Abstract

AbstractThe social solidarity economy is an approach to the production and consumption of goods, services and knowledge that promises to address contemporary economic, social and environmental crises more effectively than business as usual. The paper employs the concept of commons ecologies to examine the practices, relationships and interactions among actors and organisations in the social solidarity economy, as well as between them and the mainstream economy, which shape the field and its degree of autonomy in relation to capitalism, through a process defined as boundary commoning. Such process shapes both local and regional commons ecologies, as well as the participation of local and regional actors in wider networks at national, international and global levels. The paper takes a case study‐based approach to identify practices, relationships and interactions of commons ecologies in relation to selected community‐led initiatives in the UK, Portugal, Brazil and Senegal. Each case study illuminates different qualities of local/regional commons ecologies and their forms of engagement with wider networks. Further, the paper shows that these cases demonstrate how the social solidarity economy may facilitate delivery of the Sustainable Development Goals in a distinctive way. In each case, SSE acts as a vehicle for expressing participants' values and principles consistent with those underlying the SDGs. Local implementation of SDGs is thus an in‐built feature of these commons ecologies. The participation of community‐led initiatives in international and global networks offers opportunities to learn from local level experiences and successes, potentially strengthening SDG implementation more generally.

Highlights

  • According to a recent OECD (2019) report, most countries covered are closer to achieving Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) concerned with ecological sustainability (SDGs 6 [clean water and sanitation]; 7 [affordable and clean energy]; [sustainable cities and communities]; [responsible consumption and production]; [climate action]; and 15 [life on land]) than those related to social justice (SDGs 1 [no poverty]; 2 [zero hunger]; 5 [gender equality]; 10 [reduced inequalities]; and 16 [peace, justice and strong institutions])

  • This paper examines the scope for balancing the implementation of these differently oriented SDGs through social solidarity economy ( SSE)-based strategies that combine regenerative ecology with the promotion of postgrowth livelihoods based on cooperative approaches to production, commercialisation and consumption

  • Pressures originating in both states and markets mitigate against socially and ecologically regenerative livelihoods, buffered by multiactor networks of relationships within commons ecologies originating through selforganised action at community scale

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Since their ratification by the UN in 2015, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), 17 in number and covering a wide range of environmental, economic and social concerns, have become the predominant global framework for addressing societal progress towards sustainable prosperity. According to a recent OECD (2019) report, most countries covered are closer to achieving SDGs concerned with ecological sustainability (SDGs 6 [clean water and sanitation]; 7 [affordable and clean energy]; [sustainable cities and communities]; [responsible consumption and production]; [climate action]; and 15 [life on land]) than those related to social justice (SDGs 1 [no poverty]; 2 [zero hunger]; 5 [gender equality]; 10 [reduced inequalities]; and 16 [peace, justice and strong institutions]). The paper addresses key aspects of this Special Issue involving attention to the substantive rather than definitional qualities of sustainable or regenerative entrepreneurship (Muñoz, Janssen, Nicolopoulou, & Hockerts, 2018) (Roland & Landua, 2013). These issues extend to how to transcend the preoccupation with trade-offs between ecological, social and economic goals that has been typical of research on sustainable entrepreneurship to date (as noted by Muñoz & Cohen, 2018; cf Schaltegger & Wagner, 2011; Shepherd & Patzelt, 2011; cf Genus, Iskandarova, & Warburton Brown, 2020)

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call