the third
sector at that time. Arguments were put forward to challenge a defi nition of the
social economy solely based on the type of entity or legal status.
2 From this effort,
the term ‘civil and solidarity economy’ was coined to account for numerous other
initiatives that had emerged, particularly in Europe, that were neither non-for-profi t
nor non-governmental (Laville 2011 ). Private enterprises, for example, can be built
on social values and have their place in what came to be known as the ‘social and
solidarity economy’ (SSE), primarily in French, Spanish, Italian and Portuguesespeaking countries, in Europe and in the Americas.
As Fraisse ( 2003 ) rightly notes, the SSE is being interpreted in different ways
around the world. In the United States, members of the SSE aim towards the sys2 Historically in France, the defi nition of the social and solidarity economy had been based on
organizational type: all mutual companies and cooperatives fall under this defi nition. In Western
Switzerland, however, another defi nition is upheld, that of guiding principles and key criteria. A
for-profi t company can be part of the SSE, as long as it is aligned with the principles of the SSE
and profi t-making is not the primary goal. The debate about structure versus content of such organizations (Kawano 2009 ) has been focused on the distinction between theory and practice: some
cooperatives may be seeking the economic benefi t for their members above all, while some forprofi ts may be working towards greater social and environmental aims. Simply put, adopting a
legal form does not guarantee that an entity becomes part of the social and solidarity economy
(Swaton 2011 ; Defourny et al. 2000 ).
M. Sahakian