English – Page 52 – Canadian CED Network

Social Enterprises in Ontario: Opportunities abound

Ontario’s social enterprise sector is dynamic and growing rapidly, as described in Enterprising Change: Report of the 2015 Social Enterprise Survey for Ontario.

597 social enterprises (SEs), both non-profit and for-profit, reported to a team of researchers creating significant economic and social impact across a diverse range of industries. The report finds a great deal of momentum, but also highlights challenges that are worth considering.

Creating jobs, contributing to the Ontario’s economy

Social enterprises in Ontario employed at least 12,000 people in 2014, more than half of which were full-time equivalents. They earned over $380 million dollars of revenue through the sale of goods and services alone.

These are just cold, hard, numbers. But they don’t even begin to capture the vibrancy of what these sales lead to, the importance of what this work means to so many people. The overwhelming majority of SE work in, and draw from, the local community. They engage with tens of thousands of volunteers and provide training and employment to people from marginalized backgrounds. Half of them have a focus on poverty. These organizations are doing work that matters.

Uncertainty amidst opportunity

Despite the increasing success of SEs across the province, challenges persist that need greater attention.

Access to capital remains a significant barrier to development, although the growth of the social finance ecosystem has clearly made a difference. Only a quarter of non-profit SEs receive loans (although this number has gone up by 150% since 2012, indicating greater risk tolerance from both SEs and impact investors). For-profit SEs are more able to use loans, with 68% of them reporting loans in 2014. Even more promisingly, most of these loans came from banks, credit unions and corporations, not private investors. This indicates greater institutional investment flowing into social enterprises.

Brand recognition and awareness is another area of concern – one that 40% of nonprofit SEs and 65% of for-profit SEs battle with. A common perception is that social enterprises have inferior products, but organizations lack the marketing muscle to change the image. The lack of a common understanding around social enterprise also poses challenges when it comes to recruiting skilled staff and accessing funding.

Finally, many SEs feel like they lack the human and technological resources with which to make things happen. When it comes to human resources, the challenge is not just finding high-quality workers but also finding funding to pay salaries and succession planning. As technology requirements change, SEs are increasingly concerned about having up-to-date infrastructure and information technology. Many SEs have highlighted the need for more capacity building resources, such as online manuals and in person workshops.

Join us this Thursday at the Social Finance Forum at MaRS Discovery District as we discuss these challenges. In an interactive session led by and for social enterprises, we’ll develop recommendations for enabling growth. We look forward to your insights!

This session is being organized by Social Enterprise Toronto and the Canadian CED Network.

This article was originally published at socialfinance.ca

Nabeel Ahmed is the Network Coordinator for Social Enterprise Toronto. He is also a Financial Analyst at the University of Central Asia in Bishkek as part of a fellowship in microfinance and microenterprise with the Aga Khan Foundation Canada. Previously, he was the Managing Editor of SocialFinance.ca, where his keen eye and deep knowledge of the field aided him in supporting the conversation around social finance and impact investing in Canada.

He has experience managing content, partnerships, media, and volunteers for multiple nonprofit organizations and initiatives. With a background in business, public administration, nonprofits and social enterprise, he is interested in supporting the creation of multi-sectoral partnerships to address wicked problems.

In a certain way, this “new” economy is a return to the values that preceded the era of all around capitalism that we have known since the 50’s. This model is based on competition, to the benefit of the market, excessive individualism and consumerism. A model that shapes humans as wage-earners and consumers and for those who have money, such as investors, the lure of profit is encouraged.

However, not so long ago, in villages and city neighbourhoods, collaboration, trade, and mutual aid in the community were dominant. This also holds true for humanity as a whole. In general, humans lived in harmony with nature; as was the case for Native populations of the Americas before the colonization imposed by the Europeans. Humans lived in harmony with nature, which was the source and the support for life. It wasn’t perceived as a resource to be exploited.

In some ways, the new economy must come back to the fundamental values that have been those of humanity and of most human communities of the planet. In other words, the economy needs to serve humans instead of humans being at the service of an economy that ensures that 1% of humans own 50% of all riches.

We thus need to reinforce the alternate trend to capitalism that already exists. In fact, it is not a new economy. This alternate movement to capitalism dates back to the 19^th century in an era when capitalism was imposing itself. It is thus that workers have given themselves defense tools such as trade unions, but also mutual funds and cooperatives in order to fulfill their needs. This movement has never ceased to exist, and has even expanded in times of crisis, not necessarily through ideology, but through need.

