Among the categories that refer to economies predominantly oriented towards the reproduction of life (and not of capital), we have chosen to adopt social and solidarity economy (SSE) (Coraggio, Hintze), as developed in a mixed economy with three sectors: private capitalist, public sector and popular economy (PE). We focus on public policies that promote SSE (SSEP), using elements of the political sociology of public policy instrumentation (Lascoume and Le Galès).
Since we are interested in discussions that “serve us all better and the kinds of strategies that might move us in those directions” (Wallerstein), we hypothesize that the policies aimed at SSE mercantile experiences that express continuities with neoclassical microeconomics, diminish their promotional potential by deepening their capitalist components. Our second hypothesis holds that, at the local scale, there are more favorable conditions for the promotion of SSE with instruments more suited to its hybrid nature. Our approach is based on the relationship among the micro-meso-systemic levels from the cases analyzed (Coraggio, Santos B., Lago, Narodowski, Clemente, Fernández). Otherwise, the sustainability conditions of the promoted subjects of the SSEP would be affected, and the policies would be operating at the margins of the problems.
We delve into operationalizations that express tensions and inconsistencies in promoting PE and SSE at the micro level, focusing on the structuring dimensions of SSEP: 1. 1. Producing subjects and their hybrid nature (Laville, Wright, Coraggio), with a persistent emphasis on the mercantile sphere and doing we identify a “denied hybridization”; 2. Several destinations of PE and SSE production, including markets but exceeding them, such as fair trade along with public procurement and promotion of self-consumption (Polanyi, Coraggio, Mance, Marinho Alves da Silva); 3. Diversity of financial instruments and modalities (where the predominance of microcredit inhibits an adequate development of all SSE expressions (Barco Serrano et al); the need to overcome the supply-driven approach (Mendell and Nogales); and, finally, the importance of problematize microfinance technologies.
The empirical object is the SSEP in the Conurbano Bonaerense (CB). As far as we know, this is the first attempt to gather information in this territory. This research encompasses the evolution of two periods of local governments (2012-2015/2016-2018) and two case studies extending between 1995 and 2018. The universe of SSEP during 2016-2018 was constructed through the nominal self-identification made by municipal agents. We identified 14 municipalities that developed 121 SSEP, from 12 specific public institutions with a more diverse profile than similar supralocal institutions (specific objective -SO-1 and 3).
A comparative analysis was carried out though a causal configuration with three variables (SO2) whose values in the main pattern of similarities and differences (Ragin) revealed in 8 municipalities with SSEP: 1. The existence of PE or SSE actors who socially problematized the PE/SSE issue; 2. The presence of at least two municipal agents who belonged to PE and/or SSE (or are trained) with enough power as to influence on local policies (this condition could be considered a necessary and sufficient variable for the development of SSEP); 3. The political party in government at the time was the Frente para la Victoria.
During the period 2016-2018, a strong predominance of the municipal action was observed in this field, with 80 SSEP of this level and 41 supra-local policies. The analysis of the first ones shows findings of co-construction and co-production (Vaillancourt), a representation of a more diverse subject of policies than the institutionalized target at the national level (with more associative expressions at the local level). In terms of instruments, they were fundamentally based on “sermons” (Vedung), especially, short management courses, and very few “carrots,” particularly microcredits (SO3). The result of the typology of municipalities is auspicious since, although the national policy left its imprint of mercantile PE in 7 municipalities, 3 were classified as SSE and 4 hinted in that direction. We deduce here the importance of recognizing these analytical differences, even more when we need to reinforce the potentialities of SSE towards the post-pandemic context. The high incidence of the 2015 elections was also observed, which resulted in changes in the specific public institutions dedicated to SSE and in SSEP (SO1 and 4).
With a qualitative research method following the sociology of absences and emergencies (Santos, B.), we identified six departures from and nine continuities with neoclassical microeconomics in the two most developed municipalities in promoting PE and SSE: San Martín and Moreno (SO5). We reflect on the challenges posed by such continuities, given the damaging power of hegemonic microeconomics, while more consistent contributions related to the SSE field were built from a substantive perspective (Polanyi).
In terms of the sustainability conditions of the local public institutions and their SSEP, the relationship between two variables of our causal configuration, synthesized as promoter-promoted relationship, becomes relevant. On the one hand, San Martín, which we consider a true co-constructive laboratory, is committed to developing an embryonic ecosystem (Mendell and Lévesque, Lévesque) that includes PE and SSE, with some practices of power concentration. On the other, although Moreno was the first municipality to legitimize previously invisible popular economic practices, this case persisted in a mono-constructive culture that underestimated the potential of these economies, especially of collective actors with more power.
A compass for a future research agenda was designed and we hope to have contributed to the purposes proposed by Ragin for comparative strategies: to explore diversity, to interpret the relevance of SSEP in the CB and to make the theory progress.
