HomePsychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journalvol. 4 no. 6 (2022)

Socio-Economic Impact of Cooperatives Among Members: An Input to Customized Program Development Framework for Cooperatives

Venus Hilario

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

Cooperatives are autonomous, duly registered association of persons, with common bond of interest, voluntarily joined together to achieve their social, economic and cultural needs and aspirations, making equitable contributions to the capital required, patronizing their own products and services and accepting fair share of the risks and benefits of the undertaking in accordance with the universally accepted cooperative principles. The study generally aims to determine the social and economic (socio-economic) impact or contributions of cooperatives as perceived by member-respondents. Specifically, it aims to determine the demographic profile of the respondents, the social and economic impact of cooperatives, the actual social and economic impacts of cooperatives, the constraints and concerns encountered by the members, and the significant difference between the socio-economic impact of cooperatives as described by the respondents when grouped according to their demographic profile. In terms of the social impact: on donations, the indicators “Donations given by the cooperative are relatively big enough to cover various causes or advocacies” and “Donations given by the cooperative provide the recipient organization/institution resources to pursue their causes or advocacies” obtained the highest mean; on volunteer/civic works, the indicator “The cooperative participate in various civic causes such as clean-up drive or Balik-eskwela caravans” obtained the highest mean; on expert services, the indicator “The cooperative provides a helping hand to students or members of the academe on topics related to this form of organization” obtained the highest mean; on policy advocacy, the indicator “The cooperative pushes for legislations that ensure productive reforms in the industry” obtained the highest mean; on culture development, the indicator “The cooperative participates in local customs and traditions such as town fiesta, festivals etc” obtained the highest mean; on scholarships, the indicator “The cooperative offers educational loans that specifically support academic concerns with relatively low interest” obtained the highest mean; on student placement, the indicator “The cooperative gets On-the-Job Trainees (OJT) in both Senior High School and College levels” obtained the highest mean; on fund raising, the indicator “The cooperative spearhead fundraising activities which aim to help those who have been devastated by natural calamities such as flood, typhoon or even pandemic” got the highest mean; and on gender and development, the indicator “The cooperative adopts policies that ensure gender and development in all areas” obtained the highest mean. In terms of economic impact, on enterprise development, the indicator “The cooperative provides business loans or multipurpose loans that benefit small business owners” obtained the highest mean; on interest charged on loans, the indicator “The interest charged by cooperative is lower than those being charged by banks and other financial institutions” obtained the highest mean; on interest earned from savings, the indicator “The interest rates were computed to provide the best value for the money saved by members” obtained the highest mean; on sales/service revenue & net income, the indicator “The cooperative has relatively good financial position” obtained the highest mean; and on dividends earned, the indicator “The cooperative has enough earnings to cover dividends share to be given to members after a fiscal year” obtained the highest mean. In terms of the actual social and economic impact, on actual social impact, the indicator “Our cooperative gives donations after devastating floods, typhoons or other man-made or natural disasters” obtained” obtained the highest mean; and on actual economic impact, the indicator “The cooperative has enough earnings to cover dividends share to be given to members after a fiscal year” obtained the highest mean. On the extent of constraints and concerns encountered by the respondents, the indicator “Documentary requirements for the application and approval of financial products (loans, savings etc.) or product ordering or service availing” obtained the highest mean as constraint/concern of members with the cooperative. On the significant difference, there is no significant difference on the respondent’s assessment of the social and economic impacts provided by cooperatives when grouped according to their personal profile except for the municipality where they live in.



References:

