space reuatiom

7/30/2019 space reuatiom

1/37

Rural Co -o peratives

and Sustainable D evelopm ent


2/37


3/37

Rural Co-operatives


M I C H A E L G E R T L E R

Cen tre for the Study o f Co -operatives

U niversity of Saskatchew an


4/37

Copyright 2001 M ichael G ertlerCen tre for the Study of C o-operatives

Un iversity of Saskatchewan

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced

in any form or by any means withou t th e prior written permission

of the publisher. In the case of photocopying or other forms of re-

prographic reproduction, please consult CANCOPY, the Can adian

Copyright Licensing Agency, at 18008935777 .

Cover and logo design by Byron H enderson

Editing, int erior layout, and design by N ora Russell

C A N A D I A N C A T A L O G U I N G I N P U B L I C A T I O N D A T A

Gertler, M ichael E. (M ichael Eden)

Rural co-operatives and sustainable development

ISBN 0888804431

1. C ooperat ive societies. 2. C ooperation. 3. Sustainable

development. 4. Rural development . I. University of Saskatchewan.

Cen tre for th e Study of C o-operatives. II. T itle.

H D2963.G47 2001 334 C20019107781

Printed in C anada

01 02 03 04 05/ 5 4 3 2 1

Cen tre for the Study of C o-operatives

101 Diefenbaker Place

Un iversity of Saskatchewan

Saskatoon SK Canada S7N 5B8

Phone: (306) 9668509

Fax: (306) 9668517E-m ail: coop .stud [email protected]

Website: http://coop-studies.usask.ca


5/37

Contents

Introduction 1

Environm ental M anagementand Sustainable D evelopm ent 2

Co -operatives and Sustainable D evelopm ent 4

W hy Are C o-op eratives

Appropriate O rganization al Vehicles

for Sustainable D evelopm ent? 7

T he N ecessity and Strategic Advantages

of Eco-Social Initiatives 13

W hy D o Co-o perativesD erive Strategic Advantage

from Environmental Management

and Sustainable D evelopm ent? 15

Pathways to Sustainable Resource M anagement:

Coopesilencio 21

Pathways to Sustainable Resource M anagement:

Coocafe and Coopeldos 24

Some Conclusions 27

References 29


6/37


7/37

U N I V E R S I T Y O F S AS K AT C H E W AN 1

Introduction1

TH I S P A P E R E X A M I N E S S T R U C T U R A L , E C O N O M I C , S O C I A L ,

cultural, and political factors that affect the ability of co-oper-

atives to implement m ore advanced forms of environm ental management

and sustainable developm ent. T he ideas presented here are conceptu al and

preliminary. Th ey are based on a heterodox analysis of co-operatives as so-

cial and economic organizations, and on empirical observation of the p rac-

tices of agricultural-sector co-operatives in Costa Rica, Chile, and Canada.

Case study field research was carried out in rural Costa Rica in 1999 and

2000, and in ru ral Chile in 1999. Th e author also draws on experience

studying agricultural and rural co-operatives in C anada. T his research is

exploratory and p reparatory for a larger stud y on th e conduct and perfor-

mance of co-operatives, corporations, and other resource-sector economic

organizations in C hile and Costa Rica.

Regions derive much of their culture and character from the character-istics and organization of key industries. Sustainable development requires

productive organizations that perform at high levels with respect to the

economic, social, and environmental services they provide to local regions.

Resource-sector productive organizations have different capacities with re-

1 An earlier version of this paper was present ed at th e X World C ongress of Rur al Socio-

logy, 30 July to 5 August 2000, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Some parts of t his paper were also

presented in Spanish at the First N ational Workshop for C o-operatives in the Forestry

and N atural Resource Man agement Sector, sponsored b y the In ternational Co-operative

Alliance, the Food an d Agricultu re O rganization Forests, Trees, and People Project,

and t he C onsejo N acional de C ooperativas (C O N A C O O P), 2629 M ay 2000, H eredia,

Costa Rica. The author gratefully acknowledges editorial input by JoAnn Jaffe and

N ora Russell.


8/37

spect to mobilization of capital, technology, and human resources, andwith respect to strategic plann ing and environm ental management .

O rganizations also h ave different strength s, p riorities, and orientations

when it com es to m anagement of complex production systems, develop-

men t of hu man capabilities, equitable distribu tion of benefits and costs,

and support ing sustainable comm unity developm ent. The history, loca-

tion, and econom ic cond ition of the organization, property relations gov-

ernin g access to resources, the regulatory context, th e experience of key

personnel, and links to oth er organizations are additional factors that m ay

affect performance. Furthermore, in a given sector, risks and opportu nities

may be redistributed am ong various kinds of economic organizations

based on relative market power and control of strategic resources.

Environ m ental M anagem ent


E

N V I R O N M E N T A L M A N A G E M E N T G E N E R A L L Y R E F E R S T O

a systematic programm e, at th e enterprise level, to monitor

and reduce environmental impacts associated with activities such as pro-

duction, p rocessing, and transportation. This may include redesign of

manufacturing, storage, and delivery systems to reduce energy, water, and

chemical consumption . It may also include approp riate treatment and re-

cycling of wastes; substitut ion of alternative soft energy sources; reduc-

tion of workplace health hazards; quality contro l and prevent ion of con-

tamination of prod ucts; and facility design t o enhance aesthetic qualities

and to m inimize such th ings as erosion, run off, dust, n oise, pests, and

traffic.

Sustainable Development is a broader idea and encompasses social,

economic, political, and environmental goals some of which involve im-port ant com prom ises. I take it to refer to development that enh ances qual-

ity of life withou t jeopardizing the ability of other pop ulations, or of futu re

G E R T LE R

2 C E N T R E F O R T H E S T U D Y O F C O - O P E R AT I V E S


9/37

generations, to access the resources needed for their own development. It isa conception that encompasses ideas of eco-social justice. This can be taken

to include, as a necessary precondition and as a worthy goal, the broaden-

ing of democratic participation in the ownership and control of resources.

In terms of production and consum ption systems and m anagement of en-

vironmen tal impacts, it calls for holistic vision and attention to t he full

range of the ecological costs engendered, and the ecological services ren-

dered (Mooney and Ehrlich 1997).

As an approach it seeks to do no lasting harm. Sustainable develop-

ment t hus calls for m odification of human activities to work in greater har-

mony with natu ral processes, and to reduce the poten tial for degradation

or catastrophic collapse of natural systems. It pu ts a special responsibilityon human beings to treat their fellows and the rest of the world in such a

way as to avoid destruction of cultu ral and bio-d iversity. It is a radical

orientation when it addresses contrad ictions in comm ercial-indu strial de-

velopment throu gh a combination of fundament al changes in values, or-

ganization, and technology. It is also a conservative orientation when it

admits to limits in our ability to comprehend, model, and manage natural

processes. T his imp lies a need to err on the side of caution an d safety.

As a social process, sustainable development can be encapsulated as

approp riate relationships between p eople and people and nature (Allen

1993:5). In th is conception, hum an commun ities are located cent rally ascore elements of sustainable ecosystems. As a social process, sustainable

development t hus requires organizational and institution al arrangements

that a) support sustainable systems of production and consum ption , and

b) suppor t the developm ent of sustainable comm un ities that h ave the in-

terest and capacity to defend local ecosystem integrity. Individuals acting

alone cannot preserve bio-diversity, manage landscapes, or protect water-

sheds. It takes some form of comm un ity to imp lement sustainable prac-

tices. W ithou t com mu nity, ind ividuals have little incentive to conserve or

protect resources (Gertler 1999).


R U R AL C O - O P E R AT I V E S A N D S U ST AI N AB L E D E V E L O P M E N T


10/37

Co-operatives


WH A T G R O U N D S A R E T H E R E F O R S U G G E S T I N G T H A T

co-operatives may be especially suited to promote environ-

mentally and socially advanced forms of sustainable development (see

Holmn 1994; Saxena 1995; Chavez-Pirson 1997)? As organization s operat-

ing in market contexts, co-operatives can imp lement sustainable resource

management only if there are ways to capture some of the value preserved

or created. C onventional firms can defray the costs of environm ental man-

agement un der a num ber of scenarios. D ominant firm s with significant

market power can make environm ental investments withou t serious im-

pacts on profit s. Some firms can tu rn a small environm ental investm ent

into an im portant benefit in terms of marketing or raising equity. O ther

firms can claim to be green precisely because they are not importan t u sers

of natural resources or because the processes involved have few (direct) en-

vironm ental consequences.

Co-operatives tend to be over-represented in sectors and contexts that

rule out the kinds of easy relationships to environm ental managemen t d is-

cussed above. Co-operatives are concentrated in renewable-resource-based

sectors such as agriculture, fisheries, and forestry. C o-operatives are also

found in t ransportation and electrical power ind ustries, where there are

environmental issues related to the use and production of energy. Strong

representation in natural-resource-based sectors suggests that co-operatives

have a particular need to implement sustainable practices, bu t structu ral

conditions may make it difficult for co-operatives to defray the necessary

investments. Co-operatives are frequently active in sectors with low rates

of return on capital. Examples include banking services for working-classpeople, hou sing for m oderate-income families, and processing basic com-

modities that o ffer little opport un ity for prod uct d ifferentiation.



11/37

Co-operatives have often come into existence because small-scale pro-ducers seek protection from more powerful players in the m arket-place.

O ther co-operatives have been developed where convent ional firms per-

ceive high risks and low returns given m arket structure or the character of

the part icular resources involved. Th ese co-operat ives may survive because

they take on roles that are of minor interest to others. Certain co-opera-

tives have been created in reaction to acute ecological and social crises.

Examples include co-operative pastures set up in th e 1930s to m anage land

damaged by drought and poor farming practices on the Canadian prairies,

and textile co-operatives initiated to rebuild economies and comm unities

shattered by war in rural Guatemala.

Yet co-operatives may have special pot ent ial as enterprises that canfoster cultural, organizational, and technological changethe kinds of

change required if significant movement in the d irection of sustainable

development is to be achieved. A central thesis of this paper is that co-op-

eratives, and especially resource-sector co-ops, can successfully take on

eco-social agendas. Given their structure, rationale, and principles, this

is an arena in which co-operatives may well outperform both private and

state enterprise. Given their organizational characteristics and context,

th is is also a playing field on which co-operatives can achieve com mercial

advantages.




12/37

W hy Are Co-operatives

Appropriate Organizational Vehicles

for Sustainable Development?

C o-o per a t i ves ro u t i ne l y i n t eg ra t e mu l t i p l e econo mi c , soc i al , and eco l og i cal

ob j ec t i ves .

C o-o per a t i ves a re p rac t i cal veh i c les f o r co -oper a t i on and co l l ec t i ve ac t i on ,

bo t h o f wh i ch are c r uc i al t o sus t a inab le deve l opm en t ; t hey bu i l d and r e i n -

f o r ce com m un i t y , wh i ch i s bo t h a m ed i um f o r , and a m easure o f , sust a i nab l e

d e v e l o p m e n t .

G i ve n co m m u n i t y t i es an d le ss n e e d f o r s h o r t - t e r m p r o fi t s , c o - o p e r a t i v es

have t he capac it y t o emb race and ac t o n l onger p l ann i ng ho r i zons .

C o-o per a t i ves he l p t o st ab i li ze r egi ona l econo m i es and p r ov i de a f avour ab le

c li m a t e f o r f u r t h e r i n ve st m e n t .

C o-o per a t i ves red uce i nequal i t y and p r om ot e equ i t ab le shar i ng o f t he cos t s

and benefi t s o f sust a i nab l e deve l opm en t .

C o - o p e r a t i ve s c an p r o m o t e e c o n o m i c d e m o c r a c y a n d t h e e m p o w e r m e n t o f

m arg ina li zed gro ups a hal lm ark o f sus t ai nab l e deve l opm en t and a p r econd i -t i on f o r sha red r espo ns ib i l it y .

C o -o per at i ves serve as fac i l i ta t ing par t ner s in al l iances invo lv ing loca l and

na t i ona l, and pub l i c - and p r i vat e -sec t o r o r gan i zat i ons .

Sus t ai nab l e deve lopm en t i s kno w l edge- and m anagem ent - i n t ens i ve;

co -o per a t i ves have o r gan i zat i on a l capac i t y f o r com m un i cat i on , t r a in i ng ,

and educa t ion .

C o - o p e r a t i ve s ar e p a r t o f a w o r l d m o v e m e n t t h a t h as st r o n g li n k s t o o t h e r

c o n t e m p o r a r y so c i al m o v e m e n t s fo c u s se d o n t h e e n v ir o n m e n t , w o m e n s

l ibe r a t i on , demo cracy , deve lopm en t a l t e rn a t i ves , po ve r t y , and r es is t i ngneo- l ibera l g lobal i sm.



13/37

W hy Are C o-o peratives

Approp riate O rganizatio n al Veh icles

for Sustainable D evelopm ent?

C o-operatives routi nely in tegrate m ulti ple econom ic, social,

and ecological objectives.

SU S T A I N A B L E D E V E L O P M E N T I S O F T E N R E P R E S E N T E D A S

having three dimensions, or t heatres, for action: the economic,

the social, and the environm ental. T his draws attention to the requirement

to m eet at least m inimal standards of performance in all th ree dom ains in

order to qualify as truly sustainable developm ent. T he implication is that

no claims to sustainability can be justified where any on e of these dimen-

sions is seriously neglected, but also th at th ese three arenas interact andmutually condition outcomes in important ways. This points to the need

to t ake a furt her step, both conceptually and in practice. It mu st be recog-

nized t hat economic m atters are inherently and inevitably social, and t hat

social objectives can be achieved m ost reliably when they are built in to

economic practices, not addressed as an afterthought or sidebar. Like-

wise, it must be acknowledged t hat t he costs of environmental mismanage-

ment are tangible and large, and that it is far more efficient to address eco-

logical matters at the earliest stages of production (e.g., product or process

design), than to att empt to m itigate the imp acts of poorly conceived prac-

tices at a latter stage (Com moner 1971).It is in t he cont ext of th is re-examination and re-framing of the re-

quiremen ts for sustainable developm ent t hat co-operatives come to the



14/37

fore as an attractive organizational op tion. Co-operative managers andboards must rou tinely integrate multiple econom ic, social, and resource-

man agemen t objectives. T his makes the m anagement of co-operatives

more complex, but also renders them m ore ready and adaptable as organi-

zational p latforms for sustainable development. T he corporate culture

of co-operatives prepares them for further travels in the complex realm of

socio-economic, enviro-economic, and eco-social optimization. Moreover,

co-operatives can support the kind s of human interaction that m ake such

complex tradeoffs and adjustments conceivable and viable.

Co-operatives are practical vehicles for co-operation and collective

action, both of wh ich are crucial to sustain able developmen t; they

bui ld and reinforce comm un ity, w hich is both a m edium for, and

a m easure of, sustain able developm ent.

Inasmuch as co-operatives promote co-operation and collective ac-

tion , th ey provide an organization al vehicle for addressing collective social-

ecological interests. This is a key contribution to sustainable development

since capitalist market economies frequently fail when it comes to translat-

ing comm un al interests into app ropriate action . Co-operatives also help to

build sustainable commu nities that are bot h a goal of sustainable develop-

men t and a crucial ingredient for imp lementing sustainable systems of pro-

duction and consumption.

Sustainable developm ent requires social capital, a concept u sed by

some analysts to refer to networks and positive working relationships, and

to social condition s such as mutu al trust and good will (Roseland 1999).

T hese kinds of social dynam ics are generally essent ial for the success of any

significant u ndertakingincluding the bu ilding of a co-operative. T hey

are likewise central to sustainable developm ent in t hat they provide the

necessary context for improving living standards without depend ing exclu-

sively on increased levels of private consumption. When they work well,

co-operatives reproduce and expand social capital, which then contribu testo the success of other projects. Co-operatives play an integrating and sta-

bilizing role, foster alliances and coalitions, and can help to reduce social

G E R T LE R



15/37



inequ ality. C o-operatives thus provide social services to regional econo-mies in much the same sense that some activities (e.g., agriculture) may

provide environmental services.

G iven com m un ity ti es and less need for short-t erm profits,

co-operatives hav e the capacity to em brace an d act on lon ger

plan nin g horizons.

O ne of the key contradictions of capitalist developm ent is the

inability to represent the interests of the future to th e present (T hurow1998:26). Capitalist market econom ies tend to h eavily discount the future.

T he combination of risk and long-term interest rates generally yield a n et

present value near to zero for investm ents in pollut ion con trol or resource

conservation . Th is is especially true when effects are gradu al and n onlocal-

ized, as in the case of long-term im pacts on water quality or the ozone

layer. This market failure calls for national and international regulation,

but co-operatives may be an approp riate additional institutional innova-

tion for promoting ecological responsibility.

Co-operatives are not tightly constrained by the discipline of capital

marketsat least in th e short run . Co-operative managers do n ot need to

demonstrate growth and profits (surp lus) every quarter, nor do t hey risk

their jobs if they fail to generate competitive rates of return on shareholder

investments. Co-operatives can raise capital via retained earnings and vari-

ous forms of member equity contr ibution s and loans. Moreover, co-opera-

tives do not need t o make a profit in the conventional sense. They can

persevere in t he long term without more than b reak-even performance;

co-op capital is patient capital. Co-operatives can thus make longer-

term investments that p romise import ant returns in the future, even if

that future is more than one business cycle away. Members derive other

kinds of advantages besides those enjoyed by owners of a firm. They are

likely to be positively affected by investments in environmental sustain-ability, for example, because they live and work in the region directly

affected by the co-operative.


16/37

C o-operatives help to stabiliz e regional econom ies an d providea favourable climate for further investment.

Co-operatives can be useful vehicles for addressing collective, long-

term interests. They also rend er a hidd en econom ic service by helping to

stabilize regional economies, and by creating a climate favourable to in vest-

ment by individuals, firms, and state agencies (Ketilson et al. 1998). Co-

operatives tend to out live many private firms (Direction d es Coopratives

1999), and their presence in rural areas helps to stabilize economies that are

typically the most vulnerable. This allows others to plan and invest with

greater confidence, and to reap the benefits of long-term projects designed

to enh ance productivity or to p rotect the resource base.

C o-operatives redu ce in equality an d prom ote equit able sharin g

of the costs and benefit s of sustain able developm ent.

Sustainable resource use is usually not compat ible with the exis-

tence of gross social and economic inequalities. Some would argue, in fact,

that such social conditions cannot ever qualify as sustainable development.

Co-operatives often h elp to reduce inequality. It can be argued th at the

psycho-social precond itions for sustainable developm ent also include

workable and transparent arrangements for the equitable apportionment

of costs and benefits. As vehicles of shared or collective enterprise, co-op -

eratives can be useful arrangements for accomplishing these kinds of eco-

economic justice.

C o-operatives can prom ote econom ic dem ocracy and the em powerm ent

of m arginaliz ed groups a hallm ark of sustainable development an d a

precon dit ion for shared respon sibi lity.

Social integration and t he enfranchisement of marginalized groupsthrough co-operative organizations and co-operative action are much

needed counterweights to processes of exclusion and exploitation. This in

G E R T LE R

1 0 C E N T R E F O R T H E S T U D Y O F C O - O P E R AT I V E S


17/37

itself qualifies as a step towards a sustainable society, bu t is also linked t othe ecologically sustainable use of natural resources (UNRISD 1994). Co-

operatives promote greater econom ic democracy through shared own er-

ship and shared con trol. M ore people gain d irect roles in the allocation

and management of resources, and their skills and creativity are more fully

engaged (Sen 1999). Econom ic participation on equitable groun ds is also a

necessary precondition for the emergence of attitudes and practices of

shared responsibility that support sustainable resource use.

C o-operatives serve as facilitatin g partn ers in alliances in volvin g

local and national, and public- and private-sector organizations.

Co-operatives frequently serve as facilitating partners in alliances or

coalitions involving combinations of local, national, and international, and

public- and p rivate-sector organizations. Partnerships are part of th e new

orth odoxy and practical reality in comm un ity econom ic developm ent. C o-

operatives are often key partners, tru sted and respected by non governmen-

tal organizations (N G O s), state agencies, and p rivate-sector firms. As brok-

ering partners, they frequently provide leadership resources and may serve

as facilitators for projects involving com plex alliances (O rtz Mora 1994;

Ketilson et al. 1998).

Sustainable development is knowledge- and m anagem ent -int ensive;

co-operativ es hav e organ iz ation al capacity for com m un ication, t rain-

ing, and edu cation.

Co-operatives can be effective schools for sustainable development ,

which is, compared t o less sustainable forms of developm ent, both knowl-

edge- and management-int ensive. Educating members, employees, and the

public is a co-operative principle, and many co-ops have been successful

in upgrading the technical, managerial, and organizational skills of theirmembership and staff. Short courses, advanced edu cation , peer instruc-

tion , and learning by experimentation all become more feasible in a co-

U N I V E R S I T Y O F S AS K AT C H E W AN 1 1



18/37

operative context. Co-operatives can sponsor participatory research inwhich m embers and employees design and manage research projects. They

can serve as networks for generatin g, sharin g, and validating local expert-

ise. T hey can collect, codify, and corroborate local knowledge (also kn own

as folk or indigenous knowledge) (Sillitoe 1998). Co-operatives are a con-

duit by which government or non governm ent organizations can effectively

deliver training, technical support , and adapted technologies.

