"Der Prozess der Institutionalisierung von Organisationen kann mit dem Konzept der politischen Einbettung in zweierlei Hinsicht analysiert werden: einerseits kann gefragt werden, wie die Organisationen an der Entwicklung von staatlicher Politik beteiligt sind, und andererseits, in welchem Ausmaß diese Politik die Organisationen selbst beeinflusst. Im Falle der Sozialunternehmen, die aktiv in die Integration von benachteiligten Menschen am Arbeitsmarkt involviert sind, sind diese Fragen einfach zu beantworten: In Belgien und generell in den europäischen Ländern haben diese Unternehmen zur Entwicklung von aktiver Arbeitsmarktpolitik beigetragen, heute stellen sie selbst ein Instrument zur Umsetzung entsprechender Maßnahmen dar. Der Artikel untersucht, auf welche Art diese Form der Institutionalisierung die arbeitsmarktpolitischen Ziele, Governance-Strukturen und Ressourcen der betrachteten Unternehmen beeinflusst." (Autorenreferat)
El interés de los gobiernos por las cooperativas y la economía social ha aumentado en los últimos años, en el contexto de la crisis y de la lucha contra la pobreza y la exclusión. Para analizar el tema de la relación entre el Estado y la economía social en América Latina, se presentan dos casos contrastados, el de Brasil y el de Venezuela. En ambos paísesse ha producido un importante crecimiento en el número de empresas colectivas, y gobiernos progresistas, en la década 2000, han desarrollado políticas de apoyo a la ESS. Sin embargo, existen importantes diferencias en los procesos de institucionalización de la ESS enambos países. En el caso brasileño, se ha desarrollado un movimiento social de economía solidaria desde la sociedad civil, movimiento que ha conquistado un lugar en el espacio público y ha logrado generar una relación de concertación con el Estado.En el caso venezolano,el gobierno del presidente Chavez ha aplicado una política voluntarista, en un contexto de débil desarrollo de las organizaciones de la economía social y de la sociedad civil. En este artículo, se analizan estos dos procesos de institucionalización y se sacan algunas conclusiones transversales sobre los desafíos presentes en el desarrollo de la ESS y en sus relaciones con el Estado y con otras instituciones. ; In recent years, there as been a growing interest of governments for social o solidarity economy, in the context of the crisis and the need for new sustainable development policies.To illustrate these new policies in Latin America, we use two specific case studies, Brazil and Venezuela. In both countries, social and solidarity economy has been encouraged by public policies, and is a fast-growing sector. However, the dynamics of the State's role in structuring the SSE movement are contrasting. In the Brasilian case, public policy is the product of a relationship of partnership between the government and the social movement of the Solidarity Economy, which has gradually conquered a place in the public space. In the Venezuelan case, the construction of public policy exhibits a top-down approach and many social economy ventures are the product of a proactive State policy. In the paper, we analyse both institutionalization processes and draw comparative conclusions about the challenges associated with the relationship between SSE and the State and other institutions. ; 39 - 58 ; andreia.lemaitre@uclouvain.be ; mricher@cantv.net
Do informal initiatives share a capitalist spirit of entrepreneurship? This article attempts to answer this question, using a "popular economy" analytical framework and focusing on the case of Chile. First, we present the context of the research, namely the economic and political evolutions in Chile since the 1970s and their effects on the popular economy. Then, we seek to answer the original question, relying on in-depth case studies of so-called "popular economy organizations". Our research shows that their socio-economic logics significantly differ from those of the traditional capitalist firm. Our observations also suggest important differences between current and older initiatives. ; Peer reviewed
Introduction: informal economy, vulnerabilities, and popular security-enhancing practices / Isabelle Hillenkamp, Frédéric Lapeyre, and Andreia Lemaître -- Part I. A plurality of socio-economic logics: new Polanyian approaches to informality and vulnerability. Popular cooperatives and local development in South-East Brazil: towards socio-economic pluralism / Andreia Lemaître -- Solidarity and protection in Bolivian popular economy / Isabelle Hillenkamp -- Self-managed work, social protection, and community development: the case of the UST Cooperative (Argentina) / Gonzalo Vázquez -- An analysis of the socio-economic logics underpinning formal and informal strategies for coping with economic hardships in South Kivu, Democratic Republic of the Congo / Maïté le Polain and Marthe Nyssens --
In: Revue internationale des études du développement: revue trimestrielle publiée par l'Institut d'étude du développement économique et social de l'Université de Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne, Band 245, Heft 1, S. 69-92
L'article interroge la forme que prend, au Bénin, la réémergence du discours sur l'entrepreneuriat, en se penchant sur l'évolution de la figure de petit entrepreneur dans le discours – globalisé – des « partenaires du développement » et sur la manière dont la figure d'entrepreneur est acceptée et réinterprétée localement par les élites et les populations bénéficiaires des programmes de soutien à l'entrepreneuriat. À travers l'analyse d'entretiens et de discussions de groupe, nos résultats montrent que, bien que la désignation « entrepreneur » soit désormais largement adoptée par les populations locales, ce terme, en contre-pied des tendances récentes des politiques d'aide, est principalement associé à la sécurisation réussie du groupe domestique et à la création de travail pour autrui. ; "Entrepreneurship," You Said? When Divergent Conceptions and Interests Meet in the Field in Benin's Mono Department The article questions the specific form that the re-emergence of the discourse on entrepreneurship is taking today in Benin, by looking at the evolution of the figure of the small entrepreneur in the - globalized - discourse of development institutions on the one hand, and at the way in which this ideologized figure has been accepted and reinterpreted by the local elite and the population targeted by entrepreneurship support programs on the other hand. Through the analysis of interviews and focus groups, our results show that although the designation "entrepreneur" has now widely been adopted locally, the term, in contrast to recent trends in aid policies, is mainly associated with the successful safeguarding of the domestic group and the creation of work for others.
