×

El presente artículo tiene por objeto analizar el impacto evolutivo de los valores constitucionales en el cooperativismo y la economía social y solidaria en España. A tal efecto, se abordan primeramente las coordenadas en las que se desenvolvió el corporativismo en el primer constitucionalismo liberal decimonónico y del primer tercio del siglo XX, para a continuación examinar los elementos que coadyuvaron a instaurar el cooperativismo social y solidario en el contexto de la Constitución republicana de 1931. Seguidamente se somete a escrutinio la tensión dialéctica con la que se enfocó el modelo cooperativo bajo el régimen franquista, para así comprender el marco consensual alcanzado en el movimiento cooperativo en el escenario del régimen constitucional vigente de 1978. Ponen colofón al trabajo unas reflexiones sobre la evolución de nuestro constitucionalismo, en clave multinivel y europeizada, y la paralela actualización del cooperativismo social y solidario.

×

COOPERATIVISM AND THE SOCIAL AND SOLIDARITY ECONOMY IN SPAIN’S HISTORICAL CONSTITUTIONALISM

The aim of this paper is to analyse the evolutionary impact of constitutional values on cooperativism and the social and solidarity economy in Spain. To this end, it first tackles the coordinates in which corporativism developed in the first liberal constitutionalism of the nineteenth century and the first third of the twentieth century. Then, the essay examines the elements that contributed to the establishment of social and solidarity cooperativism in the context of the Republican Constitution of 1931. Next, the article submits to scrutiny the dialectical tension with which the cooperative model was approached under the Franco’s regime, so that it is possible to understand the consensual framework achieved in the cooperative movement in the context of the current constitutional regime established in 1978. The paper concludes with some reflections on the evolution of our constitutionalism, under a multilevel and Europeanised perspective, and the parallel updating of social and solidarity cooperativism.

The paper demonstrates that Spain’s historical constitutionalism has given rise to a fluctuating cooperative model, both in the 1906 legislation on agricultural unions under the doctrinaire liberalism of the long-lived 1876 Canovist Constitution, and in the 1931 legislation which was the seed of a cooperativism reflecting a more markedly social and solidarity-based nature under the short-lived Constitution of the Second Republic. Such fluctuating cooperative model was also projected under the Fundamental Laws of the Franco’s regime, in particular through the 1942 legislation on cooperation (which exacerbated “national-syndicalism” in the face of both liberalism and socialism) as well as through the subsequent 1974 legislation (which was more restrained towards the former in order to move closer to the economic system of the then European Communities).

The fluctuations in the status of cooperatives were partly due to the complex dissociation between the commercial company and the cooperative society, which was simpler if the political focus was placed on the social purpose of the latter than if it was sought from an economic analysis (through a complicated discernment based on the profit goal which the latter supposedly would not have). As a result, a lack of legal certainty was generated as a consequence of the regulatory fragmentation of the last third of the 19th century (confluence or concurrence of the Civil and Commercial Codes, legislation on associations, etc.). In addition, social instability of cooperativism was directly related to the degree of ideological interference by public authorities through regulatory norms which eventually distorted the hierarchically superior legislative norms.

Curiously, there was room for a certain modulation in terms of the possible prevalence of one or other constitutional values, closer to liberalism or closer to socialism, but under a certain coexistence. This would partly explain (in addition to the non-generation of regulatory gaps or the tacit repeal technique) why the 1906 Agricultural Unions Act remained in force during the nineteenth-century liberal constitutionalism and the first third of the twentieth century (until it was repealed by the 1942 Cooperatives Act). Furthermore, that would also explain why Franco’s 1942 Cooperatives Act was not repealed until the current democracy era by the 1987 General Cooperatives Act.

That said, this coexistence of values must be subject to some nuances, since its impact was different in a liberal or socialist environment in comparison with the coordinates of Franco’s ‘New State’. In the latter, the national-syndicalist dynamic was totally reactionary towards liberalism and socialism, whereas in the framework of both the liberal state and the social state, a modulated coexistence of values was possible.

On this point, it has been stressed that the wording of art. 1.1 of the 1931 Constitution (“a democratic republic of workers”) responded to a dynamic that was both dialectical and conciliatory, by paradoxically including this compromise formula to emphasise the need to overcome the process of class confrontation (by precisely using Marxist language).

With this approach, which is both dialectical and conciliatory, the liberal triptych associated with the 1789 French Revolution (‘Liberty, Equality and Fraternity’) has been taken up with evolutionary tints from the point of view of social and solidarity-based constitutionalism. Therefore, in taking this postulate into consideration, it has been argued that it is the fraternity of the liberal triptych which consolidates the fullness of the contemporary constitutional State, since it gives maturity to the liberal State of Law, constitutes the matrix of the most characteristic constitutional values and rights of the social State and favours the structuring of the legal order of any democracy. With a similar approach, it had already been suggested that ‘fraternity’ has now been revamped in its version of ‘solidarity’ and that it can reduce the controversies between freedom and equality that have fuelled the traditional right-left disputes.

With this in mind, the internationalisation and Europeanisation of the formula of the social and democratic State of law (art. 1 of the 1978 Constitution) and the strength of the progress clause (art. 9.2) facilitate overcoming the fluctuating cooperative model of historical Spanish constitutionalism to place us in the context of the tense balance of the new social and solidarity-based cooperativism. Moreover, multilevel European constitutionalism is also taking into account: such an approach is reflected in the two basic vectors of state legislation currently developing art. 129.2 of the Spanish Constitution, that is to say, the 1999 Cooperatives Act and the 2011 Social Economy Act.

To conclude, it can be stated that these are the evolutionary pillars on which the new cooperativism and the forms of social and solidarity economy have been built. These pillars are also supported by the social platform of art. 129.2 of the 1978 Constitution. In short, the main conclusion to be drawn is that we have moved from a fluctuating cooperative model in Spain’s historical constitutionalism (with a difficult dissociation between the commercial company and the cooperative society, or with a marked regulatory fragmentation which generated legal uncertainty and social instability in the cooperative movement), towards a tense balance of the new social and solidarity-based cooperativism in the framework of the current multilevel European constitutionalism (with a complex conciliatory dynamic of the values of freedom, equality and solidarity that have characterised the historical configuration of the social and democratic State of law).

×

Entre 1864, fecha de la disposición que consagró la supresión de los gremios marítimos, y 1931, año en que se promulgó la primera ley española de cooperativas, la ayuda, la colaboración o cooperación en el ámbito pesquero experimentó algunos cambios. Sin embargo, no cabe considerar la llegada del cooperativismo a la economía pesquera hasta la década de 1910. Con anterioridad solo se constata la continuidad de la cooperación entre quienes se dedicaban al mundo pesquero en términos bastante similares a lo que había sido dicho auxilio en los siglos precedentes.

En las siguientes páginas estudiamos, desde una perspectiva histórico-jurídica, cómo se pasó de la simple cooperación al cooperativismo en el mundo pesquero en las primeras décadas del siglo XX.

×

FROM COOPERATION TO COOPERATIVISM IN THE SPANISH WORLD OF FISHERIES (1864-1931)

The idea of cooperation, understood as collaboration, help, support, assistance and/or assistance, has been closely linked to the fishing world since the distant times of the Middle Ages, when those who were dedicated to maritime activities, especially fishing, they noted the advantages they could achieve if they harmonized their interests and helped and collaborated with each other. This favoured the creation, first de facto and later expressly, of brotherhoods or guilds of fishermen in many of the seaports of both the Crown of Aragon and the Crown of Castile, and especially in the Cantabrian coasts of this.

Now, the verification of a history of cooperation between the people of the sea, perceptible in all the functions performed by the brotherhoods, does not mean that cooperative practices existed in the maritime brotherhoods either in the Middle Ages, nor in the Modern Age, nor in the 19th century during the time in which these brotherhoods prolonged their existence. The arrival of cooperativism, understood as the movement aimed at the constitution of cooperative associations through which an attempt will be made to dignify the lives of seafarers, facilitating their participation in a socio-economic system that could allow the correction of deficiencies and of the abuses to which sea workers were exposed as a consequence of the arrival of capitalism in the fishing world, was delayed until the first decades of the 20th century. Unlike what had happened in the industrial and agricultural fields, where the establishment of cooperatives was common since the second half of the 19th century.

Between 1864, the date of the provision that established the suppression of maritime guilds, and 1931, the year in which the first Spanish law on cooperatives was promulgated, as well as the regulations for its execution, aid and collaboration in the fishing field experienced some changes coinciding with the incorporation of different new depths to the fishing activity, both high and inshore, although our attention is focused on this occasion particularly in this last. However, it is not possible to consider the arrival of cooperativism to the fishing economy until the 1910s. Previously, only the continuity of cooperation between those who were dedicated to the fishing world was confirmed in terms quite similar to what said aid had been in the preceding centuries.

Against this backdrop we have been interested in determining, from a historical-legal perspective, how we went from simple cooperation to cooperativism in the Spanish fishing world in a process that concluded in the first decades of the 20th century and in which the ideas of Alfredo Saralegui Casellas were to prove decisive.

The incorporation of cooperativism into the fishing framework through fishermen’s “pósitos”, organized as cooperatives, and with the active participation of the Central Maritime Credit Fund, was achieved in Spain in accordance with the model designed by Saralegui. Previously, Saralegui himself had proposed the creation of the Fisherman’s Protective Association, which, initially planned for the Biscayan coast, were only established in the province of Almería for a short period.

The design of the cooperatives in the Saralegui project was closely linked to the objective pursued of improving the living situation of the fishermen, eliminating the exploitation to which they were subjected and elevating their cultural, material and moral life and thereby their position in society. Proof of this is that, finally, the idea of cooperativism was part of the same definition that was provided for the fishermen’s “pósitos” in the Statutes of the Central Maritime Credit Fund of 1920.