Compared to household-based firms or large corporate operations,

co-operatives are more likely to have the combination of technical capacity

and workplace organization t hat allows them t o m anage more (ecologi-

cally) complex production systems. Sustainable development requiresadaptive learning, flexible organization, and adept fin e-tuning. It requires

motivated and thought ful workers and managers. Some forms of co-opera-

tive can p roduce and reprod uce such a workforce. T his is a key advantage.

Given the prospect of long-term relationships, co-operatives can val-

orize investm ents in member, employee, and customer edu cation. As dis-

cussed below with respect to marketing, co-operatives can benefit when

mem bers and customers are more aware of the substantive dimensions of

quality. G iven a relationship of t rust based on participation in governance

and ownership, co-operatives may be un iquely well placed to influence the

practices of members and staff. As locally cont rolled organization s, co-op -eratives are in an advantageous position when it comes to effective com-

mu nication (O rtz Mora 1994). There is less reason to conceal product or

business information, and m embers can be confident that they are not

being misled. Education is also a benefit that co-operatives can offer to

their employees, a mu tual advantage because emp loyee allegiance and ef-

fectiveness are thu s enh anced.

C o-operatives are part of a w orld m ovem ent t hat has strong link s to

other contem porary social m ovem ents focussed on t he envi ronm ent,w om ens liberati on, d em ocracy, developm ent alt ernat ives, poverty,

an d resistin g n eo-lib eral globalism .

G E R T LE R



19/37



Co-operatives are part of a long-stand ing world movement t hathas gathered strength in many contexts. Local co-operatives achieve global

reach via links to nation al and international co-operative organizations,

and through t hese second- and th ird-tier organizations, they share infor-

mation and lobby for appropriate regulatory frameworks at national and

int ernat ional levels. Co-operatives also have strong links to social move-

ments focussed on the environm ent, econom ic democracy, and develop-

ment alternatives. These movements can be strategic allies in making

transformative changes. C o-operatives are in a good position to t ake up

the challenge laid down by critics of globalization as envisioned by trans-

nation al corporations and supra-national trade and fin ancial organizations

(Korten 1995; Mand er and G oldsmith 1996). T hey appeal to a broad p ro-gressive constituency and have been viewed favourably by state aid agencies

and international N GO s as approp riate partners. With additional resources

from such sources, some co-operatives have pioneered in providing sus-

tainable livelihoods to marginalized peoples. Such examples provide viable

alternatives for those advocating another development to replace forms

of produ ctivist and consumption -oriented developm ent that p rivatize gain

and socialize costs. As key organizations in fair-trade n etworks, co-opera-

tives have provided n eeded links between socially conscious consum ers and

innovative producers who wish t o imp lemen t m ore sustainable forms of

production and consumption.

T he N ecess ity

and Strateg ic Advantages

of Eco -So cial Initiatives

TH E P R E C E D I N G S E C T I O N F O C U S S E S O N T H E A D V A N T A G E S

offered by co-operative forms of organization with respect tofacilitating a more sustainable development. It is argued that, for reasons of

structure and principle, co-operatives can m ove further and faster in this


20/37

direction than many oth er kinds of enterprise. Th is section t akes a slightlydifferent tack: it focusses on the potential advantages to co-operatives

when th ey take a proactive approach to environmental management and

sustainable development . It explores reasons why eco-social initiatives can

be favourable strategies in terms of organizational development, commer-

cial success, and responding to d iverse member in terests. Again, the d iscus-

sion addresses the logic of co-operative organizations and the quality of the

fit with various requirements of sustainable development.


W hy Do Co-operatives Der ive Strategic Advantage

from Environmental Management and Sustainable Development?

C o-o per a t i ves a re ac t i ve i n na t u ra l - resour ce -based i ndust r i es, w her e sus t ai n -

ab i l it y i ssues ar e cent r a l co ncer ns.

Env iro nm en t a l m anagement p r om ot es qua l it y and e ff ic i ency , r educes w ast e

and cos t s , and a ll ow s t he en t e r p r i se t o m ee t na t i ona l and i n t e r na t i ona l st an -

da rds t ha t are r equ i red t o secu r e access t o m arke t s .

Sus t ai nab l e p r ac t i ces can be a cen t r a l com po nen t o f M arke t i ng O ur C o-

op era t i ve A dvan t age .

Sus t ai nab l e p r ac t i ces p r om ot e co -o per a t i ve i den t i t y and i den t i fica t i on w i t h

t h e c o - o p e r a t i v e.

En v ir o n m e n t a l m a n age m e n t p r o v i d e s a b a si s f o r n e t w o r k i n g w i t h o t h e r c o -

op era t i ves and o r gan i zat i ons t ha t p r ov i de s t r a t egi c resour ces.

C o-o per a t i ves have s t ro ng t i es t o l oca l com m un i t i es and reg ions so t ha t

m emb ers and s t af f benefi t f ro m sust a i nab l e p rac t i ces as w or ke r s , res i den t s ,

an d h o u se h o l d m e m b e r s .

St r on g l inks be t w een p ro ducer s , p r ocessi ng ac t i vi t i es, and cust o m ers al low

c o - o p e r at i v es t o m a n d at e an d t o c ap t u r e t h e b e n e fi t s o f su st a in a b lepract i ces.

G E R T LE R


21/37

W hy D o C o-operat ives

D erive Strategic Advan tage

from Environ m ental M anagem ent

and Sustainable D evelop m ent?

Co-operatives are active in natural-resource-based industries,

w here sustain abi lity issues are central con cern s.

MA N Y C O - O P E R A T I V E S O P E R A T E I N N A T U R A L - R E S O U R C E -

based indu stries, which means th at th eir future is directly

linked to the sustainable use of resources. It also means that co-operatives

are directly exposed to the enviro-ethical campaigns that focus on issues

such as biodiversity and watershed protection, and on the negative conse-

quences of pesticide use, indu strialized livestock p roduction, and indu strial

forestry. Th ese realities argue th at co-operatives should be proactive in de-

veloping environmental expertise and p rogrammes. With approp riate ini-

tiatives, environmental liabilities can be transformed into assets.

Environmental management promotes quality and efficiency, reduces

w aste and costs, and allow s the enterprise to m eet n ation al and in ter-

nati onal stan dard s th at are requ ired to secure access to m arkets.

T here are other obvious and expedient reasons to in stitu te pro-grammes of environm ental management. As a cost-cont rol measure, envi-

ronmen tal management can help to eliminate waste, improve efficiencies



22/37

in p roduction, and convert by-products into valuable resources. If a co-operative want s to position its products for export, it m ust be prepared to

meet in ternational, as well as nation al, standards. Th is is not a simp le pro-

cess and can be facilitated by a systematic programme of monitoring and

improvement using an approved package of practices (e.g., those condon ed

by the In ternational Standards Organization). Such a programm e can yield

un expected dividends in t erms of marketing and overall managemen t, even

as it leads to cleaner and h igher-quality prod uction .

