The document has been elaborated on the ground of a stakeholder consultation which took place during summer 2017, and which involved representatives of sectoral cooperative associations at the European and national levels, and cooperative entrepreneurs across different sectors and European countries.

Through the consultation, a number of comments, observations and proposals were collected not only in relation to the European Agenda, but in general around the current challenges, opportunities and trends for the innovation of the cooperative movement brought about by the collaborative economy. While inspiring this position, the consultation has helped to reflect on the diversity of perceptions, approaches and models adopted by cooperatives in collaborative economy across Europe.

Despite the diversity of approaches, models and outcomes found within this fast changing landscape, a common vision has emerged: the fundamental role played by communities in the collaborative economy, and the opportunity to integrate economy, technology and society within a unique, inclusive and sustainable project of growth. This element deserves further room for investigation, experimentation and debate not only for its potential contribution to a renewed and empowered cooperative membership, but also for the yet untapped opportunity to unleash social and economic forms that can enable a smart, sustainable and inclusive growth in Europe.

In this scenario, the cooperative movement stands out as a key player to ensure a sustainable, competitive and

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

"Cooperatives call for a public-private partnership"

inclusive development of the collaborative economy in Europe. However, there is the need of a European enabling ecosystem that recognizes and fully includes the cooperative model, making the most of its distinctive features and values to imprint the collaborative economy with strong social purposes, addressing societal challenges and achieving positive impact on individuals, communities and society.

In this perspective, Cooperatives Europe, the voice of cooperative enterprises in Europe, calls for a partnership between European institutions and community-based organizations to shape and implement an ambitious collective project for the collaborative economy.

On June 15th, 2017, the European Parliament (EP) adopted a Resolution 1 on the European Agenda for the collaborative economy, published by the European Commission (EC) in 2016 2 to provide guidance to businesses, consumers and public institutions, engaging in the emerging collaborative economy.

The EC's Agenda has represented a major cornerstone in acknowledging the importance of the collaborative economy in Europe, recognizing its increasing relevance for the creation of new opportunities for consumers and entrepreneurs, as well as for the creation of jobs and growth.

With a gross revenue in Europe of around 28 billion euros in 2015, and an index of growth that for some sectors like accommodation and mobility almost doubled in one yeartime 3 , the collaborative economy is indeed much more than an eccentric trend. By designing goods and services and shaping economic relations around unedited or massively empowered features -temporary access to assets, disintermediation, peer-to-peer exchange, distributed networks -the collaborative economy is disrupting almost all sectors, challenging the competitiveness of traditional businesses. In turn, the ongoing 4th Industrial Revolution characterized by automation, robotics, artificial intelligence, digital fabrication and big data on the one hand, and surrounded by growing societal concerns on the other hand, is putting a major question mark at the horizon of our production model. The question is if and to what extent it can adapt to this changing scenario not only securing jobs, but rather driving growth and wealth benefitting all.

Doubtless, the disruption brought about by the collaborative economy is not free from serious consequences. Controversial impacts in many areas such as fair competition, labour rights, consumer protection, quality of services and transparency are, among others, under the spotlight of a global debate. Taken together, these aspects all converge towards a deep concern about the new forms of exploitation and concentration of wealth powered by many 'platform businesses', questioning the democratic nature of the 'knowledge society' and its main 'armed wing' -the Internet, therefore turning the collaborative economy into an urgent matter for policy-makers, researchers and practitioners at all levels.

INTRODUCTION

"Adapting to a changing scenario" Indeed, the collaborative economy has something deeply in common with the cooperative movement: sharing and collaboration strongly belong to both their vocabularies, as much as the community dimension represents a common ground of action. Born in the 19th century from the need of advancing inclusive, socially driven forms of economic and productive organization, cooperatives have gone through all major revolutions of modern times, showing resilience and adaptation to changes, protecting workers and contributing to the welfare state. To date, they can be found all over the world, with numbers that are showing a promising increase. 4 Like other social and economic actors, the cooperative movement has recognized the disruptive potential of collaborative economy models. More specifically, it has acknowledged the emergence of unedited forms of community building, organization, participation and governance that the collaborative economy brings with it. If there is a risk of making the traditional cooperative membership and the same cooperative model losing ground, there is also an opportunity: that of unlocking the distinctive features of cooperatives -democratic ownership and governance, mutualistic relationship and concern for communities -towards empowered models for people to connect and collaborate around shared goals, strengthen social ties, and earn sustainable livelihoods.