The model of fishermen’s “pósitos” envisaged by Saralegui was very similar to that designed to organize the operation of the Fisherman’s Protective Association that he had published in the Biscayan press a few years before, although some forecasts now had greater development, as was the case of the functioning of the governing bodies. But some new developments are also observed. One of the most important is the incorporation of women into the warehouses and their governing boards.

The fishermen’s “pósitos” would be subject to the inspection of the General Directorate of Navigation and Fisheries, who could be in charge of promoting the federation among them to more easily meet its objectives and achieve better administration. For the government of each warehouse, the existence of a General Board, a Governing Board and a Protective Board was foreseen. The regulations designed by the promoter of cooperativism in the fishing world detailed the operation and powers of each of these bodies. Furthermore, to fulfill their intended purposes, the fishermen’s “pósitos” had to be organized into five sections: mutual aid, loans, sale of fishing products, cooperative and pawnshop.

Alfredo Saralegui’s determination to achieve the implementation of the fishermen’s “pósitos” in the ports, which included having collaborators in the institutions, but also in the ports, as he was aware that he had to convince the authorities and the public of the usefulness of his proposal. political class, but also the sea workers, he managed to create a significant number of them, however, he did not manage to silence some critical voices and even some of those collaborators, finally, abandoned him because they considered that the execution of the project was unviable or, At least, more complicated than initially anticipated.

Not having a law on maritime fishermen’s “pósitos”, nor a law on cooperatives, which would unify the way in which cooperativism should be organized in each “pósito”, in practice each fishing association or society that became a fishermen’s “pósitos” did so following the guidelines that interested you the most. Certainly, Saralegui’s proposal was taken as a model, but this does not mean that all fishermen’s “pósitos” were established in the same way and with the same cooperatives.

×

Si bien el asociacionismo obrero de los inicios de la revolución industrial es reconocido como una de las raíces originales del cooperativismo, su importancia ha sido minusvalorada por la literatura científica. Los avances de la historiografía social respecto al asociacionismo obrero nos permiten reinterpretar su rol en la génesis del cooperativismo. En el presente artículo se observa cómo, junto con las funciones defensivas y asistenciales, las asociaciones obreras eran portadoras de un marco más amplio de aspiraciones sociales. Estas aspiraciones son las que serán recogidas e institucionalizadas en principios y normas por el modelo cooperativo. El estudio, además de identificar el hilo conductor entre el asociacionismo obrero y el modelo cooperativo, permite una mayor comprensión de la genealogía y el sentido filosófico de algunos de los principios y valores que caracterizan al cooperativismo.

×

WORKERS’ ASSOCIATIONISM AND THE GENESIS OF COOPERATIVISM. A REINTERPRETATION OF THEIR CONNECTION

Most scholars of cooperatives locate the birth of modern cooperativism in the Rochdale cooperative experience of 1844. This observation, however, should not prevent us from affirming that the roots of the cooperative model significantly predate Rochdale. Social historiography accounts for the existence of cooperative associations since at least the mid-18th century. Cooperative practices are, therefore, contemporary with the early Industrial Revolution and are promoted by popular sectors who saw their living conditions deteriorate with the emergence of liberalism and industrial capitalism.

The roots of the cooperative model are closely related to the associative practices that the working and popular sectors will begin to develop at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution. Despite the prominence of associative practices, their role in the formation of cooperativism has tended to be undervalued in academic studies of cooperativism, which tend to describe the spontaneous, defensive, immediate and merely practical nature of this worker associationism. Our hypothesis suggests that its influence has been greater. These associations, in addition to their practical functions, were carriers of a wide range of social aspirations that will be collected and institutionalized in principles and norms by the cooperative model. This article investigates the associative practices developed by working and popular sectors in order to obtain a greater understanding of their connection with the genesis of the cooperative movement.

The emergence of industrial capitalism in the 18th and 19th centuries brought spectacular progress in the technical means of production but, in parallel, broad destruction of the traditional bases of social and socioeconomic organization, spreading poverty and misery widely among the working classes. Associationism can be considered a first reaction of the popular and working sectors to the impact on living and working conditions generated by the new industrial capitalism. This first worker associationism was characterized by its multifaceted character to the extent that the same association, regardless of its initial typology, tended to bring together mutualist functions, worker resistance as well as practical implementation of cooperative initiatives.

We should keep in mind that labor associations emerged in a society that was, in the initial phase of the industrial revolution, predominantly rural, in which large industrial facilities had not yet been developed, and the industries that existed were characterized by their isolation and regional concentration. Indeed, many of them were still in a pre-manufacturing stage. Under these circumstances, the associations appeared to be formed mainly by artisans and skilled workers, that is, the better-off segments of the working class. The artisan and skilled strata, thanks to the key role that their knowledge and qualifications gave them in the production process, maintained a significant degree of control and autonomy in the organization of work.

This fueled their prestige and awareness of their status, which was accompanied by higher and more regular salaries and longer life expectancy. Association in its different manifestations was, therefore, the practice developed by artisans and skilled workers, basically, to defend themselves from the danger of status deterioration and to articulate protection mechanisms against the risks that derived from the new economic and social order.

Cooperative practices are, therefore, contemporary with this first associationism and reflect the concerns and aspirations of the working classes that were involved in them. Through these associations, workers sought to collectively revive the ideal of autonomous and emancipated work in which they would retain, in the new historical context, social control over their work and over their capacity to make a living on their own. The association became an essential complement to workers’ ability to maintain their dignity and the means to support themselves through their own effort and free initiative. The association aspired to regulate industrial development in accordance with ethical priorities and to subordinate economic gain to human needs. Worker associations responded to the regime of competition among individual workers by extending a culture of solidarity, reciprocity and mutual aid.

Given our analysis, it is not difficult to argue that the roots of cooperativism are found in the first associative expressions articulated by the working classes in response to the economic and social conditions that accompanied the development of industrial capitalism. From a practical point of view, the importance of this first associationism in the subsequent development of cooperativism was notable: it fortified collective practices among broad segments of the working class and it played an essential role in the accumulation of experience among working people in managing their own affairs. The associations were practical schools of community self-government, where workers developed the skills and discipline necessary for the prudent custody of funds, the use of orderly procedures in meetings and reasoned decision making about the allocation of subsidies. From associations of this kind, will emerge workers trained to direct cooperative and union organizations.

Perhaps even more important is the fact that in these first cooperative initiatives, working people began gain experience with operational norms and rules, experiencing both their achievements and their failures, and these will constitute the raw material from which the pioneers of Rochdale will extract the system of rules that would seek to guarantee the subsequent success of the cooperative model.

Beyond the practical dimension of the contribution of this associationism, many of the distinctive ideological features that came to characterize the cooperative model can also be identified in the aspirational framework put into practice by workers’ associations early in the Industrial Revolution. The notions of free association, solidarity, reciprocity and mutual assistance, the value of self-help, a commitment to democracy, the spirit of equality, the aspiration to subordinate capital to human needs, the desire to find collective approaches to facilitate greater autonomy and control over work and over the means for making a living, all of these make up the body of ethical aspirations and values ​​of workers’ associations that will develop and become interconnected through application and systematization in the cooperative system.

We believe that our article contributes both to demonstrating the common threads that join the first worker associations and cooperativism, as well as to illustrating, from an aspirational and philosophical point of view, several central principles and values ​​that were later institutionalized in the cooperative model.

×

La Restauración (1875-1923) es el periodo en el que se genera en España un sistema político basado en el falseamiento sistemático de las elecciones mediante acuerdos de partidos que se turnan en el poder. Se trata de mantener el statu quo y una cierta estabilidad social. Es el momento de la consolidación del movimiento obrero, y de los esfuerzos de los partidos de gobierno para evitarlo. Las organizaciones que mejor se controlan son las legales, y la mejor forma de evitar su creación es buscar una salida a los problemas que propician su aparición.

La Ley de Asociaciones de 1887 genera el marco para la creación de sociedades de socorros mutuos, cooperativas de diversa índole y sindicatos. Los sindicatos católicos agrarios aparecen en 1906. Son estructuras mucho más complejas, y más efectivas.

×

SOLIDARITY SOCIETIES AS GENERATORS OF LOCAL POLITICAL STRUCTURES IN THE PERIOD OF THE RESTORATION. THE CASE OF MONTILLA

The last third of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century are the years in which universal suffrage was forged, first exclusively male, and finally extended to women in more recent years. These were also the years in which the workers movement became institutionalized, created large mass parties, and entered parliament.

In a broad analysis of local power structures throughout the twentieth century, focused on the city of Montilla (Córdoba), various solidarity societies in which all social classes participate are studied. Three large organizations appeared with a very interesting development under the protection of the Associations Laws of 1887 and the Agrarian Unions of 1906, with their subsequent regulations of 1908 and the modifications of 1929, at the end of the Dictatorship of Primo de Rivera. The objective of this article is to analyze how these laws were implemented in a population that is not very numerous but that is extraordinarily dynamic and examine how personal leadership influences the creation of organizations that are not only collective, but that base their actions on solidarity and mutual support.

In 1894, the first to appear was the Mutual Aid Society. Its main purpose was to act as a private bank. Monthly installments were paid that served to lend small amounts to help with the unforeseen events of workers and artisans, and to keep away the ghost of usury and the pawnshop. A short time later, at the dawn of the twentieth century, the Cooperativa Benéfica emerged. Whereby, through a small registration fee, people could acquire good quality bread at a better price than the market. This cooperative expanded supplies to fruits, vegetables, and offal from the slaughterhouse, and it also hired a teacher to give evening classes.

The two associations have a link with federal republicanism. There is not much literature on the subject. Díaz del Moral mentions them almost in passing, but original documents of both are preserved in the Library of the Manuel Ruiz Luque Foundation. There is the Regulations of the Mutual Aid Society and part of the minutes book of the cooperative, with a list of members used for a vote.

