Sunday, December 03, 2006

International Newletter on Sustainable Local Development
Newsletter #34
December 1, 2006

Summary

Message from the Editorial Team

Micro-credit cannot claim to be a major element in the eradication of poverty
The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Muhammad Yunus : commentary

Uniting local and global initiatives : some European examples
Research Group for an alternative economic Strategy (GRESEA)
Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly (HCA)
Initiatives for another world is a platform for networks (IPAM)
Network of resource centres for sustainable development and international solidarity (RITIMO)


Message from the Editorial Team
The attribution of the Nobel Peace Prize to Muhammad Yunus, founder of Grameen Bank of Bangladesh, is very significant in more than one respect. In particular, this prize recognizes that lasting peace cannot be established on our planet without the abolition of poverty. Moreover, this prize shows that it is possible to develop strategies by and for developing countries which fall under a plan to fight poverty.

Nevertheless, micro-credit raises criticisms and comments on its limits, especially when one presents it as the solution to the problem of poverty and underdevelopment.

Thus, we consider it useful to present a summary of an article by Jean-Michel Servet published in a daily Geneva newspaper on October 25th. Although we are not experts on this question, we think that micro-finance - term that we find more accurate - is an instrument to fight poverty on the condition that it be part and parcel of a more global approach to the development of communities.

Our own observations in our respective countries are in accordance with those of the author, namely that in the majority of the cases, these tools allow the destitute to ease the effects of poverty and exclusion. This usually allows for more dignity and viewing the future with more optimism. But, for the majority of cases which we know, people remain below or close to the poverty line. All in all, when it is understood that micro-finance is one of the instruments, and that one does not create illusions on its role and its objectives, it is an extremely valid tool.

In addition, we are including four European initiatives, presented and summarized by Martine Théveniaut. These initiatives testify to the promptness to act by the European civil society in step towards greater social and economic justice in Europe, as well as between Europeans and the countries of the South. The inventory will be continued in the subsequent issues, depending on available space, in order to facilitate the gathering of energies which could contribute to promote the preparation of the 4th meetings of the globalisation of solidarity, scheduled in Europe in 2009.

As we come to the end of 2006, we wish to thank our faithful readers for the attention which they pay to our publication and for the comments and suggestions which they address to us. Presently 200 individuals receive our newsletter directly. As several readers diffuse it internally within their organizations, there are a few hundred more people who receive it.

Brunilda Rafael of Marseilles has volunteered to help us with the translation into Spanish. We welcome her to the team.

NEXT ISSUE: February 1, 2007

Editorial Team
Francisco Botelho
Yvon Poirier
Martine Théveniaut

**************************************************************
Micro-credit cannot claim to be a major element in the eradication of poverty
There are too many myths, it is urgent to draw attention to the limits of micro-credit

The quasi-unanimity around the supposed virtues of micro-credit is so strong, that it seems incongruous to question the reasons for which the Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded their prize to Muhammad Yunus and the Grameen Bank. After a period of euphoria, disappointments are likely to result in casting anathema on a technique, which when employed with moderation and in appropriate local circumstances and with adapted methods of accompaniment, has proven a certain degree of effectiveness.

More important change and a much stronger will than these small loans are needed to meet the needs of the planet.

Today micro-finance is not limited to micro-credit. Secured savings are often of more important service than credit. Financial transfers for migrants and micro-insurance are developing. But where there is a lack of hospitals, dispensaries, medication and doctors, micro-insurance will not make them miraculously appear, just because there is a demand for them. To propose services, which do not exist, has more negative than positive impact. For the poor, access to water, education, health, and transportation are more urgent needs that have to be solved.

A common mistake is the belief that Muhammad Yunus is the first to have developed micro-credit, whereas the first initiatives were mainly by Christian activists in Latin America. Another error would be to imagine that the Grameen Bank always implements a model of solidarity loans for small groups; in 2002 a very severe crisis of unpaid debts resulted in the promotion of individual loans.

A third mistaken belief is to think that micro-credit is aimed at the poorest of the poor. The constraints exerted by multilateral and bilateral co-operation have made the Grameen Bank turn to an increasingly less poverty-stricken clientele. Of the 7000 to 10,000 listed micro-credit institutions, only a hundred or so can claim to serve a poor clientele and be profitable, or recover their costs in an autonomous fashion. There are a limited number of existing opportunities sponsored by certain high-risk funds, as well as ethical or sharing investments (...) In Peru, micro-credit institutions lend at a 5% interest rate per month, but they essentially provide services only to populations above the poverty line and living in urban zones; they leave the subsidized NGO’s to intervene in rural areas of extreme poverty, low population density and high levels of illiteracy.

Measuring the impact
They show that micro-credit improves the management of family budgets (by bridging the gap between the periods of need and those of regular income from work). It stabilizes small entrepreneurial activities, which is extremely useful. But, micro-credit cannot claim to be a major element in the eradication of poverty, regardless of the affirmations of the Nobel Prize Committee. Generally micro-credit loans are used for health and food expenses, which prove their role for necessities of life. But these expenditures largely outweigh the investments that generate income. Micro-credit can thus lead to over-indebtedness and therefore create more drama than hope.

In light of the Nobel Committee’s decision, ignorance of reality is illustrated: micro-credit proves to be a post-conflict factor of peace.

No reference is made to the essential role of micro-credit in post-conflict situations. This original financial technique was undoubtedly a factor in the renewal of social bonds not only in Cambodia, Uganda, Bosnia, Rwanda but also in Bangladesh. The Grameen Bank was created just after the partition of Pakistan, which had plunged the new State into war and a major crisis. The view of the Nobel Prize Committee on micro-credit only related to the economic basis, which in turn risks to spread a number of illusions.

Summary of an article by Jean Michel Servet published in the Tribune de Genève, Wednesday, October 25, 2006 - p. 15. He is a professor at the IUED of Geneva, and founder of the research program on micro-finance at the French Institute of Pondicherry (India). He is the author of Barefoot Bankers, Micro-finance (Paris, Odile Jacob, 2006).
See also the book review by Sylvain Allemand in Alternatives économiques, September 2006 http://www.alternatives-economiques.fr/lectures/L251/NL251_005.html

Uniting local and global initiatives : some European examples
Research Group for an alternative economic Strategy (GRESEA) It was born in 1978 at a meeting of persons in charge of non-governmental organizations for development, trade unionists and academics. Centered on international economy, its research related particularly to the activities of production, new information technologies, the debt of Third World countries, or on the emergence of regional common markets. A place of reflection, analysis and proposal, GRESEA is also a center of training and information on the mechanisms and the actors of international economy and in particular on the North-South dimension of the latter.

GRESEA has just created BELWATCH: an observatory of the practices of active multinationals in Belgium.
BELWATCH is a working method aimed at supervising multinational corporations to detect any bad practices: behaviour with regard to the workers, damage caused to the environment or breaches committed in regards to legal provisions, for example.

One of the axes of work is reflection and awareness of the stakes in the Cotonou file.

Free trade is one of the key notions of the current dominating economic speech. By free trade, it is necessary to imply free movement of goods, services and capital. People are another matter, that of policing those from abroad! The free trade concept occupies a central place in the policy of co-operation of the European Union (EU) with regard to old colonies, the 79 ACP countries (Africa, Caribbean and Pacific). The trade section of the agreement known as Cotonou (capital of Bénin where it was signed in June 2000) foresees under the title of sustainable development and harmonious insertion in the world economy, the progressive creation of free trade zones between the EU and six ACP groupings defined on the basis of existing initiatives regarding regional integration. These future agreements, compatible with the rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO), will put an end to the more than 25 years of preferential and nonreciprocal trade arrangement in favour of the ACP countries. The negotiations of these new trade agreements, known as the Agreements of Economic Partnership or APE, have been in effect since 2002. When they are concluded, the reciprocity will be gradually introduced into trade relations of the UE-ACP. With less than one year and half until the 2008 deadline, and taking into account the process of revision in progress, a special number of Gresea Échos is devoted to the topic. A term at the University of Alternatives on the subject: Europe – Africa : a new economic imperialism coming of age? is organized in November from the content of the GRESEA Echos. The program is available on their website.

For further information: www.gresea.be

Helsinki Citizens' Assembly (HCA) The European Assembly of citizens is the French branch of this international network

The European network (HCA) was born in 1990 in Prague from a will to extend the dialogue between the actors of the civil societies in Eastern and Western Europe, in reference to the Helsinki Agreements of 1975 as well as in conjunction with a bottoms-up approach to co-operation and security in Europe. Since its inception, this network works for peace and the peaceful resolution of conflicts, the promotion of democratic values and the development of civic participation in the world.

HCA is a network of individuals, movements and organizations which includes over 35 national committees and groups and a great number of sections or local contacts in more than thirty countries. This network developed a significant activity of solidarity with the democrats of the former Yugoslavia, but also with other areas of the Balkans, the Caucase, Russia, and the Maghreb. Within HCA exists a HCA-Youth Network which organizes meetings gathering young people from the Balkans and Western Europe. This international Youth-Network publishes a quarterly review in English called The Collage.