To date, no unique and univocal definition is able to fully encompass the huge variety of models and approaches labelled as collaborative economy. Uber, Airbnb, Blablacar, Copify, Loomio, as some examples, are very diverse in terms of scale and scope, as much as they are in their ways of harnessing distributed assets and networks, building communities, and facilitating exchanges among peers. To the extent that the language shapes the reality, such ambiguity in meanings is what blurs the borders between an economy supporting citizen's empowerment on the one hand, and business strategies operating in an extractive logic on the other hand. This eventually prevents from building a regulatory framework able to fully unleash the former, while mitigating the negative effects of the latter. "A disruptive potential of collaborative economy models" manner, making it socially and environmentally sustainable. By recognizing a "growing interest in the collaborative economy based on cooperative business models"5 , the European Parliament opens doors for a collaborative economy that can be social and collaborative in scopes rather than only in means, imprinting the European way to the collaborative economy with strong values of democracy, equal opportunities and rights.

Cooperatives Europe welcomes the European Parliament's acknowledgment that the collaborative economy is much more than "a collection of new business models offering goods and services", but rather "a new form of integration between the economy and society."6 However, also in light of the growing social tensions stemming from aggressive strategies implemented by a few giants of the collaborative economy, it regrets that the Resolution does not stress further on the structural prerequisites to which collaborative economy businesses should comply with.

Within this framework, the present document represents an attempt to provide European institutions and stakeholders with a contribution aimed at developing an ambitious agenda for the collaborative economy in Europe.

The overall position and proposals contained in this paper have been built on the ground of a stakeholder consultation realized during summer 2017, which involved representatives of sectoral cooperative associations at the European and national levels, and cooperative entrepreneurs across different sectors and European countries. Through the consultation, a number of comments, observations and proposals were collected in relation to the European Parliament's Resolution, as well as around the current challenges, opportunities and trends for the innovation of the cooperative movement brought about by the collaborative economy. The consultation was complemented with extensive literature review, aimed at gathering existing positions from different cooperative actors operating in the collaborative economy. Moreover, the preliminary study published by Cooperatives Europe in 20167 , drawing an initial picture of the engagement of cooperatives across Europe in the collaborative economy, served as a starting point to enrich the consultation, while helping to select "A contribution to an ambitious agenda for the collaborative economy"

the main topics of discussion. Finally, this position builds on the work done within Cooperatives Europe's Working Group on Collaborative Economy since early 2016, which was established with the goal of stimulating a common understanding and approach towards the collaborative economy. The WG involves experts at national and local levels in the fields of cooperatives and the collaborative economy.

The document is organized into three sections: Section 1 highlights the main assumptions that underpin Cooperatives Europe's position; Section 2 provides non-exhaustive insights about the potential of the cooperative model for the collaborative economy; finally, Section 3 contains a set of proposals for achieving a European level playing field allowing cooperatives to fully engage in collaborative economy models, and calls for the establishment of a partnership between cooperatives and European actors to shape an ambitious collaborative economy.

OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES

The collaborative economy has contributed to bring new opportunities and benefits for European citizens, enterprises and other public and private organizations.

As pointed out by the European Commission (EC) in the European Agenda for the collaborative economy 8 , and further confirmed by the European Parliament's (EP) Resolution of June 2017 9 , the collaborative economy proves to be an enabling factor in three main dimensions.

First, it allows citizens to rely on new opportunities of consumption and production, benefitting them from enhanced competition, tailored services, increased choice and lower prices. Moreover, by enabling them to position both on the demand and supply side, the collaborative economy allows to valorize assets that are underused, turning passive consumers into active 'prosumers'.

