Schlagwort-Archiv: Soziale Bewegungen

Selbstverwaltete Betriebe – der Fall Vio.Me. in Griechenland

Die Idee der Selbstverwaltung und die Versuche der Organisation von selbstverwalteten Betrieben gewannen in Deutschland in den 1970er Jahren an Popularität. Vor dem Hintergrund der multiplen Krisenereignisse ab 2007ff. erlangte die Idee der Selbstverwaltung und der self-managed company als alternative, demokratische und solidarische Organisationsform wieder verstärkte Aufmerksamkeit. Einen möglicherweise exemplarischen Fall – auch hinsichtlich der Unerwünschtheit und des prekären Status selbstverwalteter Betriebe –  stellt das griechische Unternehmen Vio.Me. dar. Allerdings ist der Ausgang noch offen: Erst vor einigen Wochen scheiterte der von zahlreichen Protesten und Solidaritätsbekundungen begleitete Versuch der Versteigerung des selbstverwalteten Unternehmens. Zur Geschichte der Ereignisse siehe hier:

Vio.Me. war zugleich Veranstaltungsort des ‚Second Euromediterranean „Worker’s Economy“ Meeting‘ Ende Oktober 2016. Im Programm wurden zahlreiche weitere Beispiele selbstverwalteter Betriebe diskutiert:

(Vielen Dank an Sarah Langer für den Hinweis auf Vio.Me. und die Tagung)

Woher kommt all der reaktionäre Populismus? – Judith Butler im ZEIT-Interview

Instruktiv – Hier geht es nicht nur um das neue Buch Judith Butlers, sondern um rechten und linken Populismus, Rassismus, Prekarisierung und Vielfalt:

Reminder – CfP on ‚Post-Growth Organizations‘

This is a reminder for our call for a special issue in Management Revue on Post-Growth Organizations (mrev-cfp-post-growth-organizations_PDF). Deadline for abstracts is September 30, 2016. Full papers must be submitted by 31 March 2017.

*Special Issue* Post-Growth Organization

Guest Editors:

Matthias Rätzer, Technical University Chemnitz, Germany

Ronald Hartz, Technical University Chemnitz, Germany

Ingo Winkler, University of Southern Denmark



For a couple of years now growth-driven societies have been in a permanent state of crisis. Since 2007 the global financial crisis and its aftermath are challenging our ideas of growth, well-being, consumption and work within global capitalism. Consequently, critical scholars in management and organization studies have begun to advocate alternative forms of organization and to problematize the collective imagination that ‘there is no alternative to growth’ (Parker et al. 2014; Atzeni 2012).

One important analytical dimension within the search for alternatives relates to the limits of growth in its economic, ecological and social dimension. For example, Meadows et al. (2004) explicate that a finite (world) system cannot handle an everlasting orientation toward growth without running into a collapse. Hirsch (1976) argues that social rise in a stratified society smolders, leading to social imbalances in the long term. Several authors discuss economic restrictions under the name of de-growth (Georgescu-Roegen 1977; Latouche 2009; Martínez Alier et al. 2010; Schneider et al. 2010; Kallis 2013). Schneider et al. (2010) point towards unfulfilled expectations in the context of creating win-win-situations and question the possibility of sustainable growth through technological and efficiency improvements. Relative to the social context, others discuss the label steady-state-economy, which challenges the relationship between growth and labor, solvency and consolidated public finances (Daly 1972, 1973; Lawn 2011; Blauwhof 2012).

However, there exist only few contributions discussing organizational alternatives to an orientation toward growth (Cheney et al. 2014). Some authors address growth neutral enterprises (Bakker et al. 1999; White/White 2012). Others note that neither governments nor private sector executives have any incentives supporting the development of a post-growth environment (e.g. Latouche, 2006; Ayres, 2008; Martínez Alier 2009). Therefore, the specific aim of this special issue is to substantiate the debate on post-growth, steady-state and de-growth from an organizational perspective. How can organizations respond to the limits of economic growth? How can organizations, from a post-growth perspective, promote their social worth as opposed to their monetary worth? How can organizations implement the elements of a post-growth economy, such as cutting-down and slowing down, a balance between sufficiency and dependency on consumption, institutional innovations for the society, the environment and regional economy (Paech, 2016)?