Solidarity Economy as an Alternative Model

One of the promising avenues appears as an alternative model to the dominant system: the solidarity economy. Depending on the countries and the cultures, it takes on a slightly different name. However, fundamentally, the similarities are great and common characteristics can be found such as the pre-eminence of human needs to the needs of capital, a reduction of inequalities, the respect of the fundamental rights of all humans, an economic model that respects nature, including repairing the damage already caused.

Everywhere on the planet, human communities are already on this route or are taking this direction. We can consider that by choice or necessity, between 30 and 50% of human activity respects these values. Indeed, one must not forget that beyond the usual examples such as cooperatives or non-profit enterprises, in many countries, an important part of the communities, especially in rural areas, lives largely outside of the large production and consumption track as it exists in so-called developed countries. Thus, it would be possible to topple over whole societies towards a model that is not submitted to the diktat of capital or of the 1% who are owners; providing that they do not direct their societies to the overconsumption model.

Resistance will be strong. The ideology of the dominant model counts on humans’ egotistical feelings. Religions are used to divide. Racism and discrimination wreak havoc in all societies.

However, a majority of humans are not fools, and they realize that it is impossible to continue in the same way that is going to bring our current civilization to destroy itself by making the planet unlivable for the majority of current species, including the human species.

It is increasingly recognized by scientists that the human species has survived and developed because collaboration was the species’ fundamental characteristic.

The same goes for survival. The key to this survival is cooperation and solidarity. Otherwise, our species is threatened because it is destroying the biosphere that has allowed it to emerge as a species.

Biography

Yvon Poirier is Secretary of the Board of Directors of CCEDNet and President of the International Committee.

He is also a member of the Board of Directors of the Intercontinental Network for the Promotion of Social Solidarity Economy (RIPESS). As such, he participates in various activities of the network, including in the UN Inter-Agency Task Force on the Social and Solidarity Economy. Recently, he participated, as a RIPESS delegate in the group of Civil Society and Non-governmental Organizations at the UN General Assembly that adopted the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for the 2015-2030 period. He accompanied his colleague from Mali who had been chosen as a speaker in an interactive dialogue during the General Assembly.

During his years in education and trade unionism, he was continuously involved in social movements, especially in local development and community economic development. He was thus the founding President of the Corporation de développement économique communautaire Québec (CDÉC) in 1993-1994.

He has been involved in RIPESS since 2004, and he has written various documents on the origin of the SSE concepts and on the role of Québec trade unions in SSE. He has participated in many World Social Forums and in various RIPESS member meetings, and this, particularly in Asia.

A new study shows that Ontario’s co-operative sector contributes $5.97 billion yearly to the province’s GDP. The research, released by CCEDNet member the Ontario Co-operative Association (On Co-op), the capacity-building organization and trade association for the province’s 1,300 co-operative business enterprises, found that the highest number of co-operatives are in housing and child care services — and that insurance, finance, agriculture and whole sale industries are the economic drivers for the co-operative sector in Ontario.

Mark Ventry, On Co-op’s Executive Director says, “Co-operatives are increasingly recognized for their contributions to the community and now we can demonstrate their contributions to the economic wealth of the Province.” He adds, “The Ontario co-operative sector injects $3.3 billion into household income and is responsible for providing more than 57,000 jobs (full-time equivalents).” Ventry says that Ontario co-ops pay more than $1.3 billion in taxes annually.

Fiona Duguid, president of the Canadian Association for the Studies in Co-operation and a researcher in the study, analyzed data from the 2010 annual co-operative survey conducted by Industry Canada. “The province of Ontario counts for nearly 40% of both population and GDP of Canada, yet its co-operative sector accounted for only 10% of the national co-op activity,” she says. “If Ontario’s co-operative sector had grown at the national average, the sector would have been four times as large as it was in 2010.”

Ontario’s co-operative sector is a combination of financial co-ops such as credit unions, caisse populaires and insurance companies, and non-financial co-operatives which operate in about 20 key sectors of the Ontario economy including telecommunications, housing, agriculture, arts and culture, social services, child care, retail sales and transportation.

Duguid notes that her research team has examined the size and economic impact of co-operatives nationally, in Manitoba and in other provinces using the same methodology. Additionally, On Co-op conducted a socio-economic impact study of the 59 co-ops and sector-affiliated organizations in Guelph earlier this year, and plans to work with partners in other areas to replicate its study in other regions across the province.

