Italy's Solidarity Purchase Groups as " Citizenship Labs "

Italy’s Solidarity Purchase Groups as “Citizenship Labs” Francesca Forno, Cristina Grasseni, and Silvana Signori Introduction Contemporary Western societies have been identified as particular variants of advanced capitalism due to the shift from the primacy of production to consumption, and the fact that the “consumer” has become a central societal figure vis-à-vis the declining relevance of the “citizen” (Clarke et al. 2007). This is a process that, as is often pointed out, has favored the individualization and fragmentation of contemporary society (Bauman 2007). In fact, while the notion of the “citizen” may be strongly linked to the notion of the “common good,” the term “consumer” evokes primarily personal and instrumental preferences that are typically associated with the “private good.” Given the centrality of consumption in late capitalist societies, it should come as no surprise that many contemporary social movements have started to appeal to individuals in their role as consumers and identified “political consumerism” as an important form of action through which to bring about social change. Examples include groups devoted to protecting the environment, to ameliorating poverty, to overcoming corporate power, to resisting war, and to challenging organized crime (Forno and Graziano 2014). Political consumerism refers to the purchasing of goods and services based not only on price and product quality, but also on the evaluation of producers’ behavior and production methods with respect to environmental sustainability, labor justice, and human rights. This mode of citizen participation stresses the importance of individual responsibility for the common good through acknowledgement that the act of consumption is a fundamental part of the production process (Micheletti 2009). 2 Although not new, since the mid-1990s the political use of consumption has experienced significant growth, even in contexts where it has long been a niche phenomenon, such as in southern Europe (Ferrer-Fons 2006; Koos 2012). Throughout the Western world, there has been considerable increase in market demand for food, manufactured goods, and services from companies that ensure codes of conduct respectful of workers’ rights and the environment. This development indicates that political consumerism today enjoys favorable cultural, political, and economic opportunities. Perhaps not surprisingly, the growth of political consumerism has generated a great deal of scholarly interest. Many studies on the topic, however, have analyzed this phenomenon mainly from the perspective of individual consumers (Forno and Ceccarini 2006; Micheletti 2003, Stolle et al. 2005) while less attention has been paid to social movement organizations that promote a political vision of consumption and try to mobilize consumers in favor of their cause (Sassatelli 2006; Balsinger 2010; Alexander and Ussher 2012; Graziano and Forno 2012; Grasseni 2013). This chapter specifically reflects on the recent rise of political consumerism in Italy. Rather than investigate this activity from a microeconomic point of view, considering consumers as individual actors in a value-neutral market, we analyze the expansion of political consumerism by connecting it to new social movement organizations, and by identifying it as a specific form of collective action. In Italy, the Gruppi di Acquisto Solidale (GAS or Solidarity Purchase Groups) have grown significantly over the last decade (Rebughini 2008; Carrera 2009; Graziano and Forno 2012; Grasseni 2013). Due to their numbers, GAS members constitute a viable sample for investigating the decision-making processes and organizational practices through which provisioning is being critically reinvented. 3 As our analysis shows, in such experiences alternative provisioning moves beyond the narrow understanding of political consumerism as it brings different collectives together and helps them to develop strategies of territorial and economic intervention, in the name of the common good, of sustainability, and as a critique of commonly-held conceptions of “growth” as synonymous with “development.” Unlike traditional consumer organizations that seek to protect customers from corporate abuse (such as unsafe products, predatory lending, or false advertising) GAS groups create a space for civic learning, building social capital, and considering opportunities for political mobilization, often counteracting or aiming to substitute inefficient governance in the realms of environmental stewardship and labor protection. The chapter is structured as follows. We first provide a general description of GAS groups in Italy before proceeding to describe the research framework and data-collection process The fourth section discusses the most relevant findings, focusing particularly on the socioeconomic characteristics of GAS participants and the motivation behind their involvement, the structure and organization of GAS groups, and the ability of the groups to function as new sociopedagogic laboratories where attitudes are translated into concrete behavior. What is a GAS? Although the first GAS in Italy was established during the mid-1990s, this particular type of buyers’ group became increasingly common during the following decade when it spread to all of the Italian regions. This system, though, maintains its highest concentrations in the northern and central regions of the country. According to data provided by the website of the national GAS network, the number of self-registered GAS has risen from 153 in 2004, to 394 in 2008, to 4 518 in 2009, and to 977 in 2014.1 However, these figures, as is argued below, are likely significant underestimates of the real number of existing groups. Figure 1 - Growth trend of Solidarity Purchase Groups in Italy, 1994-2013 1000 977 920 900 839 800 742 700 600 599 500 501 400 358 304 300 233 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 160 2006 112 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 8 1999 3 1997 1995 1994 2 1996 0 81 44 54 15 17 32 1998 100 2005 200 Source: GAS registered on www.retegas.org The GAS are mutual systems of provisioning, usually set up by groups of people who cooperate to buy food and other commonly used goods directly from