Skip to main content

Twin Goals and Two Communities: A Behavioural Approach

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Cooperative Enterprise

Part of the book series: Cooperative Management ((COMA))

  • 585 Accesses

Abstract

Cooperatives are not ideological cliques trying to detach themselves from the world. In simple terms, they are merely associations of people who establish a business to provide themselves with certain services in order to thrive in the global market.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The phrase ‘enlightened self-interest’ comes directly from philosopher David Hume, the colleague and sounding board of Adam Smith.

  2. 2.

    Example: Timur Kuran and Cass R. Sunstein, Availability Cascades and Risk regulation, 51 Stan. L. Rev. 683, 688–89, 746 (1998).

References

  • Bijman, J., Muradian, R., & Cechin, A. (2011). Agricultural cooperatives and value chain coordination: Towards an integrated theoretical framework. In B. Helmsing & S. Vellema (Eds.), Value chains, inclusion and endogenous development. Contrasting theories and realities (pp. 82–101). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, M. L., Iliopoulos, C., & Chaddad, F. (2004). Advances in cooperative theory since 1990: A review of agricultural economics literature. In G. W. J. Hendrikse (Eds.), Restructuring cooperatives. Rotterdam Erasmus University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Didier, V. B., Henninger, M. C., & El Akremi, A. (2012). The relationship between members’ trust and participation in the governance of cooperatives: The role of organisational commitment. IFAMR, 15(1), 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eser, Z., & Peek, J. (2006). Reciprocity and network coordination: Evidence from Japanese Banks, Hi-Stat Discussion paper series; No. d05-157, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fowler, J. H., & Christakis, N. A. (2010). Cooperative behavior cascades in human social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(12), 5334–5338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gulati, R., & Singh, H. (1998). The architecture of cooperation: Managing coordination costs and appropriate concerns in strategic alliance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, 781–814.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, O. D. & Moore, J. (1998). Cooperatives versus outside ownership. National Bureau of Economic Research. http://papers.nber.org/papers/w6421.pdf.

  • Iiro, J., Noreen, B., & Tuominen, H. (2012). Affective commitment in co-operative organizations: What make members want to stay? International Business Research, 5(10), 1–10. Available at www.ccsenet.org/ibr.

  • Kahan, D. M. (2002). The logic of reciprocity: Trust, collective action and law, John M. Olin Center for Studies in Law, Economics and Public Policy. Working Papers. Paper 284 http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/leep-papers/281.

  • Kalogeras, N., Baourakis, G., Zopounidis, C., & van Dijk, G. (2009a). Evaluating the financial performance of agri-food firms: A multicriteria decision-aid approach. Journal of Food Engineering, 70, 365–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalogeras, N., Pennings, J. M. E., van der Lans, I. A., Garcia, P., & Dijk, V. (2009b). Understanding heterogeneous preferences of cooperative members. Agribusiness, 25(1), 90–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mauss, A. (1969). The gift (p. 70). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michael, P. E., & van Vugt, M. (2014). The evolution of leader-follower reciprocity: The theory of service-for-prestige. Hypothesis and Theory Article. Published on June 2014. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00363.

  • Rilling, J. K., & Sanfey, A. G. (2011). The neuroscience of social decision-making. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 23–48. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.121208.131647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, S., & Siu-Yun Lui, S. (2005). Distinguishing costs of cooperation and control in alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 26, 913–932.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

van Dijk, G., Sergaki, P., Baourakis, G. (2019). Twin Goals and Two Communities: A Behavioural Approach. In: The Cooperative Enterprise. Cooperative Management. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16279-5_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics