Reflections on the Cooperative Model

While many aspects of the recycler movement have fascinated me so far in my research, there is one area that has really caught my attention: internal management structures of the cooperatives. My original grant proposal was to focus on that specific topic, so it is no surprise that I keep coming back to it. The cooperative model presents fascinating philosophical and economic questions and I constantly find myself reflecting on its broader implications. At times, these reflections leave me excited and optimistic. But at other times, I find myself becoming increasingly skeptical of the future of this movement.

Positive Aspects

There is a lot to be said for the benefits of the cooperative structure within the context of the recycler movement. The fact that these organizations are completely organized and managed by the catadores themselves is a wonderful testament to the abilities of these individuals. These businesses are run by the workers themselves through a process that emphasizes teamwork and equality, using democratic decision-making processes and rotating leadership responsibilities to maintain a positive dynamic and buy-in from each associate. This stands in sharp contrast to traditional capitalist means of production, which emphasize hierarchical business structures and promote competition as a way to increase incentives. The goal is a more humane production process, one that does not merely treat the worker as another form of input/capital but rather as an individual human being, whose agency and feelings must be taken into account. The trade-off between these two processes is relatively clear: efficiency and maximization of production vs. valorization of the worker and humanization of the production process.

For most catadores, the cooperative structure is not only beneficial because it gives them more agency within their work environment. Simply put, it is the only structure in which many of them are able to make a living. Many catadores live on the margins of society, unable to participate fully in our traditional capitalist system because they are not efficient enough producers to sell their abilities on the labor market. The reasons for this vary: physical or mental disabilities, old age, lack of education, drug/alcohol addiction issues, health problems, etc. Many simply cannot compete and survive within traditional workplace settings, which is why they have been relegated to the streets or the trash dumps. Within the cooperatives, however, the catadores take care of each other. They recognize that there are some who are unable to collect or sort as much material, but they still allow those people to participate in the group and receive a decent share for their efforts. As one catador said to me recently, "our goal isn't just to produce as much as possible, it's to make sure we give everyone a chance to be included and participate."

Drawbacks

Of course, this sort of model has very clear downsides. As pretty much everyone who has ever studied communist economies knows, emphasis on inclusion and equality rather than incentives and efficiency undermines economic dynamism and growth. These cooperatives are certainly not an exception. A common slang term within the organizations is people who are morcegando ("batting"), sitting around and not working hard while letting others pick up the slack. Because remuneration schemes within the cooperatives are not fully based on individual production (some groups divide revenues equally, some by work hours, some by a system of quotas), it can be difficult motivating people to work to the full of their abilities. Some cooperatives use extremely subjective measures of how much someone was perceived to be morcegando in order to dock their pay. It often falls to the associates holding rotating leadership positions within the diretoria to supervise the production process and hold everyone to account, but these people are often busy with administrative duties and do not have time to resolve every problem or conflict. One idea often discussed is to create official supervision posts within the cooperatives, but the creation of such hierarchical structures creates a whole new set of conflicts within the group and undermines the goals of equality and inclusion. This is just one example of the constant trade-off within these organizations between the social goals of the cooperative and the production goals of the business enterprise.

The bigger issue for me, however, has to do more with the leadership of these organizations. Overall, I strongly admire the goal of having the catadores themselves completely run and manage these organizations. This is, after all, their movement. They are the ones who have made livings for themselves collecting recycling and who have made these organizations possible. To believe in the cooperative model, you have to believe in the power of the workers to organize and lead themselves and to manage their own systems of production. For us technicians and outsiders to come in and try and take over these groups not only undermines the agency and empowerment of the catadores, it also reinforces the idea that enterprises must be run by the elite and well-educated.

But at the end of the day, I worry that sticking rigidly to these beliefs undermines the expansion and development of these enterprises. There are many complex aspects of integrated solid waste management and recycling programs in developing urban communities, and for this sector to be able to grow and thrive using a profitable triple-bottom line the companies that pioneer it really need to be dynamic, innovative and capable. While I do not doubt that there are many impressive catador leaders out there (several of whom I already know), most of the individuals within the movement do not have the formal education, business administration skills or technical expertise to fully handle these responsibilities themselves. The strengths of the MNCR tend to lie in the catadores' keen understanding of social issues: organizing workers, social mobilization and political lobbying. In terms of the more business-minded ability to handle complex financial accounting, develop strategic action plans for expansion and improve commercial viability, the organizations seem to be severely lacking. While there are certain individuals with strong leadership abilities who I believe we could single out for intense training and skill development, this risks creating two tiers of catadores within the organizations, which creates its own set of problems. (In practice this inequality between catadores often exists already, but the theory of rotating leadership positions is meant to correct the issue.)

While I do not support the idea of non-catadores taking over the management of the organizations because it would completely undermine the goals and philosophy of the cooperative model, I often worry if this movement will have a very low ceiling unless we change our approach. I just do not see how the catadores themselves will be able to develop large-scale commercially viable social enterprises that can fully handle integrated waste management services and process recyclables with the limited role that outside technicians and business partners currently play.

Basically, everything always seems to come down to this question for me. To what extent should we be sitting back and letting the catadores themselves fully control this movement, and to what extent should we be taking the lead to help build and expand the cooperatives? Is there really a "correct" balance that can be found? And if one thing or another must be sacrificed at times, is it better to sacrifice the ownership of the catadores and the cooperative model to further develop these enterprises, or is it better to pass up opportunities for growth and improvement (and better environmental management) in order to ensure the primacy of the catadores and their cooperative leadership approach?