When the Social Reform Board was created, the workers’ representative was the doctor Francisco Palop Segovia, of the Municipal Beneficence. Of Jerez origin, it was necessary to ask for special permission so that a doctor, necessarily bourgeois given the structure of education at the time, could represent the workers, even if it was at their request. He was also present in the Charitable Cooperative, and with the most lucid and committed elements he created another organization, of a cultural nature, entitled La Ilustración Obrera. He also founded the Socialist Group and the Sociedad Espírita Amor y Progreso, of a discreet nature, and with a very extensive career, already related to cooperativism, in the second half of the twentieth century.

The internal organization of the Cooperativa Benéfica is structured by streets. It is present throughout the urban area of Montilla, following the pattern of electoral districts. Each district has some leaders, who stand for election to councilors, and are usually elected. They are people known by their neighbors for their honesty and their ability to solve the problems of daily life. They are also responsible for republicanism taking hold in the way it does. When the Socialist Group was formed, many of the cadres that made up its configuration were trained in the cooperative by Dr. Palop.

When the Agrarian Trade Union Act of 1906 was enacted, the trade union La Montillana was set up. It was the first to take advantage of this rule in the province of Córdoba. Its founder was also a doctor who worked in the Municipal Beneficence, Antonio Cabello de Alba Bello. Of conservative ideology, he was a member of the Sociedad Económica de Amigos del País and a man of excellent personal qualities, who met with the workers in the worst moments of their existence and wanted them to leave the penury in which they lived. Although it did not have a very active role, the union was important because it served as a precedent for the creation of another much more active one in 1919, the Catholic Agrarian Union S. Francisco Solano, known in working class circles as El Gatopalo. This union was presided over by the Conde de la Cortina, who was at one time president of the National Catholic Agrarian Confederation. He was an important winemaker, linked to Carlism and of enormous influence at the regional level.

In the Catholic trade union of 1919, other elements were developed. These included a rural savings bank, a dowry fund to help women save for marriage, a mutual aid society, a cooperative for the construction of cheap housing, leases of plots of land that would serve as a mitigating factor to the unfortunate situation in which the workers lived, collaboration with the Salesians so that the children of affiliated workers who were good students could study some of them for free, in addition to the objectives of the agricultural unions, such as the purchase of inputs to improve the performance of agriculture and livestock.

The Catholic union was created to combat the extraordinary rise that socialism was acquiring. A magazine, Montilla Agraria, was published, that disseminated anti-Semitic, racist and anti-liberal pamphlets in the broadest sense of the term, without being directly fascist. After Mussolini’s triumph, they were going to show themselves to be in favour of an authoritarian solution to the chaos of Spanish politics. When the Nazi theses began to be disseminated, some collaborators were going to make them their own.

If the organizations that formed the backbone of the political and social left in the first half of the twentieth century were derived from the Cooperativa Benéfica Republicana, those that controlled local life in the second half of the century were derived from the Cooperativa Benéfica Republicana. The influence of all of them can be traced back, at different levels, to the present day.

×

A finales de la Restauración, España vivió una renovación en los ámbitos universitario, científico y social, motivada por la necesidad de transformación del país. Se percibió la urgencia de reformar la educación, dar mayor protagonismo a la investigación y abordar los problemas sociales. Entre los intelectuales, que promovieron esta modernización destaca Eduardo Soler, krausista y profesor de la Institución Libre de Enseñanza, cuyo trabajo fue fundamental en el avance de la universidad y la cultura en España. Su influencia se hizo sentir en la posterior legislación republicana. En este sentido, la Ley de Asociaciones de 1887 fue un hito en ese cambio legislativo, que permitió mayor grado de organización social y contribuyó a sentar las bases para la legislación cooperativa del s. XX. Las lecciones impartidas en las aulas, junto con las experiencias prácticas de la época, brindan una perspectiva valiosa sobre cómo se interpretaron estos antecedentes en el cooperativismo.

×

VALENCIAN KRAUSISM AND THE LAW OF ASSOCIATIONS OF 1887: THE LESSONS OF PROFESSOR EDUARDO SOLER PÉREZ (1845-1907)

At the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, Spain experienced a period of profound labor and social transformation, driven by the growth of the workers’ movement and the urgent need to regulate labor and social associations. The economic and social context of the time, characterized by the rise of the proletarian class in the cities and the development of new industries, highlighted the lack of protection and labor rights for workers. In response to these needs, workers’ movements arose that promoted organization and demanded improvements in working conditions. This period of struggle and change culminated in the creation of legal frameworks and reforms that defined the Spanish labor landscape and laid the foundations for an incipient cooperativism in the country.

One of the crucial steps in this transformation was the enactment of the Law of Associations in 1887, which allowed the creation of workers’ organizations and other collectives. This law represented a radical change, since until then workers’ associations had been prohibited or restricted. The 1887 legislation led to the founding of the Unión General de Trabajadores (UGT) in 1888, one of the most important trade unions in Spain, which in its beginnings promoted socialism and defended the interests of the working class. This law laid the foundations for a series of subsequent labor laws, such as the regulation of the eight-hour workday in 1919, the result of pressure exerted by the workers’ movement. Difficult working conditions and the lack of adequate labor protection motivated workers to organize to demand reforms, provoking tensions between the State and the business sectors. This legislative framework, although limited, offered for the first time a legal structure for workers to unite and demand their rights, which was fundamental for the growth of the labor movement and trade unionism in Spain.

The workers’ movement found in the political context of the Restoration (1874-1931) an atmosphere of resistance and repression that, paradoxically, also strengthened its efforts. The Glorious Revolution of 1868, which had promoted freedom of association, paved the way for workers’ organizations to take shape more easily, although they often had to operate clandestinely. Tensions with the two-party system, which responded more to the political and economic elites than to the interests of the workers, manifested themselves through strikes and protests, which showed the proletariat’s dissatisfaction with the system. During this period, the workers’ movement in Spain was divided into two main currents: anarchism and Marxist-oriented socialism. The influence of anarchism in Spain was particularly strong in regions such as Catalonia and Andalusia, where the ideas of autonomy and self-management were deeply rooted in the working class sectors. Socialism, on the other hand, promoted the creation of a state that would defend workers’ rights. Although both currents had ideological differences, they agreed on the need to improve the living and working conditions of the working class.

The academy also played an important role in the social change of the time, one of its representatives being the Professor of Administrative Law at the University of Barcelona, Eduardo Soler Pérez. Between 1906 and 1907, Soler gave lectures on the evolution of guilds and associations in their relationship with the State, influenced by Krausism and the ideas of the Institución Libre de Enseñanza, which promoted a secular and liberal education focused on social progress.From his professorship, Soler saw the university as an engine of social economy and cooperativism, promoting a vision of the economy based on mutual support and cooperation among workers. The influence of Soler and other progressive academics helped lay the foundations for an early cooperativism in Spain, in which the university and civil society came together to seek collective and solidarity-based economic solutions.This cooperative model was strengthened in the following decades, with the emergence of the first cooperatives and the development of laws supporting these initiatives.

The creation of the Commission of Social Reforms in 1883 and its subsequent transformation into the Institute of Social Reforms in 1903 marked a milestone in the process of labor legislation in Spain. These institutions were instrumental in the drafting of labor laws aimed at improving workers’ conditions, driven by pressure from the labor movement.The Agricultural Union Law of 1906, the regulation of child and female labor in 1900 and the establishment of Sunday rest in 1904 are examples of measures that sought to respond to the labor needs of the time. These legal reforms reflected a growing sensitivity to social and labor issues, responding to the demand for basic rights and protection for workers.However, these laws were also the result of increasingly visible pressure from the labor movement, which was beginning to understand that only through collective organization and active struggle could they achieve advances in their rights.

The political system of the Restoration, based on the two-party system, began to show signs of wear and tear during the reign of Alfonso XIII (1902-1931). Labor conflicts, regionalist movements and the lack of responses to workers’ demands provoked a crisis in the system, which was reflected in short-lived governments and social instability.The academy and the universities, renewed by scientific and modern thought, tried to resolve the crisis.

The academy and the universities, renewed by scientific and modern thinking, tried to respond to these tensions, promoting reforms and solutions to improve the conditions of the working class. In this context, cooperativism emerged as a solidarity-based alternative to the limitations of the liberal economic system. The first cooperatives, related to workers’ mutual societies, received support from laws such as the 1906 Agrarian Union Law, and from figures such as Francisco Largo Caballero, whose draft law in 1927, during the dictatorship of Primo de Rivera, would serve as the basis for the cooperative legislation of the Second Republic. With the establishment of the Second Republic in 1931, there was a renaissance in social and cooperative legislation. One of the most important measures was the approval of the first general cooperative law, which was based on the studies of the International Cooperative Alliance of 1925. During this period, the number of cooperatives in operation grew significantly, reaching 536 registered cooperatives. This reflected both the impact of favorable legislation and the influence of a social environment that favored the cooperative economy. However, the Civil War (1936-1939) truncated the development of cooperativism in Spain. With Franco’s victory in 1939, many of the advances achieved during the Republic were reversed. Francisco Franco’s regime introduced labor legislation inspired by fascist models, such as the 1938 Fuero del Trabajo, based on the Italian Carta del Lavoro, which limited the freedoms of association and organization in the labor and social sphere.

Despite the setbacks suffered during the Franco dictatorship, cooperativism in Spain finds its roots in the interaction between the labor movement, legal reforms and the role of academia in the development of a social economy. The ideas of figures such as Eduardo Soler and the Krausist intellectuals of the Institución Libre de Enseñanza promoted a vision of progress based on participation and collective entrepreneurship.The universities, in their role as promoters of new ideas, created a favorable environment for the emergence of a strong cooperativism which, although it suffered significant setbacks during the dictatorship, would re-emerge with the arrival of democracy. Francisco Franco’s regime introduced labor legislation inspired by Fascist models, such as the inspired by fascist models, such as the Fuero del Trabajo of 1938, based on the Italian Carta del Lavoro, which limited the freedoms of association and organization in the labor and social sphere. Despite the setbacks suffered during the Franco dictatorship, cooperativism in Spain finds its roots in the interaction between the labor movement, legal reforms and the role of academia in the development of a social economy.The ideas of figures such as Eduardo Soler and the Krausist intellectuals of the Institución Libre de Enseñanza promoted a vision of progress based on participation and collective entrepreneurship.

