exchange networks & parallel currencies on the map of greece: geographical patterns and schemes’...

8/13/2019 EXCHANGE NETWORKS & PARALLEL CURRENCIES ON THE MAP OF GREECE: GEOGRAPHICAL PATTERNS AND SCHEMES ACTIVITY Irene Sotiropoulou

1/25

1stInternational Conference in Political Economy Rethymno, 10-12thSeptember 2010Exchange networks & parallel currencies: Theoretical issues or research in Wonderland (July 2010)

1

Irene Sotiropoulou, PhD Student (Department of Economics, University of Crete)

E-mail: [email protected]

Supervisor: Professor George Stathakis (Department of Economics, University of Crete)

E-mail: [email protected]

EXCHANGE NETWORKS & PARALLEL CURRENCIES: THEORETICAL ISSUES or

RESEARCH IN WONDERLAND

ABSTRACT

This working paper belongs to a greater ongoing field research project concerning economic

activity in Greece that is performed without the use of any official currency. The scope of the paper

is twofold: a) To present the theoretical issues that the project aims to deal with, while studying

exchange networks, parallel currencies and free bazaars in Greece. Particularly, the variety of the

schemes and initiatives studied touches essential points of economics, like the notions of value,

money, exchange, market, etc. And b) To present the findings of the first stage of field research in

connection with the theoretical arguments that might have an explanatory ability concerning the

initiatives studied.

Keywords: exchange networks, parallel currencies, free bazaars, value, money, market, exchange,

grassroots theory.

I. INTRODUCTION

Non-monetary activity or activity involving currency which is not official in any country is

usually considered to be outside the scope of economic research, even if this activity is not

performed for charity or among family and friends. However, if by economy we mean

sharing/distributing within the oikos, then official currency cannot be the main criterion of the

definition. Thus, this paper has been prepared within the framework of a larger research project

titled Exchange Networks and Parallel Currencies: Theoretical approaches and the case of

Greece, which studies economic activity without the use of any official currency. This is the first

time that parallel currencies and exchange networks, as well as free bazaars, are studied in Greece,

not only because of lack of interest by academia, but mostly because such initiatives emerged the

very last years in the country and still emerge and develop, especially since 2009 onwards.

II. FIRST ATTEMPT FOR A TYPOLOGY AND DESCRIPTION OF THE INITIATIVES

STUDIED

A first attempt has been made to create a typology, which is used for analytical purposes

only and not as a fair description of reality. The main criterion for this is the object of each initiative

by object, we mean the transaction aimed by the scheme participants. Therefore, this paper

distinguishes those various grassroots initiatives in a) parallel currencies, b) exchange/barter

networks and c) free bazaars and free networks. To those categories, a sui generis scheme can be

added, named Money Back System, also described below.


2/25


2

II. A. Parallel currencies

By parallel currencies we mean any currency used by people in transactions, without this

being official in any country. A parallel currency might have only a virtual or digital appearance

(f.ex. units credited in a computer database) or it might take a physical appearance in notes, issued

by the currency users. In Greece, all parallel currencies are digital or virtual and no-one hasacquired any material appearance so far. There follows a brief description of the parallel currencies

that exist nowadays in Greece.

II.A.1.The Athens Time Bank

The oldest parallel currency scheme in Greece is a Time Bank based in Athens and run by

the Greek branch of the European Network of Women1. The scheme started working in October

2006 and follows the general structure of time banks: it is a network of individuals who are offering

services to each other. In reward, each member gains time so that he/she is able to ask for the

other members services. The value of the services is accounted in time hours and the hours credited

and debited for each member are recorded in a computer with software created by a volunteer.

The time hours expire six months after they have been gained by a member. The expiry date

has been set by the organisers so that the time currency will circulate efficiently within the scheme,

instead of being accumulated by some members only. If one does not want to spend his/her time

hours gained, one can donate the time currency to somebody else or even to an NGO, even if that

other person or organisation is not a member of the scheme. The major emphasis has been given so

far to education services, related to languages, PC skills, arts, etc but also to domestic work.

At this point (July 2010) the Time Bank is being resuming its function, despite the financial

problems the parent NGO is facing and despite the fact that the Time Bank database needs

personnel for its central management. They also organise workshops, where people from Athensand other Greek cities participate, in order to learn more about Time Banking.

II.A.2. The Ovolos currency

The Ovolos project started organising in January 2009 and it is based in Patras city (South-

West coast of Greece) but also run in Thessaloniki (in the North of Greece)2. The effective launch

of Ovolos currency was done finally in late March 2010 and despite the expanding membership

(already more than 4800 in July 2010, although only a part of them are actually exchanging), its

organisers consider the project to be still in testing-phase.

Moreover, Ovolos is used by several people who do not live or work in Patras andThessaloniki, but they prefer to transact with parallel currency. This has created a peculiar situation,

where locality of transactions is not linked necessarily to the base cities. The Ovolos organisers

see this as an advantage, which will make Ovolos an online technology platform available to all

people living in the country, enabling them to experiment using parallel currency while transacting

locally no matter where they live.

The main idea of the scheme is that the members can use the Ovolos currency (which is

virtual, e.g. on the main computer system and on each members digital smart card) instead of euro

1www.enow.gr. The Greek Branch of the European Network of Women is a Non-Governmental Organisation assisting

women who have been violence victims. However, the Time Bank is an activity totally separated from the rest NGOactivities and anyone can be a Time Bank member.2See the website www.ovolos.gr. There is also a group with the same name at Facebook, where the members discuss

issues about their currency. All texts are so far in Greek only.


3/25


3

currency for their transactions with scheme members. To avoid abuses, the scheme has not

permitted double pricing, e.g. the items or services sold are priced and paid in Ovolos only.

Each member has an equal say on the management of the scheme. To achieve this equality

in practical terms, there has been created a non-profit organisation () based in Patras city

and named Ovolos Research and Documentation Center for Social Currency which supervises the

entire initiative.A small part, e.g. 1% of the transaction value is retained by the scheme to cover its

administration costs, with the intention that this will create an excess of Ovolos currency under the

management of the Organisation. This amount will also cover sums for charities and sums for

balancing possible losses of the system from micro-credit loans to members.

The other important feature of Ovolos is that the scheme members use extensively the social

networking internet applications to communicate, exchange ideas, discuss and notify each other

about current news or gatherings, etc. The use of Facebook as well as the use of blogs, email lists,

etc is also found in other, non-monetary initiatives. However, the use of those same applications for

Ovolos currency has been an essential element of the scheme, long before the scheme itself was

launched, and it still is a main feature of the initiative.

II.A.3.The Local Alternative Unit of Volos city

The Local Alternative Unit ( ) was formally planned to

be launched on June 15th

2010 in the city of Volos, on the East Central coast of Greece. The Unit is

digital only and will be used within the framework of the Exchange and Solidarity Network1which

covers the entire county of Magnesa. At the moment, the membership is rather low because they

have not proceeded with heavy publicising yet, given that the scheme is on the process of resolving

several practical issues.

The project is a very interesting one, not only because it is designed to remain local, but alsobecause the managing team has opted so far to avoid the network taking any official legal form.

However, they name their project as a mainstream one and an observer could say that this is true,

given that the network tries to be as inclusive as it can be. They are also in close coordination with

local municipal services, so that the network can have several trading points hosted in the citys

Social Centres, where people with no access to internet or uncomfortable with using PCs can ask

for support in order to register and trade within the network. Local businesses are also welcome to

participate and actually it is a local business that offers the server of the network.

