In his book “The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto” (Rostow, 1960Rostow, W. W. (1960). The stages of economic growth: a non-communist manifesto. Cambridge University Press), which formed the basis of the government program proposed by J.F. Kennedy, Rostow outlines that economic growth occurs in five basic stages of varying lengths: the traditional society, the preconditions for takeoff, the takeoff, the drive to maturity, and the age of high mass consumption.
Traditional society is characterized by a large proportion of resources being used in agriculture due to low productivity. With a hierarchical social structure, there is little vertical mobility; political power is concentrated in the hands of landowners and local authorities, and family and clan ties are significant. In the second stage, the preconditions for takeoff, there is an expansion of education, the emergence of new types of businesspeople, the development of the financial system, intensified investment in infrastructure, and raw material exploitation. This stage sees the flourishing of modern industrial enterprises. The third phase, the takeoff, is marked by increased income, savings, and investment resources. Society begins to accept new agricultural and industrial techniques. Rostow asserts that increased agricultural productivity is a sine qua non for economic takeoff. The fourth stage, the drive to maturity, occurs when modern technology permeates the entire economy, the investment rate reaches 10% to 20% of GDP, and production grows significantly faster than the population. At this stage, Rostow highlights the dominance of “the powerful arithmetic of compound interest applied to the capital stock” (Rostow, 1960, p. 21). Finally, in the age of high mass consumption, average income exceeds basic needs (food, housing, clothing), the population becomes predominantly urban, and workers become more specialized and eager to enjoy the benefits of a mature economy (Rostow, 1960, p. 24).
Rostow argues that countries progress through these phases in a fairly linear manner, establishing a series of conditions that likely affect investment, consumption, and social trends at each stage. However, not all conditions occur in every phase, and the duration of each phase and transition can vary significantly from country to country and even region to region. Rostow does not address the issue of what happens once the appeal of intensive consumption fades. More importantly, is it feasible for all the inhabitants of our planet to reach this stage?
Economic models and plans are designed for perpetual growth, as if continuous expansion were possible, despite economic principles reminding us that resources are finite.
In this context, Raworth (2017Raworth, K. (2017). Doughnut economics: seven ways to think like a 21st-century economist. Random House.) argues that we should replace financial metrics such as GDP (Gross Domestic Product) as the sole measure of progress. She advocates for an economic model that fosters human and ecological well-being, which she terms the Donut Model, ensuring that external inequalities are not normalized and that all of humanity can thrive within a safe and just space.
Raworth’s model (2017Raworth, K. (2017). Doughnut economics: seven ways to think like a 21st-century economist. Random House.) is named the “Donut Model” because of its visual resemblance to a donut. The model is based on sustainable development, aligning planetary boundaries and social foundations to ensure global economic performance does not exceed the Earth’s ecological limits.
The Donut model emphasizes that true economic success should be measured not only by GDP growth but also by the well-being of people and the health of our planet. This approach challenges countries to restructure their economies to be regenerative by design and distributive by intention. It aims to ensure that everyone has access to the essentials for a dignified life while safeguarding planetary resources for future generations.
In this framework, the social foundations include food security, health, education, income and work, peace and justice, democracy, social equity, gender equality, housing, social capital, energy, and water. The planetary boundaries, or ecological ceiling, include climate change (caused by anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions that trap heat in the atmosphere and alter the Earth’s climate), ocean acidification (when anthropogenic carbon dioxide is absorbed by the oceans, making the water more acidic and harming marine life), chemical pollution (the release of toxic materials into nature, reducing biodiversity and animal fertility), the biogeochemical cycles of nitrogen and phosphorus (inefficient or excessive use of fertilizers leading to algae proliferation in water bodies, which kills aquatic life), freshwater use, land conversion for economic activities, biodiversity loss, aerosol emissions into the atmosphere, and ozone layer destruction.
The solidarity economy transcends the traditional notion of economic growth, embracing a holistic vision that includes social justice, inclusion, and sustainability. It calls for a radical rethinking of the economy, work, and society, promoting practices such as cooperation, democratic management, fair trade, and responsible consumption.
Reflecting on the teachings of Rostow and the ideas of Raworth, it is clear that transitioning to a solidarity economy requires substantial changes in public policy, business culture, and social consciousness. This emerging paradigm suggests that, rather than pursuing growth at any cost, we should aim for equitably shared and environmentally sustainable prosperity. This represents a significant evolution in economic thinking, offering solutions to some of the most pressing issues of our time, such as extreme inequality and the climate crisis.