Second, it boosts innovation and entrepreneurship, allowing in particular individuals and groups traditionally marginalized from entrepreneurship to collaborate around common needs and mutualize resources within creative models of service/goods creation and delivery. Besides, established organizations benefit from tools and models that allow them to go beyond their traditional boundaries, reaching out to new markets and needs, and thus becoming more competitive and efficient.

Third, it stimulates the transition towards the digital economy, bringing individuals and communities to make the most of digital technologies to collaborate at unprecedented scales and scopes. In this respect, the growth of the collaborative economy reflects a collective enthusiasm for technologies empowering individuals through their communities, creating positive conditions to anticipate and foster the transition to the digital economy.

However, the collaborative economy also brings with it major challenges.

Although not yet quantified nor systematically assessed, the fragmentation of the European single market, dynamics of unfair competition and rising 8 COM(2016)0356. 9 Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0271.

THE COLLABORATIVE ECONOMY: PEER-TO-PEER EXCHANGES EMPOWERING INDIVIDUALS AND COMMUNITIES

"Boosting innovation and entrepreneurship" social tensions are currently emerging as concrete evidences.

Prompted by the urgent need to balance economic potentials with social and economic sustainability, national and local governments have developed a number of uncoordinated regulations. As a consequence, the single market -a fundamental pillar of the European Union (EU)has weakened, paradoxically under the weight of a model which naturally crosses borders. In turn, the proliferation of national and local legislations has contributed to create an uncertain and risky environment for enterprises and communities, preventing them from making long-term investments and identifying adequate strategies. On the other hand, such legal uncertainty has contributed to strengthen the position of large-scale, often non-European businesses, which in some cases have gained market positions near to monopoly, navigating through the grey zones of non-regulation.

Finally, since its birth, the collaborative economy has been accompanied by conflicting positions among different social and economic actors, which have recently resulted in strikes and mobilizations in many European cities. 10 Tensions mainly relate to the ways through which many platform businesses create and extract value, as well as to the different regulatory regimes that apply to traditional and collaborative economy businesses operating in similar markets. If not tackled in all their complexities, these aspects could seriously contribute to hamper the achievement of Europe 2020's goals.

DEFINING THE COLLABORATIVE ECONOMY

Within this framework, the European Agenda for the collaborative economy marked the first step of European institutions within this complex landscape. By approaching the collaborative economy as "business models where activities are facilitated by collaborative platforms that create an open marketplace for the temporary usage of goods or services often provided by private individuals", the European Commission has contributed to the emergence of a common understanding of the collaborative economy 10 See for instance "Anti-Uber protests around the world, in Pictures", The Telegraph (available at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/picture-galleries/11902080/Anti-Uber-protests-around-the-world-in-pictures.html) showing demonstrations in the UK, Italy, Belgium, France and Poland among others.

"Governments have developed uncoordinated regulations"

at the European level, linking it to the broader development of the digital economy. However, the Communication has omitted to propose a broader approach able to apprehend the full picture and diversity of the collaborative economy, limiting the analysis to a factual consideration based on few large-scale and well-known existing business models.

In its recent Resolution, the European Parliament then called to adopt a broader conception, emphasizing "the need to consider the collaborative economy not only as a collection of new business models offering goods and services, but also as a new form of integration between the economy and society where the services offered are based on a wide variety of relations embedding economic relations within social ones and creating new forms of community and new business models." 11 Both documents are cornerstone references that will be transversal to any future work conducted by European institutions on this topic. However, although they provide a valuable understanding, a definition able to encompass the diversity of collaborative economy models is yet to emerge among EU institutions. 12 The absence of a definition opens the door to misleading interpretations regarding the nature of exchanges and type of actors encompassed under the collaborative economy. Besides theoretical reflections, this gap produces negative consequences on the development of the collaborative economy and the Single Market. The existing confusion among policy-makers, researchers and practitioners leads to uncertainty about potentials and risks, and eventually creates tensions among them. In particular, the lack of a common understanding negatively affects the capacity of policy-makers to develop coordinated political objectives and adequate regulations, leading in turn to a fragmentation of approaches across Europe.