producers at prices that are equitable to both parties. The organizations may collectively buy bread, pasta, flour, milk, dairy products, oil, fish, meat, detergents, wine, preserves, juices and jams, fruit and vegetables and other items of everyday use (such as detergents and basic toiletries). They also increasingly purchase textiles and “alternative” services such as renewable energy and sustainable tourism. For GAS groups, the term “solidarity” represents a sort of a guiding principle in the choice of products and producers. This means that unlike other collective purchasing groups, GAS do not simply strive to get the cheapest price, but instead choose their products and producers with the 5 explicit goal of building a viable alternative to the “consumer society” which they tend to regard as a societal model based on the exploitation of human and natural resources. These criteria generally lead to a preference for local products as a way to minimize the environmental impact of transportation but this approach also supports regional economies and increases the transparency of the food chain. Other criteria favor organic agriculture for environmental reasons, fair-trade goods out of an effort to assist disadvantaged producers by promoting their human rights, and reusable or eco-compatible goods to promote a sustainable lifestyle. Rather than as an end to itself, collective purchase for GAS groups represents a way to foster awareness of environmental and social problems. Furthermore, this mode of provisioning constitutes a first step toward building a more just society. In this sense, GAS may be seen as a type of social movement as defined by della Porta and Diani (2006) as “distinct social processes, consisting of the mechanisms through which actors engage in collective action [through which they]are involved in conflictual relations with clearly identified opponents; [and through which they]are linked by dense informal networks; [and] share a distinct collective identity.” As we shall see, compared to other “alternative food networks” that have emerged in affluent countries over the last decade—such as the French AMAP (Associations pour le Maintien d’une Agriculture Paysanne) or the American CSA (Community-Supported Agriculture)—being part of a GAS requires a higher level of commitment and involvement. Members are in fact usually asked to participate actively in the organization of their group by taking part in the creation of norms, the management of financial and logistical activities, and the planning of convivial and informational activities. This is because GASs, unlike CSAs, are largely consumer- rather than producer-driven. Moreover, at the local level, once these groups achieve a critical mass, they sometimes assemble themselves into Distretti di economia solidale 6 (Districts of Solidarity Economy) that are roughly similarly to the Anglo-Saxon transition town movement and have explicit governance objectives (Grasseni 2013; Grasseni et al. 2013). Our contention is that experiences in GASs move beyond political consumerism as a form of merely individual responsibility (Micheletti 2009) to develop collective, citizenshipdriven alternative styles of provisioning. These groups facilitate both the circulation of resources (information, tasks, money, and goods) and common interpretations of reality, thus simultaneously providing a framework for collective action and enabling the actual deployment of alternative lifestyles. For example, each member of the group usually buys one item (for example pasta) in bulk on behalf of everyone else and then distributes it to other members of the GAS. This activity entails collecting orders from other group members, checking availability with the provider, travelling to pick up the order, paying in advance for everyone else, and arranging a time and place for other members to come by, pay up, and collect their share. However seemingly inefficient, this time-consuming method forces every member to be proactive, to participate in the group with equal responsibilities, and to engage in intensive processes of socialization (the making of telephone calls and sending of emails, the partaking in visits that inevitably lead to follow-up invitations to cultural and political events of common interest, the circulation of relevant readings and news on the group mailing list, and the opening up of space for discussion and exchange of mutual information on how to provision “alternatively”). Within a GAS, political consumerism becomes much more than a way to compensate for the inability of institutions to pursue pro-environmental policies and human-rights protection through a so-called “politics of the self” or “life politics” (Giddens 1990). The GAS are collective experiences, designed to co-produce the common good by (re)building reciprocity and 7 trust among diverse subjects operating in the same territory, directly intervening in local food provisioning chains, and reintroducing social and environmental sustainability issues in regional economies, sometimes with the explicit aim of participating in the governance of the territory. Research Design and Data Collection Between 2011 and 2013, the CORES Lab project Inside Relational Capital gathered detailed data about GAS groups in the northern Italian region of Lombardy through a two-tiered questionnaire, combined with qualitative insights from participant observation. 