The Ontario co-operative research study was funded in part by the Government of Ontario in collaboration with the Canadian CED Network. Copies of the study and a series of infographics are available from the On Co-op website

Read more about the Ontario Co-op Economic Impact Research

ABOUT THE ONTARIO CO-OPERATIVE ASSOCIATION

The Ontario Co-operative Association believes that co-operatives build a better world. We are the trade association and capacity-building organization that develops, engages, educates and advocates for Ontario’s 1,300 co-operative business enterprises. On Co-op is an information and resources network with a mission to lead, cultivate and connect co-operatives.
Visit www.ontario.coop, facebook.com/oncoop, twitter.com/ontariocoops.

ABOUT THE CO-OPERATIVE BUSINESS ENTERPRISE MODEL

Co-operatives are community-focused business enterprises that balance people, planet and profit. Co-ops are democratic and value-based, formed to seize local opportunities and meet the needs of their member-owners. As a trusted place to do business, co-operatives are chosen by more than 1 in 7 people worldwide. Twice as many co-ops remain in operation after ten years as other types of business enterprise. Ontario is home to 1,300 co-operatives and credit unions, which operate 1,900 branches in 400 communities.

In its recent budget, the Province of Alberta announced a new initiative to partner with economic development agencies, business improvement zones, revitalization districts and local associations to enhance opportunities for businesses throughout Alberta.

In his speech, Finance Minister Joe Ceci committed the province to investing “$10 million in community economic development initiatives to support local economic development associations and help them make their full contribution to job creation and economic renewal in Alberta.”

Alberta’s announcement contributes to a growing trend of governments recognizing the vital contribution CED can make to the economy and the advantages of pursuing economic opportunities that create social and environmental benefits. Just in the past year, the UK has launched a new CED program, New Brunswick instituted new measures supporting CED investment funds, Ontario passed community benefit legislation, British Columbia created social impact purchasing policy guidelines and Québec tabled its social economy action plan, to name a few.

CCEDNet applauds Alberta’s announcement and looks forward to working with our members and partners there to ensure the success of this valuable investment.

Read the Alberta Budget Speech.
See CCEDNet’s policy priorities.

This blog was originally published on KPN Blog site, “David LePage puts his cards on the table about the definition of social enterprise, why it’s a verb and not a noun, and how it’s marketplace value.”

The definition of social enterprise continues on as a fascinating issue. In fact it seems like the definition quandary just continues to go in every direction possible, and in the last couple weeks it may have gone to completely unsurpassed extremes. Some groups seem to be recognizing any manner of company or entrepreneur that just happens to “do good” through some of its products or social responsibility activities as a social enterprise, even if their profits are the key objective and purely for the shareholders. On the other side, in a recent blog it was stated, “A social enterprise is any entity that exists with the sole purpose of benefiting humanity.” The author argues that doing business is not a requirement of social enterprise, just being a non-profit organization makes an entity a social enterprise. (Indianewengland.com, August 15, 2015)

Will we ever get past the debate of social enterprise definition? Personally I sure hope so, but I don’t think quite yet for two reasons.

One: because the more the sector grows in size and influence and impact the more we need to capture social enterprise as the valuable tool for social impact it can be, before the term becomes a diluted form of social washing or disregards the social and economic change we really wish to create.

Two: because we have to understand social enterprise is a verb, not a noun. I use the term ‘tool’ above, because social enterprise is not the “entity” it is the manner in which we do business. Social enterprise is about the social and economic value we create through marketplace activity.

Does this mean other businesses don’t achieve social value? Not at all, lots of businesses do good and contribute to the community, through products, customer targets, social giving, profit sharing, co-operative structure, and more, but that doesn’t make them a social enterprise – many of us call those them ‘social purpose businesses’. They do lots of good but ultimately operate and evaluate success in the traditional shareholder, revenue driven economy.

Yes, there is a growing new energy emerging in the business world, such as B Corp Certification and the Harvard-based Shared Values movement. Social enterprise includes these values, but also includes another goal that goes beyond just doing and being good citizens, or adding a social value to your products, or being really green – social enterprises want to change the marketplace value system.

For me the best way to understand social enterprise is as a verb. Social enterprise is a way to do business, rather than merely a noun, or a thing. It is not the entity; it is the values it brings to the exchange of goods and services.

So social enterprise isn’t a single model or simple definition, it is the business activity that integrates and prioritizes social impact over private values. Social enterprise is ultimately about shifting the very tenets of the capitalist based economy. We need a social enterprise marketplace, where we trade goods and services, based on social and community values that drive the economy.