On the other hand, the funding of the project is upon its members only. The rules adopted

for the Local Alternative Unit use are rather strict: they give an amount of 100 LAU by registration,

but debt for any member cannot get over 100 LAU either. Of course, the issue they are currently

discussing is the total money volume trap, e.g. the money volume will be limited to 100LAU perperson in average and the question they are currently facing is how the scheme can inject more

currency into the system without imposing any duty or tax on transactions and without

jeopardising the entire project by inflation or lack of trust in the system.

II.B. Exchange networks

By the term exchange networks we mean structures that facilitate non-monetary exchange

for their members and they are either of general nature or specialised in one sector of activity. To

this type of activity, there belong groups of exchange that have not assumed any network or any

other form of structure.

1www.tem-magnisia.gr


4/25


4

The biggest and oldest network is Peliti1which covers the entire country, both urban and

rural areas. It was founded in 2002 and its structure consists of two separate but intertwined

networks: the first, is a general network for exchanging goods and services, while the second, is a

specialised network which enables its members but also anyone interested, to exchange or just find

for free traditional varieties of plants2(either fruit or decorative trees, vegetables, flowers, etc) and

to acquire (at the cost of breeding only) several traditional species of domestic animals.The main idea is that for preserving the traditional plant and domestic animal varieties one

should be able to find the species for free and offer them for free to whomever asks for them.

Domestic animals, given that their cost of breeding might be high in some cases, can be purchased

with official money, but only to cover the breeding costs and not the value of the rarity of the

species (which means that if a member of the network overcharges, it will be reported). Moreover,

the transactions held in the general network do not permit the use of money by the participants

offers and demands for exchange are advertised, some on the website, some other on the annual

Peliti Magazine.

Apart from Peliti, there are several (actually at least 7 active) schemes and initiatives for

preservation and dissemination of traditional varieties throughout Greece. Most of them cooperate

with Peliti but some have opted for acting locally only. Some of them are not even networks, but

they just use local proximity of their members to create an unofficial group of people who are able

to find traditional seeds whenever they need any. All of them provide the seeds for free and there is

only a (loose) obligation of the receiver to cultivate the seeds, renew the variety for next year and

provide any other person with seeds for free.

Another general network is Logo-Timis3 ( by word of honour, in Greek)

which started its function on June 4th

2010, based in Athens. Due to its recent establishment, the

website is in testing-phase and the offers on the webpage are very few, yet. However, from the

announcements of the network which are open to all internet users, we see a prevalence of services:

dental care, business consulting, music lessons, architectural design, printing services, homeopathy

and alternative therapy/diet consulting, hotel and restaurant services, etc. Nevertheless, given thatthere is an option for a private profile on the network, it is not clear whether the announcements

freely accessible on the web are the only ones registered with the scheme.

II.C. The free-exchange bazaars (- ) and free networks

()

The term free-exchange bazaar (-) is the one used by bazaars

where people can bring things (clothes, petty machines, shoes, toys, books, CDs, etc) to exchange

them or just give them away and take anything they believe it is useful to them. To bring something

is not obligatory, but we learn that there is an unwritten rule in one-day bazaars that to participate,you should bring at least something. This rule does not hold in permanent bazaars, because a person

can bring something one day and take something else after several months. However, in no case is it

necessary to equalise the value of what you offer and what you get, which means that you are free

to take as many or as valuable things as you can carry with you.

The first free-exchange bazaar in Greece has been organised by Sporos Cooperative in

downtown Athens since 2003 but now, while still being part of the same cooperative, it has moved

to its own place and is named Skoros4 (, moth, in Greek). There are other four permanent

free bazaars in major cities of the country (Thessaloniki, Chania, Ioannina and Rhodes) and a

regular free-exchange bazaar (named Magic Carpet) in the city of Kilkis. However, most free-

1www.peliti.gr2Another term already used for them is landraces.3www.logo-timis.gr4http://skoros.espiv.net/


5/25


5

exchange bazaars are organised for an afternoon or a day, usually combined with other activities

(like collective cooking points, handicraft fairs, etc). Free bazaars are regularly organised in several

neighbourhoods of Greater Athens area, but also in many other cities of Greece. Their dispersion,

volume and regularity have greatly developed since 2009.

The free networks have a different pattern: they are online networks, the members of which

can notify when they want to give something away for free or when they need anything that mightbe available but not yet announced online, or they get instantly notified when something is disposed

by any network member. There are only two free networks in Greece, but both cover the entire

country: one is Freecycle1in Greece, which is member of the international Freecycle network which

started in USA several years ago; the other is -2 (Charise-To, Give-it-away) network,

which is based in Thessaloniki and also organises free bazaars in cooperation with the city

municipality.

A special type of free bazaars is swishing parties ( ) which

emerged in Athens3 since 2009 and Thessaloniki

4 in 2010. Swishing is a term created out of

swapping and shopping to describe parties where people bring their clothes, shoes and accessories

and can take other clothing stuff for free. It is like a free-exchange bazaar, focusing on clothing.

All free bazaars and networks have their own rules (which evolve season after season,

especially in the cases of permanent or regular bazaars and swishing parties) to prevent abuse of the

initiative or plundering of the stuff offered. Therefore, there might be limits in the stuff you may

take at once or in the stuff you may offer, and in some cases cash-sale of freely-taken stuff is

pointed out and the abusing members are banned from the bazaar or network.

II.D. The MoneyBackSystem5: A hybrid or sui generis scheme in Crete and Dodecanese

The Money Back System is a network combining exchange trade but also monetary

elements. The network has been created by a private company, which also owns the intellectualproperty rights of the system. Bus companies of Crete and Dodecanese cooperate as sponsors of the

system while other local companies (super markets, pastries, clothing stores, cafs, furniture stores,

cinemas, etc) are by contract commercial partners of the managing company.

The system has been so successful since summer 2009 when it was established, that after

some months local ship and air companies started participating and the scheme was extended to the

entire country: according to the project, the used tickets of mass transport means, no matter in

which part of the country have been used, can be re-used at the their nominal value to buy goods

and services from the participating companies, but of course, they cannot be used again for public

transport. Each entreprise announces in public which part of the price can be paid in tickets (from

1/4 to 1/20 of the price6). The only prerequisite is that the value of the ticket is written on the ticket

and it does not matter when the tickets have been issued or used for transportation.The scheme is distinguished first for its simplicity based on the used tickets circulating as

money, second for its B2B2C structure and third for its environmental and economic implications,

given that it is supposed to induce people to use mass transportation and do their shopping at local

companies.

1http://freecycle.wikispaces.com/freecycle_gr

2www.xariseto.gr3www.swishing.gr4http://swishing-thess.blogspot.com/.5More information (but in Greek only!) can be found on the website http://www.moneybacksystem.gr/home.html.6 The list of the price shares paid in tickets for by each participating company as of July 2010 can be accessed at

http://www.moneybacksystem.gr/epixeiriseis%20July%202010.pdf.


6/25


6

II.E. Other projects

There are several other parallel currency projects which, either are in preparation stage or

have not effectively started working at all. For example, the two projects announced on the

Complementary Currency World Map located in Ierapetra city, in Crete island, are still being

designed. An old (some years ago) project concerning time banks in several Greek cities under thesupport of Greek state did not start at all, because financing proved to be impossible.

However, grassroots interest about Time Banks exists and at least three Time Banks are

going to start running in September 2010 in several cities. One more Time Bank is being organised

by the City of Lamia1 in Central Greece and this is the first parallel currency established and

managed by a local authority. However, given that it has been established in summer 2010, it is

expected to get effectively running after August 2010. Finally, there is one more attempt to

establish a parallel currency in a major city of Greece, again expected to be officially announced in

September 2010.

1Its website is the following http://www.lamia-city.gr/netexchange.php, in Greek only.