2 The aim of the research was to better understand the mechanisms and processes behind the diffusion of GAS groups in Italy, exploring individual decisions to join, as well as their internal organization and action strategies. Lombardy, with approximately ten million inhabitants, is the most densely populated Italian region and the part of the country estimated to have the highest concentration of GAS groups.3 The informality that characterizes these groups, as well as their rapid spread over the last decade, required us to first generate an accurate map of these organizations as a prerequisite to the implementation of our survey. A pilot project in and around the town of Bergamo mapped approximately twice the number of previously known GAS groups.4 The mapping of Lombardy-based GAS groups was enabled by close collaboration between the research team and individual GAS activists.5 An internal “facilitator” was identified for each of the twelve provinces of Lombardy (Bergamo, Brescia, Como, Cremona, Lecco, Lodi, Mantua, Milan, Monza, Pavia, Sondrio and Varese). Under the supervision of the research team, a member of the GAS movement compiled a list of groups in his/her own province on the basis of personal knowledge and access to peers. The local facilitators not only helped to build an 8 accurate register of the active groups, but also made first contact with each GAS group in his/her province to explain the objectives of the research and to stimulate participation in the online survey. Data collection took place via two online questionnaires. We designed an initial survey for completion by the representatives of each individual GAS that was aimed at gathering information about the operational characteristics of the group such as its internal organization, logistics, and means of communication. A supplementary questionnaire was intended for individual members of each group. The main objective of this part of the survey was to collect information about the features and motivations of the gasistas, such as their socio-economic profile, educational and professional background, reasons for joining, and perceived achievements.6 In both cases, we employed a closed-ended structure in the design of the questionnaires with each consisting of approximately fifty questions. The research team sent a letter to each facilitator asking him/her to disseminate the announcement of the survey to each GAS group in their respective geographic area. The surveys were administered online and completed directly by the GAS coordinators (one per group) and by gasistas (one per family in a group). GAS activists are targeted for a large number of inquiries due to the attention that the organizations receive from political associations, media, and market-research companies. We thus arranged for prominent figures from the national GAS network (Tavolo RES) to endorse the research announcement so that the initiative would be perceived as a collaborative venture between GASs and university researchers, not as a top-down investigation on GAS activism. Internal access and support from the national network ensured a high degree of participation and valid results. 9 Results It is reasonable to presume that the profile of GAS members varies regionally due to historical, socioeconomic, and political divisions in Italian society. 7 However, the high presence of GAS groups in Lombardy makes this area a particularly interesting case. The region has always been characterized by a broad range of active civic associations, a fact that has often been linked to the economic development of this region which is the richest and most populous in Italy (Putnam 1993). When we launched our research, some information about the internal organization of the GAS groups (as well as about the profile of their members) was already available. A handful of qualitative studies had already been published (Carrera 2009; Rebughini 2008) and all the CORES researchers had direct experience with alternative provisioning as members of different GAS groups. What was missing, however, was a quantitative study capable of producing a systematic empirical investigation of this social phenomenon. The survey gathered previously unavailable data to measure GAS characteristics, together with their presence and impact on local and regional economies. As noted above, the first significant finding of the research was that the number of GAS groups turned out to be much higher than the number of self-registered groups. Table 1 compares the number of formally reported groups with those detected though the CORES LAB project. We identified a total of 429 GAS groups in Lombardy through our outreach and mapping. Among these groups, 204 group coordinators and 1,658 gasistas completed the online questionnaire.8 Collaboration with local GAS leaders and the nationwide Tavolo RES ensured an exceptionally 10 high turnout, reaching 48% among coordinators and 23% among individual gasistas throughout Lombardy. 9 MI 95 153 51 BG 24 62 44 BS 23 50 22 CO 14 46 14 VA 18 40 17 MB 23 33 23 LC 8 17 10 PV 7 11 9 CR 8 7 5 MN 4 4 3 LO 1 3 3 SO 2 3 3 TOT 227 429 204 Source: CORES Lab Project ‘Inside relational capital’. 33.33 70.97 44 30.43 42.5 69.7 58.82 81.82 71.43 75 100 100 47.55 1851 1032 704 264 607 763 540 392 374 115 355 225 7122 No. of individual GAS members completing the survey % of individual GAS members completing the survey No. of families in the mapped groups % of coordinators completing the survey No. GAS completing the survey No. GAS detected through CORES LAB mapping GAS selfregistered Province Table 1 - GAS surveyed in the provinces of Lombardy 368 299 198 42 152 224 85 70 74 39 90 17 1658 19.88 28.97 28.13 15.91 25.04 29.36 15.74 17.86 19.79 33.91 25.35 7.56 23.28 The survey provided an initial estimate of how much money families spend through a GAS. Total annual household expenditures are approximately €742 (US$941) per household. Considering that each group enrolls an average of 25 families of four people, each GAS would cater for the needs of around 100 consumers. Projecting these data onto the number of GAS groups in Lombardy (the 429 identified), the economic weight of these groups would account for about €8 million (US$10.2 million). But what are the characteristics of the people who participate in these groups? What are the reasons for joining a GAS? How are these groups organized and how do they spread? Moreover, and perhaps most importantly, does participation in these groups really bring about 11 changes in lifestyles and consumption patterns, or do GAS groups rather just tend to aggregate individuals who already have certain values and habits? 