HCA regularly organizes debates on current events or topics. Thus, in November two debates were held in Paris. A first to discuss experiences of dialogue between the civil societies in Turkey and Armenia and a second about the area of the Caucase again a hot zone. They are two current event subjects illustrating the need for setting up a citizens’ dialogue vis-à-vis political manoeuvres. In both cases, the fabric of the civil society pains to be maintained and to renew its strategy regarding the current situations.

For further information: Aec-diffusion@reseau-ipam.org
YVON, j’ai ajouté ces sites en anglais :
http://www.reseau-ipam.org/article.php3?id_article=1
http://www.citizenspact.org.yu/hca.htm
http://www.hyd.org.tr/en/tarihce.asp
http://www.activecitizenship.net/organizations/52.htm
http://www.hcav.am/


Initiatives for another world is a platform for networks (IPAM)
New forms of struggles, new movements are opposed to ultra-liberal globalisation and the fight for political, social and cultural rights, for peace and democracy, for sustainable development, etc. These movements appeared during international meetings, in local struggles with a global implication and in social fights. These forms of struggles generally intervene in a context marked by the exactions of liberalism, but also by situations of quasi permanent wars which break with the traditional forms of the conflict and which often make difficult the discernment necessary to implement actions of solidarity. In this context, reflection as well as practices must be revisited and constantly challenged. Combining reflection and action by developing meetings with those organized or not, who endeavour in the field of international solidarity and seek to build adequate answers is one of the major objectives of IPAM. The implementation of this strategy rests upon the articulation between the emerging struggles and resistances, social practices and reflection.

The HCA, the AITEC (International Association of Technicians, Experts and Researchers), AMORCES (Agency for international solidarity, culture and development), the CEDETIM (Center of studies and initiatives for international solidarity), the CEDIDELP (Resource centre on Development, Freedom and Peace) and EXCHANGES and PARTNERSHIPS (To promote the exchanges and the partnerships between the civil societies) are founders of the IPAM network. Their commitment is founded on partnership and collective work. The networks of partners are composed of associations of international solidarity, NGOs, local associations, associations of inhabitants, citizens groups and also trade unions or groups engaging in various conflicts.

For further information: www.reseau-ipam.org

Network of resource centres for sustainable development and international solidarity (RITIMO)
Launched in March 2002 by Ritimo (network of information centres for development and international solidarity), at an international meeting of documentary centres, the rinoceros project aims to create a space for international information for responsible and sustainable development. It is a shared space of information which proposes analyses of the civil societies and alternative-globalisation movements from all continents. This site uses the freeware GNU/GPL under license and is hosted by Globenet. It has recently started to host Rinoceros infos. The site was initially developed in French. To develop true international value of views expressed, the English, Spanish and Portuguese parts are being created. There is no translation of information. These will remain available in their original languages.

On-line one finds articles, files, selection of books and websites, a directory of the actors of change, a publication of upcoming international events, a DPH (Dialogues For Humanity) experience base. It offers methodological tools to find information easily and to build collectively an information system for action. It promotes international citizens’ campaigns to act, challenge, and exert pressure.

For further information: www.ritimo.org; www.rinoceros.org (in French, English and Spanish)

Excerpts and layout of information : Martine Theveniaut



Our Newsletters are available on the WEB:
http://local-development.blogspot.com/
www.apreis.org/

Special thanks to:
Évéline Poirier from Canada for the English translation
Paul M. Makédonski and Brunilda Rafael for the Spanish translation

To contact us (for information, feedback, to subscribe or unsubscribe):
Yvon Poirier ypoirier@videotron.ca

Friday, November 03, 2006

International Newsletter on Sustainable Local Development

Newsletter #33
November 1, 2006


Summary

Message from the Editorial Team

Environmental justice, community development and solidarity economy
The example of Kettleman City, California

Upcoming Events
EXPOBRAZIL 2006
Quebec Social and Solidarity Economic Summit



Message from the Editorial Team

Last September, the discharge of toxic products coming from the North to Abidjan on the Ivory Coast caused contamination and deaths. Whether it has to do with nuclear power (remember Chernobyl and Three Mile Island), or through release of toxic chemicals as in Bhopal in India, the environmental movements protest and dispute rightly, these attacks on the health of present and future generations.

But at the same time, employment in these sectors of industry often represents a significant number of jobs in the affected local communities. Even if it is often to the detriment of their own health, the workers concerned and their families are often not very inclined to protest, especially if no alternative exists for other work placement.

Therefore, we are presenting the principal elements of a text by Erica Swinney of the environmental organization Greenaction of California; it is rich in reflections for a more elaborate debate on the topic. It is essential for the environmental groups to integrate the questioning of environmental problems within the more global perspective of the economic and social development. In the same way, the actors of local development and social economy must integrate environmental issues in their visions and actions.

We observe often in our respective countries, the lack of linkage between these two approaches, which does harm to both.

We can only wish for greater collaboration, in essence the joint development of strategies and actions between these various actors. Without a coherent and encompassing strategy, environmental fights are likely to continue and be reactive and defensive. This in the long term weakens their stands.

In summary, the leitmotiv to resist and build also applies to the question of the environmental fights.

We are happy to announce that we are able once again to undertake the publication of the Spanish version of this Newsletter. Paul M. Makédonski of Lima, Peru has volunteered to translate into Spanish. We are very grateful to him.

Editorial Team
Francisco Botelho
Yvon Poirier
Martine Théveniaut

**************************************************************

Environmental justice, community development and solidarity economy
The example of Kettleman City, California


Kettleman City is a community of 1400 inhabitants in Kings County in the Central Valley of California. Its population is 90% Latino, 70% of residents are primarily Spanish speaking, 40% are monolingual Spanish speakers.

It is home to the largest toxic waste dump west of Alabama, and is run by Chemical Waste Management (Chem Waste). Kings County receives up to 1/6 of their tax revenue from this company.

In 1988, Chem Waste proposed to build a toxic waste incinerator to burn over 100,000 tons of toxic waste per year. Local residents formed a group, El Pueblo para el Aire y Agua Limpio (People for Clean Air and Water) in response to this dire threat.

After 5 years of mobilization throughout California, Chem Waste announced the withdrawal of its application to construct the toxic waste incinerator. Furthermore, El Pueblo sued Chem Waste for PCB contamination. An out-of-court settlement provided money for the construction of a community centre and the establishment of the Kettleman City Foundation.

A battle won, but is the war being lost?

Since 1993, changes have occurred. Many of El Pueblo's founding members have since moved away from the area. There has been an influx of seasonal workers who come and go. Chem Waste has gained influence in the community by stepping up charity work, sponsoring local school activities, holiday gifts. It has quietly gained support of Kettleman City Foundation Board of Directors.

Chem Waste is now proposing a major expansion of both the municipal and hazardous waste landfills (a 140% proposed increase in the hazardous waste landfill alone). Some 6 km from the municipality, 500,000 tons of toxic sewage sludge from treatment plants in Los Angeles will be mixed annually with green waste to make compost. It will be spread onto adjacent agricultural lands, which surround Kettleman City.

Confronted by this situation, El Pueblo with the support of the organization for environmental justice, Greenaction, has renewed activities in order to raise public awareness and fight these new impending threats to the health of the community.

Existing Challenges

The situation in 2006 has major challenges:
• Fewer permanent residents, more seasonal residents
• Loss of continuity from the past struggle of 1988-1993
• Chem Waste has gained support in the community by its charity works.
• Chem Waste supplies up to 1/6 of Kings County's tax revenue.
• Lead organizer, Maricela Mares Alatorre, has been virtually blacklisted from gainful employment with the county and cannot obtain work in the community. Thus, in order to live she is thinking of settling down elsewhere.
• Some of the members of El Pueblo have family members who work for Chem Waste, which significantly limits their willingness to participate in campaign work.
• It is difficult to find funding for base building activities.

Fundamental questions for our movements

In order to establish a strategy addressing these local challenges, it is necessary to understand that the total global context has evolved. Neo-liberal globalization has degraded the living conditions of the residents of these poor communities. These people are obliged to accept to move, or take on any work to earn a living, even if detrimental to their health.

Isn't it necessary that the movement for environmental justice consider a change of paradigm in its approach? Indeed, it is not enough to make a population aware of the health dangers of projects such as this one, so it may mobilize appropriately.

Overall the Environmental Justice Movement risks losing if the campaigns are:
• Limited to single-issues
• Reactive rather than proactive
• Not addressing economic root causes of environmental injustices
• Not putting into question the direction of economic actors
• Not accompanied by work on the ground with communities, forced to choose low road jobs over their own health

New strategies?

The current context encourages us to redefine another strategy for the environmental movement: an Organisational Strategy articulated around a New Economic Development, which articulates social justice, economic justice and environmental justice.

The vision must change to propose practical and positive alternatives for a given community, region, state. In summary, it is important to make the shift from reactive to proactive, instead of anti.

Thus, we must demystify the economy and the business world, learn how to develop our own businesses, share experiences, build relationships and alliances with networks of social and solidarity economy, from the local level to the international level. We must actively seek the support of unions, specific local businesses and locally elected officials, so that the culture of the area and the safeguarding of the future of the inhabitants and resources of the territory are taken into account. It would be important to seek inspiration from the examples of economic models developed in Argentina, Mondragon in Spain, the network of co-operatives in Émilie-Romagna (Italy), as well as many others.

