I reread the first three pages of Grammer of Institutions. There is a section that says that people work together to create a equilibrium and not a third party enforcer. However, after reading the introduction of the Mondragon Cooperacion Cooperativa and the history, it is discovered that Fr. Jose Maria was the reason why the cooperative was able to first start. The history says, "Father Jose Maria worked tirelessly with the young people of the parish, organising a multitude of sporting, cultural and educational activities" (Madragon, 2007). Out of these social capital creating activities, leaders emmerged and these leaders helped refine the ideas (or hypothesis) of what projects should be created in the area. It was done through "listening, debating, and doing" (Madragon 2008).
As I review both IIRD's and Grameen Bank's work, I find that both organizations helped facilitate the creation of social capital (or networks) between people of the community. As the social capital was strengthened, the institutional norms and values that are now present in these communities were formed. This is what Madragon Cooperative was able to achieve and this is what Ostrom also speaks about with regard to institutions. Finally, this process returns to one of our initial readings, The Moral Sense, which also discusses the acceptance of certain morals by a group of people through the strengthening of relationships.
So, I do agree that groups of individuals are who agree upon certain norms and values. However, a 'third party facilitator' must be present, not an enforcer. Only the members of the community could be the 'enforcers.'
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
You’re on the right track!
Okay, let’s make a few ‘connections’, starting w/last point of a ‘third party facilitator.’ That’s the LBJ School grad, having been imprinted with the School’s unique signature – the grad has become an ‘intellectual activist’ committed to making the right things happen (building relationships and structures) in the right way (democratic/participatory process) and for the right reasons (create more robust democratic society – expand opportunity and access for all to develop full potential). That is, the LBJ grad needs at hand a template (some useful theory) for moral development: how do individuals and institutions get moral?
[Hmmm, this sounds like theory! Example: Lawrence Kohlberg’s theory of moral development (derived from Piaget and the cognitive development literature. Why? The theoretical tradition assumes that humans are rational beings – they reason and choose in both their own immediate and long-term interests. Institutions? Yep, you can use Ostrom.]
That LBJ leader has to have clear vision/image of what needs to be done (i.e., what needs to be developed) first to achieve more distant, longer-term benefit (outcomes that reflect an increase in capacity – stable, durable structures and more dense and intense interactions). The leader knows and trusts that people, working together, have the ‘capacity’ to consider and choose their own destiny. The immediate challenge is to get them to come together and to work together. The first order of business after coming together is to secure a ‘sense of moral obligation’ that ties individuals to the group and to each other. The obligation comes from a ‘sense’ of shared group identity (membership), a recognized standard of reciprocity (rules/norms regulating social exchange), and an internal need to comply.
What does this have to do w/community and development?
People are the building blocks of community. People are sociable. People build/construct their reality. They act on that reality to decide if and how they interact w/others. They must set, learn, and honor the rules of exchange, and obey them, or risk internal and/or external sanction. In short, community must be grounded by a ‘moral sense’ of right and wrong.
We build our community on a moral foundation: justice, fairness, inclusion, and participation (democratic morality). In turn, the citizens (of community) learn to create ‘structure’ and ‘processes’ that embody the democratic morality.
The desired outcome is more ‘democracy’, not a particular or specific presumed ‘solution.’ It’s highly unlikely that Father Jose Maria ever conceived of the Mondragon Corporacion Cooperativa in present form. I’m sure he believed the ‘experience’ of coming together and learning to work together would produce the ‘right’ solutions for any given time.
Sounds like you might want to look into literature on leadership
Post a Comment