4.1. Who participates in GASs and why The socioeconomic profile of individuals who participate in GAS groups appears to be rather similar to those identified by other empirical research on political consumers (Micheletti 2003; Stolle et al 2005; Forno and Ceccarini 2006). The GAS participants tend to be more often female (62%), confirming the tendency that women are more involved than men in political consumerism (either individual or organized) and neither very young nor very old. 10 Among those who responded to the questionnaire, 49.6 % were aged between 30 and 44and 42.9% aged between 45 and 60. Our findings also revealed that GASs are made up mostly of families with children (71.8%), 25.6% of which have at least one child under five years old. Among gasistas, the percentage of university graduates is also considerably higher than the national average (49.5% of those who completed the questionnaire had a university degree, compared to the national average of 13.5% recorded by the 2011 National Institute of Statistics [ISTAT] census). Gasistas more frequently held white-collar jobs or were teachers (60.1%). By contrast, the percentage of blue-collar workers is limited (4.4%), as is the share of the unemployed (2.7%) and pensioners (4.1%). Although characterized by rather high “cultural capital,” families that participate in GAS groups (families made up of an average of four members) are not comprised of particularly high income earners: 22.3% declared a net monthly income of less than €2,000 (US$2,537), 56% an income between €2,000 (US$2,537) and €3,500 (US$4,440). Only 20% said they had an income of over €3,500 (US$4,440) (1.7% did not answer this question).This finding seems to suggest that, in contrast with individualized forms of 12 political consumerism (cf. Forno and Ceccarini 2006), GAS groups may not attract members of the “dominant class,” or the bourgeoisie (Bourdieu 1984), but rather that fraction of the middle class that possesses high amounts of cultural capital but relatively little financial capital. Gasistas are also usually engaged citizens and the majority of our respondents declared an interest in politics: 69.8% of them claimed to be very or fairly concerned about political issues. To keep up to date, gasistas use various channels of information such as Internet (91.1%) or radio or television news (84.3%). They also often discuss political issues with friends and colleagues (79.1%). This finding is indicative of how social and political issues are part of the daily lives of these individuals. The high interest in politics recorded among gasistas is however accompanied by relatively low confidence in certain institutions. Less than 25% trust political parties at all (only 8% of our sample replied that they trust political parties “very much” or “somewhat”), television (2.8%), the World Bank (3.4%), Parliament (7.7%), and industrial associations (23.4%). In the middle, with rates scoring between 25 and 75%, is trust in the Catholic Church (29.5%), trade unions (32.6%), the European Union (45.6%), municipal administrations (48.4%), and the police (64%). Definitely high (above 75%) is the trust that gasistas have in consumer groups (75.1%), the judicial system (77.2%), and social cooperatives (80.9%).All of these features indicate that people who participate in GASs may be classified as “critical citizens” (Norris 1999);in other words, individuals characterized by a specific socio-economic profile, usually with a higher level of education and income and a particular demonstrated willingness to bear the costs (both in terms of time and money) of experimenting with innovative forms of action and participation in the promotion of the “common good.” 13 Our data also revealed that most of the gasistas have had prior associational experience. Only 7% of respondents indicated that they had never participated in any association. This finding is particularly important as it underlines that GASs often work as secondary networks, explaining, as we will discuss below, how these groups initially diffuse. Gasistas tend to come from diverse civic and associational backgrounds, often having been members of a wide range of organizations, from environmental and pacifist groups to sports, cultural, and religious associations. Furthermore, among individuals participating in these entities, there is an equal distribution between people who claim to be religious and to attend church regularly and those who do not claim to follow any religion. Not only do gasistas come from various associational backgrounds, their motivations for joining a GAS are also quite diverse. Some may look for a GAS group out of self-interest, for example, to gain access to organic produce at an affordable price or to improve their own health or that of their family. Others want to contribute to social or collective causes—such as supporting small producers to oppose food standardization. As Figure 2 shows, the opportunity to consume healthier food and the willingness to support small local producers get very similar response rates (respectively 82% and 79.6%). Moreover, more than half of our respondents replied that the main motivation behind their decision to become a member of a local GAS was a desire to participate with a concrete action in common causes (63.5%), an opportunity to build new relationships (63.7%), or an increasing concern about environmental problems (56.2%). As the data point out, “saving money” received less preference than other motivations. However, this point was still mentioned by half of the respondents, confirming that the financial motivation is not the main factor behind the decision to join these groups, but it is not totally irrelevant either. 14 Figure 2 - Motivations for joining a GAS (% very much agree/agree) 90 82 80 80 70 64 64 56 60 48 50 40 30 20 10 00 Health Supporting local producers Builiding new Participation Environmental Save money social ties through a concern concrete action Source: CORES Lab Project ‘Inside relational capital’. As will emerge more clearly over the following subsections, rather than just a way to save money, GAS groups represent innovative participatory spaces within which individuals experience new forms of action, imagining and experimenting with practical alternatives to an economic system perceived as increasingly unjust and unsustainable. Overall, these networks offer common ground for various people to liaise through novel and collaborative projects, starting with the basic act of food provisioning. 