The third pillar of the social economy is the
creation of new jobs
By Vassilis Taktikos Introduction The social economy as an alternative to
the private and public sectors. Because only the inability of the private and
public sector to provide as many jobs as are needed, to deal with
unemployment and deal with economic exclusion, leaves vital space for the
development of the social economy.The social economy is a necessary condition
in our time for two main reasons first: to deal with social economic
exclusion and poverty and second: to expand employment in sectors of pubic
benefit, which despite being of vital importance are abandoned by the private
sector due to lack of profitability. On the contrary in the social economy the job can be done without profit, for the
purpose of public benefit by the non-profit enterprises and cooperatives and
thus the economic activity can be expanded. Another reason is transition,
which takes place with technological modernization, the transition from the
2nd and 3rd industrial revolutions to the 4th industrial revolution, which
brings with it the increase of productivity as a consequence, and the labor
transformation which involves the shrinking of wage labor in industry and
services. Such major work transformations happened
historically with the great agricultural revolution about 6000 years ago,
such transformations with the industrial revolution in the last three
centuries and similar is today the work transformation passing industrial
specialization to the digital age and artificial intelligence. It is this labor transformation that
shrinks wage labor and simultaneously creates the necessary conditions for
the development of the social economy as there is pressure for
self-employment and cooperation which is ultimately a prerequisite for the
social economy. The power of necessity is invincible and
this must be borne in mind when promoting t 30% of youth unemployment in the
Mediterranean countries proves the inability of the public and private
sectors of the economy to cover this deficit. Obviously, state interventionism
has reached its limits in relation to tackling social exclusion and
unemployment and needs the contribution of the social economy. Almost all
policies and strategies to deal with unemployment are based on the model of
strengthening wage labor mainly through the process of continuing
professional training. However, tackling unemployment only with wage labor,
as we mentioned, has its limits and cannot be a universal solution. Let's just think that in the
pre-industrial period, employees were a limited percentage of the total labor
supply and demand. While in the industrial period this percentage took off
and in some countries it reached 90% of the employed, however nothing
guarantees us that this will continue. In the post-industrial era that we are
already living through, the high percentage of wage labor is decreasing
compared to the total volume of employment for a number of reasons that we
will examine next. In fact we have an increase to self-employment that in
some cases equals the pre-industrial period. The current production
conditions no longer favor the state and private employment policies. In
particular, this happens as there is an important part of the real economy
that emerges beyond the state and the private sector and refers to the
cooperative business model. In the transition from the 3rd to the
4th industrial revolution, work faces among others the challenge of deep
restructuring which needs to be institutionalized and appropriate policies
should be adapted. Until about the end of the 20th century we knew that new
investment and growth automatically created new jobs. But now a review is
needed, that in large industrial enterprises and services, technological
modernization is largely eliminating labor. Government intervention beyond
active demand has also reached its limits. The effects of hyper-automation,
digital technology and robotics are reducing jobs without expanding
employment. Under this suffocating climate, labor-intensive small and
medium-sized enterprises are squeezed and a vacuum of business activity is
created, as they do not have sufficient capital to withstand the great
competition. For example, about 1/3 of small and medium enterprises
disappeared in the European south after 2008. The result is stagnant unemployment
while many workers are forced to become self-employed, and work from home.
And this, of course, contradicts the established notion that every
technological advance increases the supply and demand of labor without limit. The fact that with the industrial
revolution the rate of wage labor reached its highest limit does not mean
that with further automation, robotics and computer science we will have the
same trend. Exactly the opposite is happening with the new technological
revolution and the digital state and banks are expected to completely
overturn one-dimensional wage labor. The limitation is a given, whatever the
individual statistics say about wage labor. It is also known that much of the
conventional industry has moved to the third world, in China, India, Vietnam
in Polynesia, creating high rates of unemployment in the west. In the
statistics on the development of wage labor in the West which is 800 million,
we should include the other five to 6 billion of the world's population and
the supply of labor in the globalized economic system. What we can also observe is that
the law of "supply and demand" concerning work is not
self-regulating, at least as much as classical theories promise. State
interventions are not always done in a rational way for the needs of society.