L'article interroge la forme que prend, au Bénin, la réémergence du discours sur l'entrepreneuriat, en se penchant sur l'évolution de la figure de petit entrepreneur dans le discours – globalisé – des « partenaires du développement » et sur la manière dont la figure d'entrepreneur est acceptée et réinterprétée localement par les élites et les populations bénéficiaires des programmes de soutien à l'entrepreneuriat. À travers l'analyse d'entretiens et de discussions de groupe, nos résultats montrent que, bien que la désignation « entrepreneur » soit désormais largement adoptée par les populations locales, ce terme, en contre-pied des tendances récentes des politiques d'aide, est principalement associé à la sécurisation réussie du groupe domestique et à la création de travail pour autrui. ; "Entrepreneurship," You Said? When Divergent Conceptions and Interests Meet in the Field in Benin's Mono Department The article questions the specific form that the re-emergence of the discourse on entrepreneurship is taking today in Benin, by looking at the evolution of the figure of the small entrepreneur in the - globalized - discourse of development institutions on the one hand, and at the way in which this ideologized figure has been accepted and reinterpreted by the local elite and the population targeted by entrepreneurship support programs on the other hand. Through the analysis of interviews and focus groups, our results show that although the designation "entrepreneur" has now widely been adopted locally, the term, in contrast to recent trends in aid policies, is mainly associated with the successful safeguarding of the domestic group and the creation of work for others.
L'article présente la littérature traditionnelle sur le micro-entrepreuneuriat dans le secteur informel, en particulier la théorie des segments qui s'est développée à partir des années 1990. Dans un second temps, il confronte celle-ci, d'une part, aux résultats d'enquêtes exploratoires de terrain menées dans le département du Mono au Bénin et, d'autre part, à la littérature sur l'économie populaire qui s'est développée principalement en Amérique latine. Les conclusions dégagées questionnent en retour les programmes de développement traditionnels de soutien au micro-entreprenariat et d'accès au microcrédit.
Cet article retrace le processus d'institutionnalisation de l'économie populaire et solidaire (EPS) en Équateur. À travers une analyse historique, nous présentons les quatre trajectoires institutionnelles qui ont conduit à la reconnaissance politique des organisations et à leur inscription dans les politiques publiques. Nous montrons que l'institutionnalisation de l'EPS est le résultat d'une relation d'influence réciproque entre différentes catégories d'acteurs : organisations, structures intermédiaires et pouvoirs publics. L'analyse fait ressortir le mode d'encastrement politique de chaque trajectoire et les enjeux de l'institutionnalisation de l'EPS dans le cadre institutionnel en présence.