11 COM(2016)0356, p. 3, "What is the collaborative economy?". 12 The qualification of collaborative economy proposed by the Communication A European Agenda for the collaborative economy seems to offer a description suited for this report, instead of a proper definition. In particular, a definition of (collaborative) economy cannot be restricted to an aggregation of business models.

"Misleading interpretations regarding the collaborative economy"

On this ground, building on previous work done by Cooperatives Europe in this field 13 , we propose the following definition:

The term collaborative economy refers to a broad and varied group of practices and innovative models that use digital technologies to facilitate collaboration and exchange among a community of peers, and to maximize the use of underutilized resources. Collaborative economy models enable the aggregation of peer-topeer exchanges performed among community members, and turn them into systemic processes of value generation driven by the community and benefitting the community.

Such definition is based on the following assumptions:

The collaborative economy is not limited to new forms of production and consumption of goods and services, but it goes much further, unleashing unedited forms of sharing and collaboration across sectoral domains and actors. The conceptualization started by Botsman and Rogers 14 , and further elaborated by Stokes et al. 15 , identified 5 main groups of collaborative economy practices: collaborative consumption, collaborative production, collaborative finance, collaborative learning, collaborative governance. Any public action aimed at fully apprehending the collaborative economy should then consider its multisectoral and multi-dimensional nature.

The collaborative economy does not only include exchanges among individuals, but also exchanges among networks of organizations and businesses. Within this framework, two main forms of collaborative economy can be identified: The collaborative economy is rooted in peerto-peer exchanges, platforms are intermediaries. The exponential growth of the collaborative economy is driven by, and goes hand in hand with the digitalization of the economy and society. As stated by the Communication of the European Commission, collaborative platforms are one among three actors, i.e. the intermediary, the others being the service providers and the users. Evidence shows that the collaborative economy cannot be reduced to platformbased economy though. The richness in ongoing initiatives goes from informal self-organized networks, to more structured forms involving technical infrastructures such as online platforms (which may be owned and managed whether by a third party, or by community members themselves). A public action aimed at supporting a socially driven and sustainable development of the collaborative economy should primarily focus on empowering individuals and organizations to exploit the potential of peer-to-peer exchanges. Platform businesses will be important actors in a future digital economy (including the collaborative economy), and thus deserve specific consideration through a distinguished policy (see the Communication Online Platforms and the Digital Single Market 16 and related Resolution 17 ). Although B2C, C2B, B2B2C, C2B2C models belong to an emerging form of digital businesses, they must not be considered as collaborative economy models 16 COM(2016) 288 17 Texts adopted, P8 TA(2017)0272 "Empowering individuals and organizations" since they are missing one main component: an exchange between peers. A model like Uber is characterized by an economic system exclusively organized by the intermediary (i.e. the platform): individuals involved in the service (i.e. driver and consumer) are unable to organize the exchange (for instance, they do not have an influence on the price of the service). Thus, as a C2B2C model, the platform-based business model Uber is not a collaborative economy business. By extension, "on-demand household services" and "on-demand professional services" cannot, as such, be recognized as part of the collaborative economy, despite a recent study conducted by PwC. 18 The collaborative economy is communitybased. Collaborative economy models enable peer-topeer exchanges: by aggregating and scaling them up, they transform groups of individuals or organizations into active communities, and translate low-value isolated interactions into high-value powerful collaborations. Thus, collaborative economy models have developed on existing communities, or have contributed to the creation of new ones, either in physical and digital spaces. Travelers, freelance workers, social streets, knowledge communities, makers communities are some examples of communities organizing exchanges among peers through a plethora of collaborative approaches and models. A prerequisite for sustaining and upscaling the collaborative economy is thus to support the creation and development of such communities, but also to promote models sustaining them through democratic governance and control over the value generated.

