Asian Alliance for Solidarity Economy

Opening Session:

Mr. Hideo Ishizuka & Ms. Yukari Shigeto

Shoko Uchida (Secretariat of AFSE)

Yoko Kitazawa (Co-chairperson of AFSE Japanese committee)

Pierre Calame (FPH, France)

Farmer’s cooperatives are very strong in Asia, as is microcredit lending, with Bangladesh leading the way. However, these efforts are not often called “solidarity economy” or thought of as parts of the same process. Also, the agricultural cooperatives are not necessarily fighting neoliberalism or practicing participatory democracy.

The concept of “social economy” began in Europe after the war, but was later eclipsed by socialism, and then in the 1990’s was revived in the name of “solidarity economy” in the face of the havoc wreaked by neoliberalism and structural adjustment programs, the collapse of socialism, and new environmental challenges.

The World Social Forums are connected to the resurgence of solidarity economy and a response to the crisis of capitalism. Solidarity economy includes a broad variety of issues dealing with work, employment, production, technology, ethical consumption, participatory budgeting, socially responsible finance, sustainable finance, social/local currencies, debt cancellation, fair trade, women, and socially responsible enterprises. Tools include microcredit, fair trade, cooperatives, debt cancellation, international regulation and more.

We need to deepen and radicalize the solidarity economy movement. Go to the roots not treat the symptoms. The global economy has become invisible – we don’t know where or how what we consume is produced, where money comes from or goes, an opaque process.

“Economics” has become an ideology rather than a discipline, we need to address the gaps in the discipline and train economists for our future.

Plenary Session 1: “Solidarity Economy from the Global Perspective”

Ben Quinones (CSRSME Asia)

Vincent Dagenais (Groupe d’economie solidaire du Quebec: GESQ)

Martine Theveniaut (Lux-09 Workshop 7)

Yvon Poirier (Canadian Community Economic Development Network: CCEDNET, RIPESS North America)

David Thompson (Jobs Australia)

Must ensure that finance serves the real economy. We can’t forget about the world food crisis, the importance of local produce and good sovereignty.

Democracy is in crisis. Start with the grassroots not the large institutions, involve the excluded, make local agreements.

Territorial approach – talk about access to land, local food production, directly linking producers and consumers. How can we transfer from the globalized growth/debt driven economy to a federated local sustainable economies approach.

With oil/gas costs and diminishing resources transportation costs of the global production chain no longer makes sense.

Next steps: learning from and listening to people already practicing solidarity economy, linking with researchers, knowledge exchange, overcome intercultural and language barriers.

“The world is enough for everyone’s needs, but not enough for everyone’s greed.”

We have to look at solidarity economy like our bodies, we have different efforts, say feet, and hands, but we have to put it all together to make a full body.

The government in Australia is now trying to quantify the contribution of the non-profit sector in Australia, actually generates $80 billion/year, employs 880,000 people, and engages 2.7 million volunteers.

The non-profit sector is substantial, but how are our outcomes? We haven’t used the financial crisis to promote solidarity economy as well as we should.

We also need to document the outcomes and impacts of solidarity economy practices.

Climate change and the end of oil will cause energy to go up having implications for food and hunger, food sovereignty more important than ever.

Question and Answer

Question about territorial communities versus interest and internet based communities. We should not forget the advocacy potential of these communities, especially around corporate accountability and lobbying in the North to change policies towards the South. Also international territorial associations, such as people around the world living in mountains facing similar problems.

Question about isolation and suicide, and how to bring these people back into society.

Comment about difficulty of linking local to international and the importance of having all the layers, linking local to regional to national to international.

Comment about the need for microfinance, fair trade, coops, international regulation advocacy and others to work together rather than individually. RIPESS is working on this.

Plenary 2: Solidarity Economy from the Asian Perspective

Reiko Inoue (Co-chair of AFSE Japanese committee)

Ben Quinones (CSRSME Asia)

Denison Jayasooria (Binary University College, Malaysia)

Ila Shah (SEWA, India)

Jang Won Bong (Korea Foundation for Social Investment, Korea)

Jun Nishikawa (Co-chair of AFSE Japanese committee, Japan)

Solidarity economy practices have been active in Asia for a long time but have not been seen together as linked. The 1^st Asian Forum for Solidarity Economy in the Phillippines began this process.

CSRSME in Phillippines is promoting solidarity economy, facilitating dialogue on solidarity economy, has spun off two co-ops, has a holdings company for social enterprises, and an educational institution, International Institute for Solidarity Economy. Mobilize savings from the grassroots, co-ops, and invest in social enterprises. Approach: 1) building shared vision 2) mobilize local resources 3) link up with stakeholders, network, supply chain management 4) project management. How is solidarity economy different from the mainstream economy? It strengthens civil society. It is based on the “triple bottom line”, financial profit, social benefit, and environmental effects. “Social enterprises” as the intersection between non-profits and co-ops. Democratic ownership and a social mission, led by principles of sustainability, transparency, equity, and participatory democracy.

Malaysia experiencing economic growth and development, potential for co-op movement, growing civil society, also no minimum wage, wealth gap growing, digital divide, possibility of public sector being privatized into social enterprises.

Center for Social Entrepeneurship in Malaysia doing research and networking, rural community internet centers addressing the digital divide. Participatory approach key, need by-in from local community leaders. How to transform into a coherent political force?

SEWA in India strengthen local production and consumption, create a market within the organization for poor women’s enterprises, member-owned, concept of self-reliance, vocational training.

In Korea generally use term “social economy” instead of “solidarity economy”. 27 unions form the Korea Foundation for Social Investment, including 242 community self-support centers, almost 3,000 businesses, 26,000 people, 251 accredited social enterprises working in job creation, social services, social welfare, and environment. The social enterprises integrate marginalized people, those without technical skills, elderly, long-term unemployed, into the workforce. Social enterprises serve as middle man between civil society and government.

