Here is a summary of the discussion which took place on the "coopvalu" conference. This summary attempts to highlight the topics which received most interest and the areas in which there was common agreement.
The "Coopvalu" electronic conference on co-operative principles concluded Sept. 29, 1995. This discussion forum brought together 70 subscribers from Canada, the U.S., U.K., Australia, Switzerland and Sweden. Thirty comments were posted during the 3-week conference. The sectors which participated included the housing, energy, consumer, and worker co-op sectors as well as universities and co-op federations and associations. An independent co-operative consultant also contributed comments.
There were three topics open for discussion: the ICA Statement on Co-operative Identity (the revised principles); how co-ops can implement the 7th principle on community in their work; and the role of information technology vis-a-vis the principles.
Most of the discussion focused on the co-operative principles. The two principles which generated the most discussion were the 1st and 7th principles: "Voluntary and Open Membership" (1st) and "Concern for Community" (7th) . Several participants also emphasized the need for co-operatives to define and articulate their uniqueness -- to members, the general public, and to governments. People must see co-operatives as an alternative to the dominant capitalist model. Co- operative principles define this uniqueness. As one participant expressed it: "unless co-operative philosophy and principles reflect and reinforce practices, then the co-operative difference is jeopardized".
The most frequently discussed item was that part of the 1st Principle which says that co-operatives are "open to all persons able to use their services". Some argued that this principle cannot apply to worker co- ops, where the workers are the providers not the "users" of the service. Others suggested that employment could be seen as the service offered by the worker co-op. Several participants agreed that co- operatives are not strictly "open" to anyone since there are often eligibility criteria (or "natural restrictions") to join the co-op. These restrictions can include: the need to purchase membership shares; or the condition that the workers in a worker co-op must contribute to the commercial viability of the co-op by having the appropriate skills before joining the co-op; or the restriction that in secondary co-ops individuals cannot be members. Three participants agreed that the "openness" conundrum could be addressed by saying that membership in a co-operative is voluntary and non- discriminator.
Most of the participants were pleased with the inclusion of the 7th principle on community and felt that it extended and clarified a concern for community imbedded in the 1966 principles. The fourth 1966 principle on return of surplus to members included the directive that savings could be allocated to the "provision of common services". One participant argued that the 1995 Statement on Co-operative Identity actually weakens this idea of social or community capital because the new principle only refers to surpluses supporting "other activities approved by the membership". There was also some back and forth discussion on what "sustainable development" of the community implied. Some suggested that it meant the development of people. Two others preferred the idea that development referred to the development of a "peaceful community where people, society and nature are in harmony". Two participants argued that co- operatives should be free to define their own community objectives.
The 4th principle on "Autonomy and Independence" received wide support, particularly with respect to the co-op housing sector where government funding can easily lead to government intervention.
The 5th principle on "Education, Training and Information" received less discussion. The need for members and staff to understand the uniqueness of co- operatives was cited by some as vital to the strengthening of the movement.
The 6th principle on "Co-operation Among Co-operatives" was not discussed, apart from the CCA/CCC position that initiatives in this area must be focused on needs and the role of each co-operative must be clear.
The 2nd principle on "Democratic Member Control" was not widely discussed although a few participants did debate whether employees should sit on the board. Most agreed that co-operatives should have defined structures or processes which include employee participation -- but these systems need not mean participation on the board.
There was surprisingly little discussion on the 3rd principle of "Member Economic Participation" apart from the CCA position that the distribution of surplus must be decided by members at the annual meeting. One conference participant was disappointed that the 1995 principles do not refer to social or community capital.
The last topic which received some comment was the potential of the Internet to disseminate co-op information cheaply and widely. People could access information on case studies of how co-ops have implemented the 7th principle on community; co-op publications could be made available on the Net; and courses could be run, and moderated, online.
TO THOSE OF YOU WHO CONTRIBUTED COMMENTS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH!
The Canadian Co-operative Association and the Centre for the Study of Co-operatives (in Saskatchewan) will be developing a co-operative electronic clearinghouse and Home Page with information on co-ops and credit unions in Canada. We will also have links to other co- op sites.
If any of you would like more information on Canadian co-operative online initiatives, or if any of
you have suggestions on what information should be included in a co-operative electronic
clearinghouse, please drop me a line.
I can be reached by e-mail at: ccainfo@web.apc.org.
Fax: (613) 567-0658; Phone: (613) 238-6711.
Address:
Canadian Co-operative Association,
400-275 Bank Street,
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K2P 2L6.
Carol Hunter, Information Officer, CCA