The Impact for Kettleman City

Such an approach would enable us to include into our strategy of alternative approaches situations like that of Kettleman City. How is waste management itself approached in other countries? How can this industry better serve the community in employment and revenues, while decreasing the negative impacts for pubic health and ecology?


Article by Erica Swinney, Community Organizer for Greenaction for Health and Environmental Justice, San Francisco. Original article in English available upon request.
erica@greenaction.org

Edited by Yvon Poirier

Upcoming Events

EXPOBRAZIL 2006

EXPOBRAZIL V will be held in Salvador de Bahia from December 5th – 8th, 2006. An outline of topics on the agenda:

Strategic axes
• Participative democracy and political culture: the challenge of consolidation of the new institutions of local development
• Articulation of the activities of production on the territories (including the approaches/topics like: productive territories, solidarity economy, local productive arrangements, systems of credit, fair trade)

Specific themes
• Family agriculture and local development
• Arts and culture as factors of local development
• Agro energy, bio-combustibles and local development
• Recycling and local development
• Local development in the metropolitan context

Web site : http://expo.rededlis.org.br/default.asp

Summit on the Social and Solidarity Economy of Quebec

Over 600 people from all sectors of the Quebec Social and Solidarity Economy will meet in Montreal, next November 16th and 17th in order to hold a Summit at the time of the 10th anniversary of the public recognition of social economy by all the social actors of Quebec society. This recognition was officially acknowledged by the government through policies and programs in support of the development of the social economy sector.

There will be an important international presence, because the actors of the social and solidarity economy of Quebec recognize the importance of representation of their efforts in the globalization of solidarity.

For further information (French and some sections in English)
http://www.chantier.qc.ca/



Our Newsletters are available on the WEB:

http://local-development.blogspot.com/
www.apreis.org/

Special thanks to:
Évéline Poirier from Canada for the English translation
Paul Maquet. Makédonski from Peru for the Spanish translation

To contact us (for information, feedback, to subscribe or unsubscribe):
Yvon Poirier ypoirier@videotron.ca

Sunday, October 01, 2006

International Newsletter on Sustainable Local Development

Newsletter #32 - October 1, 2006

Summary

Message from the Editorial Team

Sustainable Social Development and Networking
Contribution from Rosemary Gomes (Brazil)

New policies on aid for development
Impacts on sustainable local development

News briefs
The Home of World Citizenship of Mulhouse (France)
Katrina one year later: civil movements demand right of return


Message from the Editorial Team

The articles dealing with networking in our last newsletter gave rise to many positive and encouraging comments.
Rosemary Gomes of the Brazilian Forum on Solidarity Economy (FBES) forwarded to us a text in Portuguese, as well as to several mailing lists in Brazil and Latin America. We are reproducing this text because it brings very relevant comments and questionings.
The text stresses the essential character of the circulation of information directly elaborated from the social practices of actors. It therefore carries value as an example for others. Furthermore, it stresses the importance of learning how to essentially communicate in comprehensible terms for all the public, to bring closer the points of view, beyond the ideologies: in the South and North relations, but also to facilitate relationships being established in a long-lasting way between actors of the South and the South, which is also the intent of this newsletter. Indeed, information, when it is adopted by the actors at the grassroots level is a good, which multiplies when shared, and which increases the capacity for action. The text by Rosemary Gomes opens from this point of view a prospect for dialogue, which is interesting and courageous by its clarity. It is necessary to congratulate her.
In addition, we wish to bring your attention to the major impact of the Paris Declaration regarding the policies of development. If it is not already done, we suggest that organizations devoted to local development and social solidarity economy hold this debate, because the role of the civil society in regards to development is in jeopardy.
We are SUSPENDING INDEFINITELY the publication of this Newsletter into Spanish. Thus, we wish to reiterate our call for volunteer translators, especially for the Spanish version.

Francisco Botelho
Yvon Poirier
Martine Théveniaut



Sustainable Social Development and Networking
Contribution from Rosemary Gomes (Brazil)

The International Newsletter on Sustainable Local Development in its last edition (#31), brought to the forefront important questions on the present day debates concerning Networks and the social actors who live – act – and take a stand in their midst. It deserves an attentive reading by all:
• who follow the development of methodologies of the life of networks and the multiplicity of the forms that they have assumed these past years, especially in Latin America.
• who are concerned by a better way of reinforcing our camp, always characterized by its diversity (actors, “flags”, causes, social movements…)
• who want to avoid fragmentation, the multiplication of structures and the unnecessary repetition of the same financial and human investments.

Major challenges
We believe that we can work together effectively. The complementarity and integration (whether inter, intra or supra) will enable us to progress very much, not because it is pleasant to work jointly, but because it is only by combining our efforts that we will manage to produce changes in real life.
This politization moves us away from the assistance, of aid practices. The echo of the South speaks about radicalization… that of North to work in the direction of international institutions. But in the South, there are also actors who aspire to promote, to take part in the design of new approaches. The need for producing real alternatives to globalisation leads to very distinct dynamics that meet.
For such an important challenge as that of globalising solidarity, I believe that we should also act so that the co-operative sectors of production are convinced - and even conquered - by the will to work with a new type of relations of international co-operation. To make the producers perceive themselves as actors of development, and not only as producers or consumers. Producers who also perceive themselves as entities bearing rights, duties, and strengths to build new territories, new markets. It is necessary to finish with the existing myth of the Market in which it is necessary to participate. The experiences where markets were born from the will of ethical and solidarity economic relations should be shown. That does not occur spontaneously, and that is where the role of NGOs intervenes, in the processes of Networks and International Forums.

Information: a crucial question

The topic of a constant, fluid communication (in our various languages and dialects), transparent and frequent, could gradually bring a greater perenniality to the processes, apart from the moments of meetings in Events. But who will finance such dialogues when they are not bilateral? Especially the South towards the South?
It is also important to specify and highlight that communication is not only information or connection.
Information can be transmitted, used and abandoned; all depends on the use, which one makes of it. Then, the need appears in the Networks to promote training for effective use of Information Technology (IT), since it is not always adapted for those who need to use it. Then, there is the lack of time, dedication and especially financing for this training in the use of these instruments.
This year, with the use of the GNU free software, we made fantastic things addressing solidarity economy, but they were not completely adopted by the users whether they be co-operatives, or young people who develop…
It would be necessary to define the (re)significance of the concept of information, in an era of digital and information technology.

The Life of Networks
Networks need both direct meetings and mechanisms of communication in order to create bonds of confidence, to look at each other face to face, eye to eye, to see the products, to learn the techniques, to know the position of each one… The use of Skype and teleconferencing have facilitated things and saved many resources.
Those who use and master these new instruments are still very few, either because of technical inability, or because they are not at ease. There are still human limitations to be surpassed.
But it is a priority to decentralize information, because otherwise the elite and “the experts” will continue to be the only ones who are always well informed.
What do our leaders think of the production of an Alternate Globalization? What is missing to launch a campaign, a “flag”, a cause (I know that many exist - but we need to prioritize and to practise this internationalism)? I am sure that there would be no lack of arms, legs, voices, everywhere in the five continents – what is missing is the political direction of the process. To be less concerned with the wording of the international platform - it already has our minimum agreement - than to start to unite ourselves in concrete actions.
Part of the politization passes by the need to combat internally our ambivalences. Topics like the model of consumption, either in North or in the South, are often circumvented because they generate dead ends… Should Solidarity Economy take a more radical form in order to build another model of production or proceed in a way to mitigate the consequences of an unsustainable model? And the question of the precariousness of the social rights in solidarity enterprises? We always advocate in documents the defence of economic and social rights. What does that mean in the solidarity economy? And the topic of the financing of development?
What is our agenda for development; does this agenda have a North and a South? The moment to work the interactions or interrelationships between the Networks has it not arrived?

The reading of this Newsletter reinforces these questions, these doubts.

Rosemary Gomes
FASE, FBES, FASE - Brasil
rgomes@fase.org.br


New policies on aid for development
Impacts on sustainable local development

An important debate within the aid for development sector has been provoked by the adoption of the Paris Declaration in March 2005.

The provisions of the Paris Declaration
At this meeting, 90 donor countries and multilateral agencies adopted the Paris Declaration on the effectiveness of aid. The Paris Declaration was adopted to bring about reforms regarding the rules governing aid in order to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDG).
“We recognize that while the volume of aid and other development resources must increase to achieve these goals … aid effectiveness must also increase significantly” - Paris Declaration
The Declaration asserts five principles for development aid: strengthening partner countries’ national development strategies; increasing alignment of aid with partner countries’ priorities; reforming and simplifying donor policies and procedures; implementation centered on performance; enhancing donor’ and partner countries’ respective accountability. At first glance, these principles seem positive since they clarify somewhat the rules applicable to aid, and normally they will force recipient countries to increase transparency, better management, etc. Therefore, international NGOs in general agreed with the principles.