Japan in 1989 recognized juridical existence of NPO’s. The new government is advocating a “fraternity society” with a greater focus on the poor. How does Japan use it’s capital? Buying bonds from the US, how else could that capital be used? Solutions: local consumption and production, lifestyle shifts, social policies, connecting around the world.

Question and Answer

Question about the dependence of social economy on the government in Korea, should the social economy be more independent of the government? Social economy in Korea financed by a mix of government and private money, multiple goals, multiple stakeholders, multiple resources.

Plenary Session 3: Alternative Development Approaches & Solidarity Economy

Bernd Balkenhol (International Labor Organization)

Viviane Vandemeulebroucke (INAISE)

Micol Pistelli (MIX)

Mariko Kawaguchi (Daiwa Soken)

The difference between social finance and conventional finance: mission (social and financial goals), scale (microfinance being small, co-op finance in some nations includes 1/3 of the market), scope, values, innovations. Must look at both the interest of the stakeholders and the effects on the community. Social financial institutions must be profitable but they cannot maximize profits. Structural dependency on the government is not good. Social finance should include government policies that induce financial institutions to maximize public benefits.

AIG bailout was $170 billion, yet less than $40 billion invested in microfinance around the world.

Question: should social finance continue as a niche sector or spread to the whole economy? Often co-ops when get larger become easily convert into mainstream corporations.

The International Labor Association working on two research projects 1)to demonstrate the effects of microfinance on child labor and working conditions 2) to test approaches to microinsurance

INAISE is a social finance member organization network with 54 organizations in 30 countries. Socially conscious investors can invest in small medium enterprises and individuals, using the triple bottom line of people, planet, profit. Institute for Social Banking and International Summer School of Social Banking in Italy.

MIX is measuring social performance, serving as an information platform on microfinance institutions around the world, collecting financial and social performance data. They have developed 22 indicators. Respond to “mission drift” where firms begin to respond more to shareholders than community.

Question and Answer:

Some big corporations are now getting into fair trade, and the same is happening with microfinance, for example Citibank has a microfinance window – what are the opportunities and risks here?

There are opportunities, but it’s important to distinguish between exploitative institutions making small efforts in the name of reputation management, and real social banks.

Question for MIX about how microfinance institutions are measuring up – are they putting people more and more into debt or are they helping? Just starting to implement performance standards, those that have reported are doing well, but it is voluntary to report to them, so there may be many not doing well who choose not to report.

Plenary Session 4: Social Enterprises: Facets of Solidarity Economy

Sudha Reddy (Charter for Human Responsibility)

Ben Quinones (CSRSME Asia)

Chigusa Fujiki (Workers Collective Network, Japan)

Ha Jung Eun (Work Together Foundation, Korea)

Kenmichi Ohdaka (Seigakin University)

Majority of world’s population vulnerable to changes of globalization

Gandhian concept of trusteeship, cooperation and compassionate competition

“Social enterprise” – must generate economic value added, and also must generate social and environmental value added. Some examples: former Bed and Bath workers took over the factory and turned it into a coop, group trying to take back ancestral land, World Fair Trade conference, community based tour group guide, cooperatives of artisans making handicrafts, fair housing project, local coffee collective, financial services cooperative.

Work ahead:

-need for mapping of solidarity initiatives in geographic areas

-understand the interplay of governance, market, and solidarity economy activities

-develop the solidarity economy supply/value chains with networking

-develop performance measures

-policy advocacy – to see solidarity economy as an approach to development

The Workers Collective Network in Japan. 1980’s agricultural coops grew in Japan, 1984 disability rights national network, 98 non-profits recognized. Collectives must include 1 person, 1 vote, workers play a role in magagement. In 1980 collectives took off in Japan, collectives work in healthcare/nursing, childcare, meal delivery and services, funeral services. They are currently working for a national law defining cooperatives, drawing from Korea.

Work Together Foundation Korea. The Korean Social Enterprise Act supports and sets a system for certification of social enterprises. The criteria include: organization, paid employees, social purpose, democratic decision-making process (recipients, workers and stakeholders have a role), must make a profit, 2/3 of profits must be spent on a social purpose. In Korea there are 7,000 people employed in this sector, 58% of whom are from “disadvantaged” sector, employed in manufacturing, care services, recycling, and others. The Korean government provides regulation, loans capital, provides training and some finance. Internal issues remaining: reduction of ghettoes, balance social values and profits, tools for evaluation on social goals, project planning, skill development, social capital and alternative financial resources, networking and formation of markets, growth, alternative structures of governance, meeting the needs of clients and participants, strengthening leadership and interbusiness networks, social enterprise promotion and awareness in the public, greater research.

There is a new government in Japan, and there is the opportunity to promote social enterprises as employment generating mechanisms to be supported by stimulus money. We have to start by looking at social exclusion and move from there to business rather than starting with a business and then looking at social exclusion. In Japan, many social enterprises provide welfare services and jobs in various sectors of society. Social enterprises still don’t have legal status in Japan. Currently working to map social enterprise in Japan. How do you distinguish between social enterprise and “poverty business” that is exploiting the poor? How is being “social” defined? Are the voices of the excluded driving or even part of the governance of social enterprises?

Employment is often not enough for socially excluded people, they may need more comprehensive support, there are multiple interrelated problems. When talking to marginalized youth see they feel rejected, afraid of others, doubting themselves and their acceptance by society. Social enterprises should also be tools to build community and a sense of belonging.

Questions and Answers:

Question about whether Korean model, which started from the government, is a strong model for the future or too dependent on the government – is it self-reliant? Talked about the need for public resources in public/social service sectors, but that other sectors should be self-reliant.