4.2. Structure and organization of GAS groups Setting up a GAS is not effortless, and managing its activities, as we will see, can be very time consuming. Most of the GAS groups that we analyzed originated as spontaneous initiatives among groups of friends (39.4%), and in a further 21.2% of cases they stemmed from preexistent GAS groups. As will be argued in more detail below, members’ interdependence 15 constitutes a core relational resource which, among other things, GAS groups continually attempt to encourage and reproduce through a series of strategies. These include initiatives to stimulate participation and to attract new members, but also lengthy internal discussions to avoid the risks of “professionalization” (Grasseni 2014). As Figure 3 highlights, respondents heard about their GAS from close friends (28.3%) and acquaintances (24%). Also Internet news (11.2%) and conferences/meetings (7.7%) were mentioned by a significant number of gasistas as ways of getting to know about GASs. Of minor importance, by contrast, are television programs (5.3%), print magazines (4.7%), relatives (4.5%), colleagues (3.5%), newspaper articles (3.1%), posters (1.1%), and the Church (0.4%). Figure 3 - Main means of finding out about GAS Posters 1.1 Magazines 4.7 Newspaper 3.1 TV news 5.3 Relatives 4.5 Web news/Internet 11.2 The Church 0.4 Acquaintances 24 Conferences 7.7 Colleagues 3.5 Closed freinds 28.3 Other 5.1 n.a. 1.1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Source: CORES Lab Project ‘Inside relational capital’. Groups may also be very diverse with regard to their size. Among the 204 GAS groups that participated in the survey, 34.4% consisted of fewer than twenty families, 44.8% of between twenty and forty families, 10.4% of forty to sixty families, and another 10.4% of more than sixty 16 families. Despite this diversity, GASs appear to have quite similar internal organizations. In fact, unlike other initiatives aimed at promoting the commercialization and dissemination of ecofriendly or fair-trade products (such as farmers’ markets and organic box schemes), all members of GAS groups are, as a rule of thumb, required to manage orders as explained above. Group members may propose a product or producer to the rest of the group, or “inherit” contacts from previous members and groups, but in any case it is expected that they will contact the producers and deliver the produce to other members. Noncompliance with this requirement (whether formalized or not) may be sanctioned with expulsion from the GAS. The majority of the GAS groups that we analyzed opt for an egalitarian division of labor. For instance, 72% of the 204 groups split up responsibilities for the collection and distribution of orders among members so that there was one contact person for each product. In only 19.7% of cases was there a distinct group of people within the GAS that organized purchases, and only in 4.7% of cases were the orders managed by an external cooperative. Although not all GAS groups have formal rules (only a minority are registered associations), choices regarding purchases, producers, and more generally, the mission of each group is discussed collegially during general assemblies. As may be seen from Figure 4, in most of the groups (68.4%) this meeting is held on a monthly basis; in other cases every 2–3 months (13.7%), and in others every 3–6 months (7.8%). Only in a few cases are assemblies held on an annual basis, and only a very small number of groups (1.6%) do not organize general membership meetings at all. In general, then, gasistas discuss and scrutinize products and production methods collegially. Producers are often invited to participate and present not only their merchandize but their vision with respect to the social responsibility of the company, including its environmental stewardship and solidarity with workers. 17 Thus, critical consumption is exercised collectively and face to face, which has the effect of (re)socializing citizens into many aspects of logistics, distribution, and production. Gasistas call this “co-production.” Figure 4 - Frequency of GAS plenary meetings 80 68.4 70 60 50 40 30 20 13.5 7.8 10 0.5 0.5 n.a. Once a week 3.1 4.7 1.6 0 Twice a week Once a Every 2-3 Every 3-6 Once a month months montu year Never Source: CORES Lab Project ‘Inside relational capital’. Gasistas are directly involved in rethinking logistics. Families in particular usually provide space for receiving and distributing goods themselves. Once there is agreement on which producers to source from, orders of each product (greens, fruit, pasta, jam, olive oil, but also such products as meat, fish, flour, snacks, cheese, yoghurt, and eggs) are usually posted to a website or mailing list by one of the members, who then collects orders at announced deadlines. The GASs often produce specific company documentation so all the members (old and new) have a full overview of the reasons that led the group to select a particular supplier. Choosing products and manufacturers occupies most of the time in GAS discussions. However, if shopping remains, on one hand, the central activity of GASs, on the other hand, the 18 main perceived result of participating in these groups is to move beyond collective buying per se. Interesting in this regard is Figure 5, which shows the differences that gasistas themselves identified regarding the main objectives and results achieved by GAS groups. For half of our respondents, the main objective of the groups is to encourage more environmentally responsible lifestyles (50.1%). Among the major achievements of the groups, however, is the concrete support that gasistas give to local producers (29.6%) as well as the opportunities that members have to build new social ties (21.8%).The GAS life in fact often facilitates meeting new people as the groups offer a common ground to discuss topics of mutual interest. Figure 5 - Main objectives and results of GAS groups (%) Protect personal and family health 7.1 11.7 Encourage environmentally responsible lifestyles 50.1 28.6 20.1 Support local producers Provide opportunties to build social ties 5.6 Facilitate networking to influence public policies 5.4 3.8 29.6 21.8 6.1 7.3 Lower the cost of quality products 0.9 1.8 n.a. 0 Objectives 10 20 30 40 50 60 Results Source: CORES Lab Project ‘Inside relational capital’. In other words, GAS activities help to build or extend networks, across which knowledge travels. This knowledge-building process engenders trust, firstly among GAS groups, thus 19 facilitating, for instance, feedback about producers. Such cooperation, however, often extends to new activities beyond the shopping: barter fairs, reading groups, cooking workshops, cultural events such as book presentations or seminars, and responsible consumption fairs (not only of food but also of textiles) are all examples of initiatives organized by networks of GAS groups. Thus the roles of consumers and citizens cross-fertilize, and collaboration between consumers and producers finds new spaces, for example in setting up farmers markets and “citizenship markets” (Forno 2013; Grasseni 2013). The GAS activists maintain that they not only exercise ethical or critical consumption as individuals or as groups, but that they “co-produce” a common wealth. In short, political consumerism is not the objective, but rather the result of engaged practice. 