Su stain able practices can be a cent ral com ponent ofM arketing O ur Co-operative Advan tage.

Public opinion surveys reveal that co-operatives continue to enjoy

widespread tru st and respect (Cooperative Developm ent In stitut e 1996).

Some analysts have suggested a marketing strategy that builds on this posi-

tive image; they have called it M arketing O ur Co-operative Advantage

(M O C A) (Ferguson 1996). An import ant part of this advantage may be the

ability to offer guarantees concerning quality, safety, and the eco-eth ical

conditions associated with production. Some co-operatives have success-

fully taken a lead in offering their members the opport un ity to purchase

items with a green and socially clean pedigree. Some have also taken stepsto assist th eir suppliers in m aking changes to t heir production meth ods.

Sustainable development is a strategic option for all co-operatives.

This obviously includes co-operatives that hope to access organic, fair-

trade, or other kinds of international solidarity markets. It also app lies to

co-operatives that sell into conventional commodity markets, or th at pro-

vide inputs and services to local consumers and producers. Ecologically

appropriate and socially just goods and services are closely related dim en-

sions of the co-operative advantage. This is an arena in which co-opera-

tives, in part icular, can reap importan t d ividends in terms of synergies

and complementarities.To be successful in t he long term, marketing the co-operative advan-

tage will require educating and empowering consum ers. Th is must include

G E R T LE R



23/37

clear explanations concerning the co-operative difference and a new ori-entation towards sharing information about the conditions of production

and the p arameters of quality. Th anks to processing, packaging, and decep-

tive advertising, many people now lack ru dimentary and essential knowl-

edge concerning the origins and preparation of basic foodstuffs. C o-opera-

tives could take a lead role in reskilling consumers. T his is a strategy that

few private firms will be willing to emulate, in part because they have more

incentive to keep consumers in a state of semi-literacy when it comes to

reading the various components of quality, value, and cost (see Gabriel

and Lang 1995).

Su stai nable practices prom ote co-operative ident ity

and identifi cation w ith the co-operative.

Marketing the co-operative advantage requires a comm itment t o

affirm and strength en the co-operative ident ity of the enterprise. This

means adop ting and espousing key co-operative principles as outlined by

the International C o-operative Alliance (ICA) (MacPherson 1995). Com-

mitmen t to sustainable development is consistent with both the spirit and

the letter of these principles, and helps to d istinguish the enterpr ise as a co-

operative. Com mitment t o sustainable practices can also be expected to

prom ote member and employee identification with t he co-operative. It can

be helpful for recruiting and retaining key personnel, and in p romoting

positive comm unity relations. In short , eco-social comm itments shou ld

yield a n um ber of organizational benefits that h ave positive implications

for the viability and sustainability of the co-operative.

Env ironm ental m anagem ent provides a basis for networking w ith

other co-operatives and organizations that provide strategic resources.

Explicit adopt ion of an environm ental and eco-social agenda p ro-vides a basis on which to establish working relations with other co-opera-

tives. Most co-operatives cannot hope to be fully successful in sustainable




24/37

Co-operative Principles

DefinitionA co -o pera t i ve i s an au t o no m ous assoc i at i on o f pe rsons un i t ed vo l un t a r i l y

t o m ee t t he i r co m m on eco nom i c , soc i al , and cu lt u r a l needs and asp i ra t i ons

t h r o u gh a j o i n t - o w n e d a n d d e m o c r a t ic al ly - c o n t r o l le d e n t e r p r i se .

ValuesC o-o pera t i ves are based o n t he va l ues o f se lf -he lp , sel f- respo ns ib i l it y , dem o-

c racy , equa li t y , equ it y , and so l i da r i t y . In t he t r ad it i on o f t he i r f o under s , co -

operat i ve members be l ieve in the eth ica l va lues of honesty, openness, soc ia lrespon s ib i l it y , and ca r i ng f o r o t he rs .

PrinciplesTh e co -o pera t i ve p r i nc ip l es a re gu ide l i nes by w h i ch co -o per a t i ves pu t t he i r

val ues i n t o p r ac t ice .

F ir s t Pr inc ip le :

Voluntary and Open MembershipC o-o pera t i ves are vo l un t a ry o r gan i zat i ons , open t o a ll pe rsons ab le t o use

t he i r se rv i ces and w i ll ing t o accep t t he r espons ib i l it i es o f mem ber sh ip ,

w i thout gender, soc ia l , rac ia l , po l i t i ca l , or re l ig ious d iscr iminat ion.

Second Pr inc ip le :

Democratic Member ControlC o - o p e r a t iv e s ar e d e m o c r a t i c o r g an i za t io n s c o n t r o l l ed b y t h e i r m e m b e r s,

w ho act i ve l y pa r t i c i pat e i n se t t i ng t he i r p o l i c i es and m ak i ng dec is ions . Men and

w om en serv i ng as el ec t ed rep r esen t a t i ves a re accoun t ab l e t o t he m emb ersh i p .

I n p r i mary co -oper a t i ves , m emb ers have equal vo t i ng r i gh t s (on e mem ber , one

vo t e ) and co -o per a t i ves at o t he r l eve ls are a l so o rgan ised i n a demo cra t i c

m a n n e r .

Th i rd P r i nc i p l e :

Member Economic ParticipationM emb ers con t r i bu t e equ i t ab l y t o , and dem ocr a t i ca ll y con t ro l , t he cap it a l o f

t he i r co -oper a t i ve . A t l eas t par t o f t ha t cap i t a l i s usual ly t he com m on p r oper t y



25/37

o f t h e co -o per a t i ve . Mem ber s usua ll y rece i ve l im i t ed co m pensat i on , i f any , on

cap it a l subsc r i bed as a cond i t i on o f mem ber sh ip . Mem bers a l loca t e su rp l uses

f o r any o r a ll o f t he f o l l ow i ng pu r poses : deve l op i ng t he i r co -o pera t i ve , po ssi b l y

by se t t i ng up r ese rves , par t o f w h i ch a t l eas t w ou l d be i nd i v i si b l e ; benefi t i ng

m e m b e r s in p r o p o r t i o n t o t h e i r t r a n sa ct i o n s w i t h t h e c o - o p e r a t i v e; an d s u p -

p o r t i n g o t h e r a ct i v it i e s ap p r o v e d b y t h e m e m b e r s h i p .

Four t h P r i nc i p l e :Autonomy and IndependenceC o-o per a t i ves a re au t o no mo us , se lf -he lp o r gan i zat i on s con t ro l led by t he i r

m emb ers . I f t hey en t e r i n t o agreem en t s w i t h o t he r o r gan i zat i ons , i nc lud i ng

governm en t s , o r ra i se cap i t a l f ro m ex t e r na l sou r ces, t hey do so o n t e r m s t ha t

e n su r e d e m o c r a t ic c o n t r o l b y t h e i r m e m b e r s a n d m a i nt a in t h e i r c o - o p e r a t i v e

a u t o n o m y .