Contrasting impacts
However, the Paris Declaration has very serious omissions that have greater impact, including some negative and bad effects. A first negative impact has been a large decrease in funding for projects managed by international NGOs. As donor Agencies transfer directly funds to partner countries, the programs supporting civil society, community organisation and local development, have largely decreased (sometimes by over 50%). This is not very surprising since the Paris Declaration does not even mention once the concept of civil society.
In certain cases, these new aid policies aggravate existing problems. For example, during the Summer University organised by the Groupe d’économie solidaire du Québec (GESQ) last June, representatives of NGOs explained that in certain countries corruption practices have worsened since most aid has to go through Ministries. One NGO told us that last year, they were retained after a tender process to implement a program to sustain agriculture. Just before signing the contract, the Minister asked “What is there for me in this agreement”. Since the NGO refused to pay a kickback, they did not obtain the contract.

Questioning by the NGOs
However, the response is increasingly more animated. In Canada, as in many other countries, the NGO sector and development networks question their respective Agencies. There are encouraging signs. Agencies such as the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) now recognizes that they went too far in reorienting the practices and that they need to reintroduce aid programs for civil society and other practices that involve development by local populations themselves.

The Centre d’études et de coopération internationale (CECI), a Canadian international aid NGO with a long experience in development asserts: The CECI observes on the terrain that the vitality and diversity of civic engagement is a better approach to ensure winning results than government action. In disadvantaged communities where there is insufficient government support, and with almost no private investment, the partnerships that CECI weaves with the organisations that the populations have given themselves to assure their.
In summary, the situation is similar in countries of the North and the South. Without an organised civil society to build influence, without strong involvement of local populations in neighbourhoods and villages, without populations taking charge of their own development, important government policies and all funding programs will only reinforce the faults of approaches that only rely on the private sector, or on the State. Experience shows whatever the diversity of situations or levels of poverty, the development process needs to make place for a third pillar - civil society, and needs to rely on similar values and practices of empowerment, of civic participation and of taking charge by the part certain failures which we have witnessed.

Yvon Poirier
The Paris Declaration is available in different languages at the following website:
http://www.aidharmonization.org/
CECI website (French, English, Spanish)
http://www.ceci.ca/
Yvon Poirier


News briefs
The Home of World Citizenship of Mulhouse (France)
Nestled within the borders of the cultures of Switzerland, Germany and France, the Home of World Citizenship’s ambition is to show on a daily basis, through a citizen action, that another world is not only necessary but also possible. How? By “daring to go against the flow”. By combining reflection and experimentation. A whole series of topics which cross everyday life are taken into account: citizenship, solidarity economy, culture, popular education, willingness to grow by being involved in diversities, by discovering common roots, while resting on a spirit of solidarity.
Some examples: the Home of World Citizenship (MCM) accommodates Citizens’ Forums every Saturday morning, as well as an annual transborder meeting. In 2005, it became the Regional Center of the Citizens of the World and launched a project of World Games for Peace. The multicultural activities multiplied: public writer, asylum seekers, search for housing and work, multicultural meals, meetings on specific topics, conversational French classes. These various activities occur mainly under the sponsorship of the JID (Justice-Immigration-Rights), which is to some extent, the permanent and privileged partner.
Lastly, with regards to solidarity economy, the MCM follows specific projects (solidarity restaurant, social grocery store, solidarity housing project, a free shop - “Umsonstladen”), a Center of Resources and Competencies, a partnership with the Bank of Projects and the start-up of a data base, the pursuit of the solidarity market (through a complementary currency: the “PLUS”) and… today, the possibility of branching out to the Alsace area through the project SOL (SOLidarity).
“It is a question of showing through these experiments, projects, reflections that the economy must become distributive, to be of service to man and not to money and that the human person must be taken into account as an individual and not as factor for production”.

Summary by Martine Theveniaut
For more information : mcm.arso@wanadoo.fr and r.winterhalter@wanadoo.fr


Katrina one year later: civil movements demand right of return
On August 29, 2005 Katrina demolished the United States Golf Coast with catastrophic results, previously known only to residents of the poorest countries like Bangladesh.
After the emotion and the initial phase of confusion, the Bush Administration declared that America was able to handle the catastrophe on its own, refusing the assistance of countries that like Cuba, were ready to send urgently needed assistance. The government recently affirmed that in excess of 70% of the 110 billion dollars allocated for reconstruction had been utilized or was available.
The reality is quite different. One year later the networks are on the brink of war because nothing has changed. The solidarity initiatives, the marches, the protests, the lawsuits, the network proposals, the citizens’ organizations, the labor unions (are) relegated to the local news.
Survivors’ testimonies given in front of the First National Truth Commission … in July 2006, brings light to the situation: persons forced to survive on 123 dollars a month, evacuated thousands of miles or simply disappeared. The major portion of these are poor and African-American… 38 of the 47 poorest New Orleans districts were literally swept away by Katrina.
The first anniversary of the hurricane has seen major movements focus on making available the truth to the USA and the world: in the Fall of 2006 a delegation of Katrina evacuees will travel to Geneva … to hear a UN Special report on human rights violations and poverty in the USA, a true first for this state ; initiatives (are) scheduled for the International Human Rights Day on December 10.

Finally, in March 2007, the development of the International Tribune on Katrina , organized by the Black Activist Coalition on Katrina and the People’s Hurricane Relief and Oversight Coalition, preceded by a special international inquiry commission composed of delegates from South Africa, Brazil, the Caribbean and Venezuela among other countries.

Excepts from an article by Cesare Ottolini, Coordinator International Alliance of Inhabitants
For more information: www.habitants.org Newsletter # 9, September 2006
Summary by Martine Theveniaut



Our Newsletters are available on the WEB:http://local-development.blogspot.com /
www.apreis.org/Special thanks to:
Évéline Poirier (Canada) for translation to English
To contact us
For informations, subscribe or unsubscribe
Yvon Poirier (ypoirier@videotron.ca)1

Friday, September 01, 2006

International Newsletter on Sustainable Local Development

Newsletter #31
September 1, 2006

Summary

Message from the Editorial Team



Communication and Utopia: promoting solidarity economy
The challenges of working in networks

Building Networks: how to overcome the challenges?
Some ideas

Cancellation of the 4th meeting of RIPESS
Announcement by Belgian organizations


Message from the Editorial Team

We regard this current newsletter as a special issue on the topic of networks.

The cancellation of the International Meeting of RIPESS next April in Belgium testifies to the difficulty of networks in Europe and other countries to keep alive an international network such as RIPESS. The next meeting is now being considered for 2009. This pause or downtime creates an occasion to reflect on the functions and the organization of networks, as well as networking in Europe.

A workshop at the meeting of Roanne last June, entitled Communication and Utopia: promoting solidarity economy, brings a significant and relevant contribution to the debate. In addition, an article by Yvon Poirier, member of our team, raises several practical questions concerning network building.

From our perspective, finding ways adapted to build networks for organizations of civil society actors is more than ever necessary, because they participate in the international building of a fairer and more equitable globalization; they integrate concepts of sustainable development, social solidarity economy, and this starting from the local territories. The civil society faces the challenge to constitute itself as a third power with them between the economy and politics.

However, after identifying that in spite of the great ambitions which we share, the building of international networking is only at its infancy. Networks and organizations are very much alive in certain countries. For example, social solidarity economy networks have made great strides in Brazil and Peru in South America, in Mali and Niger in Africa, and in Canada and Belgium, as well as community development in India. However, at the international level, the existing organizations are very fragile and weak, because of their limited level of means of action.

Our contribution seeks to be supportive of the militants, who on a daily basis work to take up these challenges in their respective organizations.

This current issue is the last which will be produced with the support of Anne Vaugelade for the Spanish translation. We wish to offer her our sincerest thanks and we wish her success in her future endeavours.

We wish to reiterate our call to volunteers, in particular for the translation into Spanish. Nonetheless, we have decided to continue the publication of this newsletter in three languages (French, English and Portuguese), while waiting for volunteer translators to be able to present it in Spanish.

Francisco Botelho
Yvon Poirier
Martine Théveniaut


Communication and Utopia: promoting solidarity economy

Challenges of working in networks

The GRIL, a Research Group on Local Initiatives at Saint-Etienne University, Roanne (France) held on June 23, 2006 a French-speaking international conference entitled Communication and Utopia: promoting solidarity economy. The participation was constant throughout the day, with a hundred individuals. Six months after the 3rd International Meeting of globalisation of solidarity in Dakar, what are the theoretical and practical difficulties encountered by the actors promoting solidarity economy? How do we bring to life solidarity Utopia, within the organizations which promote it?

The diversity of the situations
The afternoon was devoted to workshops. One of them focused on Utopia in networks: how to give life to solidarity economy networks. The first fact noted was that the topic is in vogue. A new miracle cure against working separately within the same field. Certain participants live a network of close contacts, which organize themselves for self-production and eco-construction, and then analyze successes and failures. A coordination of fair trade testifies to the problems of internal cohesion which are created by differences of opinion. Others manage networks on a large scale: national, European and international levels. They raise the question of operating on large geographical distances, with a more or less strong proximity in terms of affinity of ideas or expectations regarding operations.

