IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/ird-01963635.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Principios y conceptos de la economía social y solidaria : para una economía plural, feminista y política

Author

Listed:
  • Isabelle Hillenkamp

    (CESSMA UMRD 245 - Centre d'études en sciences sociales sur les mondes africains, américains et asiatiques - IRD - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - Inalco - Institut National des Langues et Civilisations Orientales - UPD7 - Université Paris Diderot - Paris 7, IRD - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement)

Abstract

Principios y conceptos de la economía social y solidaria: para una economía plural, feminista y política Isabelle Hillenkamp, investigadora del Instituto de Investigaciones para el Desarrollo (IRD-CESSMA), Francia, París e investigadora asociada al Programa de pos-graduación en sociología de la Universidad Federal de São Carlos (PPGS-UFSCar), Brasil. Introducción Objetivos Esta ponencia tiene como objetivo proponer principios y conceptos para el análisis de la economía social y solidaria (ESS). Esta propuesta es desarrollada desde una triple mirada de economía plural, feminista y política. Resulta de un ejercicio de abstracción a partir de una diversidad de casos, de los cuales se intenta resaltar los principios y características conceptuales comunes. No es, por lo tanto, un ejercicio meramente teórico, sino que más bien parte de observaciones de campo. Estas son los resultados de mis propias investigaciones, en Bolivia, junto con organizaciones de productores y con grupos de mujeres y, en Brasil, también junto con grupos de mujeres, así como con llamados "Bancos Comunitarios de Desarrollo". Además, me baso en los resultados de investigaciones de otros autores que resumiré aquí muy brevemente. Es, pues, este universo que los organizadores de este seminario me pidieron que resuma y conceptualice. Ejemplos y contornos de la ESS Antes de empezar la discusión de los principios y conceptos, y tomando en cuenta que mi ponencia es la primera de este seminario, quisiera dar algunos ejemplos de lo que me refiero a través del término de ESS. Un primero caso son las asociaciones o cooperativas campesinas y agrícolas, como, por ejemplo, las Cooperativas del Ceibo en Bolivia, que representa un caso de organización colectiva en dos niveles-las cooperativas de base y la Central de cooperativas-para el acopio, la transformación y la comercialización del cacao. Otro caso importante, presente en todos los países de América latina, son los colectivos de mujeres, a menudo informales, y vinculados a espacios de socialización femenina como es, típicamente, la costura, la artesanía o la cocina. Una pregunta recurrente de este tipo de experiencia se refiere a las condiciones para que se consoliden y favorecen el empoderamiento de sus participantes, evitando el riesgo de reproducir la división sexual del trabajo y la explotación de las mujeres de bajo nivel de ingreso. En Brasil, en las últimas dos décadas, se desarrolló el modelo de Banco Comunitario de Desarrollo, a partir de la experiencia pionera del Banco Palmas, en la periferia de la ciudad de Fortaleza, en el nordeste de este país. Hoy en día, existen más de 100 de estos bancos en todo Brasil. Son,

Suggested Citation

  • Isabelle Hillenkamp, 2017. "Principios y conceptos de la economía social y solidaria : para una economía plural, feminista y política," Post-Print ird-01963635, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:ird-01963635
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://ird.hal.science/ird-01963635
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ird.hal.science/ird-01963635/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ferber, Marianne A. & Nelson, Julie A. (ed.), 1993. "Beyond Economic Man," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226242019, September.
    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. Astrid Agenjo‐Calderón & Lina Gálvez‐Muñoz, 2019. "Feminist Economics: Theoretical and Political Dimensions," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 78(1), pages 137-166, January.
    2. Judith Record McKinney, 2004. "Lone Mothers In Russia: Soviet And Post-Soviet Policy," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(2), pages 37-60.
    3. Paul Shaffer, 2002. "Poverty Naturalized: Implications for Gender," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 55-75.
    4. Nelson, Julie A., 1997. "Feminism, ecology and the philosophy of economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 155-162, February.
    5. Palsson, Gisli, 1998. "The virtual aquarium: Commodity fiction and cod fishing," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2-3), pages 275-288, February.
    6. Stephanie Baker Collins & Marge Reitsma-Street & Elaine Porter & Sheila Neysmith, 2010. "Women's community work challenges market citizenship," Community Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(3), pages 297-313, June.
    7. Pienkowski, Dariusz, 2009. "Selfishness, cooperation, the evolutionary point of view and its implications for economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 335-344, December.
    8. van Staveren, I.P., 2002. "Social capital :What is in it for feminist economics?," ISS Working Papers - General Series 19126, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), The Hague.
    9. Anna Horodecka, 2015. "The Changing Face of Economics? Ethical Issues in Contemporary Economic Schools as a Consequence of Changes in the Concept of Human Nature," Annales. Ethics in Economic Life, University of Lodz, Faculty of Economics and Sociology, vol. 18(4), pages 55-71, December.
    10. Iulie Aslaksen & Ane Flaatten & Charlotte Koren, 1999. "Introduction: Quality of Life Indicators," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 79-82.
    11. Zdravka, Todorova, 2009. "Employer of Last Resort Policy and Feminist Economics: Social Provisioning and Socialization of Investment," MPRA Paper 16240, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Zdravka Todorova, 2013. "Connecting social provisioning and functional finance in a post-Keynesian–Institutional analysis of the public sector," European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 10(1), pages 61-75.
    13. Gillian Hewitson, 2001. "A Survey of Feminist Economics," Working Papers 2001.01, School of Economics, La Trobe University.
    14. Steve Cohn, "undated". "Telling Other Stories: Heterodox Critiques of Neoclassical Micro Principles Texts," GDAE Working Papers 00-06, GDAE, Tufts University.
    15. Olena Hankivsk & Jane Friesen & Colleen Varcoe & Fiona MacPhail & Lorraine Greaves & Charmaine Spencer, 2004. "Expanding Economic Costing in Health Care: Values, Gender and Diversity," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 30(3), pages 257-282, September.
    16. Susan Meriläinen & Johanna Moisander & Sinikka Pesonen, 2000. "The masculine mindset of environmental management and green marketing," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(3), pages 151-162, May.
    17. Ellen Mutari, 2001. ""...As broad as our life experience": visions of feminist political economy, 1972-1991," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 33(4), pages 379-399, December.
    18. Nelson, Julie A., 2011. "Would Women Leaders Have Prevented the Global Financial Crisis? Implications for Teaching about Gender, Behavior, and Economics," Working Papers 179096, Tufts University, Global Development and Environment Institute.
    19. Horodecka, Anna & Śliwińska, Magdalena, 2019. "Fair Trade phenomenon – limits of neoclassical and chances of heterodox economics," Studia z Polityki Publicznej / Public Policy Studies, Warsaw School of Economics, vol. 6(3), pages 1-29, July.
    20. Beate Littig, 2002. "The Case for Gender-sensitive Socio-ecological Research," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 16(1), pages 111-132, March.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    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:hal:journl:ird-01963635. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.