The universities, in their role as promoters of new ideas, created a favorable environment for the emergence of a strong cooperativism which, although it suffered significant setbacks during the dictatorship, would re-emerge with the arrival of democracy. In summary, the historical process of labor and cooperative development in Spain shows how collective organization and the struggle for labor and social rights generated a profound transformation in the country.Through the interaction between labor movements, the State, academia and cooperativism, a legacy of social and economic modernization was built that continues to this day, influencing the development of social economy policies and practices in contemporary Spain.

×

Desde finales del siglo XIX aparecieron algunas iniciativas para fomentar la creación de cooperativas mediante la concesión de beneficios fiscales. Ya en la siguiente centuria, el decreto de 14 de enero de 1925 ordenó la creación de una comisión que, entre otras medidas, propondría el establecimiento de un régimen tributario que gravase a las cooperativas de la forma más equitativa posible, además de la concesión de subvenciones y préstamos gratuitos o a bajo interés. Por su parte, en el anteproyecto de ley sobre cooperativas de 1929, redactado por la Comisión de Obras Sociales del Ministerio de Trabajo, se contemplaba que quedasen exceptuadas del pago de la contribución industrial y de utilidades, siempre que no persiguieran lucro o sirvieran a personas extrañas. Aunque el avance más importante sobre el asunto se produjo con el proyecto de Largo Caballero que, sin embargo, no vio la luz ante el rechazo, no solo de la oposición política, sino también de las Cámaras de Comercio que consideraban que dicho proyecto era una clara amenaza para el desarrollo del comercio libre en España.

×

THE DRAFT LAW ON THE TAX REGIME AND OFFICIAL PROTECTION OF COOPERATIVES BY THE MINISTER OF LABOR FRANCISCO LARGO CABALLERO

In the second half of the 19th century, cooperatives promoted by industrial and agricultural workers proliferated in various areas of Spain, especially in Catalonia, Valencia, Andalusia and Madrid. At that time, there were already some initiatives that sought to stimulate their creation by means of granting tax benefits to consumer, production or credit cooperative societies.

Although this was the first step, significant developments had to wait until well into the following century. In this regard, Article 1 of the Royal Decree of 14 January 1925 provided for the creation of a commission, chaired by the Undersecretary of the Ministry of Labour, Trade and Industry, or a person to whom he delegated.

Once various postulates had been established, the debate focused on extremely interesting aspects. To begin with, what should be understood by a cooperative. It was recognised that there was a considerable number of genuine cooperatives in Spain, but that there were also other entities that were called that without deserving it. For this reason, he made sure that the system provided for cooperatives could not be used by any other type of company. Associations that wanted to be considered as cooperatives had to comply with the conditions set out in article 2 and with those imposed in other precepts for this type of company. In addition, they had to be qualified by a body with special competence, subject to constant inspection, and their qualification could be withdrawn if their operation was aimed at carrying out any lucrative activity.

Next, he dealt with the issue that is the focus of our attention in these lines, that is, the taxation of cooperatives. From the first moment, one of the members of the commission, who later formed part of the report, noted the lack of a member representing the Ministry of Finance, since everything related to the tax regime of cooperatives had to be one of the most important parts of the project. In the absence of this, the committee agreed to postpone the drafting of the chapter referring to this matter, replacing it with a verbal exposition of the opinion formed in relation to this point.

The project proposed by the commission consisted of 104 articles, divided into eleven chapters.

Regarding tax issues, registered cooperatives would be exempt from paying the tax on the assets of legal entities, property rights and stamp duty relating to all documents related to their constitution and development, not including those acts and contracts in which the cooperative was a party. They would also be exempt from paying the industrial and commercial contribution, unless legally stated otherwise.

A few days after the Second Republic was proclaimed, various cooperatives addressed a request to the president of the new Government and to the ministers of Labor, Finance and Government that the cooperative law be promulgated soon, since these still lacked any legal support.

It was finally on July 4, 1931, when Francisco Largo Caballero announced to the press that, among other measures, a decree on the regime of cooperatives was going to be approved by the Council of Ministers that day, coinciding with the day of cooperation. In this way, he added, the first specific regulations for this kind of organizations would see the light, which until then had been governed by the general law of associations of 1887. He continued saying that it was necessary to protect this kind of institutions that performed an important social function, making basic necessities cheaper for consumers and that his purpose was to make a special law for cooperatives.

Focusing on the matter that concerns us now, we can point out that the head of the Labor portfolio announced that, opportunely, an inter-ministerial commission would be appointed to study the exemptions or subsidies that would be granted to these cooperatives, because, otherwise, they would constitute one more business in competition, when what should be aimed at with them was to make life cheaper. He concluded by stating that cooperatives in Spain were on a par with any other trade, which had to be changed.

In the preamble of the aforementioned decree, after recognizing the importance of the cooperative movement and the interest of the State in promoting it in Spain, the principle of the need to subject cooperatives to their own legal regime was established, in order to avoid any confusion. Likewise, it was arranged that a commission, formed by three representatives of the Ministry of Finance, three others from Labor and one from the Economy, would present to the Government, within a maximum period of four months, a draft of bases that would allow the consolidation of this decree until it became law, as in fact happened on September 9 of that same year of 1931.

Despite the importance of all the changes mentioned above, the most important step was undoubtedly taken when, on the last day of that same month of May 1932, a decree was issued authorizing the Minister of Labor to present to the Constituent Cortes a bill on the tax regime and official protection of cooperative societies subject to the law of September 9, 1931.

It was indicated that, once the decree of the Government of the Republic of July 4, by virtue of which the legal order of cooperatives in Spain was established and the legislative channel through which they were to proceed in terms of their organization and operation was marked, the State’s action was directed at promoting the social movement that was to give real content to that legislation in the public interest.

At the same time, it was made clear that the aim was not to create a system that would hinder the development of existing or newly created cooperative associations, but rather to channel, promote and protect this movement that had already acquired enormous development in other countries. To this end, it was recalled that the law of 9 September 1931 had provided for the possibility of the State stimulating cooperative development with tax exemptions.

In addition to this, the commitment was made that the State would grant cooperatives subsidies, prizes, advances or loans at reduced interest and, finally, the credit that would be so necessary for their better development and early consolidation.

This tax system that was to be implemented in favour of cooperatives was not to be guided by the desire for tax relief, but by the achievement of social justice. In the words of the minister, “it was to be inspired by the purpose of improving and protecting those classes who, due to their situation, the State is obliged to protect and provide for their economic improvement and well-being. All these considerations have been taken into account when drafting the bill which, at the proposal of the inter-ministerial commission in charge of this, is submitted to the deliberation of the Cortes.”

It was during the session of June 3, 1932 when the Minister of Labor and Social Security went up to the Cortes’ rostrum to read this bill. The secretary of the Chamber, del Río, announced that the bill would be passed to the permanent Commission of Labor and Social Security for its opinion.

After the summer period, on October 1, Parliament resumed its activity. Some deputy recalled that numerous proposals and bills were still pending, such as the maximum troop contingent for the following year; the naval forces for the same period; the reorganization of the Treasury services and, the one that interests us most here, the designation of the tax regime and official protection of cooperative societies.

Finally, on December 22, the Labor Commission’s opinion on the bill on the tax regime and official protection of cooperative societies was presented.

But the truth is that months went by and the law on the tax regime of cooperatives still did not crystallize. During the Civil War and after the transfer of the Government of the Republic to Barcelona, ​the Central Cooperation Board was established on April 12, 1938.

It was agreed to examine with preference everything related to the special tax regime of cooperatives, which, as expected, did not materialize in any law in the short time that remained of the Second Republic.

×

Con la Ilustración, especialmente a partir de las figuras de Kant y Smith, se da paso a una filosofía de la historia optimista. Esto supone entender la historia como una marcha hacia el progreso, transformando el caos en un orden racional y armónico. El destino final es un mundo en el que la tecnología permita satisfacer las necesidades humanas y la población se vea liberada del trabajo alienante. La marcha hacia la civilización no podía ser impuesta, sino movida por la búsqueda del interés individual como impulsor del bienestar colectivo y por la tendencia innata a la asociación libre y a la solidaridad.

Para ello era necesario dotar a la economía de instituciones apropiadas, como las cooperativas, que favorecieran los objetivos de eficiencia y equidad, como trataron de impulsar los socialistas utópicos Owen, Saint-Simon o Fourier.

En España esta iniciativa se materializó con la influencia del krausismo y el impulso de la Institución Libre de Enseñanza, que supusieron una renovación del pensamiento y una esperanza de cambio. Eran conscientes de combatir la indiferencia, de reconfigurar la sociedad y de trabajar por unas instituciones más justas y humanas.

×

FROM UTOPIA TO HARMONY: THE FOOTPRINT OF ECONOMIC KRAUSISM IN THE FIRST SPANISH COOPERATIVE LEGISLATION

With the Enlightenment, especially with the figures of Kant and Smith, an optimistic philosophy of history was born. This meant understanding history as a march towards progress, transforming chaos into a rational and harmonious order. The final destination was a world in which technology would satisfy human needs and the population would be freed from alienating work. The march towards civilisation could not be imposed, but rather driven by the search for individual interest as the driver of collective well-being and by the innate tendency towards free association and solidarity.

To achieve this, it was necessary to provide the economy with appropriate institutions, such as cooperatives, which would favour the objectives of efficiency and equity. In a certain way, cooperativism shares its origins with the workers’ movement, thanks to the first initiatives of utopian socialists such as Owen, Saint-Simon or Fourier. However, the development of these currents will be conditioned by the attitude of the public powers, which will go from initial ignorance and contempt to repression when they are considered a threat to the established order, to finally be accepted as a counterweight to the excesses of liberal capitalism.

