<h1>From This Year On, I Will Use the Term “Social and Solidarity Economy” Instead of “Social Economy”</h1>

“Social and Solidarity Economy,” a term increasingly seen in promotional materials. In South Korea, a shift in terminology usage is becoming visible.(Photo by Milly) 

 I have previously written a post outlining the differences between the terms “social economy” and “social and solidarity economy.”

 

In that earlier piece, I focused mainly on comparing the two concepts—how they differ conceptually and in what contexts each term has been used.

 

👉Related post

The Shift in Terminology: From “Social Economy” to “Social Solidarity Economy”

 

What I want to write about today is not another attempt to redefine these terms. Rather, this post is a declaration of which term I will choose to use in this blog going forward.

 

The term “social economy” has played an important role in Korean society. It has functioned as the language of policy and institutions, and as a bridge connecting the public sector and the market. It has allowed social enterprises, cooperatives, self-support enterprises, village enterprises, and social ventures to explain who they are. It also helped create a foundation where values beyond profit—social value—could be discussed within the realm of the economy. As a journalist, observer, and recorder, I have naturally used the term “social economy” for many years.

 

However, over the past few years, the atmosphere in the field has begun to change. More voices have argued that we should use “social and solidarity economy” instead of “social economy,” while others have questioned whether such a change is really necessary, given how established the existing term already is.

 

As someone who has consistently remained close to the field, I also spent a long time 고민ing how to use these two terms in my writing. After much reflection, I have decided that from this post onward, I will replace “social economy” with “social and solidarity economy.”

 

In Korea, social economy initiatives have often been driven primarily by the goal of job creation. This has been—and remains—extremely important. Yet in the field, there has been a growing sense that a deeper and more expansive form of social economy needs to operate alongside this goal. In that sense, the term “social and solidarity economy” encompasses not only job creation but also a wider range of practices related to social innovation, all connected through the idea of solidarity.

 

The Korean government has also begun to adopt the term “social and solidarity economy” in place of “social economy.” For me personally, many of the scenes I have witnessed in the field, the choices and dilemmas I wanted to record but struggled to name, feel more naturally explained within the language of “social and solidarity economy.”

 

Of course, the way I use the term “social and solidarity economy” still includes the meanings traditionally associated with “social economy.” This choice is not about staking out a rigid theoretical position, but rather about my attitude toward writing. The term may still feel unfamiliar to some readers and may require more explanation at times. Even so, I believe that the depth and breadth contained in “social and solidarity economy” are sufficient to encompass not only social economy as it has been understood, but also broader value-oriented practices beyond it.

 

From this year onward, this blog will continue its record using the term “social and solidarity economy” instead of “social economy.” There may come a time in the future when another term feels more appropriate. What remains clear, however, is that language is not merely a tool of expression—it shapes how we see and understand the world.