F i fth Pr inc ip le :

Education,Training, and InformationC o - o p e r a t i ve s p r o v i d e e d u c at i o n an d t r a in i n g fo r t h e i r m e m b e r s , e le c t e d r e p -

resen t a t i ves, managers , and emp l oyees so t hey can co n t r i bu t e e f f ec t i ve l y t o t he

d e v e lo p m e n t o f t h e i r c o - o p e r a t i v es. T h e y i n fo r m t h e g e n e r al p u b l ic p a r t i c u -l ar l y young peop l e and op i n i on l eader s abou t t h e nat u r e and benefi t s o f co -

o p e r a t i o n .

S ix th Pr inc ip le :

Co-operation among Co-operativesC o-o per a t i ves se rve t he i r mem ber s mo s t e ff ec t i ve l y and st r eng t hen t he co -

op era t i ve mo vement by w or k i ng t o ge t he r t h r ough l oca l, na t i ona l, reg i ona l ,

and in t e r na t i ona l s t ruc t u r es.

Seventh Pr inc ip le :

Concern for CommunityC o - o p e r a t i ve s w o r k f o r t h e s u st a in a bl e d e ve lo p m e n t o f t h e i r c o m m u n i t i e s

t h r o u g h p o l i ci es ap p r o v e d b y t h e i r m e m b e r s .



26/37

development projects without considerable support from other co-opera-tivesas trading coun terparts, as sources of techn ical support , and as part-

ners and allies. Co-operation among co-operatives is an IC A principle and

is essential in order to escape many of the limitations of isolation, small

scale, and in experience. Strategic alliances facilitate the captu re of econo-

mies of scale and economies of scope the economies that derive from di-

versification. Th ese econom ies are necessary for both fin ancial viability and

ecologically soun d development. C ollaboration with ot her organizations

including those N GO s that have a specifically eco-social justice mandate

also provides access to technical expertise, markets, and information con-

cerning subsidies and assistance programmes. Such collaboration reinforces

an orient ation t owards sustainable developm ent amon g all participants.

C o-operatives have strong ties to local com m un iti es an d regions

so that m emb ers an d staff benefit from sustain able practices as

w orkers, resident s, an d household m emb ers.

Co-operatives are rooted capital with strong ties to local commu-

nities and regions. Th ese ties may reduce flexibility and impose additional

costs, but they also result in advantages with respect to valorizing and re-

couping investm ents in environm ental sustainability. C o-operative mem -

bers, employees, and local customers stand to benefit from sustainable

practices as workers, residents, and property owners, and as people with

family members living in the region. T his can change the calculus with

which they will assess the costs and benefits associated with finan cial sacri-

fices or investments to make the co-operative more viable and environ-

mentally sustainable. They are more likely to recognize the advantages of

eco-social improvements and to perceive a benefit, even if th ere are signifi-

cant m onetary costs.

Stron g lin ks betw een producers, processin g activ it ies, an d custom ersallow co-operatives to m and ate and to captu re the benefit s of

sustai n able practices.

G E R T LE R



27/37

Co-operatives often benefit from strong links among producers,processing activities, and consumers. Direct vertical integration, and re-

lated forms of vertical co-ordination, allow co-operatives to exert consid-

erable influence over the steps involved in primary production , process-

ing or transformation , and m arketing. T his facilitates the introdu ction of

new methods and is an advantage when it com es to captu ring and d istrib-

uting the benefits of sustainable practices. Working closely with member-

suppliers, co-operatives can ensure that raw prod ucts meet quality require-

ments and p roduction criteria. Selling finished prod ucts with guarantees

pertaining to production and processing m ethods, co-operatives can gen-

erate a premium that translates int o increased return s to mem bers and

more operating capital for the enterprise. This advantage may also applyto labour relations and occupational health and safety issues. C o-operatives

can move to protect the health of memb ers and workers (and mem ber-

workers) since th e extra costs of workplace measures can be recouped in

solidarity markets, in improved quality and productivity, and as a direct

benefit in t he form of improved health and well-being.

Pathw ays to SustainableResource Management:

Coopesilencio

CO - O P E R A T I V E S F I N D T H E R E S O U R C E S A N D R E S O L V E T O

pursue sustainable developm ent agend as by various combina-

tions of circum stance, positioning, and orientation . Located on a steamy

plain near the Pacific Coast o f Costa Rica, th e Cooperativa Autogestionaria

de Produccin Agropecuaria y de Servicios Mltiples El Silencio (Worker-

Managed Agricultural and Multiple Services Co-operative, The Silence) is

a comm unity and co-operative farm that represents hom e place and liveli-hood for some five hundred people. Coopesilencio currently has forty-

eight m embers, all but four of whom are men. The members and t heir




28/37

G E R T LE R


families make up t he bulk of the population of the pu eblo (community) ofEl Silencio, with the balance represented mostly by retired members and

others working on t he co-operative and hoping to qualify for membership.

T he co-operative started in 1973 with a land invasion of a Un ited Fruit

Com pany banana plantation that had been damaged by a hurricane in

1955, abandon ed, and th en rented out to a rancher at a nominal fee. After

mont hs of conflict, the co-operative gained both recognition and m anage-

rial auton omy from the Instituto de Tierras y Colonizacin (Land s and

Settlement Institute) (Barrantes and Victor 1998). These former banana

workers and their families have taken their experience working in planta-

tion agriculture, with its particular labou r p rocess and division of labour,

and have successfully adapted it to a production co-operative (Sobrado

2000). Building also on their union experience, they have fiercely protected

th is model of collective produ ction against any attempt to parcel out t he

land and to convert it t o some form of individualized campesino (peasant

farmer) production.

T he co-operative first attempted t o prod uce rice, but this proved dif-

ficult given the vagaries of the local climate and the high cost of inputs.

Efforts were made to diversify into corn, beans, cattle, and pigs. In 1985,

the members took t he importan t and difficult decision t o establish an o il

palm plantation, and by the early 1990s, oil palm had become th e co-oper-

atives principal source of income. An oil palm tree can produce commer-cially for up to t hirty years and t he harvest goes on year-roun d, p roviding

steady employment for the co-operative mem bers (mostly men) an d their

families (women and children). The oil palm requires a major in itial in-

vestm ent, but compared to rice production , there is mu ch less need for

commercial pesticides, which are a hazard to wildlife and to fish that are

harvested from rivers running through thefi nca (farm).

Coopesilencios mission statemen t is as follows:

Som os una organ iz acion au togestion aria que procura el desarrollo social

y econom ico de sus asociados y sus fam ilias, m edi an te la explotacion deproyectos productivos y de proteccin al m edi o am bian te bajo la m odali -

dad del trabajo colectivo.


29/37

We are a self-managed organization pursuing the social and econo-mic developm ent of members and their families by initiatives in

production and protection of the environment, under the rub ric

of collective enterprise.

This co-operative provides an example of the kind of virtuous circle

that can unfold when initial steps are made towards more sustainable de-

velopment. Between 1992 and 1996, members took advantage of govern-

ment incentives in order to diversify by plant ing trees on some 34 5 of their

1,000 hectares. These plantations include stands of teak, melina, eucalyp-

tu s, and several native species, particularly laurel. Accessing government

incentives for t ree plant ing led to another activity: the co-operative nowserves as a facilitator and p romoter of th is programm e in th e region, and

receives a commission for recruiting other landowners (Barrantes and

Victor 1998). The co-operative earns additional income p roviding forest

management services to oth er producers in the region, and has recently

become a pilot site for a new state-funded p rogramm e to prom ote im-

proved management and h arvesting practices in t ree plantations.