In addressing post-growth organizations (PGOs), we assume alternative organizations, featuring individual autonomy and respect, an orientation towards solidarity and cooperation, and responsibility to the future (Parker et al., 2014) to constitute a fertile ground for PGOs. Furthermore, we could imagine PGOs to develop from associations, growth neutral enterprises, co-operations, solidarity organizations, grass-root movements or even ‘traditional’ enterprises. Eventually, we do not restrict our focus on PGOs to the economic domain, but also take social and ecologic concerns, such as social entrepreneurs, into account. We call for contributions discussing different perspectives on PGOs, investigating their characteristics and limits. Furthermore, we embrace contributions investigating the range and coverage of PGOs as an organizational possibility in a future, post-growth society.

The contributions to this special issue should address one or more of the following questions:

– What characterizes the organization and the management of ‘post-growth organizations’ (PGOs)?

– Which role do the principles of autonomy, solidarity and responsibility play in PGOs? What kind of problems, contradictions and conjoint amplification are observable regarding these principles?

– Do PGOs enable us to cure some of the organizational ills created by a narrow focus on economic growth?

– What are the limits and prospects of PGOs in the transformation of capitalism?

– What organizational practices, tools and instruments are important in PGOs (e.g. accounting practices, compensation practices, decision making, regulations of working time, work-life balance, forms of participation etc.)?

– Is it possible to turn traditional organizations into PGOs?

– Which strategies (e.g. overcoming of externally defined difficulties, internal processes of storytelling, micro politics, adjustment of power) can be identified in the constitution and management of PGOs and which practices in PGOs are working well and which are not?

This is not an exhaustive list.

*Deadline* Potential contributors to the *Special Issue of Management Revue* are encouraged to submit an abstract of 1-2 pages before *30 September 2016* electronically via the online submission system at using ‘Post-Growth Organization’ as article section.

Contributors will receive feedback and an invitation to submit a full paper by the end of October 2016. Full papers must be submitted by *31 March 2017*. All contributions will be subject to a double-blind review. Papers invited to a ‘revise and resubmit’ are due *31 August 2017*.

*Looking forward to hearing from you!*

Matthias Rätzer ( Ronald Hartz ( Ingo Winkler (


Atzeni, Maurizio (Ed.) (2012): Alternative Work Organizations. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Ayres, Robert U. (2008): Sustainability Economics: Where do we stand?. In: Ecological Economics, 67 (2), 281-310.

Blauwhof, Frederik B. (2012): Overcoming accumulation: Is a capitalist steady-state economy possible?. In: Ecological Economics, 84, 254-261.

Cheney, George/ Santa Cruz, Iñaki/ Peredo, Ana Maria/ Nazareno, Elías (2014): Worker cooperatives as an organizational alternative: Challenges, achievements and promise in business governance and ownership. In: Organization, 21 (5), 591-603.

Daly, Herman E. (1972): In Defense of a Steady-State Economy. American Journal ofAgricultural Economics, 54(5), 945-954.

Daly, Herman E. (1973):Toward a Steady-State Economy. San Francisco: Freeman. Daly, Herman E. (1991): Steady-State Economics. 2. Edition. Washington [u.a.]: Island.

Georgescu-Roegen, Nicholas (1977): The steady state and ecological salvation: a thermo-dynamic analysis. Bioscience, 27(4), 266­70.

Kallis, Giorgos (2011): In defense of degrowth. In: Ecological Economics, 70, 873-880. Lawn, Philip (2011): Is Steady-State Capitalism Viable? A Review oftheIssuesand an Answer in the Affirmative. In: Costanza, Robert/ Limburg, Karin/ Kubiszewski, Ida (Ed.): Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1219, 1­25.