4.3. GASs as socio-pedagogic laboratories In addition to the markets and swapping clubs that GASs often organize, they also convene events of public instruction about the workings of global finance and supply chains and their alternatives, offer school classes, convene conferences, and host festivals. In this cultural mobilization of civil society, collaboration with other associations is often facilitated by GAS members who simultaneously belong to one or more citizens’ organizations. By virtue of their double affiliation, they usually play a key role in bridging different networks and discourses, thus facilitating a shared language and contagious mobilization in the case of specific events. This was the case of Italy’s referendum against the privatization of water supplies in June 2011. As is apparent in Figure 6, initiatives organized by GAS groups cover a wide range of themes including producers’ presentations (57%), sustainable agriculture (49.7 %), commons management (39.4%), local issues (38.9%), nutrition education (36.8%), and alternative energy 20 (35.8%). Other matters were the upcoming referendum of 2011 (32.6%), fair trade (29.5%), homesteading (25.9%), ethical finance (25.4%) and, although to a lesser extent, the role of the mafia in the economy (17.6%), degrowth (16.6%),11 types of quality certifications (13%), and carpooling (3.1%). The referendum against the privatization of water supplies also marked a milestone in GAS political awareness. As our survey revealed, some 80% of gasistas declared they had participated in the mobilization preceding the referendum. Several referenda had failed in the past because the outcome did not reach the mandatory quorum of 50% plus one of those having the right to vote. The fact that about 55% of registered voters actually cast a vote―almost 26 million people―to express their dissent for decentralizing and privatizing the water supply was interpreted then as a result of the grassroots campaign brought forward by civic action groups. Figure 6 - Topics touched by the initiatives of GAS Other Car Pooling Labelling Schemas Degrowth Anti-Mafia Ethical Finance Homenade Produce Fair Trade Referendum Alternative Energy Nutritional Education Local issues Commons Sustainable Agriculture Presentation of Producers 4.1 3.1 13 16.6 17.6 25.4 25.9 29.5 32.6 35.8 36.8 38.9 39.4 49.7 57 0 10 20 Source: CORES Lab Project ‘Inside relational capital’. 30 40 50 60 21 GASs are, therefore, simultaneously involved in two diverse but interrelated practices. On the one hand, these organizations try to reduce the information deficit among citizens about the environmental and social issues of global supply chains, by way of seminars and other public events. On the other hand, through collective purchases, they experiment with new solutions, intervening directly in local food-provisioning chains, identifying critical issues pertaining to delegation, representation, participation, and labor division. They, in effect, function as sociopedagogic laboratories, facilitating learning processes and the sharing of knowledge, that in turn play an important role in translating attitudes into behavior. As Tables 2, 3 and 4 show, the gasistas’ shopping baskets, their consumption styles, and even styles of civic participation changed, sometimes dramatically, after joining a GAS. Table 2 - Changes in consumption habits (%) Increased Decreased Introduced No change n.a. Total Vegetable 50.4 0.4 0.7 47.4 1.2 100 Organic 79.4 0.2 7.7 11.6 1.1 100 Wholemeal 52.9 0.6 10 35.2 1.4 100 Legumes 38.5 0.5 3.7 56.3 1.1 100 Local 80.6 0.2 5.4 12.6 1.1 100 Seasonal 68.1 0.1 2.8 27.8 1.2 100 Cereals 45.1 0.3 12.8 40.5 1.3 100 3.1 42.5 0.2 52 2.2 100 Fair Trade 39.6 1.4 5.6 51.8 1.5 100 Mafia- Free 44.6 0.6 14.7 38.5 1.5 100 Ecological 41.4 0.6 25 31.9 1.1 100 Meat Source: CORES Lab Project ‘Inside relational capital’. 22 Table 3 - Changes in lifestyles (%) Yes No Already n.a. Total did Decreased purchasing pre-cooked food 24.8 5.1 69.4 0.7 100 Decreased shopping in supermarket 41.4 47.9 9.7 0.9 100 Increased purchases in local shops 27.5 33 37.9 1.6 100 Started producing food at home 38.3 31.9 29 0.9 100 Started growing vegetables 16.2 54.8 27.6 1.4 100 Started to use the car less 17.6 46.9 34.5 1 100 Increased recycling 32.5 6.7 60 0.9 100 More attention to energy consumption 29.3 22.9 46.3 1.4 100 More attention to water consumption 28.6 6.1 64.3 1 100 Source: CORES Lab Project ‘Inside relational capital’. Table 4 - Changes in styles of participation (%) Yes No Already n.a. Total was More interested in problems 26 30.3 42.5 1.2 100 More interested in politics in general 7.9 35.8 55 1.3 100 More able to cooperate with people 39.7 16.1 42.9 1.4 100 23.9 60.8 13.8 1.6 100 concerning my town of residence in general Feeling more able to influence public policy Source: CORES Lab Project ‘Inside relational capital’. For example, consumption of local (80.6%), organic (79.4%), and seasonal (68.1%) food increased, while the consumption of meat decreased (42.5%). Participating in a GAS also increased attention to recycling (32.5%) and reduced the consumption of electricity (29.3%) and water (28.6%). In sum, GAS practice facilitated the adoption of more sustainable lifestyles. It also encouraged the diffusion of more collaborative attitudes (38.7%), fostered interest in politics 23 among participants (in particular for the local, 26%), and enhanced their sense of social efficacy (23.9%). Conclusion Although limited to a minority, there is no doubt that GAS