They may of course respond to the conditions of economic growth and the
production of wealth, but they ignore the part that lives in poverty.
Surprisingly there is no science to fighting poverty. The classic theory of value concerning
labor does not work as it is believed and needs revision. According to the
thinking of three classic economists: Adam Smith, David Ricardo and Karl
Marx, the Theory of Value focuses on labor. Smith proposes labor as a measure
of value, in the sense that it is a means to express the purchasing power of
the commodity, just as money is to express the purchasing power of the
commodity in its price. In this sense, labor is simply a
measure of value, a "true standard" of measurement. Ricardo argued that all production
ultimately comes from the employment of labor, capital, and land. That is, he
argued that the value of goods is affected by the amount of capital in the
form of tools used in their production. Marx argued that labor was the only
substance that creates value and that the total working day is divided into
two parts, one of which reproduces the subsistence of labor, the other of
which provides the surplus value of capital. Keynes, the great economist of the
twentieth century, observed that new technologies were promoting productivity
and reducing the cost of goods and services at unprecedented rates. They also
drastically reduced the man-hours required to produce goods and services.
Thus he introduced the term 'technological unemployment'. Keynes was quick to
add that technological unemployment, while inconvenient in the short term, is
a great blessing in the long run as it means that humanity will move into
plenty and work fewer hours. If this has not happened yet despite
enormous technological development, it is because the monopolies and
multinational corporations that control large capital and investment
resources direct them exclusively to highly profitable sectors for which
there is no free competition and the concept is a myth of competitiveness. As
for example is happening now with the energy crisis. We live in a series of antinomies of the
system. On the one hand, hard competition in the search for profit reduces
the rate of profit, and on the other hand technological innovation and
automation as well as intellectual property ensure high profitability for the
Capital that buys, invests in innovations and owns property rights. Thus
creating new privileged areas in profitability with fewer workers. On the
other hand, we cannot ignore how labor-intensive sectors are being destroyed
as they cannot operate within the profit-making framework without state
subsidies. In view of these developments, the
social economy is a necessary condition for one more reason. As the range of
small and medium-sized enterprises decreases and the workforce employed
decreases, the state will have a reduced tax base and limited revenues. So
not only can it not expand recruitment, it can't even keep it at the same
level, since it necessarily manages fewer resources and has to cover more
needs in yhe area of social policy and social benefits. Wage work was a condition for business
profits and profits were a condition for the creation of new jobs by
employers. Since the new technological revolution profits no longer come from
this relationship, but for a large part of the capital comes mainly from automated
industries, financial markets and banks, with few employees and limited
bureaucracy, then employers operating in traditional but necessary small and
medium enterprises are in a disadvantageous position and disappear. This
happens as the motivation to maintain their businesses disappears, leading as
a final result to the loss of a significant part of jobs. The destruction of the middle class
reduces the scope of entrepreneurship in the small and middle classes where
additional jobs are lost and in the end all this contributes to the fall of
the ideal of consumerism. The new conditions are changing and the consumption
patterns as the society inevitably gradually gets used to a more frugal life
that is focused on the basic needs of energy, food, housing and health care. This trend became evident in the
Mediterranean countries and for example in Greece we had after the crisis and
the closure of more than 100,000 businesses from which a corresponding
1,000,000 jobs were lost. This deficit is not going to be compensated for the
simple reason that there cannot be viable private enterprises without profit
in the future. Profits now exist only in those big businesses that exploit
mass markets, public infrastructure and construction, tolls, fuel, energy,
ports, transport and financial transactions. After all, many small and
medium-sized businesses are trapped in debt and continue only to avoid losing
the properties they acquired before the crisis. Others just to secure a
salary, like what their employees get. It is therefore not essentially about
profit-making businesses but about new potentially non-profit-making
businesses, which, if they want to survive in the new suffocating environment
of competition, must be supported by the social environment and social networks.