Martínez Alier, Joan (2009): Socially Sustainable Economic De-growth. In: Development and Change, 40 (6), 1099-1119.

Martínez Alier, Joan/ Pascaul, Unai/ Vivien, Franck-Dominique/ Zaccai, Edwin (2010): Sustainable de-growth: Mapping the context, criticism and future prospects of an emergent paradigm. In: Ecological Economics, 69, 1741-1747.

Parker, Martin/ Cheney, George/ Fournier, Valérie/ Land, Chris (Ed.) (2014): The Routledge Companion to Alternative Organization. London [u.a.]: Routledge.

Schneider, François/ Kallis, Giorgos/ Martínez Alier, Joan (2010): Crisis or opportunity? Economic degrowth for social equity and ecological sustainability. Introduction to this specialissue. In: Journal of Cleaner Production, 18, 511-518.

White, Doug/White, Polly (2012): Why Some Entrepreneurs Choose Not to Grow Their Businesses. In: Business Review USA, 9th March, e-Not-to-Grow-Their-Businesses.

Call for Papers: Organizational Practices of Social Movements and Popular Struggles: Understanding the Power of Organizing From Below

Special Issue of the Journal Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management

Maria Ceci Misoczky, Guilherme Dornelas Camara and Steffen Böhm


Thematic Focus of the Special Issue

The study of social movements in the field of Organization Studies (OS) has been largely influenced by theories constructed to analyze business organizations and their interactions with formal and informal social movement organizations. The predominant approach has been to construct a theoretical model and then applying it to a largely passive object (social movements). As a consequence, OS has remained relatively blind to the processes of organizing and the knowledge produced in the organizational practices from below.

These organizational practices from below tend to be hidden from the view of hegemonic (structuralist and managerialist) organization knowledge: popular struggles, anti-corporative movements, occupy events, self-organized cooperatives, community groups, indigenous people, peasant movements, to name but a few. What also tends to be marginalized or even ignored are the organizational practices of social movements based in the South, East and other peripheral places.

There is a need to fill this gap and, in accordance with Dunayevskaya (1982), to make the movement from practice to theory. For her, the practice from below is itself a form of theory. In the same way, Rauber (2004) defends the need of articulating two dimensions of critical reflexive thought: the knowledge that is theoretically elaborated and the knowledge that emerges from below and remains, most of the time, restrained to the practices and spaces of struggle. This critical, reflexive thought and the movement from practice to theory is a qualitative one, being embedded within the realities of the social and environmental struggles of social movements and popular organizations.

Studying social movements and popular struggles from below requires qualitative methods that are, first of all, respectful of the ethical and political liberating purposes. The possibility of producing knowledge through research processes that articulate theory and praxis, that take the concrete reality as the starting point, that move from the simple to the complex, from the concrete to the abstract, that share the aim of creating a theoretical content that is relevant and meaningful because it is attached to activists’ everyday life and provides a co-constructed meaning of organizing processes (Malo, 2004).

Such research perspective has a long tradition and has been experimented with and renewed for decades. This is the case, for example, of participatory research, a confluence of critical theory and social pedagogy (mainly popular education and the critical pedagogy of Paulo Freire, 1970), intending to articulate research and practical interventions with the knowledge, the experience and the needs of local communities. Another key element is the blurring of the separation between researchers and researched, in the sense that this is a process of co-research in which the participants are all partners sharing ethical and political values (Kincheloe, McLaren and Steinberg, 2011). Another example is critical ethnography and the recognition that researchers are subjects in dialogue with the Other, and that in this encounter – following the inspiration of Mikhail Bakhtin (1982) – there is dialogue towards substantial and viable meanings that make a difference in the world.