A COOPERATIVE VISION

Currently, increasing synergies between the collaborative economy and cooperatives are creating promising roots of socially-driven innovation. Cooperatives are indeed community-based organizations with a dual nature: business enterprises on the one hand, and membership based associations organised for collective action on the other. If this "new form of integration between the economy and society" 19 represents an unprecedented opportunity for social and solidarity economy (SSE) organisations, cooperative enterprises can offer a sustainable model 18 See Vaughan R., Ibid. 19 Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0271, par. 9.

"Promoting democratic governance and control over the value"

showing the capacity of "embedding economic relations within social ones." 20

Cooperatives Europe believes that a sustainable future for the collaborative economy could emerge from an ambitious partnership supporting a cooperative dynamic at European level. Reaping the potentials of the collaborative economy, while mitigating its threats, requires a strong and tangible political project, conducted through a close partnership between policy-makers and democratically organized collaborative economy communities. As acknowledged by the European Parliament, policy-makers and practitioners are demonstrating a "growing interest in the collaborative economy based on cooperative business models." The cooperative movement has the potential to articulate a community-based development of the collaborative economy within a consistent EU strategy and policy: it benefits from a dense network of communitybased enterprises from all sectors, involving a diversity of stakeholders through democratic governance models, and maintaining coordinated relations with EU policy makers.

Cooperatives experiment with promising models for a responsible development of the collaborative economy, boosting economic efficiency in a sustainable and inclusive way. Open membership and democratic governance generate trust from the service users and beneficiaries towards cooperative enterprises. Control from the community over the value generated ensure fair redistribution of profits among community members, and offer a lever to invest in the development of collaborative economy models. Multi-stakeholder governance models enable the creation of collaborative ecosystems involving all actors into a common enterprise, leading to the emergence of models more respectful of established economic and social contexts. Finally, as enterprises rooted in their communities, cooperatives are less subjected to buyout strategies.

The European cooperative movement promotes a vision of a community-based and empowering collaborative economy, contributing to shape a stimulating environment enabling people to participate more actively in their communities and pursue aspirations of a more inclusive and democratic society. However, the achievement of this objective needs 20 Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0271, par. 9.

"Promising models

for a responsible development of collaborative economy"

"Supporting a cooperative dynamic at European level" all stakeholders involved, especially European institutions and policy-makers, at all stages of innovation: from experimentation to policy definition and regulation.

Many cooperatives across Europe are at the turning point of one century of history.

Going through the major revolutions of modern times, they have ensured protection to their members and communities, created assets transmitted over generations, infrastructured wide networks of collaboration, and contributed significantly to the economy and the welfare state.

Nowadays, the European cooperative movement counts on around 180,000 cooperative businesses, 4.5 million employees and more than EUR 1,000 billion turnover. Only in the EU, there are 127 million members, meaning that 1 citizen out of 5 is a member of a cooperative. Moreover, these numbers are constantly increasing. 21 According to a preliminary study published by Cooperatives Europe in 2016 22 , cooperatives across Europe are increasingly confronting with the collaborative economy. Often prompted by the ongoing digital revolution, they are showing growing awareness and engagement in this new landscape, underlying a shared need to renew their models in light of the potential of digital technologies and new forms of sharing. Indeed, the richness of approaches and visions emerged through the study highly reflects the specific history and relevance of the cooperative movement across EU countries and regions; however, there is much convergence around the need -and the potential -of the cooperative movement being at the forefront of change.

THE CONSULTATION

The stakeholder consultation realized for the present paper involved both representatives of sectoral cooperative associations at the EU and national levels, and cooperative 21 Cooperatives Europe (2015), The power of cooperation -Cooperatives Europe key figures, [online] available at: https://coopseurope.coop/sites/default/files/ The%20power%20of%20Cooperation%20-%20Cooperatives%20Europe%20 key%20statistics%202015.pdf 22 Como et al., Cooperative Platforms in a European landscape: an exploratory study, 2016. The study aimed at investigating the potential interaction between the collaborative economy and cooperative businesses, in order to highlight synergies and opportunities of innovation. Through a mapping survey and in depth interviews which involved top representatives of national cooperative associations across Europe, the study contributed to draw in initial picture of the engagement of cooperatives in the collaborative economy, pointing out the richness of approaches and visions around this emerging landscape. 2014), suggesting that if platforms were controlled by their users -organized in the form of a cooperative -most of the governance and social responsibility issues would be solved. Over the last three years, platform cooperativism has been taking the shape of a true global movement, gathering practitioners, researchers, policy-makers and stakeholders from almost all continents. Also thanks to the dissemination work carried out by Scholz (2015, 2015a, 2016) and Nathan Schneider (2015b), initiatives of platform cooperatives from a wide number of countries across the globe have been documented, witnessing the extent to which this alternative avenue to the platform economy has already reached the stage of a concrete reality.