I think we can best define social enterprise by understanding the values that social enterprise operates within, and how it operates, rather than the thing that it is. For me social enterprise operates with a set of values:

Why it does business – primarily it has a social, environmental or cultural purpose
Who it benefits in the market– its products and services contribute to building a healthy and inclusive community economy
How the profits are distributed – primarily to further its social purpose

Social enterprises’ primary purpose, their mission, is to create a social, cultural or environmental impact; they are a business, selling goods and services generates the majority of their income; and they reinvest all or the majority of their profits into the social mission.

Yes, they use a business model. Social enterprise definitely trades in the market place. It sells something; it is a supplier of goods or services to a buyer. And income is primarily derived from sales.

But, the Social enterprise prioritizes the social over the financial return on investment. It operates a financially sound business, however the social impact dominates or displaces personal or shareholder profits.

And it is incorporated in a way to insure this profit distribution happens in perpetuity. The value created is not just a charitable set-aside, temporary sales or marketing plan, a promotional gimmick or a share valuation scheme.

But ultimately, whether we argue the definition, and where we land in 5-10 years is not the real discussion. The real discussion is about the social value we create through the market place activities. We are building a long-term change in how the economy serves a community; so in the interim, the social enterprise story of its impact becomes tantamount to describe itself.

The Social enterprise quandary is not the definition of what it is, it is understanding social enterprise as part of the process of changing from a short term, shareholder, financial value driven market place, to the trading of goods and services as a means to create social value and a community economy.

While we are in this process of transition, the stories we share about our progress are critical to the defining social enterprise. We have to describe how social enterprise is impacting peoples’ lives and creating new opportunities. We have to continue to find the channels to share stories, to build the evidence, to encourage others.

Kibble’s Podcast Network, KPN, is definitely a part of that journey.

In August of 2000, there was not yet a plan for Neighbourhoods Alive! (NA!) to partner with Neighbourhood Renewal Corporations (NRC). It had been determined that NA! would employ a Community Led Development (CLD) model. Although the CLD model was central to the NA! approach, it had not been well-defined or determined as to how it would be applied.

The initial thought was to consider identifying “umbrella organizations” in each NA! community to assist with local renewal efforts in a volunteer advisory capacity. There had been approaches to some local organizations such as community centres, but most of these organizations had their hands full with their own specific mandates and were reluctant to get involved in a broader voluntary role.

At that time, there were two pre-existing NRCs: West Broadway Development Corporation (WBDC) and the North End Community Renewal Corporation (NECRC), as well as two emerging NRCs: Brandon Neighbourhood Renewal Corporation (BNRC) and Spence Neighbourhood Association (SNA). These organizations were willing to play a role in partnering with NA!, but not without some agreement that included compensation for services. There was initially some reluctance to have the limited NA! resources spent on what could be considered an additional administrative role, but the NRCs were able to effectively lobby and there was support within government.

Neighbourhood Development Assistance

By December of 2000, the Department of Intergovernmental Affairs (the lead department for NA!) was instructed to develop a program to contract with NRCs and possibly other organizations in each NA! community. The Neighbourhood Development Organizations (NDO) program with the Province of Saskatchewan was identified as an existing model. At that time, there were four NDOs, including the Quint Development Corporation (serving five neighbourhoods) in Saskatoon, each receiving annual funding of $150,000. The NDO program promoted community economic development in NDO communities.

In early 2001, the Neighbourhood Development Assistance (NDA) program was developed, based on the Saskatchewan NDO program. As opposed to the NDO program, however, NDA included some provision for differing funding levels based on $75,000 per year for single community/ neighbourhood NRCs such as BNRC and SNA, and $200,000 for the multi-neighbourhood NECRC (serving three NA! neighbourhoods in 2001). In April 2001, the first five-year NDA agreements were signed with the original four NRCs. Initially, there was a volunteer-based committee in Thompson, the Thompson NRC was established and added to the NDA agreements in September 2001.

In exchange for the five-year NDA agreements, NRCs were asked to develop five-year Neighbourhood Renewal Plans (NRP). While Intergovernmental Affairs employed professional City Planners, the NRCs did not. A City Planning student, employed with NA!, helped develop the first guidelines for NRPs. While there was initially some reluctance on the part of NRCs, the first rudimentary NRPs were developed to help guide local renewal efforts. In the process of developing the first plans, NRCs consulted their respective communities.

NDA was initially simply meant to cover basic NRC core operating costs. In 2001, it was felt that $75,000 per year would be sufficient to cover the NRC manager’s salary and office space. NECRC could consider employing other staff members, in addition to a manager. NRCs were encouraged to explore other funding opportunities including applying to Revenue Canada to become registered charities. NECRC, WBDC, and SNA did eventually become registered charities. Brandon NRC was able to negotiate an agreement with the City of Brandon that included rent-free office space and assistance with administrative costs.

