Search results

Purpose – The aim of this chapter is to deconstruct the idea of a ‘Big Society’. We do so by underlining the left libertarian tradition in which civil society led economic activity such as the solidarity economy is embedded.

Methodology – By analysing the thought of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, a key thinker and activist in the 19th libertarian socialist movement, we identify the principles guiding the solidarity economy. We illustrate our argument by drawing on qualitative research conducted on solidarity economy organisations in France.

Findings – The solidarity economy illustrates an alternative to both capitalism and state socialism: libertarian socialism. This chapter demonstrates that this left libertarianism is not a new utopia. It is rooted in the long (but marginal) history of libertarian socialism, which was born in the 19th century.

Originality – An economy managed from the left based on libertarian political principles seems to be a novel experiment. We seek to illustrate what this may look like using the example of the present solidarity economy. However, we also emphasise that this would imply a reversal of the political programme of the ‘Big Society’. It would imply the redistribution of economic and political power not only from the state to local communities, but also from company directors and their shareholders in order to realise not a charitable but an economically empowered civil society.

In comparison with other countries, the rise of Dutch socialism was slow and difficult, and it would be impossible to explain this without exploring the movement′s early history. Such an exploration immediately leads to the somewhat singular character of Ferdinand Domela Nieuwenhuis (1846‐1919), who led the Dutch socialist movement in the nineteenth century. Gives a sketch of Domela Nieuwenhuis′ life and work; the political and social conditions under which Dutch socialism emerged; and the specific character of socialism in The Netherlands. Concludes by suggesting that the late industrialization and the opposing interests of confessionalism and modernism meant that the socialists were not able to organize a power structure for the workers on the basis of the conflicting interests of “capital” and “labour”. By the time the socialist power structure finally achieved significance, large parts of the total labour force had been assimilated into confessional cadres and, in this sense, socialism came too late to The Netherlands.

This paper explores the sociological, economic, and political reasons for the collapse of Venezuela's 40-year “pacted” democracy, the eight-year conflict between the country's new president and the opposition, where this conflict has led Venezuela, and what its prospects are for the near future. It proposes that the collapse of Venezuela's “ancien regime” can best be understood by an examination of the impact the rise and fall of oil prices had on its economy, society, and polity. A 20-year economic decline led to the election of Hugo Chavez, a radical outsider, who refused to play along with the country's old political class. This class, in turn, refused to accept Chavez as the legitimately elected president and launched the country on an eight-year roller-coaster ride of counter-revolution and radicalization, which recently ended with the reelection of Chavez and a massive popular endorsement for the establishment of “21st century socialism” in Venezuela. Exactly what such a project means is still unclear, but it so far involves state support for self-managed workplaces and an anti-capitalist and participatory democratic state in the midst of a still functioning capitalist economy. With the apparent defeat of obstacles that are external to the Bolivarian movement, as the pro-Chavez movement is called, such as the domestic opposition and U.S. intervention, the movement is now forced to confront its internal obstacles, such as clientelism, corruption, and personalism, if it is to succeed in the long run.

One challenge to understanding identity within third-sector organizations is that of definition. Third sector is a broad covering term that enables inclusion of all organizations working within this arena; yet it does not capture the exact essence of or identity of the third sector. This dilemma raises the idea that there is a possibility of an identifiable characterization of the sector that can be attributed to a particular third-sector rationality and purpose. A commonly held view is that third-sector organizations are essentially caring and provide services or goods that support this object. The aim of working toward an improved society through the provision of these goods and services is also generally inspired by the common good and underpinned by values such as solidarity, responsibility, dignity, justice, cooperation, subsidiarity, democracy, inclusivity, sustainability, and accountability. Whilst superimposed onto issues of agreed definitions and understandings of third-sector actors identity, the space within which they operate is an additional layer. Civil society is often used as a cover-all term to define the blurred space where the complex and negotiated boundaries between state, civil society, family, and markets are played out. All the chapters within this section cover issues of identity from differing perspectives giving a broader view of the particular characteristics whether technological or cultural, which determine how and why there is no one specific third-sector identity that fits all organizations working within different institutional spaces and international contexts.

