LETS

LETS at present suffer from a similar problem to the one faced by co-ops a decade ago they are predominantly a "lifestyle statement" as much as a reaction to economic circumstances. LETS could be characterised as the commodification of social networks, the formalisation of the traditional networks that enabled neighbours "to borrow a cup of sugar" from each other in neighbourhoods where now neighbours barely know each other, and need a LETS scheme as a "safe" intermediary. Both co-ops then and LETS now give prominence to the opportunities they afford unemployed people. Yet neither, with a few honourable exceptions, draw their membership from the unemployed. A decade ago further development of the worker co-operative movement was seen as being reliant on a more sympathetic attitude by central government. The situation with LETS is similar; a change of policy by the Department of Social Security in relation to the participation by unemployed people in LETS. On their present profile, changing the benefits rules to enable more unemployed people to participate in LETS would have a minimal impact. While such a change will probably make some difference, the opportunities LETS schemes offer, in terms of the range of goods and services traded, will probably be more significant, particularly access to basic needs that unemployed people would mainly look for, which are currently too limited. None of this is to suggest that LETS have no value, nor indeed that some, like some worker coops, will not thrive and expand into substantial trading networks. But our experiences suggest that current optimism substantially overemphasises their long-term importance in local economies. •