IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Résilience d'une méta‐organisation : Le cas d'un commun de l'alimentation


  • Alexandrine Lapoutte


Meta‐organization is a recent concept that draws attention of management academics. It allows to renew the private‐public partnership approach. There is still little research on meta‐organizations as contributing to sustainable development (Berkowitz and Bor, 2018) as well as to their resources, including mechanisms supporting resilience (Berkowitz, 2018). This paper focuses on the absorptive or resilience capacity of a meta‐organization in the field of sustainable food. Food governance on territories has become a major issue over the past few years. The issue is recently taken in charge by collectives bringing together public and private partners, generally civil society, around food perceived as a common. The study is qualitative and based on the case of a local food policy council in France. Refering to resilience theory (Weick, 1993) and adopting a grounded theory methodology, we identify the characteristics of meta‐organizational resilience. We then discuss the relationship between the resilience of a meta‐organization and social transformation and contribute to the knowledge of policy‐shaper meta‐organizations. Finally, in this case we show how the social and solidarity economy (SSE) and the public authorities meet around a food common, making meta‐organization an expression of institutional diversity in the deployment of the commons. Le concept de méta‐organisation (MO) est récent en sciences de gestion et fait l'objet d'une attention croissante de la part de la communauté scientifique. Il permet de renouveler l'approche des partenariats publics‐privés. Encore peu de travaux s'intéressent aux méta‐organisations en tant que contribuant au développement durable (Berkowitz et Bor, 2018) ainsi qu’à leurs ressources, notamment les mécanismes qui encouragent la résilience (Berkowitz, 2018). Nous nous intéressons ici à la capacité de résilience d'une méta‐organisation dans le champ de l'alimentation durable. La gouvernance alimentaire des territoires devient depuis quelques années un enjeu majeur. La question est récemment prise en charge par des collectifs réunissant partenaires publics et privés, généralement de type société civile, autour de l'alimentation perçue comme un commun. L’étude est qualitative et se base sur le cas d'un Conseil local de politique alimentaire : le Conseil Lyonnais de l'Alimentation Durable (CLAD). A partir de la théorie de la résilience (Weick, 1993) et selon l'approche de la théorie ancrée, nous montrons les caractéristiques d'une résilience méta‐organisationnelle. Nous discutons ensuite des rapports entre résilience d'une méta‐organisation et transformation sociale et contribuons à la connaissance des méta‐organisations de type dit “policy shaper”, c'est‐à‐dire qui contribuent à l’élaboration de politiques publiques. Enfin, ce cas nous montre comment l'économie sociale et solidaire (ESS) et les pouvoirs publics se rencontrent autour d'un commun de l'alimentation, faisant de la méta‐organisation une expression de la diversité institutionnelle dans le déploiement des communs.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexandrine Lapoutte, 2021. "Résilience d'une méta‐organisation : Le cas d'un commun de l'alimentation," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 92(1), pages 79-100, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:annpce:v:92:y:2021:i:1:p:79-100
    DOI: 10.1111/apce.12288