This paper is part of the ICSEM project, which aims to build a typology of social enterprises at the international level in collaboration with research teams from all over the world (see www.iap-socent.be/icsem-project). One of the main axes of the project aims to compare social enterprise models worldwide and their respective institutionalization processes. It is important to underline that the notion of "social enterprise" is unusual in Ecuador. Social actors and practitioners engaged in promoting alternative economic models (not linked to the private capitalistic model nor to the public statist model) have recognized themselves through historically established concepts (e.g. cooperativism and associations) or more recent expressions such as the "popular and solidarity economy". The latter emerged from theoretical and conceptual contributions by Latin American scholars (e.g. Coraggio 1999; Razeto 1984; Singer 2000) who analyzed practices of production, exchange, consumption of goods and services, and finance not driven by the sole purpose of profit maximization. The concept of solidarity economy also gained relevance within the public debate through the rise of anti-neoliberalism and anti-globalization activism by civil society organizations in the last three decades, and more particularly in the aftermath of the World Social Forum in 2001. Moreover, since the second half of the 2000s, the rise of the so-called "new left" governments in Latin America (Ellner 2012) encouraged particular trajectories of conceptual construction and institutionalization of the solidarity economy (Coraggio 2011; Hillenkamp and Wanderley 2015; Lemaître et al. 2011). The institutionalization of the solidarity economy is considered as a part of a project of state transformation driven by an apparent post-neoliberal turn (Ettlinger and Hartmann 2015; Molyneux 2008). In this context, since 2008, the term of "popular and solidarity economy" (economía popular y solidaria) has been the concept used by Ecuadorian state officials for public policy design and implementation as well as bureaucratic intervention (Nelms 2015). Due to its heuristic relevance, and since it draws close to the EMES social enterprise theoretical framework (Defourny and Nyssens 2013), the "popular and solidarity economy" (for simplification, hereafter referred to by its Spanish acronym, EPS) will be the object of study in the Ecuadorian case for the ICSEM Project. The aim of this paper is threefold. First, we present a synthetic theoretical framework concerning institutionalization and the concept of embeddedness (section 2). Through an institutionalist and historical perspective (Polanyi 1944), we review the main historical traditions that led to a political and legal recognition of EPS initiatives in Ecuador as well as their enrollment in public policies. Section 3 drafts four models of EPS organizations, each drawn from one of the sources of institutionalization previously presented. Through a synthetic analysis, in the light of the ideal-type proposed by EMES (Defourny and Nyssens 2013) and the works of Hillenkamp and Laville (2015), we identify some distinctive features of the different models regarding their legal forms, type of mission, governance structure, and resources. These models are also illustrated in different fields of activity, both established and emerging in the Ecuadorian landscape. We conclude by some final considerations regarding the social enterprise and solidarity economy research agenda.
This paper is part of the ICSEM project, which aims to build a typology of social enterprises at the international level in collaboration with research teams from all over the world (see www.iap-socent.be/icsem-project). One of the main axes of the project aims to compare social enterprise models worldwide and their respective institutionalization processes. It is important to underline that the notion of "social enterprise" is unusual in Ecuador. Social actors and practitioners engaged in promoting alternative economic models (not linked to the private capitalistic model nor to the public statist model) have recognized themselves through historically established concepts (e.g. cooperativism and associations) or more recent expressions such as the "popular and solidarity economy". The latter emerged from theoretical and conceptual contributions by Latin American scholars (e.g. Coraggio 1999; Razeto 1984; Singer 2000) who analyzed practices of production, exchange, consumption of goods and services, and finance not driven by the sole purpose of profit maximization. The concept of solidarity economy also gained relevance within the public debate through the rise of anti-neoliberalism and anti-globalization activism by civil society organizations in the last three decades, and more particularly in the aftermath of the World Social Forum in 2001. Moreover, since the second half of the 2000s, the rise of the so-called "new left" governments in Latin America (Ellner 2012) encouraged particular trajectories of conceptual construction and institutionalization of the solidarity economy (Coraggio 2011; Hillenkamp and Wanderley 2015; Lemaître et al. 2011). The institutionalization of the solidarity economy is considered as a part of a project of state transformation driven by an apparent post-neoliberal turn (Ettlinger and Hartmann 2015; Molyneux 2008). In this context, since 2008, the term of "popular and solidarity economy" (economía popular y solidaria) has been the concept used by Ecuadorian state officials for public policy design and implementation as well as bureaucratic intervention (Nelms 2015). Due to its heuristic relevance, and since it draws close to the EMES social enterprise theoretical framework (Defourny and Nyssens 2013), the "popular and solidarity economy" (for simplification, hereafter referred to by its Spanish acronym, EPS) will be the object of study in the Ecuadorian case for the ICSEM Project. The aim of this paper is threefold. First, we present a synthetic theoretical framework concerning institutionalization and the concept of embeddedness (section 2). Through an institutionalist and historical perspective (Polanyi 1944), we review the main historical traditions that led to a political and legal recognition of EPS initiatives in Ecuador as well as their enrollment in public policies. Section 3 drafts four models of EPS organizations, each drawn from one of the sources of institutionalization previously presented. Through a synthetic analysis, in the light of the ideal-type proposed by EMES (Defourny and Nyssens 2013) and the works of Hillenkamp and Laville (2015), we identify some distinctive features of the different models regarding their legal forms, type of mission, governance structure, and resources. These models are also illustrated in different fields of activity, both established and emerging in the Ecuadorian landscape. We conclude by some final considerations regarding the social enterprise and solidarity economy research agenda.
In: Ciências sociais UNISINOS: revista do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Sociais Aplicadas da Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos, Band 52, Heft 3
