The De/Repoliticization of Cooperation and the Discourse of Conversion¹

Abstract

In recent years, several agricultural cooperatives have undergone significant restructuring. Some have been taken through a conversion process and have been reorganized as “investor‐oriented firms” (IOFs). This phenomenon has attracted the interest of agricultural economists, but it has not been analyzed by sociologists. This article examines the discourse with which agricultural economists have approached the conversion issue. Drawing upon Fraser's discussion of “needs talk,” and inspired by Kloppenburg's analysis of the agricultural scientific complex, an argument is made that a reprivatization discourse of neoclassical economics has effectively depoliticized discussion about the future of cooperative enterprise. It is further argued that a repoliticization of cooperation is necessary in order to assure the protection of extra‐economic values and oppositional discourse that is embedded in the historical development of cooperative practices and institutions. We focus here on the role of expert discourse as it relates to the reinvention of cooperative institutions in the agricultural economy. It is argued that this discourse would be improved by greater attention to historical and sociological forces, rather than remaining narrowly focused on economism.

Developing a conceptual framework for the co-operative and mutual enterprise business model

“…This hybrid or dual function of CMEs to simultaneously operate as a business, while also maintaining a union or alliance of members, is reflected in the co-operative principles (Fairbairn, 1994). This approach means that while the CME needs to operate effectively and efficiently to generate a financial surplus to operate sustainably, it only retains sufficient funds to continue to deliver services to members (Mooney, Roaring, & Gray, 1996; Mooney, 2004; Levi, 2006).…”

Expanding the scope of paradox scholarship on social enterprise: the case for (re)introducing worker cooperatives

“…Worker cooperatives "have the objective of creating and maintaining sustainable jobs and generating wealth, in order to improve the quality of life of the workermembers, dignify human work, allow workers' democratic selfmanagement and promote community and local development" (CICOPA, 2005: 3). Like other social enterprises (Mooney, Roaring & Gray, 1996;Rothschild, 2009), worker cooperatives are often described as too business-oriented to fit in the non-profit sector and too driven by social concerns to fit in the for-profit sector (Lambru & Petrescu, 2014;Levi & Davis, 2008). Worker cooperatives pursue the objective of meeting their common economic, social and cultural needs and goals through an enterprise that features joint-ownership, democratic control and mutual benefits (International Cooperative Alliance [ICA], 2012).…”

Agricultural cooperatives remaining competitive in a globalised food system: At what cost to members, the cooperative movement and food sustainability?

“…The economics literature has shown an interest in studying finance, governance, and board and investors' control in ACs (Cook et al, 2004;Ortmann and King, 2007;Chaddad, 2009). Hardly any research has been done on analysing the impact that farming policy, long supply chains and the internalisation of the food system have on members, labour, food sustainability and political dimensions (Mooney et al, 1996;Stofferahn, 2010;Gray, 2014a;Ajates Gonzalez, 2018).…”