Find in Library

In the philosophical meaning, the cooperative is a result of the knowing experimentallydevelopment and includes the interaction between: persons of consequence – through ideas and attitudes,state – through laws and institutes, experiences – through structures and effects.In Romania, in the first half of the XIXth century, and to the threshold of the Second World War, areremarked numerous persons of consequence who promote and support the cooperative movement, suchas P.S. Aurelian, Spiru Haret, Ion Raducanu, Virgil Madgearu, Mitita Constantinescu and NicolaeCornateanu.The state has accepted the cooperative as an instrument of the democratization of the capital andprofit. The cooperative movement had fight continuously towards promotion of the collaboration principlebetween cooperative companies, principle by virtue of which the organizations can manifest independencein confrontation with the state.The experiences had been substantiated mostly on the ideology of modern cooperative systems:Rochdale, Raiffaisen and Schulttze.The Romanian cooperative movement appeared, just like in the majority of European states, on abackground of some restrictions in the agricultural field, generated by a complex of factors among whichthe main position in a constant way had been hold by the contest between the big and small agriculturalfarms.In Romania, during the period before and after-war, cooperatives’ organization worked successfullyas credit cooperatives or economical cooperatives (consumption cooperatives, supply and sale cooperatives,forestry cooperatives, purchase community, leasing community, etc.).The various shapes of the cooperative movements shows the potential which those have had in thepurpose of their economical development and social situation improvement of the farmers. The potentialwas narrowed not only by the legislative and institutional instability, but more by the agriculturalmarket size and intensity. The cooperatives activities efficiency was depending, before all, on the economicand social environment within which they were acting. But the economic environment was imposingas market partner, the farm as an economic-social entity with autarchic behaviour. In consequencethe cooperative sector’s performances were conditioned by the farms’ performances.