We should also take into account that the rise of working at home and
adapting to these new conditions is coming. The question here is what are the
alternatives to the system, beyond wage labor in the state and the private
sector. What will happen to the surplus workforce? If it is true that the work that is
being lost is rediscovered in new organizational forms and in many new areas
of social services then it must be sought beyond the private and public
sector. In the social economy and social entrepreneurship. The private sector
is no longer needed to operate the full volume of wage labor supply. This happens because in conditions where
a part of small and medium enterprises is destroyed, they are forced (and
this is possible) to become "entrepreneurs, collectives, united
consumers, members of an entire community based on the cooperative model of
entrepreneurship. There is the potential to create cultural institutions and
humanitarian charities. These can activate inactive
resources, buildings, abandoned facilities, land, common areas, forests, etc.
in collaboration with Local Government Bodies. These can organize inactive
human resources by offering social services in the field of nutrition and
health. They can employ unskilled people to help around the house. At
this level of job search, a new kind of homemaking and crafting can develop. This issue becomes more understandable
when it comes to the earth's energy sources. On the one hand, fossil fuels
governed by the law of scarcity of resources, cause the problem of unequal
distribution of energy poverty. And on the other hand, we have the
possibility of spreading alternative energy sources that can be developed in
the largest part of the earth. And here the social economy can make a
decisive contribution with the energy communities which are a new institution
in Europe. The SUN as an energy source beyond the cost of the initial state
of energy collection is characterized by the abundance and can free energy,
thanks to the new technologies of extracting energy directly from the Sun but
also the transformation of this energy into hydrogen. This perspective, which has emerged only
in recent years, brings enormous rearrangements of capital and labor. It may
not significantly increase employment but it frees households and businesses
from unaffordable energy costs contributing to their sustainability and to
the sustainability of jobs. The financial oligarchy is certainly not
interested in the social economy. In our time, its planning is facilitated as
work is not the absolute measure of concentration of wealth while its deficit
is the source of poverty. In addition, there are other factors that replace
paid work, such as unpaid digital work of users and consumers, and beyond the
value of land, intellectual property. In conclusion, the old 'classical' views
of work are one-dimensional. They see only one side of the hill, whereas
today work is a multidimensional affair. There is of course paid salaried
work on a large scale, there is self-service, self-employment and voluntary
work, which contributes to the total product of society. The internet, for
example, is full of digital content and free software, the product of unpaid
work. There are therefore sectors of the
economy that tend to reduce costs in favor of the consumer such as the IT and
digital economy sectors, as well as mild forms of energy sourced from the
sun. There are also natural monopolies in public infrastructure granted to
private individuals by the state itself which arbitrarily increase costs see
fossil fuels. There are also sectors such as the food and health sector where
human labor is not replaced by robots and have increasing needs in employing
human resources. This is the case of sectors in which labor intensity will
persist as it cannot be replaced by new technologies. All these data must be
considered and taken into account in a multifaceted manner. Labor policy planners should take into
account all these parameters of self-employment and unpaid work and not only
the parameter of wage labor, which they try to maintain with continuous
training programs, targeting sectors where no new jobs can be created. In order to deal with the problem of
unemployment, social exclusion and poverty, a new theory is needed, a new
"software" for the value of work and unpaid digital work on the
internet in view of the radical changes of labor. The transformation now taking place at
the level of economy and work is not like that transformation of manual labor
in the past into mechanical work, which again required laboring hands. Now it
is intellectual work that is transformed into artificial intelligence that
not only replaces manual labor and intellectual work reducing at the same
time the human factor within businesses. To put forward Adam Smith's theory today
to explain modern phenomena is like asking Aristotle to talk about another
system besides slavery which he knew. Today's big profits are big In other words, we have self-management
and customer service and an intangible profit mechanism exploited by large monopolistic
businesses. In other words, there is what we could
schematically divide and see as relativity in the values of work, within an
economic system that has no moral commitments to the type of activities it
does or does not do. The exploitative system can comfortably
manufacture new games of chance and toxic bonds, at the same time that there
are huge social needs in the field of social welfare. Google and Facebook and other
platforms on the internet do not earn their truly enormous amounts of profit
from the labor of their employees, but mostly from the unpaid labor of
accumulating data of the very members and consumers they manage. In this
sense, large digital technology companies do not only need employees, but