7/25


7

II.F. Map of Greece with initiatives functioning in July 2010

Table of signsSymbol Scheme

Parallel currency (LETS type)

Time Bank

Exchange scheme of traditional varieties of plants and

domestic animals

General exchange network

Permanent or regular free bazaar

Money Back System

Paranesti

Thessaloniki

Kilkis

Lemnos

MytileneVolos

Lamia

Corfu

PatrasAthens

Aegina

Rhodes

Herakleion

Chania

Ioannina


8/25


8

III. THEORETICAL ISSUES AND EXISTING LITERATURE

III.A. Theoretical issues raised by the initiatives studied

The questions arising from the above schemes could be distinguished into the followinggroups, just for analytical purposes:

III.A.1. The value issue

A) What happens with the value of the stuff disposed through free-exchange bazaars and

free networks, which is given away through a free-disposal action () or through

exchange? How is this value acquired or attributed to a thing?

) Do the cultivators, by exchanging or giving traditional seeds for free, reduce or increase

the seeds value? Or, are they attributing to them another value than that of the conventional

market? Is the value of a traditional seed established, not by the labour it integrates, but by the way

it changes possessor of by the market it circulates in? Or, by the rules the transaction is taking

place1?

C) The case of Money Back System is a bit more complicated: the value of the unused

tickets within the system is quite similar to the value they already had, e.g. their nominal price is the

volume of euro currency they represent within the System2. How do those used tickets get this value

again? Is this value same as the previous one in quality, given that they can only be spent in

certain companies and not everywhere?

III.A.2. The money issue

A) Why do people do transactions without exact measuring of the values transacted? Why

do people not care about measuring what is given and taken in exchange networks, but also in free

bazaars and networks, and why do they consider those transactions to be non-problematic?

B) Equalising values of given and taken stuff is one thing; equalising the value of services is

another: in a time bank, all services are equally priced according to the time spent for their

provision. This means, not only that the value of one cleaning hour is equal to one medical doctors

treatment hour, but also that the value of one fast cleaning hour is equal to one slow cleaning hour.

Why do those people accept and actually offer this equalising of their skills? What happens with the

value of labour in each case within the Time bank? Apparently, it is not perceived on the basis of

this labours reproduction value. Then, what is this value based on?C) About the time currency, but mostly about the Ovolos and LAU currency: why do the

users accept the currency of another user? How can they trust that the virtual currency they receive

or the time hour credits they gain will be accepted by other people and spent on things they need?

What is the value of those currencies? Where is it based on? How do those currencies represent the

value of things and services of the currency users? How is this currency working as a measure of

value? What does Ovolos 1:1 parity to euro currency mean for Ovolos (and for euro) concerning its

value, its circulation, its measuring role and its value storing role, if any?

1There is at least one case, where a cultivator paid a lot of money to buy a traditional seed and then he disposes it freely

to other cultivators!2There is of course a way of calculating the value toward the closest euro unit, which means, in some cases they mightrepresent a value which is less than the original, depending on the amount of tickets and the euro cent excess of the

sum. Which means, for a total amount of used tickets like 3,15 euros, the value of the tickets is 3 euros when used

within the system. This has been adopted to make transactions easier and simpler.


9/25


9

D) Particularly about the Money Back System: The used tickets work as a substitute for euro

money. To what extent is this substitution taking place? Do those used tickets work as a measure of

value or rather as a store of value? What are the implications of their new role within the System?

III.A.3. The market issue

The above case studies also raise several questions about the notion and structure of the

market as we know it in economics and as the scheme participants experience it within those

schemes. Particularly, one could wonder: Is each scheme a market? Or is it an economy but not a

market? Can we distinguish among economies where no money exist (exchange networks, free-

exchange bazaars and free networks) and markets where currency exist (time banks and parallel

currencies)? Can we have a market without exact prices? Can we have a market with an equalising

measure, like time hours in the time bank? Can we say that the rule of obligatory payment, which

definitely exists in conventional economy, also exists and works in those markets/economies in very

different ways, on various axes and on spaces that intersect each other? Can we say that those

initiatives attempt to prove that money might not be necessary for dealing within the spaces created

by the scheme participants? Can we say that reciprocity is or might (also) be something very

different from what is presented in economic books? What about the information flows, which are

running within the same schemes, but in the same or different way as material goods? Is this an

economy or market? How does it work?

III.B. Existing literature

One might consider the questions silly or nave, but studying existing literature, especially in

economics, proved that the aforementioned questions cannot be easily answered. This led the studyto other disciplines. The journey in literature is briefly presented below:

III.B.1. Economics

Biggart & Delbridge distinguish four different systems of exchange: price system,

associative, moral (where parallel currencies belong, according to the authors) and communal

systems (where barter and cooperatives belong)1. Fine and Lapavitsas

2focus on social relations or

customs connected to markets, stating that the former (customs) might have a role in turning a

commodity into commodity money. Moreover, Iwai states that several exchange mechanisms,

including money, might emerge in an economy, depending on information structure and/or sharedexpectations about the acceptability of a token

3.

Several very interesting views and theories about money are discussed in Smithins

collective volume4. To them, one could add Ohs view that, under certain conditions, barter exists

even in an economy with a generally accepted medium of exchange and that two generally accepted

media of exchange are possible in the same economy5. Niehans has worked on the non-neutrality of

money, on possibilities of several monetary or non-monetary markets and on the conditions for a

market to become fully monetised6. Of course, economic literature that considers non-monetary

1Biggart, N.W. & Delbridge, R. (2004), pp. 36-42.2Fine, B. & Lapavitsas, C. (2000), also Lapavitsas, C. (2005a, 2005b).3Iwai, K. (2001).4Smithin, J. (2000).5Oh, S. (1989), pp. 113, 116.6Niehans, J. (1971, 1987).


10/25


10

activity both possible and modern is the one concerning countertrade taking place among

companies in international markets1.

On the other hand, Diquattro2defines moral economy as peoples attempt to prevent market

economy from dominating local markets, thus both value and socially necessary labour stem from

the competition inherent in market capitalism while Vlachou seems to agree with this

interpretation of value3. Moseley4however, asserts that Marxist theory still cannot satisfactorilyresolve the value problem of pure non-commodity money.

Macy tries to re-interpret Marxist theory of value and exploitation, by exploring the

political-economic implications of an asymmetric interdependent model. He states that workers are

exploited through the constitution of the market and that the alternative exists in interpreting work

as an activity with meaning rather than purpose, in order to give the alienated workers a capacity to

speak5. Kaskarelis

6believes that in Western societies there is taking place a change of meaning

and uses for the leisure time, in contrast to consumerist attitude, as people have to deal with

unemployment after the crisis of 2008.

Finally, concerning the subjective school of value, Priddat7emphasises the collective way in

which the German school of subjective value interprets the latter, as a process of communal

formation of opinion and judgement about value.

The aforementioned literature does not follow the mainstream view that barter and multiple

currencies are relics and preliminary stages toward a fully single-currency market, because as

Dalton says, this view is linked to history invented to praise the necessity of money, with all the

consequent perceptions about money and barter8.

III.B.2. Parallel currencies and social economy

In his Scrip Money Irving Fisher considered stamp scrip9currency as a tool used in times

of recession only

10

. Of course, stamp scrip money is considered to be practical irrespective of anyrecession in conventional economy, as Timberlake states after studying historical evidence from

United States11

.

Clearly, Fisher was aware of Silvio Gesells theory about rusting money, which would be

a medium of exchange only. According to Gesell, money, to maintain its value, should be regularly

stamped after the money holder has paid a duty (negative interest) to the issuing body12

. Gesells

purpose was to help workers face a monetary system which was allocating wealth away from its

poor producers, but as Dillard states, his theory does not explain its practical proposition13

. Keynes

had almost the same view about Gesells theory14

.