WORKSHOP: International Solidarity Tax

Jun Nishikawa (Waseda University, Japan)

Kon Gihyon (Community Coalition for Environmental Justice, Korea)

Tohru Morotomi (Kyoto University, Japan)

Mr. Takehiko Uemura (Yokohama City University, Japan)

Proposal: International Solidarity Levy, to regulate the global money flow characterized by a non-human speculative nature, and to use this money to address global poverty and environmental issues.

Experience of Korea in the 1990’s, a reckless opening of foreign exchange and capital investment leading to financial crisis. 1995 Korea joined the Uruguay round of GATT, liberalized finance, lots of capital and investment came to Korea, when crisis hit, they all pulled out. In 1997, the World Bank and IMF imposed policies that made the crisis worse. For example, they demanded the transition from a banking system to a capital led system, which hurt Korean businesses and led to the buy-out of Korean banks by foreign banks, who then wouldn’t lend to domestic businesses but invested instead abroad in risky real estate projects. The inherent function of banks to take deposits form people and lend to productive businesses is being lost.

Solutions: recognize the real causes for the current crisis, reject World Bank and IMF policies, stop speculation instead of investment, the Tobin Tax.

Questions about the Tobin Tax (or International Solidarity Tax): who will levy this tax? If it is run by the IMF or World Bank as proposed by some current leaders, then it’s very problematic. Each country could have an independent authority related to the tax.

The Tobin Tax or Intl Solidarity Tax could help distribute wealth from North to South, help finance the Millenium Development Goals, and help address adaptation to global warming. Polluter pays principle – industrialized countries need to compensate others for effects of global warming. How would the revenue be distributed and who would decide? What if some countries implement the tax and others don’t? Will it really restrict currency volatility? Who will collect the tax? IMF would be problematic.

Currently France has started with a solidarity tax on airplane tickets that will be used to fight infectious disease in the developing world.

Why do we need a solidarity tax?

- to slow speculative capital

- to fund poverty reduction and environmental protection

- to expand transparency and accountability

2006 Paris Conference on the international solidarity tax – 13 countries were willing to do an airplane ticket solidarity tax and 9 countries are already implementing it – Japan and US have not joined.

Other types of global taxes: international transaction tax, multinational corporation tax, carbon tax, weapons trade tax.

Public Services International is discussing this in Cambodia with international network of trade unions, studying this issue. The Global Tax Research Committee has been established, and the non-profit, Association of Citizens for International Solidarity Taxes. His book The Potential for a Global Tax will be coming out next year.

Question and Answer;

This morning in the paper it talks about Gordon Brown supporting the idea of an international solidarity levy at the G20 meeting, but it would be through the IMF. How is this being addressed?

Yes, this is very problematic as the IMF is an undemocratic institution.

We talked a lot about investors from the West, but what about investors within Asia? How are they impacting local communities and environments? For example Japanese companies in poorer Asian nations, or China in Burma, Sri Lanka. Many of the threats to Asia are not only from West but from within Asia. We have talked about World Bank and IMF but what are the roles of ASEAN, APEC and other regional institutions to address these issues?

Asia is thinking about a common currency and maybe the Tobin Tax could be implemented within the Asian community. Leadership within Asia has to be looked at. Can Japan play a different type of leadership role than in the past?

What about the issue of hunger and speculation in commodities and food? Shouldn’t this be made illegal?

***Other workshops I was not able to attend since I had to pick one include:

-Social Finance/Microfinance & Solidarity Economy

-Fair Trade & Solidarity Economy

-Social Welfare & Solidarity Economy

-Agriculture and Local Initiative and Solidarity Economy.

Regrettably, I also was not able to attend the final Plenary Session 5 on “Social Performance Management for Promotion of Solidarity Economy”, the “Tokyo Consensus” or the “Closing Session” because of flight scheduling. Please check the attached official Statement of Commitment from the Asian Forum for Solidarity Economy.

*****************************************************************

I want to thank everyone so much for sharing your knowledge, analysis, and experiences with me at the Asian Forum for Solidarity Economy.  It was really inspiring to hear the stories and see the people with their feet on the ground building a healthier society and more just economy throughout Asia and the world.  And it was heartening to see the concrete planning and deeper thinking going into the formation of the Asian Alliance for Solidarity Economy moving forward from here.  I hope that I can contribute something from Taiwan in the next year and from the United States in the coming years.  Please feel free to contact me at any time (especially if you make it to Taiwan!), and I look forward to hearing more from all of you, and hopefully visiting some of your countries and projects as well.

I want to extend a special thanks to the organizers of the Asian Forum for Solidarity Economy, the staff and volunteers, who worked so hard to put on an excellent and fulfilling event which ran very smoothly logistically.

I typed up the notes I took during the Saturday and Sunday sessions to share with friends back home at the US Network for Solidarity Economy.  They are very incomplete because of missed sessions, interpretation issues, my own attention span, and other reasons, so are not intended to be an official recording of any type, but more a glimpse into a couple of the discussions taking place at the forum for friends back home.  Please feel free to let me know if any of the information needs to be corrected.  I also apologize for sending this email so late, as I was caught up in final exams the last few weeks.

Thank you again, keep up the good work, and I look forward to working together in the future!

Sincerely,
Hannah Weinstock

To Mr. Benjamin R. Quinones Jr.

I am a Tokyo-based reporter for Inter Press Service and I met you at the Asian Forum of Solidarity Economy a few days ago. I had some questions for you for my story on the Forum.

1. As a chief organizer and leader of the first Asian Forum in the Philippines two years ago, did you see any notable progress at the second Forum in Tokyo last weekend?