  1. Ademu, Y., Aduku, DJ., Elesho, TM., and Nweke, P. (2018). Contributions of co-operative societies to economic development in Kogi State, Nigeria. International Journal of Economic and Business Management, 4(6), 35-46. ISSN 2489-0065
  2. Alho, E. (2019). Farmers’ willingness to invest in new cooperative instruments: A choice experiment. Annals of Public & Cooperative Economics, 90(1), 161–186. https://doi-org.dlsu.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/apce.12226
  3. Cafer, A. M., & J, S. R. (2018). Adoption of new technologies by smallholder farmers: The contributions of extension, research institutes, cooperatives, and access to cash for improving tef production in Ethiopia. Agriculture and Human Values, 35(3), 685-699. doi: http://dx.doi.org.dlsu.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s10460-018-9865-5
  4. Debela, M., Diriba, S., & Bekele, H. (2018). Impact of Cooperatives Membership on economy in Eastern Oromia: The case of Haramaya Agricultural Farmers’ Cooperative Union (Hafcu). Annals of Public & Cooperative Economics, 89(2), 361–376. https://doi-org.dlsu.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/apce.12175
  5. Ferraz, L. Z. T., Rezende, A. J., de Lima, J., Paulo Resende, & Todeva, E. (2018). Perception of value co-creation actions in agricultural cooperatives luana. Brazilian Administration Review, 15(3), 1-32. doi: http://dx.doi.org.dlsu.idm.oclc.org/10.1590/1807-7692bar2018180005
  6. Hammarberg, K., Kirkman, M. & de Lacey, S. (2016). Qualitative research methods: when to use them and how to judge them. Human Reproduction, 31 (3), 498-501. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dev334
  7. Hernández-Perlines, F., Ariza-Montes, A., & Araya-Castillo, L. (2020). Sustainable growth in the agro-food cooperatives of Castilla-La Mancha (Spain). Sustainability, 12(12), 5045. doi: http://dx.doi.org.dlsu.idm.oclc.org/10.3390/su12125045
  8. Hohler, J., & Kuhl, R. (2018). Dimensions of Member Heterogeneity in Cooperatives and Their Impact on Organization – a Literature Review. Annals of Public & Cooperative Economics, 89(4), 697–712. https://doi-org.dlsu.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/apce.12177
  9. Hubin, Y., Yaqi, G., Liu, W., Cairang, D., & Jiang, W. (2019). Case study of “Meilong model” ecological animal husbandry shareholding cooperatives in qinghai. International Journal of Anthropology and Ethnology, 3(1) doi: http://dx.doi.org.dlsu.idm.oclc.org/10.1186/s41257-019-0024-8
  10. Mastronardi, L., & Romagnoli, L. (2020). Community-based cooperatives: A new business model for the development of italian inner areas. Sustainability, 12(5), 2082. doi: http://dx.doi.org.dlsu.idm.oclc.org/10.3390/su12052082
  11. Mhembwe, S. and Dube, E. (2017). The role of cooperatives in sustaining the livelihoods of rural communities: the case of rural cooperatives in Shurugwi District, Zimbabwe. Journal of Disaster Risk Studies, 9(91):341. https://doi:10.4102/jamba.v9i1.341.
  12. Mojo, D., Fischer, C., & Degefa, T. (2016). Collective action and aspirations: The impact of cooperatives on Ethiopian Coffee Farmers’ aspirations. Annals of Public & Cooperative Economics, 87(2), 217–238. https://doi-org.dlsu.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/apce.12103
  13. Montefrio, M. J. F., & Dressler, W. H. (2019). Declining food security in a Philippine oil palm frontier: The changing role of cooperatives. Development & Change, 50(5), 1342–1372. https://doi-org.dlsu.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/dech.12443
  14. Nan, Y., Gao, Y., & Zhou, Q. (2019). Rural credit cooperatives’ contribution to agricultural growth: Evidence from china. Agricultural Finance Review, 79(1), 119-135. doi: http://dx.doi.org.dlsu.idm.oclc.org/10.1108/AFR-06-2017-0042
  15. Poupeau, F. and Hardy, S. (2016). The social conditions of self-organized utilities: water cooperatives in La Paz and El Alto, Bolivia. Water International. 73-91. https://dpoi-org.dlsu.idm.oclc.org/10.1080/02508060.2016.1219196
  16. Shakir, K. A., Ramli, A., Pulka, B. M., & Ghazali, F. H. (2020). The link between human capital and cooperatives performance. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 23(1), 1-11. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.dlsu.idm.oclc.org/docview/2425599770?accountid=190474
  17. Sulich, Adam. "The young people's labour market and crisis of integration in European Union". Archived from the original on 2017-03-04. Retrieved 2017-03-04.
  18. Vítor Figueiredo, Mário Franco, Wine cooperatives as a form of social entrepreneurship: Empirical evidence about their impact on society. Land Use Policy, Volume 79, 2018, Pages 812-821, ISSN 0264-8377, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.09.022. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026483771830022X)
  19. Wu, X. and Ding, Y. (2018). The service supply effect of cooperatives under economic transformation: a demand-supply perspective. Sustainability. 10, 3075. 1-18. https://doi:10.3390/su10093075.
  20. Zimnoch, K., & Mazur, B. (2018). Value added as a measure of social role of cooperatives. Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, 6(1), 42-51. doi: http://dx.doi.org.dlsu.idm.oclc.org/10.15604/ejbm.2018.06.01.004