The Reciprocity Dimension of Solidarity: Insights from Three European Countries

Abstract

The article argues that closer attention to how solidarity is understood and expressed in different European contexts can shed light on the conditions for establishing a social and solidarity economy. Drawing on data collected within the H2020 SOLIDUS project, which explores current expressions of European solidarity, the comparative analysis covers three social economy initiatives, each representing a country with different political and economic context. The analysis focuses on solidarity as reciprocity and, in particular, how it is affected by such factors as actor motivations, internal participatory functioning, resource mix and political legitimacy. While further empirical work is needed, the findings suggest that solidarity as reciprocity produced by social and solidarity economy organisations thrives where political institutions are both supportive and trusted, where public funding is accessible, and where partnerships with relatively autonomous social and solidarity economy organisations are genuinely collaborative.

Estimating the Mental Wealth of nations: valuing social production and investment

“…This involves the provision of a social service valued by the recipient(s) for which no contract or financial remuneration is exchanged (other than potential reimbursement of expenses) 26 . Expressions of reciprocity to fulfil unmet individual and community needs create new bonds of solidarity between disparate groups of people, businesses and public institutions through the acts of "giving, receiving and giving in return" 27,28 . While social productivity contributes value to the measure of national prosperity (Mental Wealth), it also acts in part to redistribute resources between the economic and social arenas, acting as a temporary stabilizer to disruptive events.…”

State fragility and human development: a study with special emphasis on social cohesion

“…In fragile states, the dominant values of the state represent certain groups and that social cohesion is achieved by coercion and threats of exclusion. The inability of governments to deal with the problem of inclusion undermines their legitimacy and hinders any effort at advancing social and economic development (Eschweiler et al, 2019;Jones and Matthijs, 2017;Stanley, 2003).…”