COOPERATIVES AND THE COLLABORATIVE ECONOMY: A COMMON GROUND FOR A COMMUNITY-DRIVEN GROWTH

LOCAL & GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT

INNOVATING OWNERSHIP & GOVERNANCE

among existing cooperatives or birth of new ones to be competitive and socially sustainable at the same time.

BREAKING THE BARRIERS

Nonetheless, several barriers stand out in this landscape, often representing a concrete limit to the achievement of the stated missions and desired social outcomes. The yet unachieved European single market in many sectors, the lack of a reliable regulatory framework around the collaborative economy, cooperative national legislations that are often obsolete are the main barriers perceived to a full and meaningful engagement of cooperatives in the collaborative economy. With specific relation to cooperative start-ups, such barriers also result in heavy administrative and bureaucratic burdens, discouraging the choice of the cooperative legal form. Structural difficulties in attracting equity capital and long-term investments can be added to the pot, making the development of new cooperative businesses as difficult as the innovation of existing ones. Finally, cultural and skill mismatches have also emerged from consultations; with this respect, both a general lack of cooperative entrepreneurship education across Europe, and a certain difficulty -especially for established cooperatives -to rethink business models, cooperative governance and organization according to the key features of the collaborative economy were mentioned.

Despite such barriers, the European cooperative movement has started to take root in the collaborative economy. By approaching the latter through the lens of its distinctive features, it is contributing to show alternative, more sustainable and fairer models of collaborative economy.

In order to fully unleash positive impacts and benefits for citizens, communities and the society, in the following section a number of proposals and recommendations are exposed, directed towards the construction of a European enabling ecosystem allowing cooperatives to collaborate meaningfully to a shared project of sustainable and socially driven growth.

"Cooperatives take root in the collaborative economy"

Thanks to a long tradition of solidarity and democracy, the European continent can have the ambition to shape a responsible, sustainable and community-driven collaborative economy, aimed at benefitting all its citizens. However, the collaborative economy will not become inclusive and responsible, unless it is embedded in a selfsustaining ecosystem ensuring that the value generated by this economy contributes to develop and strengthen its own value chain, which is rooted in communities of individuals and organizations. The following conditions are identified as prerequisites to reach the objectives above:

Reach a collective understanding and recognition of the potentials of a community-led collaborative economy. Within this framework, EU institutions should: Adopt a definition of collaborative economy rooted in peer-to-peer exchanges, encompassing collaborative consumption, collaborative production, collaborative finance, collaborative learning, collaborative governance; Support large-scale research on the collaborative economy, in order to cover the diversity of collaborative economy models. In particular, it should include a social impact assessment of business models, to understand enabling conditions and factors making cooperatives a lever to boost sustainability and inclusiveness at scale; Establish monitoring and evaluation tools and mechanisms to measure the development of the collaborative economy and its socio-economic impact. This should go together with incentives for enterprises operating in the collaborative economy to share data enabling efficient Adapt EU financial mechanisms to make them more suited for community-led entrepreneurial initiatives. The European Investment Fund should in particular be able to favour projects based on cooperative business models, over other models of enterprises. Support actively the development of an ecosystem fostering the emergence and scale-up of community-based collaborative economy enterprises. In this respect, EU institutions should:

