210
The notion of solidarity tends towards a defi nition of reciprocity as going beyond
the duality of giving, receiving and the obligation to give in return, to exchanges
across and between different subgroups (Polanyi 1957 ). Reciprocity in the solidarity economy entails complementary relations based on voluntary interdependence
(Servet 2007 : 264), or being ‘invested with the potential of solidarity, consciously
interdependent on others’ (Servet 2006 : 18). This is an important distinction in theory, as it means that the SSE is not solely about reciprocity in dire straits, out of
necessity, towards the relations of ‘master and slave’, but rather out of an interest in
the commons and the community. The work of Elinor Ostrom ( 2001 /1990) is relevant here: collective action can be based on voluntary participation and an identifi -
cation of needs, going beyond the individual need or that of a self-interested group,
to broader social and environmental needs. Sahakian and Servet ( in press ) propose
the term ‘communal sharing’ to describe forms of sharing that are aligned with the
notion of collective action (Sahakian and Servet in press ), a theme that will be further explored in the second part of this chapter.
SSE is generally understood as placing human beings at the centre of economic
and social life (ISGC 1997 ). SSE seeks to foster solidarity by placing more importance on people, rather than the accumulation of capital or profi t. What inspired
early cooperative and associative movements of the nineteenth century and continues to drive efforts in the SSE today are the limitations on profi t making: the fi nancial gains for investors are subject to limits (Laville 2011 ). Another aspect is the
emphasis placed on governance systems. The SSE promotes democratic processes
within organizations: SSE entities are usually self-managed, self-organized and
generally independent from State support. According to Laville ( 2003 ), SSE is ultimately about promoting democracy on the local level through economic activity, or
the ‘democratization’ of the economy based on the participatory engagement of all
citizens (Defourny and Develtere 1999 ; Fraisse et al. 2007 ). The vision is to include
all types of people in economic life, engaging them to participate as economic
actors, most often at the level of the community. In contexts such as the Global
South, the focus is often on rural contexts and on engaging the poor as primary
stakeholders in economic activities (Sahakian and Dunand 2015 ).
To summarize some of the guiding principles that are put forward by SSE actors,
the goal of this economy is to place ‘service to its members or to the community
ahead of profi t; autonomous management; a democratic decision-making process;
the primacy of people and work over capital in the distribution of revenues’
(Defourny et al. 2000 ). Activities could include some forms of social entrepreneurship; community currencies; micro-credit programs; as well certain worker, consumer and producer cooperatives; community gardens or community supported
agriculture; social reinsertion programs; community-run exchange platforms; do-ityourself initiatives; shared services and goods; insurance and fi nancial services,
among others. The extent to which these activities fall under SSE umbrella would
depend on whether they are progressively seeking to participate in this economy
(Swaton and Baranzini 2013 ), which would need to be evaluated not only in theory
and discourse, but also in practice.
In Geneva, Switzerland, companies who want to be part of the SSE must sign a
charter, and in doing so, they comply with transparency in reporting, engaging in
M. Sahakian
The notion of solidarity tends towards a defi nition of reciprocity as going beyond
the duality of giving, receiving and the obligation to give in return, to exchanges
across and between different subgroups (Polanyi 1957 ). Reciprocity in the solidarity economy entails complementary relations based on voluntary interdependence
(Servet 2007 : 264), or being ‘invested with the potential of solidarity, consciously
interdependent on others’ (Servet 2006 : 18). This is an important distinction in theory, as it means that the SSE is not solely about reciprocity in dire straits, out of
necessity, towards the relations of ‘master and slave’, but rather out of an interest in
the commons and the community. The work of Elinor Ostrom ( 2001 /1990) is relevant here: collective action can be based on voluntary participation and an identifi -
cation of needs, going beyond the individual need or that of a self-interested group,
to broader social and environmental needs. Sahakian and Servet ( in press ) propose
the term ‘communal sharing’ to describe forms of sharing that are aligned with the
notion of collective action (Sahakian and Servet in press ), a theme that will be further explored in the second part of this chapter.
SSE is generally understood as placing human beings at the centre of economic
and social life (ISGC 1997 ). SSE seeks to foster solidarity by placing more importance on people, rather than the accumulation of capital or profi t. What inspired
early cooperative and associative movements of the nineteenth century and continues to drive efforts in the SSE today are the limitations on profi t making: the fi nancial gains for investors are subject to limits (Laville 2011 ). Another aspect is the
emphasis placed on governance systems. The SSE promotes democratic processes
within organizations: SSE entities are usually self-managed, self-organized and
generally independent from State support. According to Laville ( 2003 ), SSE is ultimately about promoting democracy on the local level through economic activity, or
the ‘democratization’ of the economy based on the participatory engagement of all
citizens (Defourny and Develtere 1999 ; Fraisse et al. 2007 ). The vision is to include
all types of people in economic life, engaging them to participate as economic
actors, most often at the level of the community. In contexts such as the Global
South, the focus is often on rural contexts and on engaging the poor as primary
stakeholders in economic activities (Sahakian and Dunand 2015 ).
To summarize some of the guiding principles that are put forward by SSE actors,
the goal of this economy is to place ‘service to its members or to the community
ahead of profi t; autonomous management; a democratic decision-making process;
the primacy of people and work over capital in the distribution of revenues’
(Defourny et al. 2000 ). Activities could include some forms of social entrepreneurship; community currencies; micro-credit programs; as well certain worker, consumer and producer cooperatives; community gardens or community supported
agriculture; social reinsertion programs; community-run exchange platforms; do-ityourself initiatives; shared services and goods; insurance and fi nancial services,
among others. The extent to which these activities fall under SSE umbrella would
depend on whether they are progressively seeking to participate in this economy
(Swaton and Baranzini 2013 ), which would need to be evaluated not only in theory
and discourse, but also in practice.
In Geneva, Switzerland, companies who want to be part of the SSE must sign a
charter, and in doing so, they comply with transparency in reporting, engaging in
M. Sahakian