NRCs were growing both in terms of their role in their respective communities and resources needed to be effective in that role. All of the NRCs identified housing renewal as critical to their role, including some employing Housing Coordinators. Where there might be a cost-sharing arrangement with local municipalities or other funders the NA! Neighbourhood Renewal Fund (NRF) was also used to facilitate agreements to fund these projects on a time-limited basis.

Organizational Sustainability Planning

In 2003, NA! contracted Tamarack to facilitate a workshop on Organizational Sustainability Planning. It assisted both NA! and the NRCs to get a better sense of how community development corporations (CDC) across Canada have managed to sustain themselves. In many cases, CDCs receive part of their funding from one or more levels of government. Other sources of income include charitable foundation grants, donations including in-kind, and own source revenue including service fees.

Currently, three Winnipeg NRCs are registered charities and receive part of their funding from charitable foundations and/or through donations. Other NRCs are also in the process of applying to Revenue Canada to become a registered charity, but the process appears to have become more difficult. Brandon NRC, not a registered charity, has managed to become sustainable with funding and other support from all three levels of government.

Several NRCs own property that may be leased to other community-based organizations and/ or public agencies. Some NRCs have launched social enterprises that generate revenue, although not always covering actual costs. In some cases, NDA is now a minority of NRC revenue. The NRCs that have been in existence for the past 15 years tend to have a more diversified revenue base, while NRCs that have more recently been established continue to seek greater sustainability.

NA! Small Grants Fund

In 2003, SNA proposed its Building with Blocks project to be funded under NRF. It proposed establishing a local fund administered by SNA to fund smaller projects with local school parent councils and other groups that would have difficulty applying to NA! or other funders. There was concern within NA! that this project delegated some funding authority directly to a NRC. It was a popular concept with other NRCs and the NA! Small Grant Fund (SGF) was eventually established with all NRCs.

One unforeseen difficultly with SGF was that Revenue Canada had a concern about NRCs that were registered charities taking on what it viewed as a non-charitable role. A solution for NECRC was to establish a separate organization, North End Revitalization Inc., to administer SGF and other non-charitable roles. SGF has allowed for more local decision-making on NA! funding, but perhaps placed NRCs in the position of being viewed as agents of government.

In addition to SGF, the previous Department of Family Services and Housing also established a small grant program for exterior renovations to eligible homeowners and landlords through its Neighbourhood Housing Assistance program. Homeowners and landlords can apply for $1,000 – $2,000 grants and must at least match that contribution. The City of Winnipeg also has a similar fund through its Housing Improvement Zones program.

NA! Expansions and NRCs

In 2005, NA! expanded to serve seven additional Major Improvement Areas (MIA). neighbourhoods in Winnipeg (twelve MIA neighbourhoods in total). In the case of NECRC, already serving two of these expansion neighbourhoods, NDA funding was simply increased proportionately to NECRC. In the case of the other five expansion neighbourhoods, the NDA program allowed for the expansion of existing NRCs to serve these neighbourhoods or the establishment of new multi-neighbourhood NRCs. NRF funding was also increased somewhat.

By 2006, NDA funding levels had also been increased to recognize the growing role of NRCs. The 2005 Neighbourhoods Alive! Community Outcomes Evaluation had identified that, while the role of the NRCs had evolved, NDA funding was no longer sufficient. For the single community/ Neighbourhood NRCs such as BNRC and WBDC, NDA funding increased from $75,000 to $150,000 per year, although NRCs would no longer be able to apply to NRF for funding for roles such as Housing Coordination.

At that time, neither WBDC nor SNA expressed interest in expanding to serve the new NA! neighbourhoods. NDA allowed for expansion neighbourhoods to receive up to $75,000 per neighbourhood per year, considering that multi-neighbourhood NRCs would have some economy of scale. The Central Neighbourhoods Development Corporation (CNDC), serving three NA! neighbourhoods, and the Daniel McIntyre/St. Matthews Community Association (DMSMCA) were eventually established. NECRC would receive $350,000, CNDC – $225,000, and DMSMCA – $150,000 per year in NDA funding.

The differing funding levels would be a source of contention for some of the multi-neighbourhood NRCs such as CNDC. In the North End of Winnipeg, NA! has also allowed for NRF funding for coordination of resident associations in those neighbourhoods. While CNDC and DMSMCA have also benefitted from some ongoing NRF funding for some of their projects, other NERCs have also continued to make demands on NRF funding for their projects.