Yes, the progress was notable. First of all, the high turn out of Japanese participants (almost 90% of the more than 400 participants) in the Asian Forum for Solidarity Economy (AFSE) 2009 was beyond expectations considering that ‘solidarity economy’ is little known in Japan. Furthermore, the quality of participation from Japan was rather high, what with the presence of highly respected researchers from noted Japanese universities, top management officers of private banks including NPO banks, fair trade organizations, cooperatives, credit unions, and other civil society organizations. Secondly, this was the first time that South Korea was represented in AFSE by a good number of civil society organizations and social enterprises. The provision of interpretation (Korean to Japanese and English) was a key factor for a visible presence of South Korean delegation in AFSE 2009. Third and finally, the thematic areas for discussion at AFSE 2009 had a much broader coverage with the inclusion of new topics such as solidarity tax levy and social welfare for the elderly, handicapped and unemployed.

2. What was the most interesting discussion through the Forum in Tokyo? Can you specify one or two?
In my opinion, the most interesting discussion at AFSE 2009 was on the issue of global and Asian perspectives of solidarity economy. Notably, all speakers agreed on one point – that solidarity economy is a timely and appropriate response to the adverse effects of neoliberal globalization (e.g increasing poverty, social exclusion, degradation of environment). Furthermore, participants through a “Statement of Commitment” enumerated a number of solidarity economy initiatives that can be found in Asia and in other continents. These included fair trade, organic farming, ethical/social finance, microfinance, solidarity markets, solidarity trading, ethical consumption, and many others. An important realization arising from this discussion was the need for mapping out solidarity economy initiatives in a given geographic area and for building inter-relationships, interactions, and interdependencies among the various solidarity economy stakeholders. It was suggested that the 3^rd AFSE in Malaysia in 2011 should give more prominent focus on the status of inter-relationships among solidarity economy stakeholders in specific geographic areas of respective participating countries.

3. Did you learn anything new, what was it?

Indeed I learned something new. During our field visit to Ogawa-machi, Saitama district, we met a local farmer, Mr. Kaneko, who pioneered organic farming some 20 years ago. Nobody listened to him at first, but he persisted. Not only did he tell his neighbors about the ill effects of chemical fertilizers and pesticides on the soil and environment in general, he also encouraged them to “buy local”. Gradually, Mr. Kaneko won over some of his neighbors to buy his organic produce, and soon even the local agricultural processors (e.g. sake producer, tofu manufacturer) started buying from him. Local restaurants serving organic dishes also emerged and a TV program occasionally feature Mr. Kaneko’s farm and the local industries that patronize his products. More and more local farmers went to Mr. Kaneko’s farm for training in organic farming. They began exchanging seeds and planting materials among themselves to ensure that local varieties that adjust well to the climate of Saitama are preserved for continuing cultivation. Only a few months ago, all farmers in Ogawa-machi converted to organic farming.

Mr. Kaneko’s example showed that a single entrepreneur can unite the whole village in co-creating a new economy based on the principle of solidarity among stakeholders and respect for the environment. The case of Mr. Kaneko deepened the understanding of participants on the concept of solidarity economy and the fact that any of the individual initiatives (fair trade, organic farming, ethical/social finance, microfinance, etc.) can be an entry point for building solidarity economy at the local level. This case strengthened the conviction of participants about the relevance of looking at solidarity economy initiatives at the local or community level in their own respective countries.

4. How can you apply your new findings or learning to your activities at the Coalition of Socially Responsible Small and Medium Enterprises in Asia (CSRSME Asia)?
At CSRSME Asia, we have already been involved in the development of the supply chains of SMEs since the establishment of the organization in 2004. However, unlike in the case of Mr. Kaneko who as social entrepreneur and prime mover of a solidarity economy initiative took the burden of building the supply chain of his own enterprise, in the Philippines it is CSRSME Asia that is carrying the burden. Unless this burden is shouldered by the social entrepreneur himself, the efforts of CSRSME Asia may not prove to be sustainable. Fortunately, the role of CSRSME Asia is limited to that of an advocate and think tank. It has established four subsidiary organizations to provide technical support services to social enterprises at affordable cost. CSRSME Asia can point to the experience of Mr. Kaneko and encourage the social entrepreneur to establish linkages with the various suppliers, buyers, workers, and other stakeholders of his enterprise for the purpose of co-creating a more robust and mutually beneficial solidarity economy initiative.

5. How fast do you predict the solidarity economy (SE) is spreading in Asian region do you think? Any evidence for it?

With the establishment of the Asian Alliance for Solidarity Economy (AASE) as the hub of SE activities in Asia, it is now possible to foresee a more organized process of coordinating the promotion of SE in various Asian countries. If our partners in Europe, North America (US and Canada) and Australia could act on their commitments in the coming months to help the fledgling AASE generate resources for a concerted promotion of SE in Asian countries, it is quite possible to see a more robust participation in the 3^rd Asian Forum for Solidarity Economy in Malaysia in 2011.

Thank you, again, and I look truly forward to hearing from you VERY SOON!