1Birch, D. & Liesch, P.W. (1998), Neale, B. & Shipley, D. (1987).

2Diquattro, A. (2007), pp. 464, 467-468.3Vlachou, A. (2002), pp. 196-197. She also quotes her personal communication with Anwar Shaikh concerning exactly

this issue, e.g. specification of value formation in capitalist markets.4Moseley, F. (2005), pp. 14-15.5Macy, M.W. (1988), particularly pp. 146-150.

6Kaskarelis, I. (2009).7Priddat, B.P. (1998), p. 1517.8Dalton, G. (1982).

9Stamp scrip is money created by private companies or individuals, but also local authorities and it consists of paper

notes with stamps on them to be validated. This type of currency was very common in the USA, but also in central

Europe during the times of the Great Depression.10Fisher, I. (1933).11Timberlake, R.H. (1981, 1987).12Gesell, S. (1906), particularly chapters 1.14, 2.2, 3.1-3.5, 3.9-3.13, 3.15, 4.1-4.4, 5.2-5.5, 5.713Dillard, D. (1942), p. 349.14 Keynes, J.M. (1936), pp. 353-357. However, Keynes believed that the future will learn more from the spirit of

Gesell than that of Marx (same citation).


11/25


11

Gesells views have been further elaborated by Margrit Kennedy, who criticises the

geometric growth of economy due to the structure of the monetary system and comments on how

this affects the lives of people and the environment1. Another environmentally aware view is the

one by Goerner, Lietaer et al. who attempt to apply the resilience principle found in nature onto the

monetary system and support for this the existence of several currency systems running parallel to

each other2.Richard Douthwaite integrates parallel currencies into a theory of sustainability, where they

are the financial tools for attaining four sustainability targets: repeatable production cycles, stable

economy, simple life and renewable energy resources3. Thus, he proposes that the sustainable

financial structures will consist of different (parallel) currencies to perform different functions of

money and that money should be created by its users only4.

On the other hand, North considers parallel currencies and other non-monetary activity like

Freecycle networks, to be alternative economic spaces or at least possible to be so in the future5.

Seyfang seems to share this view, both exploring the alternative theories on money in relation to

parallel currencies6and studying Time Banks as spaces for collective redefinition of social values

7.

Nevertheless, this alternative nature is not the only view about parallel currencies.

According to Williams, parallel currencies might have merely practical aims, irrespective of how

those are possible to be attained8 or they might end to be a structure preferred by the

disenfranchised middle class9. Powell, while studying the Red Global de Trueque (Global

Exchange Network) in Argentina, discusses the dual, complementary and alternative, nature of

parallel currencies in relation to mainstream economy10

. At the same time, Peacock11

and Ozanne12

seem to consider parallel currencies to be well connected to the social and human capital theory.

Finally, Kapogiannis and Nikolopoulos state that parallel currencies are forming a hybrid situation

between profit and solidarity, and their future will be judged by the extent to which they absorb

productive resources and market shares from the [conventional] market economy13

.

If, of course, one takes into account Allemand et Boutilliers statement that social andsolidarity economy is based on the same foundations as capitalism: private property and free

competition14

, parallel currencies are not in conflict with conventional markets. Henderson,

however, does not seem to agree with this. She considers parallel currencies and production

systems based on elaborate barter, reciprocity and redistributive schemes as highly refined

technology of software variety15

. She gives long presentations on parallel currencies in history but

also in the 1990s16

and she finally states that These nonmoney and scrip-based economies are

leading indicators of transition to a much more diverse socially and ecologically compatible

future17

.

1Kennedy, M. (1995).2Goerner et al (2010). Also Goerner et al. (2009).

3Douthwaite (2004), chapters 3 & 4.4Douthwaite (1999), especially Introduction and chapter 4.5North, P. (2007).

6Seyfang, G. (2000).7Seyfang, G. (2003).8Williams, C.C. (1996a).

9Williams, C.C. (1996b).10Powell, J. (2010).11

Peacock, M.S. (2000).12Ozanne, L.K. (2010).13Kapogiannis, D. & Nikolopoulos, T. (2010).14Allemand, S. & Boutillier, S. (2010), p. 14 (General Presentation).15Henderson, H. (1996), p. 83.16Henderson, H. (1996), pp. 157-158, 206-218.17

Henderson, H. (1996), p. 286.


12/25


12

III.B.3. Other disciplines

It is common concerning parallel currencies, to study the related issues in an inter-

disciplinary context, paying attention to any text that might be useful in answering questions or

even raising new ones. For example, old and modern zero-pricing phenomena in conventionaleconomy that dismantle our mainstream economic ideas are thoroughly explored by Anderson

1.

Historical studies are also very useful: Schoenberger, starting from the idea that markets are

mechanisms for facilitating mobilization of resources across space and time, examines the role of

the states and state warfare throughout history in establishing markets and specific monetary

structures2. In support of this view there stand Seafords

3and Kraays

4writings, where one can see

how political structures had an immense role in (but also suffered great influence by) the invention

and dispersion of coinage.

Catton, despite his insightful discussion on value, thinks that only a well-fed person will

work on a theory of valuing, otherwise a hungry person might be obsessed with food5. Dalla

Costa would probably disagree with this, because she considers food to be a common and she

examines how this principle translates into safeguarding various other fundamental common goods,

like: biodiversity, freshness, healthiness and quality of food as well as the knowability of the food

production cycle6.

Nature is considered to be the ultimate source of meaning for Consesa-Sevilla7, who states

that value cannot be partial but referring to the whole only - exposing the false sense of

empowerment consumers and labourers experience because of their (monetary) income. Close to

this environmentally aware view, Hornborg uses ideas from thermodynamic physics to explore the

contradictions of modern economy and society and how modern ideas about value, labour and

nature are constructed in order that industrial production seems more valuable than nature and life

itself, and how same production structure has substituted human needs as the aim of the economy8.

Inghams theory on the nature of money gives important directions on the social character ofmonetary structures and on the value of money, on the political character of new monetary spaces

and on the collective character of the monetary arrangements9. Zelizer, by examining thick

archival and historical information, succeeds in grasping the struggle among several agents and/or

groups within the same society, class or even household - which struggle takes place about or is

expressed by giving special meanings on money amounts and tokens, usually supposed to be

identical to each other10

. To those theories, one could add the status value theory applied by Thye in

exchange relations11

: this theory links exchange position and value with the status the exchange

actors have or try to attain through the exchange itself.

Daltons examination of Western conceptions about primitive money turns the former to

appear rather nave and market-oriented and the latter to be differentiated to serve several purposes

within the economies and societies it is used12

. This might be relevant to the research findings byWilliams and Windebank, who claim that modern non-exchange activities or unpaid exchange are

1Anderson C. (2009).

2Schoenberger, E. (2008).3Seaford, R. (2004).4Kraay, C.M. (1964).

5Catton, W.R. (1959). The entire article is very interesting however this low-value statement of the food issue can

be found on page 315.6Dalla Costa, M. (2007).

7Consesa-Sevilla, J. (2006), particuarly pp. 28, 37-39.8Hornborg, Alf (1992), particularly pp. 10-12, 16.9Ingham, G. (2004), particularly pp. 81-82, 177-189, and Ingham, G. (2007), p. 269-270.10Zelizer, V. (1994, 2001).11Thye, S.R. (2000).12

Dalton, G. (1965).


13/25


13

not really dependent on peoples income only and that apart from the precapitalist-relic assumption,

one should also consider structural economic transformations, f.ex. new regimes of accumulation,

and culture, particularly cultures of resistance1.

IV. POSSIBLE THEORETICAL APPROACHES

IV.A.1.The point where theory and methodology merge, or, conducting research without

theory

The main theoretical issue we face is that the schemes studied are choices and activities that

cannot be easily explained because there is not any thoroughly elaborated theoretical framework in

economics to explain such economic activity.

