Living co-ops in Korea 151Network 2013). It is now not uncommon to find producers (farmers) associated
with living co-ops such as Dure and Hansalim who are guinong population: For
example, Chae Jin-Hui, a producer/supplier of bracken for Hansalim is a guinong
farmer who used to be a Hansalim consumer living in Seoul.^12
A majority of this guinong/guichon population has an urban middle-class
background: They are often well-educated and relatively young compared to the
existing aged village population. By adopting advanced agricultural technologies,
they are often actively involved in the living co-op movement as a producer group
and have become a key driving force behind revitalizing the cooperative community.
Significantly, in terms of the word “gui” (“returning”), it is worth noting that most
of these guinong populations have never engaged in nong (farming) or lived in
chon (village) before. The terminology of “returning” then implies nostalgic desires
toward imagined sentiments or practices that they have never actually experienced,
yet they are feeling they imagine that traditional ma-eul must have had: These
include a sense of cooperation, fellowship, mutual assistance, and caring. By
performing guinong/guichon, they attempt to reestablish forgotten virtues that
actually have never existed in their lifetimes. By attempting to restore cooperative
community sentiments and values, these contemporary middle-class consumers/
producers contribute toward the construction of sustainable modes of living as well
as rebuilding the financial ecosystem underpinning the local food supply chain.
Conclusion
Justice and equity issues must be incorporated into the core of social sustainability
practices where social minority groups (defined in terms of race, class, and gender)
must be considered in depth. The class and social inequalities experienced by
many ordinary citizens (both producers and consumers) within Korea’s neoliberal
capitalist system often manifest in the ways that individuals suffer social exclusion,
unequal wealth redistribution, and inequitable access to environmentally friendly
goods. In the example of living co-ops in Korea, members are usually farmers/
fishers in rural areas or factory workers in small and medium-sized towns and
often suffer social inequalities under the jaebeol-dominated food supply system in
Korea. The other side of this is the middle-class urban consumers who, to a certain
degree, too often suffer social exclusions and economic pressures under extremely
competition-driven neoliberal capitalist system in Korea’s many city spaces.
The boom in living co-ops is a barometer of what many contemporary Korean
citizens from rural citizens and factory workers to the precarious middle classes
are yearning for―environmentally as well as socially sustainable living. This new
movement raises a range of questions: What kind of socio-political elements lead
members of living co-ops to participate in cooperative social enterprises? How
do their decisions enable them to create new job opportunities and horizontal
work environments, which to a certain degree deconstruct the existing neoliberal
capitalist structure and (re)establish sustainable social structures? How does this
new movement signify an emerging shift toward sustainable lifestyles in the
region more broadly, implying as it does both cosmopolitan as well as nostalgic