An attempt to define the term network
The definition suggested by Laurent Fraisse, researcher and coordinator of the Workshop on Solidarity Socio-Economy (WSSE) is as follows: “it is a method of organization asserted to carry out a collective action, founded on horizontal relations, personalized, of confidence. They are more or less formalized. The legitimacy of a network results from the effective participation in projects, in tasks. Its operation often depends on a mobilization, specific in duration, or for targeted activities of information, promotion, or realizing a particular action”. The density and quality of the relations within a network translate best the efficiency of a networked organization. If the relations are more or less intense according to circumstances, they are rearranged according to the objectives of the project. One of the indispensable conditions of the success of a network is the mutualisation of the resources (information, relationships, resources…), but it is very difficult in reality.

Why do we get involved in networks: objectives and realities?
Eric Lavillunière made a presentation based on his long experience as an organizer of networks, a French network on alternative solidarity economy (MB 2), then the European Confederation of Worker Co-operatives ”(CECOP), and presently at the European Institute for Solidarity based Economy (INEES) in Luxembourg. He highlights the reasons for organizing a network: to create visibility, mutualise, exchange the progress in practices, build a movement, find relays and thus understand better and be well grounded (in a community), to circulate information…

As a matter of fact, organizations in networks, whether they are formal or informal tend to reproduce centrality. Internal democratic vitality is often fragile, because maintaining healthy human relations within the organisation is seldom financed. Group leadership skills, links with the membership, the follow-up reporting and the circulation of exchanges take considerable time. The gap is likely to widen between those who have access to information and opportunities, and the others, recipients of periodic information which is not very useful. The tendency to become a consumer of a network, or to remain in a position of waiting for means to act, can impede active involvement. The systems of action in a network are complex, with multiple entry points and interdependence, with a strong relational dimension. The expertise tends to be concentrated on a limited number of individuals. In fact, the leadership of networks remains occupied by the same people, whether in the big federations inaugurated in the Fifties or Sixties, or in the more recent networks born from social economy and solidarity economy.

Another danger is specialization. The system of allocating means in the context of rare resources tends to overtake the internal project, the competition to accommodate the conditions of the financial partners, even between networks of the same sphere, contribute to generate suspicion rather than confidence. This prevents networks from benefiting from one another’s advances. Nothing facilitates cross-over relationships, the building of systemic approaches which would help clarify activities from a political standpoint, and which would encourage to look beyond the field of intervention and jurisdiction of each network.

And Utopia in all of that? The “How” of a networked organization must be able to attest above all, that it is at the service of the objectives of solidarity economy?
The crisis of participation and representation touches the political parties, worker unions and the systems of delegation and mandates in general. This crisis of confidence does not spare the networks of the solidarity economy. Do they make a difference? Of course their goals have their importance. However, the way in which they translate themselves in the form of organizations, the way they exercise their mandates, the transparency of their operations are also very important. The debate brings to light that many actors do not await any more a solution from above, that we cannot sacrifice the present for an eventual mythical revolution that would solve everything. “Utopia is perhaps quite simply doing what one says one wants to accomplish”. It is better to take the time to identify what hinders development, to point out “identify” disagreements, to understand their significance, to define the mandates and how to keep them into account, to incorporate the acquired knowledge and how to increase the capacity of action and influence. In sum, to put oneself in a situation of preventing the takeover of resources by a few persons, since this is the frequent cause of devitalisation followed by the death of networks.

How to pass from an ideal-model to the realization of a collective action in a network?
It requires paying as much attention to the processes as to the results to be obtained. The forms of representation have to be built. One cannot do without rules of the game. It is necessary to accept the difficulties of comprehension inherent to geographical distances, cultures, languages. It is also necessary to translate in the actions the willingness to be detached from the social systems which have produced and are still producing everyday the dominations of the centres over the peripheries, such as the pre-eminence of the speeches of the North on those of the South, of men over women in respect to positions of authority, the weight of the words of the older generation over the younger generations, of the experts over volunteer citizens for the access to resources… How can a third power be built in a democratic way? One should not despair about such concrete Utopias, because the results which they will succeed in obtaining will be used to light the way of the generation which arrives at the helm the world.

Martine Theveniaut
Participation notes from the workshop and intervention document by Eric Lavillunière.

Acts to appear (in French only), please contact IUT de Roanne, Communication, 20 avenue de Paris, 42334 Roanne cedex. E-mail: dacheux@univ-st-etienne.fr


Building networks: how to overcome the challenges?
Some ideas

Over the past years, the creation of international networks has considerably expanded in order to build an alternative globalization. Personally I’ve been involved in various projects, and I wish to share my insight in light of my ten years of experience.

I entirely share the progressive ideas debated at the workshop of the Roanne Conference (see the article in this issue). Nevertheless, my experience of the last years in Quebec as well as in Europe encourages me to push further the reflection, especially concerning the practical challenges which have to be overcome. In particular, I wish to share the lessons learned from failures in the construction of networks and organizations, in the hope that others will be able to avoid them in their own projects.

Fact 1: insufficient preparation
The majority of the organizations in which I have been involved were born in a rather spontaneous way. Often, it was quite simply because the idea in itself seemed good to maintain contact between people sharing the same ideals. However, all the literature on the question indicates that a first feasibility study is required, to make sure that all share the same objectives and values, which would subsequently avoid misunderstandings and confusion.

Fact 2: under-estimating the practical difficulties

The challenges of international networking are enormous, especially if the project is to work in several languages and in several areas of the world. If the question is not clearly put from the beginning, and if the means do not exist to overcome these challenges, the life of the network will be seriously disadvantaged. The disinterest of the members is likely to quickly distance them.

Fact 3: surpassing the level of organizing meetings
Several organizations and networks were created or proclaimed during large national or international meetings. Such occasions bring to life an intense solidarity, and the feeling of working to build a better world. However, experience shows that it is much easier to motivate many people to take part in these large meetings, than to support a network on a daily basis. Returning to their respective organizations and countries, few participants have time to get involved in new networks. Thus, the dilemma is as follows: does the network exist to organize meetings, or is the purpose of meetings to consolidate and develop the network? Except if its reason for being is to create occasions to meet like the WSF, a network whose purpose is only to organize meetings is vowed to disappear.

Fact 4: the insufficiency of human and material resources
There are three possible sources of funding: members, governments and NGO’s (or foundations). In spite of difficulties, certain networks in certain countries succeed in combining various financial sources in order to exist or survive. On the other hand, other organizations cease their activities for lack of funding, regardless of having a relevant vision and values. It was the case of the European organization DÉLOS (Sustainable Local Development), which was dissolved in 2003.

In the case of the international networking, the challenges are even greater. The funding coming from its members or governments (except for hosting events) is almost non-existent. It rests primarily on partnerships with international NGO’s. This presupposes a strong working relation to establish a partnership and maintain the autonomy of the network. Thus, it is important that the network and NGO’s agree mutually on relevant objectives or projects, for example the causes or activities to pursue.

The establishment of a coordination and leadership team dedicated to the support of the activities of the network is an essential condition for a regular functioning. Such a team, which can be centralized or decentralized, requires undeniable means.

Fact 5: difficulties in institutional life
We all know that healthy institutional life is a constant challenge in our own midst. The challenges become even larger at the level of regions and countries, because of the difficulties related to distances which require resources. The transition to the international level increases tenfold the difficulty, because the times of meetings are much spaced apart and it is necessary to work in several languages.

However, these challenges are not insurmountable. Electronic means of communication help to undertake these challenges, providing there is a sufficient level of resources, and the directing team makes information flow a priority.

Finally, the type of political direction which a network adopts needs to be well discussed beforehand and be very well established. In particular, it is necessary to take into account its specificity compared to a more hierarchical and vertical organization, which the network does not have the vocation to reproduce. It seems that the direction of a network must necessarily be collegial and decentralized.

In conclusion, it is important to stress that the enumeration of the challenges does not aim to cause discouragement, quite the contrary. I remain persuaded that the building of national and international networks is an indispensable tool to build a fairer and more equitable globalization. These statements of facts are intended to facilitate the task and to avoid pitfalls. Since it is precisely because this mission is so important, it is essential to carry it out well. Our means are limited and we cannot afford to waste our energies. Too many associations or networks have ceased their activities, because they lacked to take sufficiently into account the seriousness of surmounting difficulties. It is a collective damage.

In short, it is essential to ask the following three questions: Who? What? and How? Those like us, who have a view of building an alternative globalization agree relatively well on Who and What. However, my experience of the past 10 years has taught me that in the majority of cases, discussions on Who and What, discussions on interesting ideas and principles, while important are not enough. Not enough time is devoted to agree on the How. This question is left for later. I have even known organizations which proclaimed their existence without any discussion on How. This explains in good part certain failures which we have witnessed.

In order to ensure the durability of a network, it is necessary to deal with How as much as Who and What.

Yvon Poirier


Cancellation of the 4th Meeting of RIPESS
Announcement by Belgian organizations

SAW-B and VOSEC, the two organizations who were expecting to organize the 4th International Meeting of Globalisation of Solidarity next April (see our past newsletters), are announcing that it was not possible to meet the necessary conditions to hold this event as expected.

Nevertheless, they wish to be able to prepare the groundwork, so that the 4th Meeting can be held in another European country around 2009.

Other information will follow in forthcoming issues.