On the other hand, we do use texts originating in other disciplines, but not with intention to

explain economic activity in non-economic terms. Quite the contrary: we use economic theory as

stated or narrated in other disciplines because we want to explain the schemes we study, in

economic terms. We also use economic theory as stated or narrated by the scheme participants and

the schemes as collectives themselves, because we do accept the possibility that both practical and

theoretical knowledge might spring from social and/or collective activity, no matter whether this

has been mentioned in academic texts so far2.

Therefore, the main argument is one constructed in an eclectic way, as following:

The subjective value theory cannot be of use in this project, but only as a theory to be put

aside. First, because scheme participants do not by any means decide as individuals about the value

of each item/activity. Moreover, that same theory of value is based on the notions of scarcity and

utility, which are either rejected or re-defined by the schemes.

Neither is useful to apply the labour theory of value in this case, either liberal or Marxist

3

.First, because not all valuable things and activities can be measured by labour: teachers ability for

teaching is not measurable and actually not compensated, the medical doctors or nurses support to

the patient in pain, good behaviour toward the children by their nanny, the beauty of an art work,

etc. are not measurable and not compensated. Simmel refers to artwork4but he does not discuss the

compensation of a nanny. Of course, liberal theory measures the nannys work as the

opportunity cost of the childrens parents who can generate more income by outsourcing the

childrens care to other people and by undertaking, during the time saved, an occupation that is

better paid than the nannys work.

At this point, we use Barbara Ehrenreichs critique5that the economic system we live in is

unable, for several reasons, to commodify essential human needs (f.ex. household cleaning and

hearth care, child care, elderly care, etc). This inability is turned into wild poverty and exploitationat the expense of humans, who are able to satisfy those needs, and the reason for this ability is

exactly because we force them, through poverty, to satisfy those needs (of course not their own

the question remains: Who cares for the nannies kids?6)

Therefore, labour, no matter how we conceive it (concrete wage labour or abstract human

labour) is not enough to assess and evaluate a human activity. Much less is it enough to evaluate a

1Williams, C. & Windebank, J. (2003), particularly pp. 260-261.2However, this possibility of knowledge springing from grassroots activity has been mentioned in academic literature.

See for the this Biddle,E. et al (2007).3However, we cannot but point out that, as Harry W. Pearson (1957) states (p. 333), Marx at least understood the social

conditions of labour process. This will be useful later, while using other Marxist-originating approached to explain

some of this projects aspects.4Simmel (2004), pp. 405-406, 411-417.5Ehrenreich, B. (2002) & Erhenreich, B. & Russel Hochchild, A., editors (2003).6Charusheela, S. (2003), p. 295.


14/25


14

non-activity, f.ex. the value of solar light, or a field clean from chemical residues or clear water. At

this point, both liberal thought and environmentalist theory meet with compassion and

understanding: the value of nature is conceived positively (f.ex. anything we can use in production

process has value) and negatively (anything we cannot yet create has value1).

Nevertheless, parallel currencies and initiatives for non-monetary exchange seem that they

think or (try to) perceive value far from and beyond the limit of labour as a value foundation! Andthey do this not in reaction or in opposition to the labour theory of value!

It was so easy to be left without a mainstream theory of value, while we have all this activity

and all those statements and narrations on the part of the schemes studied to talk or imply value in

their transactions. Therefore, the economists questions are: what are those people doing? Why?

Are they doing anything that is economic or has any economic implications? Can their

activity and/or discourse answer any of the questions stated in unit III.A of this paper?

IV.A.2. Methodology used at the preliminary and the first stages of the project

It is impossible to conduct research without theory, so the researcher is obliged to find one

or some theoretical approaches, in order to be able to form hypotheses for the research.

To do this, in both the preliminary and the first stage of the project, there have been used

qualitative/ ethnographic methods: mostly observation, observation by participation and text

analysis. Observation took place in open gatherings the schemes hold. In several cases, the

researcher has been invited by the coordinators to take part in a schemes activities as a volunteer or

even as a scheme member, which made possible to use the method of observation with

participation. The texts used in analysis are those published in print or on the schemes websites.

What distinguishes the preliminary from the first stage of the project is that the first stage of

the project includes several interviews with scheme organisers or members that have a global view

of each initiative, conducted by the use of a list of open questions. Before that, but also parallel tothat formal-interview stage2 there has been a year of contacting the schemes and discussing with

coordinators and members about the initiatives. This free-discussion stage gave a first picture of the

activities studied as well as many hints on where the research should look to for literature. Of

course, the free discussions were not recorded, but they have been extremely important, along with

the entire preliminary stage of the project, in forming some theoretical arguments that could be

explored in the first stage of the field research.

The first stage of research has not been concluded yet. Through this stage, we are trying to

check out whether the theoretical arguments we have chosen can possibly be connected to or based

on the research findings. The second stage of the project aspires to check the same schemes in

quantitative terms, once it is possible to form some testable hypotheses.

IV.B. The theoretical arguments

Three theoretical arguments have been constructed to explain the activity studied and to

provide with an analytical framework that will (hopefully) permit answering some of the questions

raised by the study:

1That means, according to this view: the day we will be able to clean completely the water out of chemical residues at acost lower than changing production technology, there will be no reason to change the latter!2It is amazing the pace by which new issues come up almost everyday that are not yet elaborated enough to be included

in the formal interviews. We expect to examine them thoroughly at a later stage of the project.


15/25


15

IV.B.1 The crack

The crack is the first sign from which one can predict an evolution of things. We do not usuallypay attention to the crack. What does the crack shows? It shows a conflict of opposite things:

whether they are social propensities, or big social inequalities, or it is huge arrogance thatcannot think of its own destruction, e.g. it is the indication of great contradictions that have not yetbeen overtly expressed, Lydia Koniordou1.

The first theoretical construction is the notion of crack or . This notion emerged

from Professor Stathakis own discussion and notes over the schemes we study in this project and

by crack/ we mean that those initiatives consist of breaking points for the capitalist

economy, as it has been formed the last decades in Greece. However, this crack notion cannot be

applied on the appearance of the phenomenon, because the schemes are not modern, the main

economic system is not and is not perceived as coherent and the schemes are not in principle

inconsistent with the mainstream economy, nor do they perceive themselves as such.

On the other hand, the very same notion of crack can be applied on fundamental dissident

views of the schemes and their participants in comparison to the mainstream economy and

economic theory. Their views about scarcity and non-scarcity, about whether people have freedom

not to starve in any case and to be able to access quality and nutritious food, about whether value

cannot be measured, etc. might well be a crack, given that the scheme participants do not only

state their views, but they act accordingly.

Another issue is whether this multiple market structures created by the schemes might

prevent the main market from working as it should or as the liberal theory wants it: as a self-

regulating and free [from societal control] market. Neale2 asserts that in a markets-system,

whenever some of them start to work in a non-self-regulating manner, the entire system ceases to be

self-regulating3. So, the question might be whether the schemes are the participants attempt to

intervene with conventional markets (which claim or try to be self-regulating) and establish somecontrol over the existing of supply-demand-prices mechanism.

IV.B.2. Simmels Philosophy of Money4and Batesons Ecology of the Mind

Georg Simmel pointed out that groups and individuals, depending on their position and the

conditions of an exchange, use money in specific ways and their attitude towards money depends on

the conditions and not on the medium (money) of the exchange. Simmel understood the

empowerment (freedom) that money offers to persons, but also the pervasiveness of money into

every societal structure5.