Another important approach has been workers’ inquiry. In 1880, La Revue Socialiste asked an ageing Karl Marx to draft a questionnaire to be circulated among the French working class. Called “A Workers’ Inquiry,” it was a list of exactly 101 detailed questions, inquiring about everything from meal times to wages to lodging. The most important modern-day application of workers’ inquiry was dissident Italian Marxism in the 1960s and 1970s. Originating in the Quaderni Rossi journal, the idea was taken up by elements in Potere Operaio, Autonomia and Lotta Continua. The key aspect is the conception of the militant workers’ self-inquiry as a means for investigating situations of transformation and the relationship between conflict and antagonism within it (Panzieri, 1994). The workers’ inquiry is a kind of co-research – a form of research that tears down the division between the subject-researcher and object-researched (Malo, 2004). More recently, such approaches have been extended to militant research – the place where academia and activism meet in the search for new ways of acting that lead to new ways of thinking (Bookchin et al., 2013), connected with spaces where horizontal practices of organization are experienced.

The above mentioned approaches to qualitative research share a perspective on knowledge production in which the fixed roles of academic and activist are blurred. Following the proposition of Enrique Dussel (1974) for a methodology of liberation, we can name this approach as ‘analectics’, an attitude that requires the openness to think, to listen, to see, to feel, to taste the world from the perspective of the Other; it is conditioned by humbleness and solidarity. Analectics allows one to recognize the existence of a politics of Totality and the Other. The ‘politics of the Other is an anti-politics, it is a politics of subversion and contestation’, since it challenges established hierarchies and legal truths. It proclaims the injustice and illegitimacy of the actual system in the name of a new legitimacy (Mendieta, 2001, p. 21). Alcoff (2011, p. 67) defines analectics as ‘an epistemology for the new revolution’: a decolonized epistemology that puts ‘at the center not simply the objective conditions of global impoverishment and oppression, but the systematic disauthorization of the interpretive perspective of the oppressed in the global South’. The idea of analectics is driven ‘to get to a larger, more comprehensive, and more adequate understanding of all that is true concerning the experience of those whose experiences are most often ignored’ (Alcoff, 2011, p. 71).

Call Details

 With this Special Issue we are calling for contributions that analyze and understand the political organization of grassroots struggles and resistances against hegemonic power regimes. In our view, it is vitally important for OS to see and engage with the organizational practices of the marginalized communities of below, as otherwise our field simply contributes to the reproduction of existing power regimes, rather than seeing and analyzing those practices of hope that challenge dominant frames of organizational analysis.

We particularly invite – but do by no means restrict submissions to – manuscripts on one or several of the following topics, always in connection with the methodological aspects discussed above:

  • The analysis of social movements and popular struggles, exploring the theoretical issues that are embedded in their practices;
  • The organizational significance of ephemeral movements and/or events;
  • Theoretical dialogues with the knowledge produced by activists in their organizational processes;
  • Analysis of alternative (that is, non-hegemonic) organizations and their resistances/struggles;
  • Critical discussion and reflection on what constitutes ‘alternatives’ and what organizational practices from below can be seen as contributing to the reproduction of existing regimes of power;
  • The dialectics of organization in its multiple contradictions such as spontaneity/organization, autonomy/demands to the state, horizontality/hierarchies, leadership/leading by obeying, critical strategic reasoning/refusal of strategic reasoning;
  • Organizational practices as experiments of prefigurative politics;
  • Meanings and limits of self-organization practices;
  • The organizational dimension in occupying events;
  • Theoretical dialogues with the knowledge produced by activists in their organizational processes;
  • Research practices for studying social movements and popular struggles and their limits;
  • Examinations of and reflections on the relationship between researcher and researched;
  • Theoretical debates on research methodologies to study social movements from below.


Submission Details

Deadline for submission of manuscripts is 1 November 2016.

Manuscripts should be a maximum of 10,000 words in length (including tables, figures and references) and should conform to the normal submission guidelines for Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management,




Alcoff, L. (2011), “An epistemology of the new revolution”, Transmodernity, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 67-78.

Dunayevskaya, R. (1982), Marxism and Freedom: From 1976 until Today, Humanities Press, Amherst, NJ.

Dussel, E. (1974), Método para una filosofía de la liberación, Ediciones Sígueme, Salamanca.