**************************************************************

Our Newsletters are available on the WEB:


http://local-development.blogspot.com/
www.apreis.org/

Special thanks to:
Évéline Poirier from Canada for the English translation
Anne Vaugelade from France for the Spanish translation

To contact us (for information, feedback, to subscribe or unsubscribe):
Yvon Poirier ypoirier@videotron.ca

Saturday, July 15, 2006

International Newsletter on Sustainable Local Development
Newsletter #30
July 1, 2006


Summary

Message from the Editorial Team

Brazilian Forum of Solidarity Economy (FBES)
An inspiring network

The poor communities of Cape Verde organize themselves
A strategy to fight against poverty

German Conference on Solidarity Economy
Berlin, November 24th – 26th, 2006

France and rights of immigrants
Three battlefronts


************
Message from the Editorial Team

With this issue, we have practically finished three years of publication of this Newsletter. For your information, please note that each issue is sent to nearly 200 addresses, and that each number is disseminated more widely within certain organizations. Therefore, there are several hundred people throughout the world who receive this newsletter via email.

As the comments received are generally favourable, and very few people have stopped subscribing since the first number in the fall of 2003, we believe our work is useful. Thus, we intend to continue as long as we are capable, or until an organization or a network is willing to take this charge and see it through.

The challenge to produce our newsletter is not on the level of content. Our respective involvements put us in relationships with a considerable number of individuals and in a position to receive much relevant information.

Our main challenge, by far, is to succeed in producing our newsletter in four languages. We find it very important to establish bridges between experts and researchers of four rather widespread languages of use on our planet, that is to say French, Spanish, Portuguese and English. We think that it is important because the majority of our readers know rather well what happens in their cultural space, but often very little in the others. Within the current framework of globalization, any building of an alternative globalization requires this dialogue between people of various languages and cultures. Thus, in this number, we present two articles from countries whose language is Portuguese.

AN URGENT APPEAL FOR HELP

In order to continue our publication in four languages, we are launching an appeal for volunteer translators. Initially, we have an urgent need for translation into Spanish. Our current translator, Anne Vaugelade is returning to the full-time studies this autumn. Thus, the last number which she will be able to translate is the September 1st issue. We would also need more volunteers who are capable of translating into French, or from French towards the three other languages. For Portuguese and English, generally we are relying on one person in each case. In fact, we would prefer having several volunteer translators for each language. This would allow us to allocate timely assignments, in order to reduce the workload of the persons who do the translation on a regular basis. We do not know what we will decide if we do not have anyone who can translate into Spanish or eventually any of the other languages. On the other hand, there is no question of continuing the publication of the Newsletter if we cannot produce it in several languages.


NEXT ISSUE: September 1st, 2006

Editorial Team
Francisco Botelho
Yvon Poirier
Martine Théveniaut

**************************************************************
Brazilian Forum of Solidarity Economy (FBES)
An inspiring network


Although extremely recent, the Brazilian Forum of Solidarity Economy (FBES) is an inspiration which is also rich in lessons on how to organize oneself as a network.

At the time of the first World Social Forum held in Porto Alegre in 2001, participants from various areas of Brazil decided to work together to construct of a common platform in order to build an alternative economy to the dominant neo-liberal one. Two years of debates will have been necessary in order to agree on a charter of principles and a common platform.

Created in June of 2003 during the III Brazilian Solidarity Economy Plenary Meeting, the Brazilian Forum of Solidarity Economy (FBES) is nowadays the national authority in charge of the organization, discussions, preparation of strategies and mobilization of the Solidarity Economy movement in Brazil. The FBES represents the Solidarity Economy movement regarding the public authority (at federal, state and local level, through its National Coordination and the State and Local Forums), and domestic and international organizations, networks and associations.

Brazil is a vast country of more than 180 million inhabitants, divided in 27 states. Thus, the FBES created its organization based on Forums in each of the 27 states and 16 national organizations or entities. The National Coordination is made up of 97 people, three per state and 16 from the other organizations. This coordination meets twice per year. Furthermore, a National Executive Coordination comprised of 13 individuals ensures a regular follow-up of the FBES. In support of the FBES, a National Executive Secretariat composed of 3 persons supports and leads the whole, ensures the information flow, in particular through a newsletter distributed to over 4000 subscribers.

President Lula, elected in 2002, carried out his promise to create a National Secretariat the Solidarity Economy (SENAES). The FBES and the SENAES organized eight joint Work Groups (WG) in order to concretely promote Solidarity Economy in Brazil: communication, geographic census, legal frameworks, public policies, production, marketing and consumption, international relations, solidarity finances and training.

At present, the FBES is very active in order to promote legislative changes. The years of dictatorship did not favour a suitable legislative framework. Therefore, more than 50% of the 14,000 companies listed are associations. However, the legal framework of associations is not adapted to specificities and the diversity of the businesses of solidarity economy. In the same way, the law of cooperatives, instituted during those years, supports mostly large cooperatives (mainly agri-business). For example, one needs a minimum of 21 members to create a cooperative and the requirements of incorporation and other formalities are such that they put a brake on solidarity economy ventures. Thus, only 8% of the listed businesses are cooperatives.

In June, a first national Conference of scale took place, gathering more than 1,200 participants designated by the forums in the 27 states. In the weeks which preceded this Conference, more than 10,000 people took part in these 27 official state forums.

The Conference was convened by three Departments: Social Development, Agriculture Development, and the SENAES (which is the Department for Employment and Work). The FBES was responsible for a vast movement of mobilization in the states, in order to assure debates and to broaden the participation of the actors of the civil society and the local governments which were not yet aware of Solidarity Economy. The topic of this Conference was: Solidarity Economy as a strategy and policy of development.

It is interesting to note that the BFSE does not yet have the status of a legal association. However, this does not prevent it from having an operation of scale. In comparison with what we know elsewhere, it is undoubtedly possible to say that it is a network, even an organization.

The word “forum” was retained because its original meaning signifies “public place”. Dictionaries give the following definition: “a place where a people held their assemblies and where the public affairs were discussed”.

This article was written following exchanges and discussions with the executive secretary of the FBES, Daniel Tygel, during his mission in Quebec and elsewhere in Canada last May 15th – 27th. A text presenting FBES is available at the following address: www.fbes.org.br/internacional ( English, French and Spanish translations available )

Author: Yvon Poirier

**************************

The poor communities of Cape Verde organize themselves
A strategy to fight poverty


The Program against Poverty in Rural Areas - PPRA, in Cape Verde, has been in effect for the past 5 and half years, with the support of IFAD – the International Fund for Agricultural Development. Inspired from the European LEADER Program, this program takes place over three phases of 3 years in duration.

The first phase (2000-2003), identified as a demonstration, aimed to show the way, to set up the organization of the program which is based on Regional Partnership Commissions (RPC) - one per island - integrating community associations, central and local public organizations (with the obligation of majority decisions by community associations). The second (2004-2006) and third phases (2007-2009) are phases of planning and implementation, of consolidation of the development plan carried out by each RPC.

The basis of the intervention is the mobilization of rural communities and their organization to take charge of their own development. The program already gathers 169 community associations on 5 islands - Santiago, Fogo, Brava, Santo Antão and S. Nicolau.

Last June 3rd – 8th, the participants of the Program met on the island of S. Nicolau for a meeting of reflection and experience sharing on their own intervention. These were very rich days revolving around 4 topics: Local Development and the fight against poverty; Participative Management of community projects; Community animation and Organisational Life. Directors of community associations, managers of the program at the national and regional level and members of public organizations exchanged their information and looked for the best way to achieve success in the fight against poverty. And, the main result is seen when one visits the poor communities - the population united around its own association, defining its own development plan and discussing with the persons in charge of the program and the national institutions the financing of its needs. It was clear to everyone that only the organization of poor communities and their fight for development allow to succeed.

With many problems, the least of which is not financing, the Program against Poverty in Rural Areas of Cape Verde has become a laboratory of intervention and an example for the areas of Africa and Asia. It is always with the awareness that the principal secret of success is the participation of populations in the construction of their own destiny.

Author: Francisco Botelho

************************************

German Conference on Solidarity Economy
Berlin, November 24th – 26th, 2006


Under the theme of How do we want to produce and live? The Solidarity-Based Economy in a Globalized Capitalism, a First National Congress (with international participation) will be held from the November 24th - 26th at Berlin’s Technical University.

The Solidarity-Based Economy is a growing worldwide movement, but yet not well known and acknowledged in Germany, although there is a growing sector of social and solidarity based activities in existence already: Old and new types of cooperatives, charities, social and solidarity enterprises, self managed and alternative enterprises, collective housing initiatives, local exchange and trading systems, fair trade organisations, solidarity finance institutions, producer and consumer and other rural initiatives, integration enterprises and other forms of economic self-help initiatives for and with unemployed, women, ethnic minorities or otherwise socially and/or economically disadvantaged. Although the sector employs almost two million people in Germany, it is not yet visible as such, because it is split up in a number of diverse milieus or approaches which do not know much about each other. Therefore, the congress will bring together these different activists, exchange experiences and organise a theoretical as well as practical debate about the underlying concepts and strategies. Furthermore, the congress will bridge the gap between economic self-help initiatives and the more politically oriented activists from other social movements. The time has come to work together for another type of economy based on democratic, social and/or ecological values aiming at socially useful products and services for the common good in an empowering, peaceful and socially just environment. To achieve this, the congress will offer an open space for exchange of experiences, controversial debate and learning from each other, including examples from abroad, representing Africa, Asia, Latin and Northern America, Eastern and Western Europe.