In 2008, NA! again expanded to serve five new communities outside of Winnipeg. As these communities were generally smaller in population or considered to have lower needs than Brandon and Thompson, NDA funding for these communities was set at $75,000 per year. As these communities were situated many kilometers apart, multi-community NRCs were not viewed as an option in those communities. Eventually, NRCs were established in all five of these NA! expansion communities. NRF was also again increased somewhat to accommodate this expansion.

In 2011, NA! expanded to serve the Winnipeg neighbourhood of Chalmers. While not a MAI neighbourhood, it was considered to have comparable needs and a larger population than most NA! neighbourhoods. Again, there was not interest in expanding existing NRCs to serve this neighbourhood. The Chalmers Neighbourhood Renewal Corporation (CNRC) was established with NDA funding of $150,000 per year, although with less NRF funding available to that neighbourhood than for other neighbourhoods. The decision to provide NDA funding at this level to CNRC, despite lesser access to NRF funding, would be a source of contention for NRCs such as CNDC.

NDA currently funds 13 NRCs at an annual cost of about $1.8 Million. NRF has also increased from the original $2 Million to almost $3 Million per year. NHA has remained at approximately $1 Million, but now serving more communities. At this point in time, NA! has not identified any further expansion plans. After 15 years in operation, some of the challenges for both NA! and the NRCs will be assessing the impact, determining levels of community capacity, and sustaining ongoing revitalization efforts.

For more information on NA!, check out the resources below:

Neighbourhoods Alive! Blog Post Part 1
Neighbourhoods Alive! Blog Post Part 3
Government of Manitoba Neighbourhoods Alive! program
A Guide for Developing Neighbourhood Plans (Neighbourhoods Alive!)
A Guide to Community Development

Richard Dilay is currently a self-employed Organizational Consultant. For 11.5 years, between 2000 and 2014, he was the Manager of Neighbourhoods Alive! (on secondment to the department of Family Services between 2010 and 2012). Previously, he worked as a Community Organizer, Child Welfare Worker, and Immigrant Counsellor in Winnipeg. He has a Master of Social Work degree from the University of Manitoba.

The Pioneers

As the 28 weavers and other skilled workers of a small English town set their minds to creating a new business model back in 1844, I wonder if they had any vision for what their innovation would become. Their profound legacy is a global movement with incredible economic and community impact that we celebrate this week. You may be surprised to hear what has become of the groundbreaking work of this small group of local leaders!

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has. —Margaret Mead

What the Rochdale Society of Equitable Pioneers understood was that, even as fully employed skilled workers, they were struggling in poverty and unable to access many very basic needs. They knew that they did not control the market, and that the primary focus of the market was not about ensuring their well-being.

Their innovation was transformative—it put the power in their hands through a democratic, collectively owned enterprise entirely focused on their well-being. It was a union of people rather than a union of money; the focus was serving people rather than serving money—although sound and sustainable business practices were essential to ensuring that the members’ needs were met for the long-term.

The principles of co-operation that these early pioneers established to guide their business model have stood the test of time and continue to guide co-operative business practices around the world to this very day.

The Co-operative Advantage

A co-op is an organization owned by the members who use its services (consumer co-op, including credit union), work there (worker co-op), live there (housing co-op), or by a combination of stakeholders (multi-stakeholder co-op). While some are non-profits, most are for-profit businesses. They are governed by members who are elected by the membership.

Co-ops can provide any product or service, and exist in every sector of the economy. The difference is that they are democratic, collectively owned and controlled by users of the organization, and focused on member and community well-being. Research in several Canadian provinces also reveals that a co-operative business is twice as likely to succeed over time as compared to a traditional business model.

If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to far, go together.

The Co-operative Movement

The waves of co-operation spread from Rochdale, and within 10 years there were over 1,000 co-ops in England. The concept captured the imagination of communities throughout Europe, and soon expanded across the Atlantic. Late in the 19th Century, the co-op movement spread into eastern Canada, reaching western Canada around the turn of the century—both primarily focused on serving the agricultural and financing needs of farmers.

Today, co-ops employ over 250 million people around the world. In Canada there are 18 million members of 9,000 co-ops, who contribute over $50 billion to the Canadian economy and support over 600,000 jobs. More than 100,000 members are involved in governing their co-operative. Manitoba is home to over 350 co-ops. In 2010, Manitoba co-ops created over $1.7 billion in economic value to the Manitoba economy.

share-your-cooperative-advantage_623px.png

Celebrate Co-op Week With Us!