The material in this section dates as early as 1880, a year after publication of Progress and Poverty. George had not attained notoriety but was about to do so. It was at this time that he began a close association with Patrick Ford of The Irish World. So these selections should be read carefully both to clarify this transitional period and as a seedbed for future works.

Accounting is part of a cosmology, even an anthropology, which goes beyond the simple input/output operation. This is why its object is in the deepest sense a political term: accounting reports on and informs the relations that a society creates. As the true working heart of a company and of the State, it constitutes, however, a kind of a black box, the design of which would be reserved for certain specialists claiming to be of a scientific neutrality that conceals very political choices. From a normative point of view, accounting standardisation is an instrument of corporate or state governance insofar as it accounts for what is valued: as such, it reflects what matters in a society, not only in the strictly economic sense but also more generally in the social and political sense. As far as the company is concerned, we can conceive of it as an entity owned by the people who work there while holding a mandate of the company as a whole as long as its activity fits into the horizon it sets out. In this sense, it aims to maintain the capital (human, natural and financial) that constitutes it and to meet social needs. As for the State, re-envisioned from the perspective of the common, it becomes the object of institutions thoroughly invested by citizen control at all levels, from a perspective of complete federalism in which political and economic needs are coordinated under the principle of subsidiarity.

The purpose of this paper is to clarify and re‐position the debate on the role of women in employment in the Arab Middle East by drawing on the findings of empirical research to critique the paradigm of “neo‐patriarchy” defined by Sharabi and used uncritically by others.

A review of the literature on neo‐patriarchy is followed by some findings from an empirical study of 197 women in the Jordanian labour market, from a sample drawn on a population basis.

The findings indicate generally positive attitudes towards the employment of women and to the involvement of husbands in employment decisions, and to a slight preference on the part of managers for women as employees.

These findings need to be supplemented by more intensive studies in work situations and by case‐studies of specific employment sites.

The attitudes of women in Jordan are in general positive towards employment and policy is evolving accordingly.

These findings point to the limitations of the “neo‐patriarchy” discourse and to the likelihood that the employment situations of women in Jordan do not need to be characterized by the discourse of under‐development and traditionalism.

Prevailing concepts of corporate governance that are based on external shareholder interests have been challenged by a number of authors over the last three decades. The purpose of this paper is to outline the core assumptions of communitarian philosophy and values, together with the way writers imagine these might be enacted in a social enterprise context. These assumptions are then explored using two case studies.

The paper was conducted using participatory action research which involves parties examining current actions together and seeking to improve on them. The value of this approach is based on the plausible, authentic and critical insights it generates into management practice.

Case evidence suggests that companies are able to adopt and operate effectively while deploying communitarian values and that these values lead to alternative business objectives expressed through new forms of corporate governance. Nevertheless, the adopting of common language does not necessarily mean that social enterprises share a common philosophy.

The key contribution of this paper is to evaluate the institutionalisation of governance and consider the relationship between the form and substance of practice. By considering the link between words and actions, the paper concludes that the adoption of a governance framework, or particular language, matters less than the capacity of company members to participate in the development of governance norms that enable them to act congruently with their own beliefs and values.

Myers and Cato explore the cooperative sector in the areas of health and social services reforms, and in particular, the rediscovery of mutualism. The authors build on research of 17 case studies, which was undertaken on behalf of the Wales Co-operative Centre, to raise questions and provoke discussion about social enterprise and cooperatives operating as service providers. Myers and Cato call for taking the “mutual moment” as an opportunity to rethink the provision of public services without losing the ethos of public service and to build public value. More than this, their thought-provoking piece also gives us opportunity to critically reflect upon the changing relationship between state, private, and third sectors. The authors first analyze the progressive move from public to private provision and then look at the potential to move from private to mutual. Finally, they ask the question whether co-constructing mutualism and public services is the way forward to reconfiguring public services in a way that is both democratic and desirable.