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL:
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Philippe BANCE (ed.), 2018. "Providing public goods and commons. Towards coproduction and new forms of governance for a revival of public action," CIRIEC Studies Series, CIRIEC - Université de Liège, volume 1, number css1, July.
    2. Clarysse, Bart & Wright, Mike & Bruneel, Johan & Mahajan, Aarti, 2014. "Creating value in ecosystems: Crossing the chasm between knowledge and business ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1164-1176.
    3. Marlys K. Christianson & Maria T. Farkas & Kathleen M. Sutcliffe & Karl E. Weick, 2009. "Learning Through Rare Events: Significant Interruptions at the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Museum," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(5), pages 846-860, October.
    4. Steve Cropper & Mark Ebers & Chris Huxham & Peter Smith Ring, 2011. "Packing more punch? Developing the field of inter-organisational relations," International Journal of Human Rights and Constitutional Studies, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(3), pages 153-170.
    5. Lee Fleming & Charles King & Adam I. Juda, 2007. "Small Worlds and Regional Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 938-954, December.
    6. Philippe Bance & Malika Ahmed Zaïd-Chertouk & Juan Fernando Álvarez & Cristina Barna & Pierre Bauby & Manuel Belo Moreira & Jean-Claude Boual & Monique Combes-Joret & Pascal Glemain & Miguel Gordo & A, 2018. "Providing Public Goods and Commons. Towards Coproduction and New Forms of Governance for a Revival of Public Action [Offrir des biens publics et des communs. Vers la coproduction et de nouvelles fo," Post-Print halshs-01964961, HAL.
    7. Ali, Murad & Seny Kan, Konan Anderson & Sarstedt, Marko, 2016. "Direct and configurational paths of absorptive capacity and organizational innovation to successful organizational performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 5317-5323.
    8. Jean-Claude BOUAL & Cathy ZADRA-VEIL, 2018. "New hybrid organizations in the social and solidarity economy in France: A new cooperative governance?," CIRIEC Studies Series, in: Philippe BANCE & CIRIEC (ed.), Providing public goods and commons. Towards coproduction and new forms of governance for a revival of public action, volume 1, chapter 13, pages 265-281, CIRIEC - Université de Liège.
    9. Christian Deverre & Claire Lamine, 2010. "Les systèmes agroalimentaires alternatifs. Une revue de travaux anglophones en sciences sociales," Post-Print hal-01197840, HAL.
    10. Danièle Demoustier & Nadine Richez-Battesti, 2010. "Introduction. Les organisations de l'Économie sociale et solidaire : gouvernance, régulation et territoire," Géographie, économie, société, Lavoisier, vol. 12(1), pages 5-14.
    11. Claudia U. Ciborra, 1996. "The Platform Organization: Recombining Strategies, Structures, and Surprises," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(2), pages 103-118, April.
    12. Lucie Bégin & Didier Chabaud, 2010. "La résilience des organisations. Le cas d'une entreprise familiale," Revue française de gestion, Lavoisier, vol. 0(1), pages 127-142.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Imen Mzid & Nada Khachlouf & Richard Soparnot, 2019. "How does family capital influence the resilience of family firms?," Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 249-277, June.
    2. Andrea Salustri, 2019. "The UN 2030 Agenda and Social and Solidarity Economy: toward a structural change?," Review of Applied Socio-Economic Research, Pro Global Science Association, vol. 18(2), pages 104-117, December.
    3. Reypens, Lina & Bacq, Sophie & Milanov, Hana, 2021. "Beyond bricolage: Early-stage technology venture resource mobilization in resource-scarce contexts," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 36(4).
    4. Christina Theodoraki & Karim Messeghem & Mark P. Rice, 2018. "A social capital approach to the development of sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems: an explorative study," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 153-170, June.
    5. Niki A. den Nieuwenboer & João Vieira da Cunha & Linda Klebe Treviño, 2017. "Middle Managers and Corruptive Routine Translation: The Social Production of Deceptive Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 781-803, October.
    6. Torres, Pedro & Augusto, Mário & Godinho, Pedro, 2017. "Predicting high consumer-brand identification and high repurchase: Necessary and sufficient conditions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 52-65.
    7. Holger Graf, 2013. "Inventor Networks in Emerging Key Technologies: Information Technology vs. Semiconductors," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Guido Buenstorf & Uwe Cantner & Horst Hanusch & Michael Hutter & Hans-Walter Lorenz & Fritz Rahmeyer (ed.), The Two Sides of Innovation, edition 127, pages 55-76, Springer.
    8. Anil K. Gupta & Paul E. Tesluk & M. Susan Taylor, 2007. "Innovation At and Across Multiple Levels of Analysis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 885-897, December.
    9. Yao, Li & Li, Jun & Li, Jian, 2020. "Urban innovation and intercity patent collaboration: A network analysis of China’s national innovation system," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    10. Michele Pezzoni & Francesco Lissoni & Gianluca Tarasconi, 2014. "How to kill inventors: testing the Massacrator© algorithm for inventor disambiguation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 477-504, October.
    11. Laurent R. Bergé, 2017. "Network proximity in the geography of research collaboration," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 96(4), pages 785-815, November.
    12. Amel Attour & Pierre Barbaroux, 2015. "Le rôle des processus de connaissances dans le cycle de vie d'un écosystème d'affaires," Post-Print halshs-01244401, HAL.
    13. Ghazinoory, Sepehr & Phillips, Fred & Afshari-Mofrad, Masoud & Bigdelou, Nasrin, 2021. "Innovation lives in ecotones, not ecosystems," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 572-580.
    14. Zifeng Chen & Jiancheng Guan, 2011. "Mapping of biotechnology patents of China from 1995–2008," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(1), pages 73-89, July.
    15. Beltagui, Ahmad & Rosli, Ainurul & Candi, Marina, 2020. "Exaptation in a digital innovation ecosystem: The disruptive impacts of 3D printing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    16. Xaver Neumeyer & Susana C. Santos & Michael H. Morris, 2019. "Who is left out: exploring social boundaries in entrepreneurial ecosystems," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 462-484, April.
    17. Mariana Mazzucato & Douglas K Robinson, 2016. "Lost in space? NASA and the changing publicprivate eco-system in space," SPRU Working Paper Series 2016-20, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    18. den Hamer, Pieter & Frenken, Koen, 2021. "A network-based model of exploration and exploitation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 589-599.
    19. Massimo G. Colombo & Giovanni Battista Dagnino & Erik E. Lehmann & MariPaz Salmador, 2019. "The governance of entrepreneurial ecosystems," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 419-428, February.
    20. B. Ebersberger & S. J. Herstad & C. Koller, 2014. "Does the composition of regional knowledge bases influence extra-regional collaboration for innovation?," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 201-204, February.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:annpce:v:92:y:2021:i:1:p:79-100. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.