However, despite his clear views on the specific features of money, he never decided, forgood, about his own stance towards it and its role within economy and society. In that sense, the

critique by Leyshon and Thrift6that Simmel undertakes a schizophrenic

7position towards money

1 We have not found any literature in social sciences that uses the notion of crack. We turned then to Ms Lydia

Koniordou who is a classical theatre actress and theatre director and used the notion of crack as the main axis for

directing the play of Aeschylus Persai in 2006. The definition above has been given within the framework of an

interview which Ms Koniordou gave on May 26th2010 especially for this research project.2Neale, W.C. (1957).3Neale, Walter C. (1957), p. 369.

4Simmel, G. (2004).5See a very interesting analysis in Kalmonick, P. (2001).6Leyshon A. & Thrift N. (2005), pp. 35-37.7When I first read this critique, I thought that this notion (schizophrenic, schizophrenia) is being used by the authors to

make critique more impressive. Just after a while, political correctness hit me to the point I considered the use of the

notion quite unfortunate, insulting people under severe condition. When I finally arrived to study Batesons writings, I


16/25


16

would probably keep Simmels Philosophy of Money out of the main part of this paper, if there was

not Gregory Batesons Steps to an Ecology of Mind1, which finally gives Simmels work a new

meaning.

Batesons theory on schizophrenia consists in the idea that the condition is created after a

person is constantly exposed to situations of double bind, usually within family and actually by its

parents or by any person with power over the sufferer. A double bind is created when the sameperson receives by the same sender two contradictory messages about doing or not doing

something. One of the messages is often explicitly given in words, the other in non-verbal form, so

this makes commenting on both more difficult for the receiver. The double bind situation leads the

message receiver to be wrong and missing whatever he/she opts to do. If the message receiver

cannot for any reason abandon the field of communication (f.ex. the receiver is dependent on the

relation with the sender for practical, economic or psychological reasons) and he/she also cannot

laugh at or discuss the messages (metacommunication) with the sender, or even with a third person,

the receiver is in danger of having his/her mental integrity broken down by the impossible demands

of the double bind situation.

Therefore, we can use Simmels Philosophy of Money to detect the double binds of western

market economy and particularly of its monetary system, even if we do not use at the same time, the

critique on mainstream economic discourse, where there is analysed the symbolic role of the

capitalist market as the ideal mother to a completely isolated male agent2. Thus, Simmels genius is

revealed by his understanding of the political-ideological-verbal impasse of modern capitalist

economy - which impasse becomes material, given that it is addressed to real people. Simmel writes

down details about that impasse, following (knowingly or by intuition) the method of thick

description anthropologists use even in his own era: he does not need a theory/position at hand

about what he sees, but he writes down everything he sees, so that the writer or anybody else can

later construct a theory, if needed.

If this assumption holds, then the schemes we study are an effort of people to avoid the

double bind they face within modern economy

3

and one could add that this double bind is mereviolence, provided that it endangers peoples survival and quality of life. People, by participating in

the schemes exit from the mainstream economys field of communication and acquire an ability (or

chance) of meta-communication; they can again comment and renegotiate the conditions of their

economic activity; finally, they (try to) avoid the market-imposed double binds by using their

creativity, which Bateson considers as an alternative to schizophrenia4. In that sense, the schemes

are the result of a political-economic effort to create new discourse and the material environment

needed for implementing this new discourse.

IV.B.3. Collective viewings of value, keeping-while-giving and grassroots transaction

mechanisms or the merry anthropologists band

The third argument is constructed by using the ideas of several authors, who are

anthropologists and their writings form a whole new perception about economy.

An arguments main point is Annette Weiners hypothesis5that people in a specific social

and economic setting participate in several types of transactions, like exchange, gift-giving, giving-

realised that it might be a completely political notion, irrespective of the reasons for which Leyshon and Thrift use it in

their book. Bateson proves by ethnographically studying schizophrenia that there is a social structure which creates it

and it is not an illness stricto sensu.1Bateson, G. (1972), particularly chapters 4.4.-4.7.2See for this, Kuiper, E. (2003) and Feiner S. (2003).3For example, you need official money to access your food and clothes I cannot hire you and/or offer you a salarythat will provide you with the money to cover your basic needs because I have not official money to pay you, etc.4Bateson, G. (1972), p. 203.5Weiner, A. (1992).


17/25


17

away things, potlatch, etc. not with primary intention to participate in the transactions but aiming to

keep out of the transactions what they consider most valuable to them. Weiner links this

prioritisation of what can be exchanged, with the (re)construction, questioning and (re)negotiation,

even struggle, around social hierarchies that are defined via possessions1and the ability of humans

to decide about disposition or preservation of those possessions.

Therefore, our argument is that scheme participants, as individuals but also as groups andcollectives, attempt to keep out of transaction, or, at least out of obligatory transaction, or, at worst

case, out of disposition ruled externally (by third parties), things or activities that are very important

to scheme participants, either individually or collectively: dignity, views about the

world/economy/society, environment and nature, survival, good living conditions, household

shelter, healthy and tasteful food, etc. anything that they do consider of value, no matter whether

this is valued the same in conventional economy.

Apart from Weiners position, we use David Graebers anthropological theory of value2as

well as his views about capitalist modes of production3. Graeber links value to human action in a

wider context, well beyond the notion of labour. So, production and reproduction of ideas and

perceptions are also considered action creating and contributing to the value of some things in

comparison to other. If this holds, then value is rather running on a continuum between belief and

action/non-action (belief about a thing being the most valuable, action to protect & not-dispose the

most valuable) formed and continuously renegotiated by people themselves, individually or in

groups.

Instead of social hierarchies mentioned by Weiner as peoples motive, Graeber uses the term

of freedom defined as the freedom to choose what sort of obligations one wishes to enter into,

and with whom4. To this, one would add Caroline Humphreys results from her field research in

Nepal5. She concludes that barter not only is not the stage prior to monetary transactions, but rather

the stage after a monetary system has started to disintegrate. Barter is a response to increasing

poverty on the part of the people who wish nevertheless to maintain their autonomy6, given that

money is designed to circulate, while poor people cannot afford participating in this circulation bykeeping wealth in money7.

Taking the argument a bit further, one could point out that the scheme participants might

have their own theory to explain the economic phenomena they create themselves. Given that

knowledge can also be created by non-scholar people and/or by collective groupings, not only by

written word and narration, but by action as such8, one can also describe the theoretical approach of

the schemes themselves as a collective viewing9of value.

This collective viewing of value, far from the subjective value theory and from the

objective/labour value theory, is something that literature was not prepared for! So, we can only

describe its features, because we think that collective viewings of value are those which permit

scheme participants to prioritise their valuables, decide which of them can enter which transaction

and under which rules, and it actually explains why and how all those people bother to defymainstream evaluations and invent ways to apply their own:

1) It is not uni-dimensional and of course it is far from the mainstream.

1It does not matter whether those possessions are of material nature, like a clothe or a crown, or of non-material nature,

like a story, a myth, a poem, social status and titles, etc.2Graeber, David (2001).3Graeber, David (2006).4Graeber, David (2001), p. 221.

5Humphrey, C. (1985).6Humphrey, C. (1985), p. 67.7Humphrey, C. (1985), p. 66.8See for this Biddle, Graeber & Shukaitis (2007).9We avoid the term theory, first because it is not a theory, second because viewing implies better the positionality

of the viewer(s).


18/25


18

2) It does not perceive of itself as unidimensional, much less unique and does not function

as such it tends to work with an approach case by case.

3) It does not fit the axis conflictual/complementary. It can be one of those, or both, or

both in different combinations, or some participants in the same scheme consider their activity as

conflictual and others as complementary to mainstream economy.

4) It is by no means easy to be tagged as static. It is not only evolving day by day, but it alsotends to create multiple value systems. Consequently, this value viewing can fit an evolving

theoretical structure of participants or be linked to an already chosen theory. That very same feature

explains the horizontal dispersion of the schemes irrespective of social, economic, political or any

other background of the participants.