Rauber, I. (2004), “La transformación social en el siglo XXI: camino de reformas o de revolución”, Pasado y Presente, No. 21, pp. 1–26.

Bakhtin, M. (1982), Speech Genres and Other Late Essays, University of Texas Press, Austin, TX.

Bookchin, N. et al. (2013), “Militant research handbook”, available at: (accessed 1 June 2016) .

Freire, P. (1970), Pedagogy of the oppressed, Herder and Herder, New York, NY.

Kincheloe, J. L.; McLaren, P. and Steinberg, S. R. (2011) “Critical pedagogy and qualitative research: moving to the bricolage”, in: Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. (ed.) Handbook of qualitative research, 3ª ed., Sage, London, pp. 163-178.

Malo, M. (Ed.) (2004), Nociones Comunes: experiencias y ensayos entre investigación y militancia, Traficantes de Sueños, Madrid.

Marx, K. (1880), “A Workers’ inquiry”, first published in La Revue socialiste, April 20, 1880, uploaded in 1997, available at: (accessed 1 June 2016).

Mendieta, E. (2001), “Política en la era de la globalización: crítica de razón política de E. Dussel”, in Dussel, E. Hacia una Filosofía Política Critica, Desclée de Brouwer, Bilbao, pp. 15-39.

Panzieri, R. (1994), Spontaneita‘ e organizzazione: gli anni dei „Quaderni Rossi“ 1959-1964, BFS Edizioni, Pisa.

„Degrowth in Movement(s)“ / „Degrowth in Bewegung(en)“ – Multimedia Projekt

Man darf auf die noch entstehenden Beiträge gespannt sein.

Aus der Ankündigung:

Degrowth ist nicht nur ein neues Label für eine Diskussion über Alternativen oder eine akademische Debatte, sondern auch eine im Entstehen begriffene soziale Bewegung. Trotz vieler Überschneidungen mit anderen sozialen Bewegungen gibt es sowohl bei diesen als auch in Degrowth-Kreisen noch viel Unkenntnis über die jeweils anderen. Hier bietet sich viel Raum für gegenseitiges Lernen.

Wie steht Degrowth im Verhältnis zu anderen sozialen Bewegungen? Was kann die Degrowth-Bewegung von diesen lernen? Und was können andere soziale Bewegungen wiederum voneinander sowie von Degrowth-Ideen und -Praktiken lernen? Welche gegenseitigen Anregungen aber auch welche Spannungen gibt es? Und wo könnten Bündnisse möglich sein?

Diesen Fragen gehen 32 Vertreter_innen von sozialen Bewegungen, alternativökonomischen Strömungen und Initiativen in Essays nach.

Zum Projekt:

CfP von ephemera – What are the alternatives? Organizing for a socially and ecologically sustainable world

Noch bis Ende Februar können bei ephemera kürzere oder längere Beiträge zur Thematik alternative(r) Organisationsformen eingereicht werden. Aus dem Call:

This special issue seeks to explore the myriad of alternative ways of organizing that are striving to address the social and environmental challenges we currently face. These include, but are not limited to, collectivist approaches (Rothschild-Whitt, 1979) such as cooperatives, community owned enterprises and communal living, and usually though not exclusively these focus on specific localities. Alternative practices include freeganism (the sourcing and reusing of disposed items – see Kurutz, 2007; Starr, 2010), open source technology (Pearce, 2012), and the revitalisation of movements seeking social change, such as Occupy and Idle No More, challenging the ongoing impact of neo-colonial practices on indigenous women and youth in Canada. Many of these initiatives are anti-globalization, anti-consumerist and, in the Global South, anti-development. They tend to have been built from the bottom up and espouse inclusivity and participative action. They seek to prioritise the well-being of people, communities and nature above profit maximization, and indeed to fundamentally challenge ideas around profit, growth and capitalist forms of exchange (Langley and Mellor, 2002; North, 2010). Some may aim for autonomy and to ‘disengage from capitalist (…) systems to build new forms of social and economic relationships and identities’ (Wilson 2013: 720).

