Resource context (publisher & author)
This resource is an article titled “What Co-Ops and DAOs Can Learn from Each Other,” published by Friends With Benefits (FWB) and written by Austin Robey, with additional co-authoring and reporting by Stellar Magnet. It draws on the author’s experience founding and working with a digital cooperative (Ampled) and participating in several DAOs (including Forefront, Seed Club, and Friends With Benefits), and examines how cooperative and blockchain-based organizational models can inform one another.
What the article compares: co-ops and DAOs
The article defines cooperatives (co-ops) as businesses with shared ownership—by workers, customers, or both—typically governed by “one-member, one-vote,” where voting power is tied to people rather than capital. It describes decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) as token-coordinated, internet-native organizations built on blockchain that can take many forms (e.g., protocol/platform, creator, service, curation, investment, and social DAOs). While both models aim to expand collective ownership and shared governance of digital infrastructure, the piece highlights a common DAO governance pattern of “one-token, one-vote,” which can concentrate influence based on financial stake.
Lessons for DAOs from cooperative history
The article argues that collective work and democratic ownership long predate modern technology communities, and points to histories of mutual aid and solidarity networks. It references Jessica Gordon-Nembhard’s “Collective Courage,” describing African American cooperative economic practices such as pooling funds to buy freedom, forming intentional communities and mutual aid societies, and the Underground Railroad as a solidarity network. It also notes the Rochdale Society of Equitable Pioneers (1844) as a widely cited foundation for the modern co-op movement, and mentions U.S. examples like barter/value-exchange networks during the Great Depression, rural electrical cooperatives, and local/community currencies (e.g., Ithaca Hours and BerkShares).
Economic and racial justice, and what “ownership” means
The piece contrasts typical motivations: co-ops often arise in response to market failures and exploitative systems, aiming to deliver member benefits such as jobs, dignity, and collective agency, and are frequently guided by racial and economic justice missions. It contrasts this with prominent crypto/DAO examples that have been driven by speculation or commodification, including PleasrDAO’s fractionalization of the Doge meme and ConstitutionDAO raising over $40 million to bid on a copy of the U.S. Constitution, while noting these still demonstrate new templates for global coordination. It also mentions emerging interest in “Decentralized Impact Organizations” as a framework to allocate resources toward longer-term social impact.
Governance tooling and shared principles
The article argues that broad “ownership economy” definitions can dilute what ownership entails, emphasizing that robust ownership includes transparency, accountability, voice in decisions, and the ability to hold leadership accountable. It presents cooperatives as having a time-tested toolbox (e.g., bylaws, operating agreements, IP ownership, and clear rights and responsibilities) that can inform DAO governance design. It also highlights how cooperatives often organize around shared principles, referencing the Rochdale Principles (including open membership, democratic control, economic participation, autonomy, education, cooperation among cooperatives, and concern for community) and suggests DAOs could benefit from articulating common values—citing the DWeb Principles as one inspiration.
What co-ops can learn from DAOs, and hybrid models
The article describes DAOs as enabling rapid experimentation because they are often not tied to a corporate entity and can collectively source ideas, allocate resources, iterate, and ship quickly. It uses PartyDAO as an example (a proposal in April 2021, $100k raised, and a product shipped within months enabling collective NFT bidding and fractionalized ownership). It also highlights token-based coordination as a potential response to co-ops’ capital constraints, citing Helium’s global node network compensated with HNT tokens as an illustration of scaling participation and incentives. The article closes by pointing to blended approaches—such as DisCo frameworks and examples including ETHDenver, Opolis, Common Lands, and SongADAO—arguing that future organizations may combine cooperative values with on-chain coordination rather than choosing one model exclusively.