Sincerely,

Mutsuko Murakami
Tokyo reporter for Inter Press Service

DATE	TIME	Activity	VENUE
DAY 1 7-Nov [Sat]	8:00-	Registration	United Nations University(UNU) Entrancel
	9:00-9:30	Opening Session Welcome Remarks by Yoko Kitazawa(PARC, JAPAN) video presentation by Pierre Calame(FPH, France)	United Nations University(UNU) U Thant International Conference Hall
	9:30-11:00	Plenary Session 1 “Solidarity Economy from the Global Perspective” Latin America aniel Tigel(Solidarity Economy, Brasil) North America & Canada : Vincent Dagenais(Groupe d’economie solidaire du Quebec:GESQ) Australia: David Thompson (Jobs Australia) EU: Yvon Poirier & Martine Theveniaut( Lux’09 Worshop 7)
	11:00-11:15	break	-
	11:15-12:45	Plenary Session 2 “Solidarity Economy from the Asian Perspective” Philippines: Ben Quinones(CSRSME Asia) Malaysia: Dr. Denison Jayasooria India: Ila Shah(Self Employed Women’s Association:SEWA) Japan: Nishikawa Jun Korea: Jang Won Bong(Korea Foundation for Social Investment)	United Nations University(UNU) U Thant International Conference Hall
	12:45-13:45	Lunch	-
	13:45-14:30	Special Speech gSolidarity Economy in the Context of Globalization” Dr. Vandana Shiva(Ecogist, INDIA)	United Nations University(UNU) U Thant International Conference Hall
	14:30-16:00	Plenary Session 3 “Alternative Development Approaches & Solidarity Economy” Social Finance & Solidarity Economy, by Bernd Balkenhol, ILO Globalization of Social Finance, by Viviane Vandemeulebroucke(INAISE:International Association of Investors in the Social Economy) Microfinance by Micol PistelliiMicrofinance Information Exchange, Inc. :MIXj Japan: Socially Responsible Finance, by Mariko Kawaguchi(Daiwa Soken)
	16:00-16:10	break	-
	16:10-17:30	Plenary Session 4 “Social Enterprises: Facets of Solidarity Economy” Social responsible small & medium enterprise in Philippines,by Quinones, CSRSME Asia Japanese socially responsible entrepreneur and womens power by Chigusa Fujiki, Workers collective Network Japan The role of Intermediary organization supporting to Social Enterprises in Korean,by Ha Jung Eun, Work together Foundation, Korea The possibilities of social bussiness by Ohdaka Kenmichi	United Nations University(UNU) U Thant International Conference Hall
	18:00-19:30	Reception (Light Meal and Drink)	United Nations University(UNU) Reception Hall

DATE	TIME	Activity	VENUE
DAY 2 8-Nov [Sun]	9:00-12:00	Thematic Workshop	-
		Workshop A A.?? Social Finance/Microfinance & solidarity Economy Chair: Prof. Tsuyoshi Mizuguchi(Takasaki Economic UNIV., JAPAN) Opening : Mr. Tsuchiya Kazuyuki (A SEED JAPAN) Role of Social Financing and Networks : Ms. Viviane VandemeulebrouckeiINAISE:International Association of Investors in the Social Economy) Social Financing in Asia : Ms. Tes PilapiliOikocredit Southeast Asiaj Social Investment Fund from Japan for developing countries : Ms. Kono Satoko(ARUN) Microfinancing for self reliance of the poor : Mr. Park Mun Boon (Korean Social Solidarity Bank) Womens’ bank in Japan : Ms. Eiko Mukaida (Women & Citizen community Bank)	Aoyama Gakuin University
		Workshop B Fair Trade & Solidarity Economy Chair : Prof. Tatsuya Watanabe (Tokyo University of Economics., JAPAN) Trajectory of Fair Trade Movement in Europe : Rudi Dalvai (former president, WFTO & founder, CTM-Altromercato) Fair Trade as North-South Solidarity from Producer Perspective : Chandra Prasad Kachchipati (Rep., Sana Hastakara, Nepal & president, WFTO-Asia) Solidarity between Producer Cooperatives and Consumer Cooperatives : Makoto Ueda (Manager, Alter Trade Japan) Product Development as a Means to Broaden Customer Base- Global Campaigning: Conscientizing Consumers and Working on Media : Michiko Ono (Public Relations Officer, People Tree)	Aoyama Gakuin University
		Workshop C Social Welfare & Solidarity Economy Chair : Mr. Nobumasa Kitajima(Chief of the secretariat Asia-Pacific Health Cooperative Organization) Microinsurance for the poor in India : Speaker from India Choice of China in the aged society : Ms. Chin Shuo (Urawa UNIV.) Medical Cooperative for poor people in Korea : Mr. Kim Song-Fun (Medical cooprative) Social enterprise of medical/care survices in community : Ms. Mariko Kohmaru(“Tasukeai-club) Local network of Medical and Nursing Care : Mr. Hiromichi Matsumoto(Sho-nai medical cooprative)	Aoyama Gakuin University
		Workshop D Agriculture and Local iniciative & Solidarity Economy Chair : Mr. Tadaaki Ooe(journalist, board member of Pacific Asia Resource Center) People’s activities and small bussiness in Japanese local area : Mr. Tadaaki Ooe Formation of Local market in Thailand : Mr. Bamurung Kayota (Thai farmers network) Eco-fariming in Korea : Mr. Kon Young-gun (Korean Institute for the Study of Rural Societies (KISRS)) Womens’ Action in the rural solidarity : Anggraeni Irawati Hermantyo(Bina SwadayaFSelf Reliance Development Foundation(Indonesia))	Aoyama Gakuin University
		Workshop E International Regulation of Global Economy–” International Solidarity Levy” Chair : Mr. Takehiko Uemura (Yokohama City UNIV.) International Regulation to the Global Economy : Jun Nishikawa(Professor emeritus, Waseda University) 2) Reform to International Finance system : Mr. Ko Gye-Hyeon (Community Coalition for Environmental Justice, KOREA) Reguration to finance and Re-distribution of wealth : Mr. Tohru Morotomi(Kyoto UNUV.) Action for achievement of ” International Solidarity Levy”– in Japan, Asia and global revel : Mr. Takehiko Uemura (Yokohama City UNIV.)	Aoyama Gakuin University
	12:00-13:15	Lunch	-
	13:15-15:00	Plenary Session 5 “Social Performance Management” Chair: Ben Quinones by Laura Foose, International Coordinator, Social Performance Task Force	Tokyo Women’s Plaza Hall
	15:00-16:00	Plenary Session 6 “AFSE Tokyo Declaration, submission by AFSE Japanese committee
	16:00-17:00	CLOSING SESSION
	19:00-21:00	Business Meeting of the Asian Alliance for Solidarity Economy (by Invitation)	Akasaka Morroud Inn