Spanish cooperativism shares the problems and tendencies of the European one, although it will be constrained by the hesitant construction of the liberal State and the consequent cycles of repression-permissiveness in the face of experiences often considered subversive. Acceptance as an appropriate business alternative for alleviating the conditions of the working class will come with the fertile generation of intellectuals at the end of the 19th century, grouped around the Institución Libre de Enseñanza. This group of thinkers has in common the influence of the German philosopher K.C.F. Krause and his vision of an ideal harmonious society. Therefore, it will be the generation of Krausists who will be the true protagonists of the diffusion of the cooperative model and the promoters of the legislation that facilitated its development in Spain.

This group of intellectuals represented a genuine opening to the currents of European thought of the second half of the 19th century. The stay of many of them in the main European centres allowed them to incorporate ideas from French positivism (A. Comte) and solidarism (A. Gide), British utilitarianism (J.S. Mill), Italian critical economy (Genovesi) and, especially, German rationalism and idealism (Krause, Ahrens).

This model will try to incorporate the different ideological tendencies of the moment, without fully embracing any of them. They assume the free market, but at the same time criticize that it generates growing inequalities. They share the concern for the improvement of the working class of socialism, but question its violent revolutionary character. They respect the social doctrine of the Church, but consider paternalistic conservatism to be immobile.

Therefore, they propose what they call the “positive state”, forged thanks to scientific reason and which provides a harmonious solution, which avoids the divergence between capital and labor, while avoiding revolutionary temptations.

Members of the Institución Libre de Enseñanza were those who developed public bodies aimed at improving the living conditions of workers, such as the Institute of Social Reforms, and those who promoted the legislative reforms that allowed the development of the cooperative movement: the Law of Associations of 1887, the Law of Agricultural Unions of 1906 and, finally, the Law of Cooperatives of 1931. This last law was one of the most widely disseminated modern Spanish norms, being a model for legislation on cooperatives, especially in Latin America, due to its adaptation to the theoretical principles of cooperation.

It is relevant that cooperativism deeply seduced the most dynamic cultural renewal movement in Spain at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. This movement would try to promote the modernization of Spain through a program of gradual and peaceful reformism, based on education and ethics. To do so, it needed to specify political, legal and economic models, in accordance with an ideal towards which the country had to move. In determining the economic model, the intellectuals linked to the Institución Libre de Enseñanza and Krausism saw in cooperatives the most appropriate form of association for their ideal of a “harmonious” society, towards which the rational progress of humanity should lead.

As in other developed countries, the first steps of industrialization had accentuated social inequalities, which generated the need to offer answers and hope for a better world. Utopia had to adapt to the conditions of possibility, with a proposal that prioritized people over capital, that encouraged democratic participation and promoted equity. In addition, it had to be achieved by consensus and not by revolutionary means. Finally, this solution was being shaped and specified by intellectuals in Europe and America, places to emulate in order to set our clocks on time. The model was built on these premises; it only needed to be put into practice.

The spread of cooperativism was not restricted to the sphere of intellectuals, but also reached the popular classes, especially in rural areas where the social action of the Church was more intense.

The fact that cooperativism attracted many people is relevant. Why did it take so long to be regulated and why did it not gain a force comparable to that of the countries around us? Without a doubt, the main reason was due to the structural deficiencies of the Spanish economy at that time: the weakness of the institutions, the industrial and technological backwardness, the lack of an effective educational system when it came to spreading new ideas or the fear of conservatism in the face of any social reform. On the other hand, the promoters themselves, such as Piernas Hurtado, highlighted the individualistic idiosyncrasy of the Spanish people. Social instability, the loss of widespread democratic enthusiasm in Europe and the growing political polarization did not contribute to the consolidation of cooperativism either.

In any case, despite the difficulties, they laid the foundations for the construction of a model that is still alive.

×

La II República española fue crucial para el crecimiento del cooperativismo de producción y trabajo, impulsado por las leyes pioneras de 1931 y 1934 y otros factores socioeconómicos. En Cataluña, este auge incluyó un esfuerzo organizativo con la creación de la Subfederación de Cooperativas de Producción y Trabajo (1932-1933), que en 1935 se transformó en Federación autónoma. Este artículo analiza la labor emprendida por esta Federación los meses previos a la Guerra Civil y ofrece una radiografía del desarrollo de esta tipología cooperativa por ramos y oficios. En anexos se bosqueja también su despliegue territorial. Para realizar este estudio se ha consultado la documentación interna de decenas de cooperativas depositada en el Archivo Nacional de Cataluña y en el Archivo Histórico del Gobierno Civil de Barcelona.

×

THE FEDERATION OF PRODUCTION AND LABOR COOPERATIVES OF CATALONIA: A SNAPSHOT OF PRODUCTION AND LABOR COOPERATIVISM ON THE EVE OF THE SPANISH CIVIL WAR IN CATALONIA

The Spanish Second Republic marked a period of significant growth for production and labor cooperatives. Institutional and legislative action, such as the approval of pioneering cooperative laws in 1931 (at the national level) and 1934 (at the regional level in Catalonia), along with other political and economic factors, contributed decisively to their rise. In Catalonia, this numerical expansion was accompanied by organizational efforts to secure their own voice and representation within the Catalan cooperative movement. Thus, the Subfederation of Production and Labor Cooperatives (1932–33) was first established under the umbrella of the Federació de Cooperatives. Finally, in December 1935–January 1936, an independent Federation was formed to represent their interests within cooperative institutions: the Federation of Production and Labor Cooperatives of Catalonia. Initially, 85 cooperatives joined the Federation, and by July 1936, on the eve of the Spanish Civil War, their number had grown to 102.

This article aims to analyze the work undertaken by this Federation during the months leading up to the outbreak of the Civil War and to provide an overview of the development of production and labor cooperatives on the eve of the conflict, examining their presence across various trades and industries. Additionally, annexes outline their geographical distribution. For this study, statutes and diverse documentation from dozens of cooperatives have been consulted, primarily drawn from the archives of the Federation of Production and Labor Cooperatives of Catalonia at the National Archive of Catalonia and the Associations Collection of the Historical Archive of the Barcelona Civil Government. An exhaustive review of cooperative press publications between 1931 and 1936 has also been conducted, focusing on *Acción Cooperatista (AC)*, the mouthpiece of the Federació de Cooperatives de Catalunya, and *Producció*, the organ of the Federation of Production and Labor Cooperatives of Catalonia during the Civil War. Additionally, major labor press outlets such as Solidaridad Obrera were consulted, along with legislative sources from the Republican period, including the *Butlletí Oficial de la Generalitat de Catalunya (BOGC), the Gaceta de Madrid (now the BOE), and the Gaceta Municipal de Barcelona.

After analyzing the impact of cooperatives across all sectors, several conclusions can be drawn. Generally, labor cooperatives emerged predominantly in trades related to construction work, where most members were employed either directly or indirectly in the construction sector. A key factor encouraging labor cooperatives was their low initial investment requirements for fixed capital or machinery, relying instead on the labor contributed by the members. Furthermore, the construction sector was particularly affected by the economic crisis.

As for production cooperatives, which involved the transformation of raw materials through technical processes, they mainly developed in trades where such transformations were rudimentary and artisanal, often requiring little more than one or several kilns. Consequently, these cooperatives thrived in industries like glassmaking and brick production. These production cooperatives required only minimal financial outlays to commence operations. In 1936, 41% of the cooperatives affiliated with the Federation belonged to trades related to construction. Specifically, in the case of brickmakers, a trade closely tied to the construction sector, the cooperative model became hegemonic during the Republican regime. In the glassmaking industry, 37.5% of industrial production during this period was carried out under a cooperative framework. In these sectors of successful implementation, the strong interest in defending their corporate interests was clearly evident.

In the case of glassmaking, this was exemplified by the creation of the Agrupación de Fábricas Cooperativas de la Industria Vidriera (Association of Cooperative Glass Industry Factories), an industrial cooperative group capable of managing its own corporate interests within the Federation. In construction, this commitment is inferred through the mutualistic and solidarity practices established in their internal regulations. For example, practices included the socialization of wages when available work was insufficient for all members or the implementation of so-called collectivism-distributing any surplus earnings entirely into collective usufruct funds without returning any percentage to individual members.

This demonstrates that the foundations of success, in those sectors where it genuinely occurred, resulted from a combination of extrinsic factors -such as unemployment, which particularly affected these sectors, and institutional and legislative measures aimed at their regularization and support- and intrinsic factors. Specifically, these cooperatives emerged in trades with a strong artisanal and manual tradition, where a pre-existing occupational awareness and mutualistic guild practices were already established.

In these sectors, there was a clear focus on the collective survival of the trade, confronting unemployment caused by a severe industrial downturn. The cooperative thus became a local, almost personal, solution to a global economic crisis.

Beyond these trades, the development of production and labor cooperatives in other sectors was more anecdotal. On the eve of the Civil War, the Federation included five cooperatives in the metallurgical sector. In the textile industry, there were four production cooperatives and two labor cooperatives. In the graphic arts sector, three labor cooperatives were affiliated. Additionally, 14 cooperatives were unique within their sectors, engaging in activities such as producing bleach, pianos, pipes, or cardboard, among others.

The article highlights the qualitative significance of certain cooperatives developed in these sectors. Specifically, in the textile sector, it emphasizes the role of the production cooperative “Cooperativa Obrera de Producción de Impermeables y sus Derivados” (C.O.P.I.D.) and the labor cooperative “Cooperativa de Camisería y Confección en General,” the latter being a pioneer in Catalonia as the first cooperative formed exclusively by women. On the other hand, in the graphic arts sector, the unique nature of the Editorial Cooperativa Obrera Popular (E.C.O.P.) is underscored. As detailed in the article, this cooperative was established as a mixed entity, with collective members, such as other cooperatives, and individual members, such as its own workers, which led to complex governance challenges. Despite not achieving extraordinary economic results, this cooperative stood out for having become the publisher of the main press organ of the Federation of Cooperatives.