practice is helping collectives develop strategies for economic and political intervention, which often fill the gap left by inefficient governance in the fields of environmental management or labor protection. In this regard, our research shows that these groups represent important examples of grassroots innovation. However constrained in scope, they demonstrate the will to develop local and regional solutions to sustainability problems (Brunori et al. 2011; Migliore et al. 2013). Our claim is that despite their limited capacity to change global food systems directly, GAS groups work as “citizenship labs,” namely as spaces of aggregation and workshops for collective practice on the part of consumers. On the GAS shop floor, so to speak, people practice hands-on what it means to develop a direct relationship with a palette of producers, some proximate and others more distant (gasistas in Lombardy order their oranges from Sicily, 1,000 kilometers away). It is this practice of collective self-provisioning that develops awareness about the complexity and flaws of the global food system. A fair amount of effort is needed to find local producers that meet the solidarity criteria and/or to collect orders and redistribute produce. On the basis of this novel recognition, more responsible lifestyles ensue, and a sense of collective direction about resilience, sufficiency, and sustainability is developed as a group. Thus, in many respects, GAS groups represent new spaces for people who not only view the consumer society as unjust, but also want to search for practical alternatives. Although GAS members may hold different political and religious convictions, they come to these groups with 24 various motivations and are impelled by a desire to share a critical approach to the global economic model and consumerist lifestyles. Within their GAS groups, members find not only information and reciprocal support. The ongoing networking among gasistas facilitates social learning, building social capital and multiplying the potential of individuals to act. This is evident from the way in which many groups feel the need to evolve, expand, and set up more complex initiatives than collective purchasing among a small group of friends. The he emerging picture thus seems to highlight that GAS are not simply a “new type of consumer organization,” but rather an innovative form of political participation in an overall context of high levels of distrust in traditional channels of participation, such as that in political parties. Although their overall economic impact seems to be limited, we focus on their societal, relational, and political roles as spaces of apprenticeship for a new type of consumer citizenship. Through these groups, people not only satisfy “liberal guilt” needs by shopping ethically. They actually join together to try to make a difference to environmental and social justice issues. In our individualized and fragmented societies, these groups thus represent an important way for people to bond together. As seen, starting from the basic act of food provisioning, GASs help citizens to start asking questions not only about quality, sustainability, and the costs of goods as consumers, but also about municipal services, schools and education, pollution, and so forth as citizens whose economic needs must be met with a view to sustainability and solidarity. After all, the call for a sustainable eco-economy requires not only a radically different system of production and distribution, but also different collective styles of consumption, which need to be based on new civic values as well as novel forms of participation. 25 References Alexander, S. and S. Ussher (2012), ‘The Voluntary Simplicity Movement: a multi-national survey analysis in theoretical context’, Journal of Consumer Culture, 12(1), 66–86. Balsiger, P. (2010), ‘Making political consumers: the tactical action repertoire of a campaign for clean clothes’, Social Movement Studies, 9(3), 311–329. Bauman, Zygmunt (2007), Consuming Life. Malden, MA: Polity Press. Bourdieu, Pierre (1984), Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Brunori, G., A. Rossi, and V. Malandrin (2011), ‘Co-producing transition: innovation processes in farms adhering to solidarity-based purchase groups (GAS) in Tuscany, Italy’, International Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food, 18(1), 28–53. Carrera, L. (2009), ‘I gruppi di acquisto solidale: una proposta solida nella società liquida’ (‘Solidarity purchase groups: a solid proposal in a liquid society’), Partecipazione e Conflitto, 3, 89–117 (in Italian). Clarke, John, Janet Newman, Nick Smith, Elizabeth Vilder, and Louise Westmarlan (2007), Creating Citizen-Consumers: Changing Publics and Changing Public Services, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. della Porta, Donatella and Mario Diani (2006), Social Movement: An Introduction (2nd ed.), Malden, MA: Blackwell. Ferrer-Fons, Mariona (2006), ‘Il consumerismo politico in Europa: le differenze nazionali tra dimensione politica e livello micro’ (‘Political consumerism in Europe: the differences between national political dimension and micro level’), in Simone Tosi (ed.), Consumi e Partecipazione Politica: Tra Azione Individuale e Mobilitazione Collettiva (Consumption 26 and Political Partiipation: Between Individual Action and Collective Mobilization), Milan: Franco Angeli, pp. 109–131 (in Italian). Fonte, M., M. Eboli, O. Maietta, B. Pinto, and C. Salvioni (2011), ‘Il consumo sostenibile nella visione dei gruppi di acquisto solidale di Roma’ (‘Sustainable consumption in the vision of fair trade groups in Rome’) Agriregionieuropa, 7(27) http://www.agriregionieuropa.univpm.it (in Italian). Forno, F. and L. Ceccarini (2006), ‘From the street to the shops: the rise of new forms of political action in Italy’, South European Society and Politics, 11(2), 197–222. Forno, Francesca (2013) ‘Cooperative movement’, in David Snow, Donatella Della Porta, Bert Klandermans and Doug McAdam (eds), Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social and Political Movements, Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp.278–280. Forno, F. and P. Graziano (2014) ‘Sustainable community movement organisations’, Journal of Consumer Culture,14(2), pp.139-157. Giddens, Antony (1990), The Consequences of Modernity, Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press. Grasseni, Cristina, Francesca Forno, and Silvana Signori (2013), ‘Beyond Alternative Food Networks: Insights from Italy’s Solidarity Purchase Groups and US Community Economies’, Draft paper prepared for the United Nations Research Institute for Social Development Conference on Potential and Limits of Social and Solidarity Economy 6–8 May 2013, Geneva, http://www.unrisd.org/80256B42004CCC77/(httpInfoFiles)/FEA15BDCCDF48473C125 7B720035FE76/$file/Grasseni,%20Forno,%20Signori%20draft%20paper.pdf Grasseni, Cristina (2013), Beyond Alternative Food Networks: Italy’s Solidarity Purchase 27 Groups, London: Bloomsbury. Grasseni, C. (2014), “Seeds of trust: alternative food networks in Italy”, Journal of Political Ecology, 21 (1), 178–192. Graziano, P. and F. Forno (2012), ‘Political consumerism and new forms of political participation: the gruppi di acquisto solidale in Italy’, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 644, 121–133. Koos, S. (2012), ‘What drives political consumption in Europe? A multi-level analysis on individual characteristics, opportunity structures and globalization’, Acta Sociologica, 55(1), 37–57. Manfreda, K., M. Bosnjak, J. Berzelak, I. Haas and V. Vehovar (2008), ‘Web surveys versus other survey modes’, International Journal of Market Research 50 (1), 79–104. Messina, Patrizia (2012) Modi di Regolazione della Sviluppo Locale: Una Comparazione per Contesti di Veneto ed Emilia Romagna (Modes of Regulation of Local Development: A Comparison of Contexts of Veneto and Emilia Romagna). Padua: Padua University Press (in Italian). Micheletti, Michele (2003), ‘Why More Women? Issues of Gender and Political Consumerism’, in Michele Micheletti, Andrea Follesdal, and Dietlind Stolle (eds.), Politics, Products, and Markets: Exploring Political Consumerism Past and Present, New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Press. Micheletti, M. (2009), ‘La svolta dei consumatori nella responsabilità e nella cittadinanza’ (‘The consumer turn in political responsibility and citizenship’), Partecipazione e Conflitto, 3, 17–41. 28 Migliore, G., G. Schifani, G. Dara Guccione, and L. Cembalo (2014), ‘Food community networks as leverage for social embeddedness’, Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 27 (4) 1–19. Norris, Pippa (ed.) (1999), Critical Citizens, New York: Oxford University Press. Putnam, Robert (1993) Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Rebughini, Paola (2008), ‘Costruire nuovi spazi di consumo: i gruppi di acquisto e il sogno della trasparenza’(‘Building new spaces of consumption: purchasing groups and the dream of transparency’), in Leonini Luisa and Roberta Sassatelli (ed.), Il consumo critico (Critical Consumption), Rome-Bari: Laterza, pp. 34–61 (in Italian). Sassatelli, Roberta (2006), ‘Virtue, responsibility and consumer choice: framing critical consumerism’, in John Brewer and Frank Trentmann (eds.) Consuming Cultures, Global Perspectives: Historical Trajectories, Transnational Exchanges, New York: Berg, pp. 219-250. Stolle, D., M. Hooge and M. Micheletti (2005), ‘Politics in the supermarket: political consumerism as a form of political participation’, International Political Science Review 26(5), 245–269. 29 Notes 1 These numbers refer to the GAS groups that have decided to voluntarily self-register. See http://www.retegas.org. 2 The data presented here are part of a wider research project entitled Dentro il capitale delle relazioni (Inside Relational Capital), carried out by the CORES Lab under the scientific direction of the authors. The CORES Lab is an interdisciplinary research group, officially established in 2012 at the University of Bergamo, with the aim of investigating the mechanisms and processes underpinning the contemporary rise and growth of grassroots economic practices. See http://www.unibg.it/cores for further details. The study discussed here was endorsed by the Italian Solidarity Economy Network and carried out in collaboration with Davide Biolghini and Giuseppe Vergani of the Tavolo group within Rete Italiana di Economia Solidale (Italian Solidarity Economy Network). 3 See http://www.retegas.org (accessed March 20, 2014). 4 A parallel initiative in Rome found proportionally similar results (Fonte et al 2011). 5 A pilot study carried out in Bergamo established a protocol that was extended to the rest of Lombardy, and is currently being applied to other Italian regions―notably Sicily and Friuli Venezia Giulia―in collaboration with facilitators in situ that have in-depth knowledge of the local contexts. Members of GAS groups call themselves “gasista” and we use here the term “gasistas,” the genderneutral plural form of the word which is in fact a neologism in Italian. 6 7 Citizens’ organizations and civic associations in Italy have historically developed in close proximity with one or another political party. This “collateral” relationship between political parties and civil society organizations has resulted in distinctive “territorial political subcultures” (Communist subcultures in the central Italian regions and Catholic/Christian-Democratic ones in the northeast of the country, see Messina 2012). These relationships still play a critical role in forging and disseminating novel, but distinctive, forms of civic involvement, such as political consumerism (Forno and Ceccarini 2006). 8 Data are as of March 2013. 9 Web-based surveys usually have a much lower response rate than other survey modes (Manfreda et al 2008). 10 In the request to participate in the survey, only the person who did most of GAS-related work in each family was asked to fill out the questionnaire. It is though important to view these data with some caution. Even though we sought to ensure that the most active member of the household completed the questionnaire, this figure could also be due to the fact that women are more prone than men to take the time to respond to such inquiries. Our ethnographic observation, however, confirms this finding (Grasseni 2013). Gasistas’ motivations are thus in line both with those who believe that more sober lifestyles can benefit the planet, but also that rethinking consumption is in their immediate and long-term self-interest. 11