The programme is designed around 9 Forums with plenary sessions and workshops:
1. Good practise in the solidarity based economy: room for presentations and exchange of practical experiences
2. The solidarity based economy in education and training, science and research
3. The solidarity based economy and neo-liberalism:
precarious jobs, individualisation and social decline;
privatisation of services for the common good;
ambivalence of the self-help concept;
basic income strategies
4. Perspectives, opportunities and constraints of the solidarity based economy within the context of globalisation
5. Lifestyle and the solidarity based economy – from an individual perspective
6. Who owns the world? – The role of ownership in the solidarity based economy
7. The solidarity based economy – a worldwide movement: international experiences and co-operations
8. Working differently – practical tools for enterprises in the solidarity based economy
9. Political framework and necessary support structures for the solidarity based economy

Note: The term solidarity based economy is used here synonymously for related terms like social economy, community economy, third system, economía popular, people centred development etc.

Contact: Dagmar Embshoff, Bewegungsakademie e.V., Artilleriestr. 6, D-27283 Verden,
Tel.: +49-4231-957 512,
Email: info@solidarische-oekonomie.de,
website: www.solidarische-oekonomie.de

or: Karl Birkhölzer, TU Berlin, FR 4-8, Franklinstr. 28/29, D-10587 Berlin,
Tel.: +49-30-314 73394
Email: Karl.Birkhoelzer@tu-berlin.de

******************************************

France and rights of immigrants
Three battlefronts


Initiative to reject a disposable immigration policy, undignified of a country proclaiming human rights.

The new reform of the Code of Entry and Stay of foreigners and the right of asylum (CESEDA) has led to a radical negation of the basic rights of the person. It even more radically restricts the right to stay for families, spouses, and children of all those who build their lives in France. It ratifies the near disappearance of a tool for “integration” known as the resident card. It also attacks the stay of the foreign patients.

The project fits deliberately into a utilitarian prospect. The government proclaims its will to rampage the skills and talents in the world (which it wants). Only the foreigner perceived as profitable for the French economy will be “acceptable”. This project creates a new category of immigrant workers for whom the duration of their stay is limited to goodwill of their employer. Furthermore, the suppression of the right to stay permit, for foreigners having lived for at least ten years in France, has condemned them to be without papers in perpetuity. The project will be much more selective for the entry of the foreign students as well.

As for foreigners with papers, the right to live as a family becomes a challenge: the government is considering making more difficult the conditions for family regrouping (resources, housing, opinion of the mayor on the “integration” of the family). It throws suspicion on the foreign fathers of French children, who will have to justify of their paternity.

Knowing that a reform of the right of asylum should largely reduce the conditions for granting the statute of refugee, it is the entire rights of foreigners which are in danger. It is responsibility for each one among us to react. By stigmatizing foreigners, the government tries to oppose us one against the other as it sells off fundamental freedoms.

For more information and to sign the petition : www.contreimmigrationjetable.org

A campaign for the voting rights of all the residents of France, regardless of their nationality
The timeframe of 2007-2009, with the presidential, legislative, local and European elections, is particularly favourable to advance and to challenge all the political organizations, all the candidates, all the elected officials in place.
In the European Union, 17 countries out of 25 have a legislation more advanced than France: Spain is on the point of taking a step ahead, while the question is being discussed in Italy. In Belgium, the non EU foreign residents will take part on October 8th, for the first time, in the local elections.
Will France be the last country of the EU to give the voting and eligibility rights to all its residents regardless of their nationality?
In the absence of being able to change the law directly, all the inhabitants of this country are being asked to participate in “Voting citizen” from October 16th – 22nd, 2006. An important mobilization should result prior to important electoral deadlines.

For more information and to sign the LDH petition : pavlina.novotny@ldh-france.org

A collective support by poets for the children of families without papers

After June 30, 2006 the circular suspending the evictions of children without papers but who have been educated becomes null and void. Hundreds of children will then in danger of being detained with their families and put by force on airplanes.
Because the deportation of rejects is definitely unacceptable: companions, friends and brothers let us fight with our words, since we only have this strength.
For more information and to sign the petition: http://poetes.hautetfort.com/

Information gathered by Martine Theveniaut

*****************************
Our Newsletters are available on the WEB:

http://local-development.blogspot.com/
www.apreis.org/

Special thanks to:
Évéline Poirier from Canada for the English translation
Anne Vaugelade from France for the Spanish translation

To contact us (for information, feedback, to subscribe or unsubscribe):
Yvon Poirier ypoirier@videotron.ca
International Newsletter on Sustainable Local Development
Newsletter #30
July 1, 2006


Summary

Message from the Editorial Team

Brazilian Forum of Solidarity Economy (FBES)
An inspiring network

The poor communities of Cape Verde organize themselves
A strategy to fight against poverty

German Conference on Solidarity Economy
Berlin, November 24th – 26th, 2006

France and rights of immigrants
Three battlefronts


************
Message from the Editorial Team

With this issue, we have practically finished three years of publication of this Newsletter. For your information, please note that each issue is sent to nearly 200 addresses, and that each number is disseminated more widely within certain organizations. Therefore, there are several hundred people throughout the world who receive this newsletter via email.

As the comments received are generally favourable, and very few people have stopped subscribing since the first number in the fall of 2003, we believe our work is useful. Thus, we intend to continue as long as we are capable, or until an organization or a network is willing to take this charge and see it through.

The challenge to produce our newsletter is not on the level of content. Our respective involvements put us in relationships with a considerable number of individuals and in a position to receive much relevant information.

Our main challenge, by far, is to succeed in producing our newsletter in four languages. We find it very important to establish bridges between experts and researchers of four rather widespread languages of use on our planet, that is to say French, Spanish, Portuguese and English. We think that it is important because the majority of our readers know rather well what happens in their cultural space, but often very little in the others. Within the current framework of globalization, any building of an alternative globalization requires this dialogue between people of various languages and cultures. Thus, in this number, we present two articles from countries whose language is Portuguese.

AN URGENT APPEAL FOR HELP

In order to continue our publication in four languages, we are launching an appeal for volunteer translators. Initially, we have an urgent need for translation into Spanish. Our current translator, Anne Vaugelade is returning to the full-time studies this autumn. Thus, the last number which she will be able to translate is the September 1st issue. We would also need more volunteers who are capable of translating into French, or from French towards the three other languages. For Portuguese and English, generally we are relying on one person in each case. In fact, we would prefer having several volunteer translators for each language. This would allow us to allocate timely assignments, in order to reduce the workload of the persons who do the translation on a regular basis. We do not know what we will decide if we do not have anyone who can translate into Spanish or eventually any of the other languages. On the other hand, there is no question of continuing the publication of the Newsletter if we cannot produce it in several languages.


NEXT ISSUE: September 1st, 2006

Editorial Team
Francisco Botelho
Yvon Poirier
Martine Théveniaut

**************************************************************
Brazilian Forum of Solidarity Economy (FBES)
An inspiring network


Although extremely recent, the Brazilian Forum of Solidarity Economy (FBES) is an inspiration which is also rich in lessons on how to organize oneself as a network.

At the time of the first World Social Forum held in Porto Alegre in 2001, participants from various areas of Brazil decided to work together to construct of a common platform in order to build an alternative economy to the dominant neo-liberal one. Two years of debates will have been necessary in order to agree on a charter of principles and a common platform.

Created in June of 2003 during the III Brazilian Solidarity Economy Plenary Meeting, the Brazilian Forum of Solidarity Economy (FBES) is nowadays the national authority in charge of the organization, discussions, preparation of strategies and mobilization of the Solidarity Economy movement in Brazil. The FBES represents the Solidarity Economy movement regarding the public authority (at federal, state and local level, through its National Coordination and the State and Local Forums), and domestic and international organizations, networks and associations.

Brazil is a vast country of more than 180 million inhabitants, divided in 27 states. Thus, the FBES created its organization based on Forums in each of the 27 states and 16 national organizations or entities. The National Coordination is made up of 97 people, three per state and 16 from the other organizations. This coordination meets twice per year. Furthermore, a National Executive Coordination comprised of 13 individuals ensures a regular follow-up of the FBES. In support of the FBES, a National Executive Secretariat composed of 3 persons supports and leads the whole, ensures the information flow, in particular through a newsletter distributed to over 4000 subscribers.

President Lula, elected in 2002, carried out his promise to create a National Secretariat the Solidarity Economy (SENAES). The FBES and the SENAES organized eight joint Work Groups (WG) in order to concretely promote Solidarity Economy in Brazil: communication, geographic census, legal frameworks, public policies, production, marketing and consumption, international relations, solidarity finances and training.

At present, the FBES is very active in order to promote legislative changes. The years of dictatorship did not favour a suitable legislative framework. Therefore, more than 50% of the 14,000 companies listed are associations. However, the legal framework of associations is not adapted to specificities and the diversity of the businesses of solidarity economy. In the same way, the law of cooperatives, instituted during those years, supports mostly large cooperatives (mainly agri-business). For example, one needs a minimum of 21 members to create a cooperative and the requirements of incorporation and other formalities are such that they put a brake on solidarity economy ventures. Thus, only 8% of the listed businesses are cooperatives.