Hier der Link zum vollständigen Call:

CfP – Budapest Degrowth Conference: Call for individual papers is open

Aus der Ankündigung:

After a very successful special sessions call (more than 60 quality sessions submitted), we are happy to announce that the submission platform for individual papers is now open.

red snail  Submit your individual papers here green snail_reflection

The call will close on 29th of February 2016. Please note that the deadline will not be extended. The call for papers only requires submission of abstracts (1700 characters with spaces). Reviewing will be made on the basis of abstracts and if paper is selected, it will be presented during the conference in 15 min (only length limit). There will be no deadline for the optional submission of full papers.

Hier geht es zur Tagungshomepage:

Dokumentarfilmfestival ‚Utopianale‘ am 27.-28.Februar 2016 in Hannover

Zum vierten Mal findet in Hannover die ‚Utopianale‘ statt. In diesem Jahr steht das Dokumentarfilmfestival unter dem Motto „Was bewegt uns?“. Aus der Ankündigung:

„Unter dem Motto „Weil es ein Morgen gibt.“ treffen sich die Menschen, um über Ideen und Aktionen für eine gute Zukunft zu sprechen.

Thema 2016  „Was bewegt uns?“ & „Wie wollen wir uns bewegen?“

Dabei haben wir das Thema nachhaltiger Mobilität, die Frage „Wie gestalten wir eine gute Bürger*innen-Bewegung?“ aber auch die Fragen nach den inneren Beweggründen im Blick.“

Hier geht es zum ausführlichen Programm sowie allen weiteren Informationen zum Festival:

CfP – „Momentum16: Macht“ vom 13. – 16. Oktober 2016 in Hallstatt (Österreich)

Hier die Änkundigung des diesjährigen „Momentum“ Kongresses – Abstracts können bis 16.April eingereicht werden:
Zum neunten Mal findet von 13. – 16. Oktober 2016 der Kongress „Momentum“ statt, der über 250 Interessierte aus Politik, Gewerkschaft und Wissenschaft versammelt. Im Jahr 2016 steht der Begriff „Macht“ im Zentrum des wissenschaftlichen und politischen Diskurses. „Wie sieht eine egalitäre Gesellschaft aus und wie können wir diese erreichen?“ sind die Fragen denen sich der Kongress Momentum16: Macht widmet. Alle Informationen zum Kongress finden sich unter
Tracks Momentum16
Zentrum des Austausches bilden die zehn Tracks. Themenvorschläge (Abstracts) zu den einzelnen Tracks werden bis 14. April 2016 unter angenommen.
Der Track #10: „Globale Machtpolitiken“ wird in englischer Sprache abgehalten.
Track #1: Grundlagen der Macht
Track #2: Macht, Geschlecht & Identität
Track #3: Markt, Macht & Globalisierung
Track #4: Macht sozialer Bewegung(en)
Track #5: Klasse, Schicht und Verteilung
Track #6: Gehorsam und Widerstand lernen
Track #7: Hegemonie & Subversion
Track #8: Politische Machtarchitekturen
Track #9: Macht der Ökonomie, Ohnmacht der Ökologie?
Track #10: Globale Machtpolitiken
Weitere Informationen zu den Tracks finden sich unter:
Call for Papers: Momentum16
Bewerbungen für die einzelnen Tracks sind bis spätestens 14. April 2016 an zu richten. Die Bewerbung sollte neben dem Abstract auch Angaben zum gewünschten Track (sowie Zweitwahl) beinhalten. Die eingereichten Abstracts sollen einen inhaltlichen Überblick über den geplanten Kongressbeitrag geben und rund 7000 Zeichen (also zwei A4-Seiten) umfassen. Die Entscheidung über die Teilnahme und ein erstes Feedback erhalten die TeilnehmerInnen ab Juni 2016. Die finalen Beiträge sind bis 12. September 2016 einzureichen.