DATE	Activity
9th Nov. -10th Nov. (1nights accommodation included)	Tour 1 Organic Farming & Solidarity Economy in Ogawa-machi We visit Simosato Farm which practices strictly gIntegration of Agriculture with Livestockh and hCirculation Agricultureh for 38 years. This effort started from one farmhouse has spread to other local farms and brought cooperation with indigenous industry. It made Ogawa-machi well known as gVillage of Organic Agricultureh. This tour shows the site that has been building the economy connecting people to people, what is called Solidarity Economy, through agriculture. (Ogawa-mati, Saitama Pref.)
9th Nov. 10:00-16:00 1 DAY Tour	Tour 2 Making small businesses locally —Visiting the Field Sites of Social Enterprises in Yokohama city This tour takes you to the field sites such as recycle business by retired men and workers collective business by women in Yokohama city Kanagawa pref. How social enterprises should be, the difficulty to run the business, new movement and relationships built from involvements of various people, etcc Why donft you rethink your own hometown and business with listening to the real voice in the fields?
9th Nov. 10:00-15:00 1 DAY Tour	Tour 3 Social Finance and Citizen Enterprises Mutuality of Welfare Network in Atsugi City Elder care, recycle, childcare, housework support, multi-cultural society, transport servicec gNecessary services for their lifeh made by citizens is being expanded in Atsugi City. This tour goes around the sites of various citizen enterprises that are made by peoplefs knowledge and money. (Atsugi City, Kanagawa Pref.)

by CPRN / RCRPP
Release Date: 22 Oct 2009

>http://www.cprn.org/documents/51874_EN.jpg
>http://www.cprn.org/download.cfm?doc=2061&file=51874_EN.pdf&format=pdf&l=en
> http://www.cprn.org/images/page_go.gifDownload

Canada has long had a vibrant non-profit sector that provides important services to help meet the needs of our citizens.  Non-profit and charitable organizations work hard to make our communities a better place by providing
quality research, policy advice and front line services on everything from health care to housing to education, the environment and the economy.

What is not as well known is that the non-profit sector also makes up a significant portion of our workforce in Canada – employing 11 times more people than the automotive industry and four times more than the agricultural sector – and contributes as much to the gross domestic product (GDP) as other major sectors of the economy.  In other words, our country benefits doubly from non-profits:  through both social and economic contributions that affect us all.

Les organismes à but non lucratif jouent un rôle crucial au Canada sur le
plan de l’innovation sociale et de l’économie

par CPRN / RCRPP
Date de parution : 22 Oct 2009
>http://www.cprn.org/documents/51875_FR.jpg
>http://www.cprn.org/download.cfm?doc=2061&file=51875_FR.pdf&format=pdf&l=fr
> http://www.cprn.org/images/page_go.gifTélécharger

Le Canada possède depuis longtemps un secteur à but non lucratif dynamique qui offre des services importants en vue d’aider à combler les besoins de ses citoyens. Les organismes de bienfaisance et sans but lucratif s’efforcent de faire de nos collectivités un meilleur endroit pour y vivre en offrant des recherches de qualité, des conseils en matière de politiques et des services de première ligne, y compris dans les domaines des soins de santé, du logement, de l’éducation, de l’environnement et de l’économie.

Ce qui est moins bien connu, c’est le fait que le secteur à but non lucratif emploie aussi une fraction importante de la population active au Canada – en fait, il emploie 11 fois plus de gens que l’effectif total de l’industrie automobile et quatre fois plus que celui du secteur agricole – et qu’il contribue tout autant au produit intérieur brut (PIB) que le font d’autres
grands secteurs de l’économie. En d’autres termes, notre pays tire un double avantage des organismes à but non lucratif grâce à leur apport tant économique que social dont nous profitons tous.

Mots clés: innovation sociale, responsabilité sociale des entreprises, économie sociale, entreprise sociale, entrepreneur social, finance sociale, capital social, secteur à but non lucratif, stratégie nationale, partenariats

Marcos Arruda of PACS (Institute of Alternative Policies for Southern Cone of Latin America), Brazil and Member of the Global Coordinating Team of the Alliance for a Responsible, Plural and Solidarity-based Economy (ALOE, France): Solidarity economy is an economy centered on people, not on profits, and on ecological sustainability, instead of on immediate gains at any cost. It takes people‘s needs, not profit maximization, as the goal of economic activity, which means putting economic and technical development at the service of social and human development.  It also means adopting conscious altruism and solidarity, not extreme individualism, as the core of the new socioeconomic culture, and cooperation, not competition, as the main form of relationship among humans and between them and Nature.

A growing number of practitioners view solidarity economy as a post-capitalist mode of defining and organizing society, human work, consumption, production, exchanges, money, technology; and, further, as a new way of life that inspires attitudes and behaviors with values such as sharing, co-responsibility, reciprocity, plurality, respect for diversity, freedom equality and equity, ethics, brotherhood-sisterhood. At present, millions of people and a few nations already live by these values and practice another economy and work relationships emancipated from the chains of the labor market and of mere physical survival. This happens in concrete spaces like cooperatives and other self-managed firms, family farming, communities, peoples.

The empowerment of the social individual to become the main protagonist of her-his own development is the ultimate goal of Solidarity Economy. This means that working people, i.e. people who live mainly from their work, rather than from capital gains, must become the protagonist of development. It is important to redefine the role of the State from one which has pervasive political power to one that is truly a democratic institution, organized in ways that serve society as a whole, orchestrating diversity and seeking to build unities within diversity.