In June, a first national Conference of scale took place, gathering more than 1,200 participants designated by the forums in the 27 states. In the weeks which preceded this Conference, more than 10,000 people took part in these 27 official state forums.

The Conference was convened by three Departments: Social Development, Agriculture Development, and the SENAES (which is the Department for Employment and Work). The FBES was responsible for a vast movement of mobilization in the states, in order to assure debates and to broaden the participation of the actors of the civil society and the local governments which were not yet aware of Solidarity Economy. The topic of this Conference was: Solidarity Economy as a strategy and policy of development.

It is interesting to note that the BFSE does not yet have the status of a legal association. However, this does not prevent it from having an operation of scale. In comparison with what we know elsewhere, it is undoubtedly possible to say that it is a network, even an organization.

The word “forum” was retained because its original meaning signifies “public place”. Dictionaries give the following definition: “a place where a people held their assemblies and where the public affairs were discussed”.

This article was written following exchanges and discussions with the executive secretary of the FBES, Daniel Tygel, during his mission in Quebec and elsewhere in Canada last May 15th – 27th. A text presenting FBES is available at the following address: www.fbes.org.br/internacional ( English, French and Spanish translations available )

Author: Yvon Poirier

**************************

The poor communities of Cape Verde organize themselves
A strategy to fight poverty


The Program against Poverty in Rural Areas - PPRA, in Cape Verde, has been in effect for the past 5 and half years, with the support of IFAD – the International Fund for Agricultural Development. Inspired from the European LEADER Program, this program takes place over three phases of 3 years in duration.

The first phase (2000-2003), identified as a demonstration, aimed to show the way, to set up the organization of the program which is based on Regional Partnership Commissions (RPC) - one per island - integrating community associations, central and local public organizations (with the obligation of majority decisions by community associations). The second (2004-2006) and third phases (2007-2009) are phases of planning and implementation, of consolidation of the development plan carried out by each RPC.

The basis of the intervention is the mobilization of rural communities and their organization to take charge of their own development. The program already gathers 169 community associations on 5 islands - Santiago, Fogo, Brava, Santo Antão and S. Nicolau.

Last June 3rd – 8th, the participants of the Program met on the island of S. Nicolau for a meeting of reflection and experience sharing on their own intervention. These were very rich days revolving around 4 topics: Local Development and the fight against poverty; Participative Management of community projects; Community animation and Organisational Life. Directors of community associations, managers of the program at the national and regional level and members of public organizations exchanged their information and looked for the best way to achieve success in the fight against poverty. And, the main result is seen when one visits the poor communities - the population united around its own association, defining its own development plan and discussing with the persons in charge of the program and the national institutions the financing of its needs. It was clear to everyone that only the organization of poor communities and their fight for development allow to succeed.

With many problems, the least of which is not financing, the Program against Poverty in Rural Areas of Cape Verde has become a laboratory of intervention and an example for the areas of Africa and Asia. It is always with the awareness that the principal secret of success is the participation of populations in the construction of their own destiny.

Author: Francisco Botelho

************************************

German Conference on Solidarity Economy
Berlin, November 24th – 26th, 2006


Under the theme of How do we want to produce and live? The Solidarity-Based Economy in a Globalized Capitalism, a First National Congress (with international participation) will be held from the November 24th - 26th at Berlin’s Technical University.

The Solidarity-Based Economy is a growing worldwide movement, but yet not well known and acknowledged in Germany, although there is a growing sector of social and solidarity based activities in existence already: Old and new types of cooperatives, charities, social and solidarity enterprises, self managed and alternative enterprises, collective housing initiatives, local exchange and trading systems, fair trade organisations, solidarity finance institutions, producer and consumer and other rural initiatives, integration enterprises and other forms of economic self-help initiatives for and with unemployed, women, ethnic minorities or otherwise socially and/or economically disadvantaged. Although the sector employs almost two million people in Germany, it is not yet visible as such, because it is split up in a number of diverse milieus or approaches which do not know much about each other. Therefore, the congress will bring together these different activists, exchange experiences and organise a theoretical as well as practical debate about the underlying concepts and strategies. Furthermore, the congress will bridge the gap between economic self-help initiatives and the more politically oriented activists from other social movements. The time has come to work together for another type of economy based on democratic, social and/or ecological values aiming at socially useful products and services for the common good in an empowering, peaceful and socially just environment. To achieve this, the congress will offer an open space for exchange of experiences, controversial debate and learning from each other, including examples from abroad, representing Africa, Asia, Latin and Northern America, Eastern and Western Europe.

The programme is designed around 9 Forums with plenary sessions and workshops:
1. Good practise in the solidarity based economy: room for presentations and exchange of practical experiences
2. The solidarity based economy in education and training, science and research
3. The solidarity based economy and neo-liberalism:
precarious jobs, individualisation and social decline;
privatisation of services for the common good;
ambivalence of the self-help concept;
basic income strategies
4. Perspectives, opportunities and constraints of the solidarity based economy within the context of globalisation
5. Lifestyle and the solidarity based economy – from an individual perspective
6. Who owns the world? – The role of ownership in the solidarity based economy
7. The solidarity based economy – a worldwide movement: international experiences and co-operations
8. Working differently – practical tools for enterprises in the solidarity based economy
9. Political framework and necessary support structures for the solidarity based economy

Note: The term solidarity based economy is used here synonymously for related terms like social economy, community economy, third system, economía popular, people centred development etc.

Contact: Dagmar Embshoff, Bewegungsakademie e.V., Artilleriestr. 6, D-27283 Verden,
Tel.: +49-4231-957 512,
Email: info@solidarische-oekonomie.de,
website: www.solidarische-oekonomie.de

or: Karl Birkhölzer, TU Berlin, FR 4-8, Franklinstr. 28/29, D-10587 Berlin,
Tel.: +49-30-314 73394
Email: Karl.Birkhoelzer@tu-berlin.de

******************************************

France and rights of immigrants
Three battlefronts


Initiative to reject a disposable immigration policy, undignified of a country proclaiming human rights.

The new reform of the Code of Entry and Stay of foreigners and the right of asylum (CESEDA) has led to a radical negation of the basic rights of the person. It even more radically restricts the right to stay for families, spouses, and children of all those who build their lives in France. It ratifies the near disappearance of a tool for “integration” known as the resident card. It also attacks the stay of the foreign patients.

The project fits deliberately into a utilitarian prospect. The government proclaims its will to rampage the skills and talents in the world (which it wants). Only the foreigner perceived as profitable for the French economy will be “acceptable”. This project creates a new category of immigrant workers for whom the duration of their stay is limited to goodwill of their employer. Furthermore, the suppression of the right to stay permit, for foreigners having lived for at least ten years in France, has condemned them to be without papers in perpetuity. The project will be much more selective for the entry of the foreign students as well.

As for foreigners with papers, the right to live as a family becomes a challenge: the government is considering making more difficult the conditions for family regrouping (resources, housing, opinion of the mayor on the “integration” of the family). It throws suspicion on the foreign fathers of French children, who will have to justify of their paternity.

Knowing that a reform of the right of asylum should largely reduce the conditions for granting the statute of refugee, it is the entire rights of foreigners which are in danger. It is responsibility for each one among us to react. By stigmatizing foreigners, the government tries to oppose us one against the other as it sells off fundamental freedoms.

For more information and to sign the petition : www.contreimmigrationjetable.org

A campaign for the voting rights of all the residents of France, regardless of their nationality
The timeframe of 2007-2009, with the presidential, legislative, local and European elections, is particularly favourable to advance and to challenge all the political organizations, all the candidates, all the elected officials in place.
In the European Union, 17 countries out of 25 have a legislation more advanced than France: Spain is on the point of taking a step ahead, while the question is being discussed in Italy. In Belgium, the non EU foreign residents will take part on October 8th, for the first time, in the local elections.
Will France be the last country of the EU to give the voting and eligibility rights to all its residents regardless of their nationality?
In the absence of being able to change the law directly, all the inhabitants of this country are being asked to participate in “Voting citizen” from October 16th – 22nd, 2006. An important mobilization should result prior to important electoral deadlines.

For more information and to sign the LDH petition : pavlina.novotny@ldh-france.org

A collective support by poets for the children of families without papers

After June 30, 2006 the circular suspending the evictions of children without papers but who have been educated becomes null and void. Hundreds of children will then in danger of being detained with their families and put by force on airplanes.
Because the deportation of rejects is definitely unacceptable: companions, friends and brothers let us fight with our words, since we only have this strength.
For more information and to sign the petition: http://poetes.hautetfort.com/

Information gathered by Martine Theveniaut

*****************************
Our Newsletters are available on the WEB:

http://local-development.blogspot.com/
www.apreis.org/

Special thanks to:
Évéline Poirier from Canada for the English translation
Anne Vaugelade from France for the Spanish translation

To contact us (for information, feedback, to subscribe or unsubscribe):
Yvon Poirier ypoirier@videotron.ca