Assiniboine Credit Union, as a values-based financial co-operative, is grateful for the determination, inspiration, values, and vision of those early pioneers in Rochdale and we celebrate with pride the global co-operative economy that continues to create incredible social and economic impact around the world today for so many people and communities.

International Co-op Week:
Celebrating Our Co-operative Advantage
October 11-18, 2015.

4 Ways You Can Participate:

Join a co-op; shop co-op: Every time you spend money you’re casting a vote for the kind of world you want.
Listen to BOLD Radio
Use Your Voice: Use social media to celebrate #coops2015 and @MyAssiniboine!
Follow Assiniboine Credit Union: on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn

Originally published on Assiniboine Credit Union’s Community Hub, Asterisk

Brendan Reimer is Assiniboine Credit Union’s Strategic Partner of Values-Based Banking. As the former Manitoba Regional Director at the Canadian CED Network, member of the Social Enterprise Council of Canada, former board member at LITE and former member of ACU’s Board of Directors, Brendan is a passionate educator and organizer dedicated to creating inclusive, fairer, and more sustainable economies and communities.

Elections are natural times to think about the future. What kind of Canada do we want? What issues are most important? What kind of change is possible?

Hand putting a ballot in an Elections Canada ballot box

But what if the deluge of issues was actually a symptom of some more profound systemic problems? What if dealing with them in isolation won’t change the dynamics that created them in the first place?

Don’t get me wrong — treating symptoms is essential. But if we don’t also address causes, we may never get off our hamster wheel.

Many of the frustrations with government responses to these issues are rooted in the siloed structures and jurisdictional walls that were created long ago. They are the legacy of a way of thinking about the world that focuses more on differences and separateness than connections.

Today, it’s obvious that the economy is connected to the environment. Public health specialists and epidemiologists know that your health is affected by your income. And businesses are essential to building communities.

For most of us, all of these issues come together where we live, and the economy affects almost every sphere. Taking action to shift the economy on a community level, as part of a move to re-embed our values in the economy is a growing trend. We see it in consumer choices for healthy, local food, the creation of new co-ops and social enterprises, and the move towards community investment and social purchasing opportunities, to name a few.

Thousands of Canadians are building community economies that are more democratic and contribute to positive local economic, social and environmental impacts.

To some, talking about community economies may seem like parochial nostalgia for bygone days. In contrast, Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis predict that shifting control to communities is likely to grow in the future. The reason is that the types of problems communities can solve – those which also tend to resist governmental or market solutions – arise when interactions cannot be regulated by contracts or external decisions due to the complexity of the interactions or the private nature of the information involved. As information-intensive team production replaces assembly lines, and the economy shifts from an emphasis on quantities to qualities, the superior governance capabilities of communities are what will facilitate the qualitative interactions underpinning the 21st century economy.

The shift to a community focus is not just practical, it’s also simply a better, fuller way of living. Charles Leadbetter argues that the time has come for a co-operative correction, to shift our cultural centre of gravity. After having become too dependent on explicit rules, formal systems and material incentives, which stifle co-operation, we can now focus on forms of community governance based on relationships and trust, rather than systems and rules, and approaches to public policy which open up opportunities for co-operation rather than closing them down from the outset.

Co-operation and communities – far from seeming quaint and anachronistic – could come to define the spirit of the times, successful and modern, aspirational and dynamic. Backed by many converging sciences, we now understand more about how to sustain co-operation through fairness, communication, norms and reputation-building. Internet and social media are working in favour of co-operation, amplifying and reinforcing relationships.

For my money, the most fitting label for our current predicament was suggested by evolutionary biologist David Sloan Wilson in a conversation I had with him earlier this year. After working with Nobel Prize winner Elinor Ostrom for many years to generalize the design principles of co-operation in successful groups, he described the opportunity before us as ‘cultural evolution’. It’s a chance to change some old practices that may have worked for a time, but are now outdated.

By strengthening communities and shifting our economies to increase local control, we create opportunities to make a difference across a wide range of issues. These steps to reinvigorating neighbourhood economies can lead the way to a new era of abundance, resilience, and health.

So as you cast your vote in the federal election, consider action for community economies in your choice, as well as in your everyday choices afterwards.

It’s democracy in action.

Michael Toye is the Executive Director of the Canadian CED Network. He has also taught courses on CED and social enterprise at Concordia University and has written a number of articles and other publications on CED and the social economy, including co-editing the book, Community Economic Development: Building for Social Change.

Read Michael’s blogs

Follow Michael on Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn

Co-op Week 2015, taking place from October 11-17, is an opportunity for co-ops and credit union members across Canada to celebrate that they have collectively helped to build this country – and to recognize their continuing contributions both at home and abroad.