Yvon Poirer, Member of the Coordination Committee of the North American Network for Solidarity Economy (NANSE) and participant of the Workshop on Socially Responsible Governance. Solidarity economy, as defined by the 2001 International Forum of the Alliance for a Responsible, Plural and United World, refer to activities of production, distribution and consumption which contribute to the democratization of the economy based on the involvement of citizens at a local and global level. It takes form through different modalities on all continents. It encompasses the different forms of organizations that a population adopts to create its proper resources for work or to access quality goods and services; this is accomplished through a dynamic socially responsible reciprocity which articulates individual and collective interests.

Another definition of solidarity economy is the one adopted by the U.S. Social Forum (June 2007) organized by the US Solidarity Economy Coordination Committee. According to the U.S. Social Forum, Solidarity Economy constitutes an alternative economic model to neoliberal capitalism, one which is grounded on solidarity and cooperation, rather than the pursuit of narrow, individual self-interest, and that promotes economic democracy, alternative models of local economic governance, equity and sustainability rather than the unfettered rule of the market.

Yoko Kitazawa, founding member of Pacific Asia Resource Center in Japan and facilitator of the Workshop on Socially Responsible Governance: Solidarity economy is an economy which does not seek maximum profit, but works with solidarity among people.

Cecile Lapenu, Executive Director of CERSIE (France), International Coordinator of ProsperA (France), and resource person of the Workshop on Socially Responsible Financing: Solidarity Economy is oriented towards reaching a triple bottom line (financial efficiency, social impact and respect of the environment). It promotes activities that reinforce social capital and respect human being. In this context,  short-term profits do not lead the decisions in solidarity economy, but rather the impact of the economic activities on the individuals, their families, the communities where they live and the environment. It is important to have a broad vision, as in ALOE (Alliance for a Responsible, Plural and Solidarity Economy). Social responsibility, diversity of actors and alliances, and solidarity among people, among countries are key issues for a more humane economy.

Giovanni Acquati, from Italy, President of INAISE (International Association of Investors in Social Economy) and participant of the Socially Responsible Investment Workshop: Solidarity Economy is a form or branch of Social Economy that looks particularly to the poor, the weak and the excluded persons, as for example the people supported by the microcredit system. Being part of Social Economy, the respect of people is the operative philosophical base of Solidarity Economy . In every process of Solidarity Economy, people and the respect of environment should be the core focus, and that the impact of every human activity on the environment has to be considered wherever this activity develop. Solidarity Economy also implies the idea of Solidarity among Enterprises, that is, Enterprise Networks that decide to work together and practice self help in their development.

Sudha Reddy, Director of SHARE (Solidarity for Harmony, Awareness, Responsibility & Empowerment) of India, and resource person of the Workshop on Socially Responsible Governance: Solidarity Economy is an alternative form of life-centered economic process based on the democratic, ethical and humane principles and collective action that leads to overall wellbeing of the humankind and environment.

Dr.Christopher Shun, Finance and Administration Director of Foundation for Community Studies and Social Development (YKPM, Malaysia): The term solidarity economy is used interchangeably with social economy, popular economy and labour economy. But the word Solidarity Economy has a special meaning because it describes the coming together of people as a cohesive unit working to serve common vision and interests to form the economic foundation of these initiatives. As their interests vary, so do the activities. These interests range from micro-credit schemes through local exchange systems, income generation groups, barter groups to collective kitchens. Solidarity Economy is free, harmonious, mutually binding, and organized, wherein the relationships are of cooperation and for the construction of a social power. It looks to create economic growth stressing the importance and priority of the well-being of society and seeks to preserve and sustain the original indigenous culture, which is the source of personal identity, heritage and legacy.

Bienvenido Padilla, Consultant of Timor Aid (Timor Leste), and resource person of the session on Investment Opportunities in Solidarity Economy: In solidarity economy, all stakeholder-members are affected or involved, directly or indirectly not only in the creation of wealth but also in its appropriation. Each stakeholder-member contributes to the productive undertaking and corporately all the members benefit equitably from the same. This is in contrast to the maintstream economy where only some or a few individuals get all the benefits.

Arun Raste, Director of International Resources for Fairer Trade (IRFT, India) and resource speaker of the Workshop on Socially Responsible Enterprise: Solidarity economy does not exploit either nature or people. It gives the small and primary producers the chance to manage both their production and the economy and cares for all people of the planet, as well as for future generations. It treats human beings in a humane way and not as machines.

Kyoko Sakuma, Executive Director of Sustainability Analysis and Consulting (Belgium), and Coordinator of the Workshop on Socially Responsible Investment: Solidarity economy can operate side by side with the market economy for as long as its approaches continue to be innovative . Solidarity economy cannot operate independently of the market economy, but on the contrary, it needs to compete in the real market logic of traditional market. Creating one‘s own niche or segment within the market economy requires innovation, or an innovative mind. In this context, solidarity economy can be called social entrepreneurship, which may be defined as a network of people with entrepreneurial spirit and an innovative mind in
providing solutions to societal problems and their supporters in joining the newly created segment of the market.

Dr. Tito E. Contado, President/CEO of Philippine Morinda Citrifolia Inc. and case study presentor of the Workshop on Socially Responsible Enterprise: Solidarity Economy is a new concept. It can be associated with the word ’solidarity‘ and Lech Walesa of Poland who in the early 1990s toppled down the communist leadership in his country under the rallying battlecry of “Solidarity” which eventually became the name of his political party. Solidarity economy is  the unity of interests, objectives and standards of the different economic actors/sectors characterized by their interdependent relationships.