In our quest to rethink our perceptions and interactions with the world, this special issue is dedicated to exploring and reassessing the many facets of the solidarity economy from diverse ontological perspectives. Our goal is to provide a rich and varied platform where thinkers from all disciplines can converge to reflect on sustainable practices and social justice, which are essential for collective well-being and the preservation of our planet.
Featuring articles that challenge the status quo, this special issue of Cadernos EBAPE.BR. encourages deep reflection on the possibilities of a more inclusive and equitable economic system. It invites readers to actively participate in shaping a future where the solidarity economy becomes the norm, not just an alternative..
We begin this issue by reflecting on “Sociological interpretations of decent work in the social and solidarity economy,” Stefania Becattini Vaccaro, José Roberto Pereira, and Cristina Parente write an introduction addressing this topic, presenting the various theoretical currents on work in modernity to contextualize the concept of decent work by the International Labor Organization (ILO). They then analyze the interface between the social and solidarity economy and decent work as a field of study.
Next, in the essay “The solidarity economy beyond the issue of labor,” Jean-Louis Laville and Jeová Torres Silva Junior discuss the limitations of the orthodox approach to work regarding the solidarity economy adopted by the ILO and the classical view of the sociology of work.
In the third article, “The dignity of work and the social economy in Portugal,” Pedro Hespanha sociologically analyzes how the social economy in Portugal structures work relations. He emphasizes that the social economy is centered on people rather than capital, thereby playing an active role in pursuing social justice and decent work for all, contributing to the democratization of the economy.
In “Decent work in Catalan solidarity economy,” Jordi Estivill Pascual presents an overview of decent work in Catalonia’s solidarity economy. He highlights the ambiguities of this concept and its international successes.
Daiane Lima da Silva and Vicente da Rocha Soares Ferreira, in their article “Solidarity economy and its institutionalization stage: public policy contributions,” describe how public policies contribute to the institutionalization of the solidarity economy field.
The sixth article, “A typological study based on the attributes of solidarity economy workers for the improvement of public policies for job and income generation,” by Eliene Gomes dos Anjos and Carlos Eduardo Crispim de Oliveira Ramos, presents a typological study based on the personal attributes and economic activities of associates in solidarity economy enterprises. The main focus is on the different social actors involved in various types of solidarity initiatives.
Ariel Oscar García and Aldana García Tarsia present an experience of generating public policies developed through the exchange between local bureaucracies and the cooperative sector. Their study, “New municipalism and management of the common: the experience of Red de Municipios Cooperativos (Argentine Republic, 2016-2022),” explores how creating an economic dynamic associated with local cooperative purchases, where credit plays a significant role, can generate and maintain local employment sources, and strengthen the economic structure in municipalities.
In “Rural social innovation in practices of solidarity economy in the Cooptar collective in Southern Brazil,” Denise de Oliveira, Adriane Vieira Ferrarini, and Denize Grzybovski revisit disputes over land and the fight for the right to work and a dignified life for rural workers in Brazil. They explore the transformative potential of rural social innovation (RSI) developed at the Cooperativa de Produção Agropecuária Cascata Ltda. (Cooptar), a collective formed from one of the agrarian settlements established during the occupation of the farm Fazenda Annoni in Rio Grande do Sul by the Landless Workers’ Movement (known as MST).
“Forcasting of relationship between university extension and social participation in social and solidarity economy: the case of the Rural Territory Collegiate of Ilha Grande bay (RJ)” is a study on the interaction between the social and solidarity economy and social management in the context of the rural territorial collegiate of Ilha Grande Bay, authored by Patrick Maurice Maury, Lamounier Erthal Villela, Rafaela Chaves Cardoso, and Isabella Dias de Carvalho.
In the tenth article, “The organic management of conflicts developed in enterprises formed by women in the solidarity economy: A post-colonialist analysis of a feminist practice of self-management,” Maria de Nazaré Moraes Soares, Sílvia Maria Dias Pedro Rebouças, and José Carlos Lázaro da Silva Filho examine some practices in the solidarity economy that are termed feminist practices of self-management.
This issue of Cadernos EBAPE.BR also includes a bibliographic review titled “An economy for society: third sector, social economy and solidarity economy,” written by José Roberto Pereira.
We wish you a pleasant read!
REFERÊNCIAS
- Raworth, K. (2017). Doughnut economics: seven ways to think like a 21st-century economist Random House.
- Rostow, W. W. (1960). The stages of economic growth: a non-communist manifesto Cambridge University Press
Publication Dates
-
Publication in this collection
05 Aug 2024 -
Date of issue
2024