mainly consumers and customers who buy the services they own and manage, the
available software and robots. There are other commoditized symbolic
and intellectual values and conditions for wealth accumulation that are not
horizontally defined by wage labor. All sorts of sports and art stars who
enjoy huge salaries and financial rewards are not subjected to the uniform
system of wage labor and in no way can they be justified by the logic of
converting raw matter into useful material products. On the other hand, there is the
concentrated cultural heritage, family investment in education, volunteerism
and unpaid intellectual work on the internet, exploited sometimes by the
state and sometimes by the private sector to gather resources and manage
wealth. Increased taxation also finances activities
with symbolic value in culture. Finally, churches or simply sports
teams and fans that indirectly boost economic activity with masses of
believers and volunteers and create huge profits. In these fields the law of "supply
and demand" does not yield to material needs, but to the collective
fantasy that is related to the entertainment needs that have been formed in
society and become a "product" with the multiplicity that takes
place on television and on the internet. For these reasons are of great importance
the culture and the propaganda that is carried out each time, towards which
investments will be made and which new jobs are actually created, are of such
great importance. When the "product" is the
spectacle and through it the advertisements and not the "bread",
the health and welfare of the people, the jobs will constantly be limited. On
the contrary, the jobs can increase as the social economy develops, with
public purposes to the real needs of the people. The importance of the transformation of work
can be better understood now with the global energy crisis where the stake is
the gradual production of energy by energy communities. In the study we need to determine what
is the object of social entrepreneurship and also the subject that mobilizes
the production processes. The object is: Ø The energy sector with the aim of
producing energy by energy cooperatives. Ø The nutritional sector with the aim of
nutritional self-sufficiency with contractual social Agriculture. Ø The health sector with the aim of
creating new cooperative structures in order to make healthcare
accessible by all . Ø The social housing sector Ø The environment sector with the aim of
developing participatory green - social entrepreneurship. Ø The Local Government sector with the
aim of developing social entrepreneurship in local government Ø The digital social entrepreneurship Ø The culture sector with the aim of
social cultural entrepreneurship. Ø The cooperative banks will also become
insurance funds. The subject of social entrepreneurship
in labor supply and demand is determined by collective civil society
organizations and cooperatives. Cooperation and social capital is the
decisive factor in mobilizing labor forces, against the material and human
resources that remain inactive, in the context of the supply and demand of
labor from the private sector. This awareness approach can catalyze job
creation beyond state and private sector entrepreneurship. The differentiation of the social
economy in relation to the market economy is not so much in the object as in
the subject of entrepreneurship which is collective and mobilizes resources. Therefore, when we consider the
creation of jobs through the social economy we should highlight this whole spectrum
of conditions that drive the institutional process of initiative by local
communities. In the field of social enterprises, many
people usually talk about the "ecosystem" of the social economy
implying the need for a relevant institutional environment. But looking at
the theory of supply and demand in the creation of new jobs, we did not find
any theory concerning supply and demand in the social economy. For the social economy there is no
comprehensive institutional approach to deal with as a whole. The existing
theories of supply and demand refer to neoclassical economic theory, and the
Keynesian theory of active demand. This means that there is a theoretical gap
for the modern reality to really create an "ecosystem" of the third
sector of the economy. A theoretical and practical guide is therefore
necessary for the third pillar of the economy which, among other things,
creates new jobs. Finally: Bearing in mind the
"technological" unemployment in a period of transition towards the
4th industrial revolution which shrinks small and medium enterprises and
reduces employment in the private sector. Bearing in mind that state
interventionism cannot fully cover the needs with allowances and subsidies
for the supply of work. Having on the other hand examples
of writing at a pan-European level that social entrepreneurship progressively
and steadily develops employment by dealing with economic exclusion, we
propose: a business program of social
entrepreneurship and employment. Until now, the relevant response from
the Ministry of Labor and the Regions has been pretentious. It recognized the directives of
the European Social Fund to strengthen the social economy in Greece, but
directed the relevant resources exclusively to other sectors of the public
and private sector. Thus, in the last 10 years, social
enterprises have been virtually excluded from community resources and have
been poorly financed. This vicious circle will only be broken
if civil society organizations are mobilized, which are also the subject of
the social economy and social entrepreneurship. Then it is certain that similar policies
will be adopted by Governments and Local Governments. |
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου