THE UNITED NATIONS is celebrating 2012 as the International Year of Co-operatives with the slogan: “Co-operative enterprises build a better world”. With an environment abuzz with discussions on the need to address the livelihood needs of India’s vast population, the UN’s decision serves as a reminder of an important strand of the democratic tradition. Within India, with its eponymous ‘demographic dividend’ (the fact that the country’s majority are below the age of 30) and accelerated migratory patterns, it is now recognised that the size of a country’s workforce will need to be absorbed in gainful employment in sustainable ways. In the context in which discussions about creating sustainable livelihoods are flying fast and furious, the experience of co-operatives can provide some insights. Over the past decade, the response of policy-makers to livelihood challenges has been to unleash a series of schemes that seek to ‘organise’ what is still the country’s largely unorganised workforce. The Mahatma National Rural Employment Guarantee (MNREGA) and the National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM) are but two of the manifestations. The Bharat Rural Livelihoods Foundation—announced by Pranab Mukherjee during Budget 2012—is the latest arrival. Far away from the Delhi corridors, a number of entrepreneurs are attempting to develop newer models of manpower training, recognising the potential for growth in the workforce management sector. Now it is a good time to restate that perhaps the most successful experiment in livelihood creation has been the dairy co-operative movement, which has come to be associated with the brand AMUL (an acronym for Anand Milk Union Limited). This is relevant in view of the UN’s ongoing celebration of cooperatives, which affirms the principle that the powers of democratic decision-making, collectivisation and resource aggregation can provide livelihoods and social security for marginalised people. This UN recognition also underscores the pertinence of a political metaphor: in the same way that a democratic polity attempts to address the aspirations of a large group of citizens by aggregating their views through the electoral process, co-operatives seek to bring the powers of aggregation among producers to the marketplace. At the core of the co-operative organisational form are two fundamental principles—the sovereignty of labour (which is at the heart of the organisation’s management culture) and democratic values (integral to the decision-making processes). Question is: do these types of organisations work in today’s cutthroat environment? Historically, cooperatives have been successful, especially in the agricultural sector. Fonterra Co-operative Group, which began in 1956, is New Zealand’s single- largest company. It is organised as a producer-owned co-operative by 10,500 farmers. The firm is responsible for 30 per cent of the world’s dairy exports with a revenue exceeding NZ$19.87 billion. The US-based co-operative Land O’Lakes Inc., started in 1921, serves over 300,000 producers and has a footprint in 50 countries. In the non-agricultural sector, Mondragon Corporation, located in the Basque country, is rooted in the co-operative tradition. It is the seventh-largest company in Spain with a history that began in the 1950s. It has a sectoral spread that covers industry, finance, retail and the knowledge economy. Within India AMUL has served as the flag-bearer for co-operative values. It has an inspiring record going back over half-a-century. Despite swirls of political and economic pressures, especially in the 1990s, the AMUL movement has worked hard to remain grounded. This is also true of the SEWA Bank set up in 1976. Despite the sense of doom characterising the microfinance sector, SEWA Bank has remained unscathed with a business of Rs 175 crore and 87,000 members. The success of such enterprises was probably the reason as to why in 2002, the Centre adopted the Companies (Amendment) Act 2002, commonly described as the Producer’s Company Act. At the core of the design of a producer company is the co-operative principle that members have to be primary producers. The Act draws from the international experience of “new generation co-operatives”, of which a great deal has been written of especially by the likes of International Co-operative Alliance. At the heart of this legislation is an attempt to create livelihoods for India’s burgeoning workforce through an organisational model that attempts to leverage the efficiencies of the 21st Century capitalism without diluting the community-based orientation of co-operatives. Today, India’s economic landscape is dotted with entrepreneurial ventures seeking scale through producer company model. Among the better known ones are Fabindia and DCM Hariyali. Many more are in the pipeline. It is fair to say that even as the Centre continues to unleash new centrally-and state-sponsored schemes on India’s largely youthful population, these will all be tested. It is gratifying that the UN has placed its belief in the co-operative tradition. It will help recognise the fact that solutions to bigger problems are often found locally and are best managed through appropriate deliberative processes and organisational forms. Sources of livelihood come in all shapes, from governmentsponsored schemes (MNREGA and NRLM), to seasonal employment, to social enterprise. In this mix of good and not-so-good options, it would be useful to remember that the values and processes championed by (producer and consumer) co-operatives continue to exercise influence and have the potential in mitigating economic hardship. The extraordinary story of India’s dairy co-operatives (which made India the world’s leading producer of milk) as well as the plethora of experiments in cooperation mushrooming around the country should serve to reinforce this belief as we look to the future.