Takashi Sawaguchi, Chairman of Policy Research Institute for the Civil Section (Japan) and participant of the Workshop on Socially Responsible Enterprise: I am not an intellectual, so I do not know how to define. Therefore I would like to tell you just facts about the solidarity between consumers and producers that we have been doing for last nearly forty years in Japan. Seikatsu Club is a consumers‘ co-operative, but it has established its own three milk plants with 100 dairy farmer-families and 4000 cows. We have our own chicken farms with producers. We have been co-operating with rice farmers and pork meat producers for the last nearly 35years. Seikatsu Club has created some of the sustainable agriculture models through the solidarity between consumers in urban areas and producers in rural areas. We have been living our lives as the consumers who are also the producers, Takashi says. That is the not only our philosophy but also our own practical standard.

Charisse Baldo Development Programme Officer of the Advocate of Philippine Fair Trade Inc. (APFTI) and co-facilitator of the Workshop on Socially Responsible Enterprise: Solidarity economy is an economic model of cooperation. It involves different sectors of society working together towards creating an economy that looks out for the weak. The different sectors are in ’solidarity‘ with a certain cause, a certain group of stakeholders. It looks not just at the numbers, but also at the people, the stories behind the numbers. Fair Trade is a concrete example of solidarity economy. Fair Trade tries to level the playing field for the small producers, in what has become a flatter but more competitive and unequal world .It is a model of development that focuses on trade, not aid.

Dr. Miguel P. Niez, Assistant Vice President of Tagum Agricultural Development Company, Inc (TADECO, Philippines) and participant of the Workshop on Socially Responsible Enterprise: Solidarity economy is a process of producing goods and services that utilizes available resources to meet social needs. It recognizes the value of labor and finds ways for product maximization and the preservation of environment‘. Solidarity economy is an attractive alternative to neo-liberal globalization in terms of the ethics, political, social, cultural and ecological dimensions. Solidarity economy is about sharing of resources in the process of mobilizing people, nature and capital for sustainable growth.

Franck Renaudin, Founder and Director of Entrepreneurs du Monde (France), a partner organization represented in the Asian Forum by a sizeable delegation that participated in the Worshop on Socially Responsible Financing: Solidarity economy is an economy that puts respect for Human Beings and the Earth at the heart of its concerns. The different actors of solidarity economy fully perceive and understand the need and interest to fight against inequalities and to protect planet Earth.

Jeanne Bernardo, Executive Director of Bayanihang Pilipino Inc. (Philippines) and co-Coordinator of the Workshop on Socially Responsible Governance: Solidarity economy as comprising the whole spectrum of economic activities which socially responsible and values-led organizations undertake by collaborating with and networking among other like-minded organizations and the communities they serve to meet the needs of all concerned.

Jimmy Ching, Chairman of Christian Businessmen‘s Forum International (Philippines), and co-Coordinator of the Workshop on Socially Responsible Enterprise: Solidarity economy is an alternative economy that is based on compassion for people and care for the environment. It is an economy where self-interest gives way for the interest of the whole; where greed, as the motive for profit is eliminate. In solidarity economy, love for God and country becomes the center of everything. The standard therefore is based on objective truths that can only be found in the Word of God, he says.

Vicente L. ”Sonny” Domingo, National Chariman of the Kapisanan ng Magsasaka, Mangingisda at Manggagawa Ng Pilipinas Inc. (KaMMMPi, Philippines), and participant of the Workshop on Socially Responsible Governance: Solidarity economy is the convergence of socially oriented individuals.  Leaders and institutions that recognize man as the center of economic activity are the ones who desire righteous relations with others. Solidarity economy also recognizes the existence of a social capital (vis-à-vis financial capital) coming from people who have a solid stand on a common cause. In developing a business or an enterprise, whether micro or a business conglomerate, the human resources or manpower should be recognized as  ‘capital‘ and their aspirations as ‘collateral‘ (vis-à-vis money capital and real estate) so that ordinary people can have an equity share in the business and its profits‘. This viewpoint represents a paradigm shift in business development which usually recognizes only money as capital and real estate as collateral.

In sum, Solidarity Economy denotes an economic system oriented towards people and ecological balance as opposed to the mainstream economy which is geared towards maximization of profit and wanton accumulation of private wealth. Some countries (e.g. France, Canada) adopt the term ’social economy’ instead of solidarity economy, the latter being more widely used in Latin America.

Some people make a distinction between Solidarity Economy and Social Economy but the more important thing to remember is that they share similar basic principles. For example, the five key principles established by the Chantier l‘ Economie Sociale of Quebec to distinguish social economy enterprises can well be applied to solidarity economy initiatives.

These are:
● the objective is to serve its members or the community, instead of simply striving for financial profit;

● the economic enterprise is autonomous of the State;

● in its statute and code of conduct, a democratic decision-making process is established that implies the necessary participation of users and workers;

● it gives priority to people and work over capital in the distribution of revenue and surplus; its activities are based on principles of participation, empowerment, and individual and collective responsibility. It can be said that the concept of solidarity economy is much better entrenched than it was before the Asian Forum in the Philippines, and for the participants from other countries

e-mail: mig@olccjp.net, website: http://www.olccjp.net/ , skype: migjp2003

Since 1999 I have been working on the research and promotion of complementary currency (CC) systems, alias “social money” as I presented at the CSRSME Asia Workshop on Social Finance (March 10-13, 2009. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia) that use something else than the official tender as their means of exchange. I have given lectures in different countries (Brazil, Japan, Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, Portugal, Spain, Taiwan and United States) and will start giving training courses too.

 

The term “CC” was coined by Bernard Lietaer, a Belgian economist who proposed the prototype of Euro in 1980s, as he observed, from the Taoist viewpoint, that the conventional money system, in which the financial elite has the monopoly to control it, has promoted male = yang values such as competition, hierarchy and development while female = yin values such as collaboration, equality and sustainability are ignored. He defined money as “an agreement within a community to use something as a means of exchange,” suggesting the use of different currencies in parallel with different rules = agreement to complement yin in our society.

continue reading…