T he existence of the tree plantations together with some managed n at-ural forest has led to involvement in a small sawmilling operation. It hasalso made feasible an eco-tourism project that was initiated in 1994 with

the building of six cabins and a restaurant facility. Walking and riding trails

have been developed t o take advantage of attractive forests, rivers, and wa-terfalls, and the eco-tou rism project now provides employment for twelve

women and several men. T he existence of th is project has also h ad ot hersynergistic and complementary effects. T he co-operative has become th erelease site for a wildlife rescue and rehabilitation centre, Jardin G aia. T hiscentre, which also t rains veterinary students, has formed a partn ership with

the co-operat ive and uses it as its prim ary site for releasing rescued birdsand mammals. Several co-op members have received training to assist inthis process, and the wildlife has become an additional attraction for visi-

tors to the eco-tour ism project. The co-operative has plant ed fruit t rees tofeed the wildlife and has undertaken to preserve parts of its natural forest

without any cutting. The Jardin Gaia centre has plans to sell its facility inthe coastal resort town of Q uepos and to relocate its operations to a site at

the co-operative.




30/37


T he eco-tourism project attracts stud y groups and overseas volunteerswho pay to live and work at the co-operative. The project has also h elped

to deepen the comm itment of the co-operative to sustainable developm ent.

T his is reflected in a current in itiative to furt her reduce use of comm ercial

pesticides. With t he help of a self-taught farmer-consultant from n eigh-

bouring C oopecalifornia, they are und ertaking a tree-by-tree diagnosis of

disease and nu trient problems, and are initiating a biological control pro-

gramme. To this end they are propagating and planting shrubs and flowers

that attract p redator species, po llinators, and other beneficial insects. This

is don e on field edges, on ditches and d ikes, and in op en spaces where

palm trees have died or been removed.

Pathw ays to Su stainable

Resource Management:

C oocafe and C oopeldos

C

O N S O R C I O D E C O O P E R A T I V A S D E C A F E C U L T O R E S D E

Guanacaste y Montes de Oro (Consortium of Coffee Pro-

ducing Co-op eratives of Guanacaste and M ont es de O ro) was found ed

in 1988 with assistance from the Fredrich Ebert Foundation of Germany.

Coocafe is a co-operative consortium representing nine small co-operatives

that prod uce coffee in the highlands of western Costa Rica. Th ese co-oper-

atives include thirty-five hundred growers with an average fi nca of1.3 hec-

tares. Coocafe serves as the marketing organization for its member co-ops,

selling coffee in conventional and fair-trade markets of Europe, U SA, and

Asia. It export s roasted coffee, plaintain and casava chips, hearts of palm,

and m acadamia nuts, but the main product is green coffee beans. In 1998,

it exported a total of twenty-six thousand bags. Coocafe is a source of cre-

dit for th e co-operatives operating un der its umbrella and h elps them tolocate financing for special pro jects.

Coocafe is also dedicated to upgrading the operations and manage-

G E R T LE R


31/37


ment of the member co-operatives, and t o prom oting th eir sustainable de-velopment. In 1996, in collaboration with co-operatives in t he consortium ,

the Hijos del Campo (Children of the Countryside) Foundation was estab-

lished. It provides scholarships to children of m embers attending educa-

tional institutions at all levels and funds infrastructural projects for rural

schools. Ecological education and management are also important objec-tives. Member co-operatives and growers have been support ed in projects

to redu ce agrichemical dependence and t o gradually convert m ore area to

organic production. C oocafe and m ember co-operatives have also promo-

ted projects to m ake coffee-processing activities more sustainable by reduc-

ing water use and water pollution. T he consumption of wood and electri-

city has been diminished by the installation of improved process controls,and by the substitution of soft technologies such as solar dryers. Several

member co-operatives have installed lagoons and other waste-managemen t

technology, and some are making organic fertilizer from the coffee pulp

and other by-produ cts. C oopeldos is one successful example of this path

of developm ent.

Founded in 1971, La Cooperativa de Caficultores y Servisios Mltiples

de El D os de Tilarn (T he C offee Producers and Mu ltiple Services Co-

operative of El Dos de Tilarn) is located in a moun tain town in the Prov-

ince of Guanacaste. As of1999, Coopeldos had more than five hun dred

members. Almost every family in the locality belongs to the co-operative,

with some families having up t o five memberships (including women andyoung people). In t he early 1980s, the co-operative initiated forestry proj-ects, including a nursery to produce seedlings that are given or sold to

members at nominal prices. T hese trees are used on thefin cas belonging to

members for reforestation, as shade trees for coffee, and to establish wind-

breaks. The nursery also produces fruit trees to encourage diversification,

and coffee seedlings to prom ote expanded coffee produ ction. All co-op

members have completed a conservation p lan for their farms with the help

of technicians employed by the co-operative. Recomm endations are made

concerning terraces, field layout , d itching on the contour, establishing veg-

etative cover on the ditches, planting windbreaks, and establishing shaded

coffee production . T he recommendations are not compulsory, but t he co-operative has a nu mber of ways to encourage compliance, e.g., withhold-

ing operating credit.



32/37

In 1998, Coopeldos received ISO 9002 certification from the Interna-tional Standards O rganization. It was the first co-operative in Latin Amer-

ica to qualify for this designation as an organization meeting these high

standards of quality control and workplace safety. The co-operative is pro-

viding leadership t o oth er members of the Coocafe consortium interested

in certification and is preparing to apply for ISO 14000, which pertains to

stand ards of environmental managemen t. Th e co-operative pays for annu al

environmental assessments by expert consultants and has already made

many of the important investments needed to meet ISO 14000 standards.

These include building a waste-water treatment facility, redesigning the

coffee-processing p lant to reduce water consum ption , installing a hydro-

electric generating plant, and recycling organic wastes through a compost-ing p lant t hat produces organic fertilizer. Experiment s are being carried ou t

with worms to speed the composting process. The organic fertilizer is avail-

able free of charge to mem bers and is being used principally by th irty pro-

ducers who are experimenting with the produ ction of organic coffee. T he

co-operative and C oocafe have promoted this option even t hough, at pres-

ent, cost savings on in puts and the p remium received barely offset redu c-

tions in yield. Coopeldos has recently set up a separate receiving and

processing facility to segregate organic coffee.

Coopeldos is active in regional development organizations and ini-

tiatives. It has begun several land-resettlement projects to purchase large

fin cas and resettle area families who are landless or lack a sufficient land

base. Like Coopesilencio, C oopeldos is also investing in regional infra-

structure by up grading roads and b ridges. Its accomplishment s in sustain-

able commu nity econom ic developm ent are all the more impressive when

one und erstands that this is a poor area where many people still depend

on horses for transportation and quite a few homes still lack access to

telephone lines.


G E R T LE R


33/37

Som e Con clus ions

AL O N G W I T H T H E C A P A C I T Y F O R A D A P T A T I O N A N D I N N O -

vation, diversity in form and shared p hilosophy are strengths

of the co-operative movement. The examples discussed above illustrate

how, under some conditions, co-operatives can be import ant contribut orsto sustainable regional development. There are many examples of such suc-cess, as well as coun ter examples, and instances in wh ich con trad ictory eco-

nomic, social, and environmental agendas have not been clearly resolved.

