Consumption cooperation of Siberia in the early 20th century in the context of the cooperative identity problem

How adequate is the use of categories "enterprise" and "public organization" for a consumer cooperative? The answer to this question will determine the place of consumer cooperation as special trade and public organizations in the process of forming civil society in Russia in the beginning of the 20th century. The use of methodological approaches of the theorists of the cooperative movement A. V. Merkulov and I. V. Emelyanov allows seeing that the cooperative is neither an enterprise nor a joint stock company. With all the variety of devices and activities the most important, unique, exhaustive and conclusive sign of a cooperative organization is its overall structure. The author has considered the dual trade-economic and socio-integrative function of the cooperative consumer organizations, revealed the features of cooperative structures in comparison with other public organizations and non-cooperative economic entities (private enterprises, joint stock societies). By example of the Siberian cooperative movement the author shows that cooperatives were aware of the danger of pseudo-cooperative rebirth and understood the importance of compliance with cooperative principles as the basis of cooperative identity. In the Siberian city and working consumer societies in 1912 - February 1917 dividends ranged from 0.9 % to 6-8 %, rarely rising to 10 % allowed by the normal Statute. In monetary terms, the amount of bonus for the purchase of goods exceeded the dividends. Thus, profit was distributed, mainly, in proportion to the amount of purchases. During the First World War the trend of reduction of material stimulation of shareholders in the name of saving the financial viability and social development of cooperative organizations was growing. This was manifested in the refusal of dividends and directing them in the purchase and cultural funds. Profit from non-members was not issued to the members, and was also directed to cultural objectives. Unlike public organizations which were communities of like-minded people and united civilly responsible members pursuing the ideal goals and universal interests, cooperatives united the citizens to protect their individual economic interests. However, acting on the basis of the Charter and operating by such concepts as representation, elections, accountability, collegiality, cooperative helped overcome individual selfishness of the members and taught shareholders to link their private and collective interests with the public interests and the universal public good. In Russia the social dimension of cooperation received a large development creating numerous opportunities for communication, education, cultural activities, guardianship and charity. This clearly showed that economic success contributed to social integration. Non-trading activities of cooperation played a significant role in encouraging initiative.

Keywords

Authors

References