Regarding territorial most of the cooperatives affiliated with the Federation were established in the Barcelonès region, specifically in the working-class neighborhoods of Gràcia, Sants, and Ciutat Vella. This demonstrates that these cooperatives were essentially a self-management resource employed by the working-class population to address, through their own means and in light of state neglect, the adverse effects of the economic crisis on their lives.

×

Durante el periodo franquista se produjo la expansión y consolidación del cooperativismo en el sector vitivinícola español. El objetivo principal de este trabajo es determinar el papel del diseño institucional en este proceso. Las bodegas cooperativas crecieron en número e importancia durante el mencionado periodo, pero no funcionaron de forma eficiente. El diseño institucional de estas entidades en un contexto de dictadura presentaba dos problemas fundamentalmente: la profunda heterogeneidad social de los miembros, que derivó en conflictos de intereses y la aparición de comportamientos oportunistas; y el diseño de unas normas no ideadas localmente y de difícil cumplimiento que no pudieron reducir el impacto de las actitudes del free-rider. Las bodegas cooperativas españolas no fueron entidades surgidas de manera espontánea y a nivel local, sino que respondían al impulso dado por el Estado franquista que las financió y controló mediante su integración en las estructuras corporativas del Régimen.

×

COOPERATIVE WINERIES DURING THE FRANCO REGIME: AN ANALYSIS OF THE INSTITUTIONAL DESIGN

During the second half of the twentieth century, the spread of wine cooperatives took place in several European countries. This phenomenon was particularly intense in France and Italy, but it also occurred in Spain. For the French case, various factors have been identified to explain the success of wine cooperatives. Among them were state support, especially in terms of access to capital and the resolution of financial issues; external backing from socialist or Catholic ideologies; the presence of commercial wineries; land ownership fragmentation; product quality; and the advantages of grouping within specific regions.

In Spain, cooperative wineries experienced their greatest expansion and consolidation from the 1950s onward. Quantitatively, the phenomenon was significant, as hundreds of new cooperatives emerged within a few years, although it occurred later compared to other European countries and within the framework of the Francoist dictatorship. The origins of Spanish wine cooperativism date back to the late ninetieth century and extended through the first third of the following century, particularly in regions like Cataluña, Valencia, and Navarra. Under the 1942 Cooperatives Law, the period from 1945 to 1965 saw prolific growth in the creation of new entities. By the end of the Franco era, there were over 800 cooperative wineries, accounting for 60% of Spain’s wine harvest, with other regions such as Castilla-La Mancha, Murcia, and Aragón joining the movement. The development of cooperativism led to significant progress in vertical integration, mass production, and the industrialization of the Spanish wine sector.

However, research conducted in recent years indicates that these cooperatives faced numerous problems. On the one hand, it has been noted that these entities were not economically and financially efficient in their operations and showed a strong dependence on external financing, particularly from the State. Moreover, profitability indicators revealed that such investment was not being used efficiently, with resources being suboptimally allocated due to an excessively production-oriented focus. Other scholars have argued that their problems were not due to organizational shortcomings but rather their specialization in low-quality wines, driven by challenges in controlling grape quality, characteristics of demand, inadequate state-created incentives, and other environmental factors. These studies mainly highlight the Francoist state as a key factor explaining their poor performance, viewing cooperatives as suitable tools for market regulation and control over the sector and the many winegrowers involved.

The aim of this research is to explain the causes of the peculiar development of wine cooperativism in Spain, characterized by the ambivalence of rapid growth accompanied by operational difficulties. To this end, institutional design theory will be utilized. Drawing on the work of Ostrom and later reformulations by scholars such as Agrawal, recent years have seen an emphasis on the importance of institutional design in explaining the success or failure of collective action institutions, alongside other factors like the nature of the goods produced, technology, and state support.

Using this theoretical framework, Spanish cooperative wineries will be analyzed to assess the extent to which certain conditions that favor cooperative sustainability were present. Although some of these conditions pertain to the nature of the resource, technology, or state involvement, most relate to institutional design. The initial hypothesis is that, in this case, the institutional design did not aid the functioning of the cooperative wineries. State financial support was likely the key factor behind the consolidation of the Spanish cooperative movement during the second half of the 20th century. Simultaneously, this support facilitated their persistence despite issues arising from the operational rules of the cooperatives.

The study will be based on an analysis of the structure, internal functioning, property systems, and management and governance bodies of a sample of 20 Spanish cooperative wineries located in some of the country’s most important wine-growing regions. The analysis of the operational rules of Spanish wine cooperatives has shown that the institutional design of these entities under a dictatorial regime did not support balanced operations and was detrimental to their subsequent development. Two main causes help explain this inadequate institutional design, as outlined by Agrawal’s framework: the characteristics of the group, marked by the social heterogeneity of its members, conflicts of interest, and the emergence of opportunistic behaviors; and the design of rules that were not locally conceived, making them difficult to apply and enforce.

Spanish cooperative wineries were not spontaneously and locally created or designed entities but instead were shaped by the impetus of the Francoist state, which imposed their organizational structure through regulatory frameworks (legislation). Therefore, they did not initially adhere to criteria for optimizing the local resources of each case. Nor did they have a defined ideological foundation or unique organizational culture. Instead, they were interclass entities where significant conflicts of interest and agency costs emerged, primarily due to the presence of members with opportunistic behavior encouraged by their limited liability. These members sought only to maximize their individual profit rather than the collective interests of the cooperative.

What then were the causes behind their expansion and consolidation? The cooperative movement grew numerically and consolidated due to state assistance, particularly financial support. Cooperative wineries were financed through three methods: their own rural banks, state or private external funding and subsidies, and their own resources via amortizations. The first method failed, and the third generated dissatisfaction among members, making external financing the primary source for maintaining operations.

This differentiation explains the limited development in the first half of the 20th century and the expansion in the post-Civil War years. While the early 20th century had a legislative framework (the 1906 Agricultural Cooperatives Law) and sectoral crises that could have spurred stronger cooperative creation, the lack of state support hindered significant growth. After the war and with the 1942 Cooperatives Law, the state incentivized the creation of cooperatives in response to the steep price drops of the early 1950s, with the goal of controlling and intervening in prices and production in a sector traditionally facing overproduction problems.

All these factors contributed to the directed growth of the cooperative phenomenon, but not to its effective functioning. The consolidation was standardized, top-down, and incorporated criteria that did not always align with cooperative principles. This contributed to the lack of commitment among cooperative members, who prioritized individual profit maximization over cooperative ideals. Due to the weakness of social capital derived from collective action in the design of the entity, members primarily sought the highest price for their grape harvests, frequently engaging in opportunistic behaviors. This situation forced the state to impose a system of regulations and penalties to prevent such behaviors, resulting in high control and supervision costs but limited enforcement mechanisms. The root of these behaviors lay in certain basic design rules of these entities, particularly the limited liability of members, which led to low member involvement, undemocratic functioning, and the absence of ideology in cooperatives created by state impetus rather than spontaneously.

×

Este artículo examina la evolución histórica y jurídica de las cooperativas de crédito, desde sus orígenes en el siglo XIX hasta su consolidación como entidades de crédito equiparadas a las instituciones financieras convencionales. A través de un análisis detallado, se identifican tres etapas clave en su desarrollo: la distinción inicial de las cooperativas respecto a las sociedades mercantiles y sindicatos; la formalización del cooperativismo de crédito durante el régimen franquista; y finalmente, la equiparación con las entidades de crédito en la España democrática, destacando la Ley 13/1989 que estableció un marco jurídico unificado para estas instituciones. Además, se discute la naturaleza jurídica de las cooperativas de crédito, situándolas como entidades sui generis dentro del derecho cooperativo y financiero, y se evalúan las implicaciones de su evolución normativa en el contexto del sistema financiero español.

×

ORIGINS AND EVOLUTION OF CREDIT UNIONS UP TO THEIR EQUALIZATION AS CREDIT INSTITUTIONS

Credit unions, initially designed to democratize access to credit and promote the economic development of the underprivileged classes, have undergone a significant transformation since their beginnings in the 19th century. This text examines their historical and legal evolution in the Spanish context, from their early stages as marginal entities in the financial system to their consolidation as fully recognized and regulated institutions, reaching a status comparable to that of other credit institutions in Spain.

The development of the credit cooperative movement in Spain can be divided into three main phases, each marked by different legislative and socioeconomic approaches. The first phase, which spans from the end of the 19th century to the beginning of the 20th century, was crucial in establishing the legal and organizational basis for credit unions. In this period, the legislator sought a clear differentiation between these cooperatives and other entities such as commercial companies and labor unions. The Code of Commerce of 1885 and the Decree of November 20, 1868 on the Right of Association represented the first steps towards a specific regulation of these entities, which allowed them to operate independently in relation to their members and, in some cases, to the State. The Agricultural Unions Law of 1906 was also an important framework that fostered the development of credit unions in the agricultural field, allowing them to operate in areas where other financial institutions could not reach.

In a second phase, during the Franco regime, credit unions were subjected to stricter and more limiting regulation, although they also consolidated themselves as actors within the Spanish economic system. During this period, the Cooperation Law of 1942 and the Decree of November 11, 1943 formalized the existence of these entities, establishing limits on their operations and significant restrictions, such as the prohibition of active operations with non-members. These regulations sought to ensure that credit unions maintained their character of mutual support and self-management among their members, avoiding direct competition with commercial banks. However, these restrictions limited their expansion and development, creating a competitive disparity compared to other financial institutions. Despite these limitations, the Franco regime indirectly encouraged the resilience of these cooperatives, allowing them to consolidate their operations within local communities and specializing in financial support to the agricultural and rural sectors.

Credit cooperatives underwent a fundamental change with Law 13/1989, which marked the beginning of a third phase of integration into the financial system. This law, enacted in the framework of democratic Spain, put credit cooperatives on an equal footing with other financial institutions and allowed them to operate on an equal footing in the market. Law 13/1989 was a response to the constitutional mandate to promote cooperatives and establish a unified framework for their regulation, thus creating a specific regulation that recognized their role as credit institutions. This equalization allowed them to operate beyond the scope of their members and compete on equal terms with other banking institutions, a significant change compared to the previous restrictive framework.

This process of homologation with other financial institutions was not without its challenges. Law 13/1989 and its regulatory developments, such as Royal Decree 84/1993, introduced solvency, transparency and control requirements that sought to protect the stability of the Spanish financial system as a whole. These requirements included the need to have a minimum capital stock and to comply with Bank of Spain supervision and control regulations. Although these requirements strengthened the position of credit unions within the financial system, they also generated tensions with some traditional principles of cooperativism, such as democratic management and the primacy of social objectives over financial ones.

In addition, the context of the globalization of financial markets in the 1980s and 1990s posed new challenges for the cooperative sector, forcing credit unions to adapt to a financial environment in which competitiveness and efficiency were essential for their survival. The legislation promoted by Law 13/1989 and its complementary regulations allowed credit unions to expand their operations and attract new savings funds, which increased their capacity to offer credit and financial services. However, compliance with solvency and financial efficiency standards also put greater pressure on these institutions to compete on equal terms with private banks, an environment which, in some cases, contradicted the traditional values of cooperativism.

On the other hand, the regulations in force also sought to preserve the social character of credit unions, establishing restrictions on the distribution of profits and requiring that part of the profits be allocated to cooperative education and promotion funds. This measure was intended to strengthen the social commitment of cooperatives and their role in the development of communities, allowing them to continue to fulfill their public service function. In addition, Royal Decree 84/1993 allowed credit unions to be acquired by other credit institutions, which provided greater flexibility in the market, although with the requirement that the purchase option be offered first to other cooperatives in the sector, thus avoiding their absorption by conventional banks.

Throughout this analysis, the unique legal nature of credit unions as entities operating in the financial sphere, but without losing their cooperative and social character, is also highlighted. Law 13/1989 recognized this particularity and allowed these entities to operate under the principle of freedom of enterprise, in line with Article 38 of the Spanish Constitution, but at the same time maintaining a democratic governance structure and a purpose of service to their members and the community in general.

An analysis of the evolution of credit unions in Spain reveals, therefore, a process of constant adaptation to changes in the economic and political environment. From their beginnings as marginal entities, intended to provide financial support in rural and agricultural areas, to their equalization with other credit institutions, credit unions have witnessed a process of regulation that has attempted to balance their social character with the need for solvency and efficiency in a constantly evolving financial system. Despite the tensions between cooperative principles and market demands, credit unions have managed to maintain their commitment to the social economy, demonstrating a capacity for adaptation and resilience that consolidates them as essential players in the Spanish financial panorama.

×

En este trabajo se analiza de manera comparada la historia de la economía social en el Sur de Europa, con algunas incursiones en Latinoamérica. La matriz geográfica y cultural será el mundo latino donde aparecen convergencias que inciden en la evolución del asociacionismo, del mutualismo y del cooperativismo desde inicios del siglo XIX hasta los años treinta del XX. En una primera parte, más teórica, se plantea la confluencia de una visión crítica de las ciencias sociales y de la historia social con el resurgimiento de la economía social, así como algunos antecedentes y dificultades que ello comporta. En la segunda parte se descubre su uso parecido en Portugal, España, Francia e Italia del concepto de economía social en el XIX; el papel de la ley y la fuerza de los movimientos asociativos populares; las posiciones ideológicas compartidas, en las que el cristianismo tendrá fuerte presencia al tiempo que el republicanismo, así como el socialismo utópico y el anarquismo.

×

A COMPARATIVE HISTORY OF THE SOCIAL ECONOMY IN SOUTHERN EUROPE

This paper analyses in a comparative way the history of the social economy in Southern Europe, with some incursions into Latin America. The geographical and cultural matrix is ​​the Latin world where convergences appear that influence the evolution of associationism, mutualism and cooperativism from the beginning of the 19th century to the 1930s. The article has two parts. The first, of a more theoretical order, in which the confluence of a critical vision of the social sciences and social history with the resurgence of the social economy is raised, with some antecedents and difficulties that this entails. The second, discovers its similar use in Portugal, Spain, France and Italy of the concept of social economy at the beginning of the 19th century; the role of the law and the relative strength of popular associative movements; the shared importance of ideological positions in which Christianity has a strong presence at the same time as republicanism, so-called utopian socialism and anarchism. Except for France, the polyvalence of functions characterizes the social economy of the other three countries and is widespread throughout Latin America. Reciprocity and cooperation, although less studied, are also distinctive signs of mutual aid and primary systems of solidarity. The article questions the role of the social economy in fascist dictatorships and the shared impact of economic cycles on the expansion and decline of the social economy. It ends by evoking the frequent circuits, circulations and bypasses that occurred between these countries.

The work is based on the hypothesis that there are shared convergences in the history of the social economy in Southern Europe. Although it is true that the contexts of each country condition their itineraries, the common traits seem to dominate over the differentials. The importance of cooperativism, mutualism and associationism is not equal and their chronology does not always coincide, their role in relation to the market and the state sometimes diverges, but if the borders are transcended, common characteristics appear that shape the evolution of the social economy. In the first forty years of the 19th century, the use of the concept emerged in the four countries and did so with similar contents and visions. The renewal of the views of the social sciences and social history that reaches Latin America has helped to have this vision. The weight of the Catholic Church and the struggles with the anticlericals are felt, but it is the so-called utopian socialism, republicanism and anarchism that mark the pace more in the 19th century, when Freemasonry takes on more and more importance in the origin and evolution of the social economy of the four countries. They share the organizational transversality and the polyvalence of functions in their beginnings and later, although less in France where the specialization and diversification of the statutes of the three families is much greater. Although it is a little-studied problem, also in the two peninsulas, the role of primary networks and informal solidarity initiatives is greater. The growing visibility of the role of women will undoubtedly contribute with new knowledge. Likewise, the historical influence of the structure and economic circumstances on the social economy has been little investigated. The crisis of 1929 does not provide, for now, definitive conclusions for comparative analysis. The weight of the law, which oscillates between repression, in the vast dictatorial periods, and guardianship, forces workers’ and popular associations to live in clandestinity, in illegality and sometimes in institutional permissiveness. They do not wait for a legal framework to emerge and form themselves. The laws force the cooperative world to swing towards commercial codes and to a certain extent hinder the expansion of the association world until the end of the 19th century. In this context, the mutual aid societies are those that manage to survive with greater room for manoeuvre. In all four countries, the social economy was born and developed as a rearguard of the workers’ and popular movement, in a hostile capitalist system against which it positioned itself by adapting pragmatically, or by wanting to reform it or by proposing emancipatory alternatives. For this comparative historical analysis, it is interesting to contrast the particularities of the European social economy with those of Latin America. The Latin European conglomerate appears to have a certain homogeneity, as a result of migrations and repressions and a certain influence on the American continent. The networks and circuits created are a testimony to this. Therefore, in order to further substantiate the common point of the social economy of Southern Europe, it is possible to compare it with the trajectories that these follow in other European countries. Thus, it can be discovered that there is a Scandinavian matrix, another Germanic one, a third Anglophone one, and even a Slavic and Central European one.

×

Este trabajo estudia la legislación para la promoción de cooperativas a lo largo de la historia del Uruguay. Se presenta la evolución de la legislación cooperativa (con énfasis en las cooperativas agrarias y las cooperativas de trabajo asociado) para explicar si el marco normativo potencia o limita la promoción de cooperativas.

Como metodología se construye un relato histórico que describe y explica la evolución de la legislación analizando sus objetivos y el reconocimiento que hace de la especificidad de las cooperativas.

Del análisis se desprenden algunas constataciones que reafirman la idea del doble movimiento de promoción cooperativa y retroceso del Estado durante el período estudiado (1935-2006). La primera constatación es que la legislación cooperativa fue tardía respecto de la consolidación del Estado y también en la comparación internacional. La segunda conclusión es que la evolución de la legislación está fuertemente relacionada con las etapas del Estado uruguayo.

×

BETWEEN THE PROMOTION OF COOPERATIVES AND THE RETREAT OF THE STATE. LEGISLATION AND PUBLIC POLICIES ON COOPERATIVES IN URUGUAY (1935-2006)

This paper presents and analyzes the evolution of cooperative legislation as it constitutes the institutional rules that limited or expanded the capacity of the Uruguayan State to deploy public policies towards cooperatives.

The institutional rules that the actors had to take into account as they constituted obstacles and opportunities are presented.

The relationship between the State and cooperatives is analyzed based on the evolution of cooperative legislation. The period analyzed is from the approval of the first cooperative law in 1935 –Law 9.526 of Conaprole- until the last law prior to the promulgation of Law 18.407 General of Cooperatives of 2008.

Although legislation for other cooperative sectors is mentioned, the emphasis is placed on general legislation and specific legislation for agricultural and production cooperatives since the aim is to present the regulatory framework that strengthens or limits policies.

The evolution of cooperative legislation is compared with the stages of the Uruguayan State proposed by Filgueira et al. (2003). These authors propose a periodization of the Uruguayan State in two moments. A first moment of consolidation, expansion and crisis of the State (1904-1958) and, a second moment of “cushioned” withdrawal of the State (1959-2000).

In the first stage of consolidation, expansion and crisis, public policies towards cooperatives either do not exist or are functional to curb interventionism.

In the second moment of cushioned withdrawal of the State, public policies are functional to liberalization and the advance of the market. After the crisis of 2002 and, fundamentally after the arrival of the Frente Amplio government in 2005, a new stage in statehood opens that is outside the analysis of this work. From the analysis carried out and in accordance with the background information collected, it is possible to show that the dynamics of Uruguayan cooperative legislation is related to these two moments of expansion and retreat of the State.

The methodology proposed was a historical account that describes and explains the evolution of legislation in comparison with the stages of the Uruguayan State. The laws, regulatory decrees and complementary resolutions of the Executive Branch are analyzed. In addition, the legislative debate was analyzed and interviews were conducted with experts who participated or advised in the drafting of the legislation.

From the analysis of the evolution of the legislation, it is possible to draw some conclusions. The sequence of approval of cooperative legislation can be organized in six stages that follow the retreat and advance of statist positions.

In the first stage (1935-1946) the general legal framework was established with the approval of the first three cooperative laws: Law 9,526 on the creation of Conaprole (1935), Law 10,008 on Agrarian Cooperatives (1941) and Law 10,761 on Cooperative Societies (1946). The approval of this legal framework was done at a time when the advance of state interventionism was halted.

Secondly, there was a 20-year interregnum in the approval of cooperative legislation (1946-1966). This period coincided with a new push for statism during the neo-Batllist period.

The third stage was from 1966 onwards, when cooperative legislation was reintroduced, but this time by modalities (Law 13,481 on production cooperatives in 1966, Law 13,728 regulating housing cooperatives in 1968, Law 13,988 recognizing the existence and establishing the regulations for savings and credit cooperatives in 1971, and in the same year Law 14,019 on tax benefits for consumer cooperatives).

The fourth period coincides with the dictatorship and corresponded to the approval of legislation directed at agricultural producer cooperatives (Decree-Law 14,330 that allowed the commercial activity of the SFR, Decree-Law 14,827 that regulated agro-industrial cooperatives and Decree-Law 15,645 that updated the legislation on agricultural cooperatives). This intensification of legislation for agricultural producer organizations is part of the economic policy of the dictatorship that promoted the opening of the Uruguayan economy, in particular the export of agricultural products.

The fifth period is made up of the 20 years following the restoration of democracy (1985-2005). During this period, legislative advances were limited and were related to the registration –Law 16,156– and the control –Law 16,736– of cooperatives. Also in this period, the withdrawal of state intervention in Conaprole was completed, and the deregulation of the milk market that had been approved in the previous period (1984) was added to the withdrawal of the political directors (2000).

In the last period, a new state configuration can already be glimpsed with the approval of two laws – Law 17,794 on production cooperatives and Law 17,978 on social cooperatives – which constituted an advance of the General Law of Cooperatives.

From the analysis, some findings emerge that reaffirm the definition of the period studied (1935-2006). The first is that cooperative legislation was late in relation to the consolidation of the State and also in international comparison. Both in terms of legislation and specialized institutions, the approval of Law 18,407 constituted a pivotal moment in the history of the promotion of cooperativism. The creation of INACOOP by this law and its subsequent regulation in 2009 put an end to a period of fragmented and incoherent legislation and late, weak and intermittent institutionality.

A comparison of the evolution of legislation with respect to the stages of the history of the Uruguayan State shows that there is a strong correspondence.

During the first period of State expansion (1904-1958) there was no legal recognition of cooperatives until the approval of Law 9,526 of Conaprole. This was due to an attempt by “terrismo” to stop the advance of statism, but without renouncing the role of the State in the solution of public problems. This law represents an important innovation with respect to previous forms of intervention. The approval of Law 10,008 of agricultural cooperatives before the approval of Law 10,761 that regulated the rest of the cooperatives, is also proof of this softened advance. With the arrival of neo-Batllism to the government, the Uruguayan State not only ignored the cooperatives but increased its intervention, as for example with Law 10,707 that expanded the State’s influence in Conaprole.

It was only in the second stage, that of “soft withdrawal” of the State that legislation began to be passed on cooperative modalities. The Uruguayan State addresses different problems that form part of the public agenda through cooperatives: production cooperatives (Law 13,481 of 1966), housing cooperatives (Law 13,728 of 1968), savings and credit cooperatives (Law 13,988 of 1971), consumer cooperatives (Law 14,019 of 1971). But the most demonstrative is the drive to the production, industrialization and export of primary products based on the promotion of agricultural producers’ associations. The last period in the phase of “soft retreat” that can be traced back to 1985 with the recovery of democracy is marked by the near disappearance of cooperativism from the legislative agenda and the incorporation of specialized institutions. The latter is explained more by the integration and mobilization of the cooperative movement than by the commitment of the authorities to cooperativism.

From 2004 onwards, a new stage seems to have opened in the State and the changes in the policies towards cooperativism would be confirming this. Two laws were approved that anticipate the general law of cooperatives and that provide interesting novelties. Law 17.794 of 2004 facilitates the recovery of companies by workers and Law 17.978 of 2006 creates the figure of social cooperatives and at the same time that it gives them facilities and benefits, it offers them training and technical assistance. These legislative changes constituted anticipations of the approval of Law 18.407 of 2008 and mark the end of the period under study.

×

El artículo analiza la historia compartida de dos cooperativas en la ciudad de Berkeley, California: la Berkeley Student Cooperative (BSC) y la Consumers Cooperative of Berkeley (CCB) como organizaciones creadas en el contexto de la Gran Depresión de 1929 y que se han convertido en modelos clave para el movimiento cooperativo en Estados Unidos. El eje central del artículo discute el origen y crecimiento de las cooperativas de la ciudad de Berkeley como una forma de autoayuda de estudiantes, consumidores, ciudadanos, desempleados y subempleados durante el período de la Gran Depresión y analiza el modelo cooperativo como una alternativa al sistema económico capitalista, enfatizando su capacidad para reducir el racismo, desigualdad y falta de acceso a la educación superior que genera. Finalmente, el artículo subraya la importancia histórica de la formación de cooperativas estudiantiles y de consumo como un proceso único del movimiento cooperativo de los Estados Unidos.

×

THE STUDENT AND CONSUMER COOPERATIVE MODEL AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO CAPITALISM: THE CASE OF BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA (1933-2023)

The main objective of the article is to construct another history of the United States based on the study of the cooperative movement in the city of Berkeley, California and to propose a shared history of cooperatives in a city that has been especially receptive to the development of cooperatives due to favorable state and federal laws in environments of economic crisis and a strong tradition of cooperativism through clubs and neighborhood associations, students, unemployed, and consumers from the time of the Great Depression of 1929 to the present day. This historical perspective, proposed by Howard Zinn, allows us to reassess the importance of cooperatives in the formation of American society and the search for alternatives to the capitalist model at a middle ground.

The recovery of a shared history of two cooperatives –Berkeley Student Cooperative and Consumers Cooperative of Berkeley– aims to rescue an important part of the history of social movements and their relationship with the formation of cooperatives in the United States, showing how cooperatives have been a tool to face economic and social challenges.  Focusing on Berkeley, California, we explore the hypothesis of how a city could be a nest of cooperativism, challenging hegemonic historical narratives and offering an alternative view of U.S. history.

Upton Sinclair’s EPIC proposal represented a pivotal moment in cooperativism and its adaptation to President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal posed a challenge to California society.  By analyzing the proposals of Roosevelt and Sinclair, we can better understand the direction that cooperatives of the unemployed, underemployed, consumers, and students took at a time of promoting cooperativism in the United States, to counteract the effects of the Great Depression.   Both proposals gave a major role to cooperatives in promoting a more democratic American society and economy based on self-help. The article connects the history of two cooperatives that were created in the thirties of the twentieth century and that have been innovative at different times, highlighting the specific factors that drove their development and assumes as a point of discussion the influence of the University of California, Berkeley in the rise of student and consumer cooperativism.

The analysis of cooperative experiences allows us to understand how they evolved in 90 years and what challenges they have overcome, emphasizing the potential of the shared experience of two cooperatives to address current problems in the city such as inequality in housing and consumption. The economic inequality generated by the crisis of ‘29 contributed to the formation of these cooperative movements and it was many young men and women who gave voice and alternatives for a more just and equitable world. Cooperatives have been a space for participation and collaboration during these years and have managed to respond to the economic crises of different times and some of them have managed to adapt to the challenges of globalization and the crisis of institutions such as universities.

The principles of the Consumers Cooperative of Berkeley were assumed prior to the Declaration on Cooperative Identity and even though they had to close their services in 198, many of its members continued to promote the values of the cooperatives and draw their experience from an oral history project of the Berkeley Historical Society. The principles of the Berkeley Student Cooperative have been faithful to the Declaration on Cooperative Identity of the International Cooperative Alliance based on self-help, self-responsibility, democracy, equality, equity and solidarity and have their own identity in the local culture.   In this historical narrative, it can be understood that the shared history of cooperatives in a city can help the articulation of a local identity with cooperative values and principles, as is the case of Berkeley, through actions that cooperatives and their allies continue as spaces for learning and developing skills.

While the rise of cooperatives during the 20th century led to an increase in membership and trust in them, the analysis of the bankruptcy of the Consumers Cooperative of Berkeley allows us to know what kind of lessons were learned. Based on the decline of cooperatives in the eighties of the twentieth century at a global level, it is possible to understand how this cooperative contributed to continue with an American spirit of cooperativism, very particular to the city of Berkeley and other small and large cities in the United States. The delivery of the archives of the Consumers Cooperative of Berkeley to the Bancroft Library of the University of California provides us with a unique opportunity to continue to detail the study of consumer cooperatives in Berkeley.

In summary, the article offers a detailed and enriching look at the history of cooperatives in Berkeley, California, and their lasting impact on the cooperative movement in the United States. It also incorporates part of the intellectual legacy left by the Berkeley cooperative movement and the ideas and concepts such as freedom of thought that are characteristic of the city and the University of California, Berkeley, which were useful for the formation of cooperatives from their origin and in protest to the United States government. Socialist and anarchist ideas have managed to significantly influence the thinking of the city in the search for a middle way that achieves a more just and equitable society in California through cooperativism and its legacy still continues to inspire new generations of activists and cooperative members around the world. Finally, it invites you to continue researching and promoting the cooperative model as a viable alternative to capitalism in this region of California, as well as to build new shared histories of cooperativism that help connect past and present experiences to learn how different models have adapted in different parts of the world.