T he successes are usually associated with favourable or at least equitable

treatment from state agencies, as well as collaboration on the p art of u ni-versities, research institu tion s, N GO s, and second-tier co-operative organi-

zations. In th is respect, at least, successful co-op eratives are not d ifferent

from other kinds of successful enterprise. Success does not come about in

a vacuum.

In the Costa Rican examples cited h ere, many challenges remain tobe overcome. While access to land has been a necessary precondition, and

a revolution in environm ental consciousness an importan t second step,

many of th e co-operat ives studied so far face the necessity of a th ird revo-

lution : the equitable inclusion of women and youth in th e life of the co-operative. Withou t t his, both organizational sustainability and qualifica-

tion as an engine of sustainable regional developm ent remain in doubt.

This criticism could be applied equally, however, to most of the resource-

sector co-operatives the author has had a chance to study in C hile and in

Canada. It is symptomatic of broader societal challenges that involve theneed to add ress arrangements and att itudes that perpetuate exclusions and

inequities.T he good n ews is that co-operatives, both in theory and in practice, are

shown to be able to adopt the more integrated and holistic mand ates of



34/37

sustainable developm ent. T he principles and accum ulated h istorical tradi-tions of co-operatives provide conceptual resources that can motivate and

un dergird initiatives to include a wider range of concerns in enterprise

planning. The financial organization and econom ic principles of co-opera-

tives provide them with a num ber of option s by which to mobilize capital,

and to valorize investments in more sustainable practices and systems of

production . The social relations within and around co-operatives provide

hope for personal liberation, expanded choices, and opportu nities to ad-

dress collective needs and concerns in n ew ways that p reserve the resilience

and integrity of ecosystems and human comm un ities. Moreover, co-opera-

tives can be catalytic actors linking many kinds of organizations, and facili-

tating th e elaboration of advanced and attractive solutions to problemsconfront ing people who are norm ally at the end of the line with respect

to seeing the benefits of any kind of development.

G E R T LE R



35/37


References

Allen, Patricia. 1993. Connecting the Social and the Ecological in Sustainable Agri-

culture. In Food for the Futu re: Cond itions and C ontradictions of Su stainab ility.

Edited b y P. Allen. N ew York: W iley.

Barrantes, C ., and J. Victor. 1998. La C onstru ccin de un Su eo: C oopesilen cio, 25 Aos

D espus. H eredia, C.R .: EUNA.

C havez-Pirson, M .-E. 1997. Co-operatives and T heir Role in Protecting the Environ-

ment. In T he W orld of Co-operative Enterprise 1997. Long H anborough, UK: The

Plunkett Foundation.

Commoner, Barry. 1971. T he C losing C ircle. N ew York: Knop f.

C ooperative D evelopment Institute. 1996. Awareness and I mage of Business Co-op era-

tives: A Survey of the American Pub lic. Gallup Survey, July 1994. In M ark eting O ur

Cooperative Advantage Learning Conference Proceedings, 1416 November 1996. Green-

field, M A: Coop erative D evelopm ent In stitut e, and Antigonish, N S: St. Francis Xavier

Un iversity Extension D epartment.

D irection des C oopratives, M inistre de lIndu strie et d u C omm erce. 1999. T aux de

Su rvie des Entreprises Coopratives au Q ubec. Qubec: Direction des Communications,Gouvernement du Q ubec.

Ferguson, Andrew. 1996. Values, Marketing, and C o-operation: W heres Ou r Com mon

Grou nd? In M ark eting O ur C ooperati ve A dv an tage Learn in g C onferen ce Proceedi ngs,

1416 November 1996. G reenfield, MA: Coop erative Development Institute, and

Antigonish, N S: St. Francis Xavier University Extension D epartm ent.

Gabriel, Yiannis, and Tim Lang. 1995. T he U nm anageable Consum er: Contemporary

Consumption and its Fragmentation. London: Sage Publications.

Gertler, M ichael. 1999. Sustainable C omm unities and Sustainable Agriculture on the

Canadian Prairies. In Communities, Development, and Sustainability across Canada.

Edited by John T . Pierce and Ann D ale. Vancouver: UBC Press.

Holmn, H. 1994. Co-operatives and the Environmental Challenge. In Ground Level

D evelopm ent: N G O s, Co-operatives and L ocal Organiz ations in th e T hird W orld. Edited

by H . H olmn and M . Jirstrm. Lun d, Sweden: Lund U niversity Press.


36/37

Ketilson, L.H ., M ichael Gertler, Mu rray Fulton, Roy D obson, and Leslie Polsom. 1998.T he Social and Econom ic Im portance of the Co-operative Sector in Saskatchewan. Re-

search Report P repared for Saskatchewan D epartment of Economic and Co-operative

D evelopm ent. Saskatoon: Cent re for the Study of Co-operatives.

Korten, David C. 1995. W hen Corporations Ru le the W orld. San Francisco: Kumarian

Press.

M acPherson, Ian. 1995. Co-operative Principles for the 21st C entury. G eneva: International

C o-operative Alliance.

M ander, Jerry, and Ed ward Goldsmith. 1996. T he Case against the G lobal Economy: An d

for a T urn tow ard th e L ocal. San Fran cisco: Sierra C lub Books.

M ooney, H.A., and P.R. Ehrlich. 1997. Ecosystem Services: A Fragmen tary H istory.

In N atures Servi ces: Societal D ependen ce on N atural Ecosystem s. Edited by G.C. D aily.Washington D C : Island Press.

O rtz Mora, Jorge Luis. 1994. Desorrollo Sustentable y Paricipacon Movimiento

C ooperativo: Un a Vison. H oriz on tes (Revista del Centro de Estudios y Capaci-

tacion Cooperativa, San Jos, C.R.) 6: 8795.

Roseland, M ark. 1999. Natural Capital and Social Capital: Implications for Sustainable

Com mun ity Development. In Com m un ities, D evelopment, and S ustainability across

Canada. Edited by John T . Pierce and Ann D ale. Vancouver: UBC Press.

Saxena, S.K. 1995. Cooperatives and Environment. D elhi: Pragati Publications.

Sen, Amartya. 1999. D evelopm ent as Freedom . N ew York: Anchor Books.

Sillitoe, P . 1998. T he D evelopm ent of In digenous Kn owledge. Current Anthropology 39 :22352.

Sobrado, Miguel. 2000. From N avvies to Entrepreneurs: The O W in C osta Rica. In

A Fu tu re for th e Ex cluded . Edited by Raff Carm en and M iguel Sobrado. London :

Zed Books.

Thu row, L.C. 1998. Economic Com mun ity and Social Investment. In T he Commu ni ty

of the Future. Edited by F. H asselbein et al. The D rucker Foundation Futu re Series.

San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Un ited N ations Research Institute for Social D evelopment . 1994. Environmental

D egradat ion an d Social In tegrat ion . Briefing Pap er Series 3. Geneva: UNRISD .

R E F E R E N C E S



37/37



space reuatiom

Documents