Co-operatives and Mutuals Canada (CMC) has chosen this year’s theme to be “Our Co-op Advantage,” and are asking people to share their views on the benefits of being a co-op with others across the country.

Earlier this year, CMC launched an online store in collaboration with the Flagshop to celebrate our co-op identity and Co-op Week. Co-op branded products such as flags, pins, decals and more are available to order. They have also established a group discount program to help make participation as affordable as possible. You can also download logos and posters for free!

The Saskatchewan Co-operative Association has created the Co-op Week Toolkit: A Practical Guide to Planning Your Co-op Week Celebrations. This comprehensive toolkit is a co-op’s guide to creating a memorable and successful celebration and includes information on what Co-op Week is, why it is celebrated, great ideas for community involvement, building membership, educating youth, advertising your event, having a civic proclamation and much more.

Co-op Week appears to be a uniquely Canadian phenomenon. In the US, October is Co-op Month, and the International Co-operative Alliance and United Nations have an International Day of Co-operatives on the first Saturday in July. Co-op Week is always celebrated during the same week as International Credit Union Day, which is the third Thursday in October of each year.

SOURCE: The Ontario Co-operative Assocation

Over the last year leading up to the federal election, CCEDNet’s Policy Council, Board, the People-Centred Economy group, members and staff have been hard at work to prepare election resources, raise awareness of our policy recommendations and advance our priorities with all political parties.

The first step began more than a year ago with an update of our policy priorities. The new document makes the case for community economic development and identifies seven recommendations to support finance and investment, community enterprise and local opportunities.

The People-Centred Economy group, a coalition of leading members and partners originally formed to organize the National Summit on a People-Centred Economy, was also involved in creating a specific set of policy proposals for Canada’s social economy. These eight proposals focus on four areas: growing social economy businesses; stimulating investment; leveraging procurement; and modernizing legislation and regulations.

Over the last nine months especially, we have been reaching out to all parties and meeting with key MPs and officials to discuss our recommendations. Our meetings in Ottawa emphasized the importance of clear and simple messages, which is why we developed a short 2-page call to action for changes spending and investment to support community economies.

We also took the opportunity to update our popular Art of Advocacy booklet with help from charities lawyer Richard Bridge. The new version clearly outlines the rules about political activities by charities and provides handy tips on a range of different advocacy tactics.

Finally, we have collected all of these resources as well as links to election materials from many of our members and partners on our Action for Community Economies page for easy access.

Now it’s Your Turn

Candidates and Canadians need to hear about how community economies are making a difference all across the country. Take action now and show your support:

share the community economies election materials on social media and in your networks
send a letter to the candidates in your riding with questions on how they will support community economies
Vote!

We can vote to support federal policy changes together. Let’s put action for community economies on the agenda of all election candidates this fall.

Read Michael’s blogs

Follow Michael on Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn

Join us for virtual regional member meetups! This is an opportunity to connect with other CCEDNet members, Board members and staff in your region, discuss opportunities and challenges, and ask quetions. New members are particularly welcome.

Atlantic Member Meetup | October 7th at 11am Atlantic Time
Please join by computer, tablet or smartphone.
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/338118397
You can also dial in using your phone: (647) 497-9353
Access Code: 338-118-397

Northern Member Meetup | October 7th at 12pm Eastern Time
Please join by computer, tablet or smartphone.
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/989973045
You can also dial in using your phone: (647) 497-9371
Access Code: 989-973-045

Ontario & Québec Member Meetup | October 7th at 2pm Eastern Time
Please join by computer, tablet or smartphone.
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/330517901
You can also dial in using your phone: (647) 497-9379
Access Code: 330-517-901

Francophone Member Meetup | October 8th at 2pm Eastern Time
Please join by computer, tablet or smartphone.
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/547726741
You can also dial in using your phone: (647) 497-9372
Access Code: 547-726-741

British Columbia Member Meetup | October 8th at 12:30pm Pacific Time
Please join by computer, tablet or smartphone.
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/425582277
You can also dial in using your phone: (647) 497-9351
Access Code: 425-582-277

Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba Member Meetup | October 13th at 12pm Central Time/11am Mountain Time
Please join by computer, tablet or smartphone.
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/125511461
You can also dial in using your phone: (647) 497-9380
Access Code: 125-511-461

If you’d like to attend but can’t make the meeting for your region, or if you have any questions, please contact Matthew Thompson at mthompson at ccednet-rcdec.ca