5) The collective viewing of value is performed not only by discourse but also by action.

Therefore, discourse and action as intertwined, but action seems to prevail preference is given to

those who act according the scheme and not to those who speak about it.

6) It takes into consideration the power relations in establishing values and permits

minorities, uneducated, marginalised, peasants, etc. to attempt to (re)define words and

meanings.

7) It does not, therefore, presuppose money to establish the value of an item or of an

activity, neither does it require one type of value but it can function with several types of value

existing together.

Especially, about money we use Christopher Gregorys (1997) quality theory which states

that the value of money is not founded on the currency quantity, but on the issuing/monetary

authoritys power over transacting agents. That means, the scheme participants who adopt a parallel

currency or even participate in a Time Bank, or accept used tickets as payment token, are accepting

the currency because they have decided or agreed so. This is not classical fiat money because here

there is not an issuing body well separated from the currency users. We have money and money

currency created by the users themselves; they set the rules and decide about the money features

and value. Its value, therefore, stems from the groups power to implement their decisions andagreements.

V. WHAT RESEARCH HAS SHOWN SO FAR AND WHAT WE SHOULD PROBABLY

SEARCH FOR IN THE FUTURE

V. A. First summary report on research findings

Research participants rarely mention any literature, much less any specific theory they think

their activity is based on. An exception is the Athens Time Bank, where they use HazelHendersons economy cake theory

1not only to present their ideas to the researcher, but basically to

describe the entire schemes mentality during the new members training workshops.

Nevertheless, schemes generally tend to create their own texts and discourse. This is not

negative at all, because it shows that very few texts outside the scheme are really expressing what

the scheme participants want to say and do. It also shows that scheme members are well confident

within their teams to explore their own views texts published by the schemes and scheme rules do

reveal the groups long discussions, study and focus on action and practicality. Those texts are even

quite flexible and evolving concerning terms used. As a participant said concerning terminology

1Hendersons picture of economic cake can be found at Henderson, H. (1996), p. 58. Henderson believes that major

part of the economy and actually its base layers are nature and non-monetary economy, while monetary economy is theupper layer and the international financial structures are just the cakes icing. In Athens Time Bank there is also widely

used Hendersons idea of love economy, e.g. nonmoney economy; it can also be found in Henderson, H. (1996), p.

183, but actually its full presentation is well dispersed in the entire book.


19/25


19

things change namesit is not unequivocal and it changesI promise you that in ten years it

will have been changed and in two years from now it will mean a different thing without

changing words.

Therefore, apart from focusing on words, research through observation and observation by

participation also focuses on action. We see, for example, that when people in a scheme use time as

a measure for their work, they do enable members to spend their time in an equal manner, e.g. no-one in a Time Bank is able or even allowed to dispose of its time at the expense of him/herself or

others. When people permit someone to acquire necessities by parallel currency without the use of

official currency, they might keep their euros, or their nutrition, or even their social status (which is

maintained by not borrowing official currency for petty purchases) out of the conventional market.

Another example: in traditional seeds exchange groups and networks, people do possess material

and know-how that is essential in food production and keep it outside conventional market but

under specific status or space of transaction: if one wants to trade traditional vegetable seeds, one

has the options either to acquire some for free, if available, or to provide other traditional seeds in

reward.

The above seem to differentiate the transactions from mainstream market and economy not

only in terms of rules and principles, but also in terms of space and time. Particularly about the

latter, obligations expand in time following scheme members ability to offer work or goods

whenever they can, or even following natures seasonal cycles which is quite different from

exact-time loan rules. Even in parallel currency schemes, where one would see a structure closer

to mainstream economy, interest payments do not exist1and the credit of one member is another

members debt, which means that a) debt is necessary for the scheme to work but also that b)

overall debt does not exceed credit.

On the other hand, when scheme participants mention that the environment is important and

they want to protect it by re-using the items the free-network members do not need anymore,

instead of selling them for euro currency, they do keep environment out of transaction. Re-cycling

in a factory would not do this; in fact it is possible that re-cycling in a factory might be as harmfulas using natural resources for first time. Instead, scheme members participate in the network to

transact on items they would not be economically active about, in normal terms.

Weiners position explains, too, activity that makes the valuable (like vegetable genetic

material) to enter transaction, but not in market terms, or in market terms that are totally different

from free market terms. In other words, people prioritise things and activities in ways that are

different from those used for prioritisation in conventional market(s). Or, even if they make this

priority same as in conventional market2, they do set a different way of transacting rules when it

comes to the same, highly-valued items.

We then, think that all those scheme participants use different techniques and actually they

do combine several techniques in order to achieve their umbrella aim3

and the aims under thisprincipal one:

1) They decide that some things are out of transaction at all (any type of transaction

included, like gift-giving). So, the things are tagged as priceless. Environment/nature is

considered to be priceless in this case. Human survival (right to food) is considered to be priceless,

too.

1To be specific, nominal interest rate is zero. Whether there is difference between nominal and actual interest rate and

whether this can happen, is a question to be answered.2 Traditional wheat and corn seeds are again a good example: both conventional market and exchange networksperceive the seeds to be of great value.3The aim might be: to keep the most valuable out of transaction, or create another economic space more consistent than

the conventional one, or do something beyond what is imposed on them by free-market rules.


20/25


20

2) They decide to give for free things1which are the most valuable (human time, knowledge

and know-how or traditional plant seeds) or the least valuable (used clothes, shoes, etc in a swishing

party). So, the price in this case is zero while value attributed to transacted things might vary!

3) They create several types of markets along or outside or in contradiction with the main

market type. In this case, they create rules for transacting on one item only (like traditional seeds

exchange networks and groups); or, they set another measure of value/equivalence (like TimeBanks); or, they set new rules for transacting, like exchange with no measure unit (like free

exchange, without exchange rate, or without time limit for reciprocation); or, they set new rules for

transacting with measure units and even money, but they do create measure units and money as they

wish (like parallel currencies or the MoneyBackSystem2).

That a market may exist without prices or without price fluctuation but with set and fixed

prices or even without the conventional supply-demand-price mechanism as we know it is not a

path-breaking option. In other times and places (in Greece, too), markets were structured in several

ways. This reminds us that self-regulating/free market is one type of market only among many3. In

addition, price as we know it in conventional economics is the offspring of value within the

framework of a specific viewing, historical moment and position of the viewing person

(middle/bourgeois class members of 18thand 19thcenturies in Western Europe). The same holds for

exchange we define exchange as the mainstream economics do, but it has not been everywhere

and always like this4.

4) They seem to create economies in parallel with the conventional one. For example, Peliti

network has created niches of traditional seeds preservation, cultivation, info-dispersion and

exchange, which now exist and act throughout the country. They follow the same transaction

patterns as Peliti network, they might participate in Pelitis feasts or not (or just send some

delegates!) but they surely transfer the entire idea and structure throughout the country, parallel to

the conventional market of seeds provided in stores. Those economies comprise more than the

transaction itself: it is cultivation, experimentation5, creation of new household production and

nutritional customs, education of adults and children in those customs, etc.However, as a research participant has told me (and he had already assured me of his anti-

capitalist ideology), it is not possible to be completely unconnected to the mainstream economy. I

have not either any impression that the scheme participants aim is to disconnect with the main

economy or to create closed circles of transactions beyond the mainstream. Even if their activity or

discourse might appear like a cracking to a commonly-shared view about economic and monetary

structures, they are not conflictual at all and they usually avoid claiming so. Nevertheless, the

dissidence takes place de facto, which integrates the notion of crack it is not fight nor struggle

at all, but it works towards challenging the conventional economic structures.

V.B. Issues to be further researched

Given that the first stage of research has not been concluded yet and new schemes will start

running in September 2010 all over the country, the first stage of the project will continue. We are,

1This one is quite opposite to the previous technique, but it is quite interesting how both techniques might lead to same

result!2MoneyBackSystem is a real puzzle: typically, the companies participating in the scheme have an incentive for this,

because they are supposed to maintain or increase their market share in times of economic crisis. However, one wouldask why they just do not offer some general discounts to their clients, but they prefer to reward with discounts the

clients who are using mass transportation.3See Neale, Walter C. (1957).4See Arensberg et al (1957).5One thing cultivators in Peliti network do, is to see which varieties will survive and flourish in areas where they have

not been traditional so far, without compromising the already existing local landraces.


21/25


21

thus, open to surprises, given that the more people are involved in initiatives of this type, the more

chances for new activity patterns there are and the more possibilities of new ideas exist.

Before even starting to formulate questions to be answered by quantitative date, the issues

that came up out of a preliminary effort to map the schemes throughout the country are being

examined: Is this an urban phenomenon only? Will Ovolos ambition to cover the entire country as

an online platform, involve more the rural areas? Is Peliti network, already covering the entirecountry, really contributing to a renegotiation of conditions for rural work or work with the earth?

How would one explain the inexistence of schemes in some regions of the country?

VI. INSTEAD OF CONCLUDING REMARKS: ARGUMENTS AND VALUE

It was neither possible nor necessary, to choose among the three arguments, although it is

obvious that the author prefers the third one as more complete in explaining the phenomena studied.

One would comment that all three might hold together and they are not exclusive to each other. A

scheme might be at the same time, an alternative view and action on values and transaction ways, a

creative way to avoid mainstream markets crazy demands and a crack to a cemented monetary

system that deprives many people from the unique generally accepted medium of exchange.

Moreover, waiting till fieldwork results support more one or the other argument, while

respecting scheme participants views as equally important as conventional academic literature, is a

choice for the project: Each scientific method is developed by the dominant group in the previous

period and still influences the formation of the new system of thought of the new dominant group1.

So, it is possible that academic thought is connected more to the previous and modern dominant

groups than to any others views. Instead, we need, as Niebyl proposes, a) to grow conscious of the

socio-economics bases of our value judgments, b) to recognise the value bases in the explanations

of particular events offered to us and finally c) to construct a theory of value by transcending the

limited boundaries of a particular social group

2

. If we cannot do all three with some certainty, wecan at least pay attention to several groups views and discuss the value judgments that emerge here

and there; and, we can have in mind that if you cannot avoid your positionality, you can at least

avoid your position to appear as the only one.

********

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:

I am grateful to Ms Lydia Koniordou and Prof. Costas Georgousopoulos for having

accepted to discuss and give interviews on the notion of crack and for their advice on literature, aswell as to the personnel of the Cultural Non-Profit Organisation Desmoi/ (Athens,

Greece), for their support and provision of library facilities. I am also grateful to Prof. Richard

Seaford (University of Exeter, UK) for his advice on literature but also for the clarifying discussion

on his writings, to Dr Stevphen Shukaitis (University of Essex, UK) for his support in methodology

issues, as we as for the literature advice and information and to Prof. Dimitris Kapogiannis and

Prof. Takis Nikolopoulos (Technological Educational Institute of Messolonghi, Greece), for their

encouragement and advice, but also for having sent to me their unpublished article on social

currencies and their unpublished teaching notes on social economy.

1Niebyl, Karl (1940), p. 209.2Niebyl, Karl (1940), p. 210.


22/25


22

REFERENCES:

1) Allemand Sylvain & Boutillier Sophie (editors) (2010): Social and Solidarity Economy New routes of innovation (conomie sociale et solidaire Nouvelles trajectoiresdinnovations), in French, L Harmattan, Paris.

2) Anderson Chris (2009): Free the future of a radical price, Random House Business Books& Hyperion, London & New York.

3) Arensberg Conrad M., Pearson Harry W. & Polanyi Karl, editors (1957): Trade and marketin early empires, Free Press, Glencoe, Illinois.

4) Barker Drucilla K. & Kuiper Edith (editors) (2003): Toward a feminist philosophy ofeconomics, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, London & New York.

5) Bateson Gregory (1972): Steps to an ecology of the mind Collected essays inanthropology, psychiatry, evolution and epistemology, Jason Aronson Inc., Northvale NJ &London.

6) Biddle Erika, Graeber David & Shukaitis Stevphen, editors (2007): ConstituentImagination: Militant Investigations//Collective Theorization, AK Press, Oakland-Edinburgh-West Virginia.

7) Biggart Nicole Woolsey & Delbridge Rick (2004): Systems of exchange, Academy ofManagement Review, vol. 29, no. 1 January, pp. 28-49.

8) Birch Down & Liesch Peter W. (1998): Moneyless business exchange Practitionersattitudes to Business-to-Business in Australia, Industrial Marketing Management, vol. 27,pp. 329-240.

9) Catton William R. (1959): A theory of value,American Sociological Review, vol. 24, no. 3-June, pp. 310-317.

10)Charusheela S. (2003): Empowering work? Bargaining models reconsidered, in Barker,Drucilla K. & Kuiper, Edith (editors): Toward a feminist philosophy of economics,

Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, London & New York, pp. 287-303.11)Consesa-Sevilla Jorje (2006): The intrinsic value of the whole: Cognitive and utilitarianevaluative processes as they pertain to egocentric, deep ecological and ecopsychological

valuing, The Trumpeter, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 26-42.12)Dalla Costa Mariarosa (2007): Food as common and community, The Commoner, no. 12,

pp. 129-137, accessible at www.thecommoner.org.

13)Dalton George (1982): Barter, Journal of Economic Issues, vol. 16, no. 1-March, pp. 181-190.

14)Dalton George (1965): Primitive money,American Anthropologist (New Series), vol. 67, no.1-February, pp. 44-65.

15)Dillard Dudley (1942): Silvio Gesells monetary theory of social reform, AmericanEconomic Review, vol. 32, no. 2 Part 1 June, pp. 348-352.16)Diquattro Arthur (2007): The labor theory of value and simple commodity production,Science & Society, vol. 71, no. 4 October, pp. 455.483.

17)Douthwaite Richard (2006): Short Circuit, online edition updated till July 2006,downloadable from the website www.feasta.org/documents/shortcircuit/index.html.

18)Douthwaite Richard (1999): The ecology of money, online edition of the SchumacherBriefing The ecology of money (Green Books 1999), downloadable from the website

www.feasta.org/documents/moneyecology.

19)Ehrenreich Barbara (2002): Nickel and Dimed Undercover in low-wage USA, GrantaBooks, London.

20)Ehrenreich Barbara & Russell Hochchild Arlie, editors (2003): Global Woman Nannies,maids and sex workers in the new economy, Granta Books & Metropolitan Books, Londonand US.


23/25


23

21)Feiner Susan F. (2003): Reading neoclassical economics Toward an erotic economy ofsharing, in Barker Drucilla K. & Kuiper Edith (editors): Toward a feminist philosophy ofeconomics, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, London & New York, pp. 180-193.

22)Fine Ben & Lapavitsas Costas (2000): Markets and money in social theory: What role foreconomics?, Economy & Society, vol. 29, no.3 August, pp. 357-382.

23)Fisher Irving (1933): Stamp scrip, (assisted by Hans R. L. Cohrssen & Herbert W. Fisher)Adelphi Company Publishers, New York, downloaded on.04.09.2004 from the website

www.appropriate-economics.org/ebooks

exchange networks & parallel currencies on the map of greece: geographical patterns and schemes’...

Documents