Encourage and support social experimentation, as a way to stimulate innovations integrating economy, technology and society. In particular, we recommend the creation of permanent multi-stakeholder working groups involving administration, economic and social actors, in charge of supporting, evaluating, assessing and eventually disseminating social experimentations aimed at improving the economic, social and regulatory environment around entrepreneurship in the collaborative economy;

Foster modernization and diversification of education and training in Europe, especially through Erasmus+ priorities. Entrepreneurial education should systematically include community-led entrepreneurial initiatives, such as cooperative entrepreneurship. The collaborative economy and platform economy should be promoted as topics to be included at all levels of education, as a way to empower citizens and young people in particular to adopt a critical and more informed approach towards these new forms of economy, and eventually stimulate the emergence of new entrepreneurial initiatives; Adapt strategies of appropriate funding lines, in particular the EU Research and Innovation Programme Horizon 2020, to the specificities of community-led collaborative economy projects. A specific attention to the type of business models supported should be reflected in the calls for projects and evaluation criteria, in an aim the ones ensuring democratic control from users over the enterprise;

SUPPORT A DYNAMIC ECOSYSTEM

Support the development of collaborative ecosystems able to stimulate the emergence of new collaborative economy enterprises. EU institutions should in particular establish public-private partnerships with networks of entrepreneurs aiming to promote and encourage the development of a community-led collaborative economy.

Lastly, the implementation of an ambitious policy for the development of a community-driven collaborative economy should lead to the adoption of a consistent approach towards topics related to the digitalization of the economy.

As a driver for the development and upscaling of collaborative economy enterprises, a strategy on online platforms should be elaborated at EU level in consistence with the needs and specificities of a community-driven collaborative economy. The potential of online cooperative platforms to enhance trust from its users, contribute to a fairer distribution of profits, and foster the diversification of models and services, should be recognized and promoted by EU institutions.

Boosted by the digital economy, the collaborative economy also contributes to the development of an economy of data, by generating user data that are valuable for the business model, but also for the users themselves and the society at large. In this respect, an EU policy on data should aim to reinforce the emergence of a community-led collaborative economy. Such a policy should recognize the need of reconnecting data to a true knowledge society, especially by encouraging open data, and put a specific emphasis on individual and collective control over data, algorithm, and fair redistribution of data-generated value.

IMPLEMENT A CONSISTENT APPROACH

The emergence of the collaborative economy represents an unprecedented opportunity for creating a new dynamic to the European project. As a vector of individuals' economic and social empowerment, creation new communities and upscaling existing ones, fostering an innovation which combines technological, social and economic aspects, the collaborative economy has the potential to organize a community-driven transition to a digital European society. However, if its development is not put in perspective with clear and coordinated political objectives, it may also carry along profound negative effects for European citizens and enterprises, by disrupting complex economic and social equilibriums at the benefit of few aggressive players.

The European cooperative movement, gathering 180,000 community-based enterprises, sees in the collaborative economy a strong lever to pursue its raison d'être to empower citizens through democratic business models. A number of successful cases have demonstrated the relevance to develop and sustain collaborative economy models organized as cooperative enterprises. Nonetheless, confronted to a non-supportive environment, such models are yet to upscale and reach their full potentials.

Unleashing the full collaborative economy potential requires an ambitious mobilization at European level of both community-based organizations and public actors, working in partnership towards the creation of an adapted multi-stakeholder cooperative ecosystem responding to the needs of entrepreneurial initiatives in the collaborative economy.

CONCLUSION

Introduction 1 .

 1 The collaborative economy: peer-to-peer exchanges empowering individuals and communities 2. Cooperatives and the collaborative economy: a common ground for a community-driven growth3. Recommendations for an ambitious collaborative economy in Europe Conclusion

TABLE OF CONTENTS 6

 OF6 This document presents the position of Cooperatives Europe with respect to the European Agenda for the collaborative economy, following the European Parliament's Resolution released on June 15th, 2017.

prove to be powerful drivers of community building across different sectors

	businesses across different sectors and EU Countries. Sectoral associations are: CECOP (European confederation of industrial and service cooperatives), Cogeca (European collective vision or project, increasing their personal, social and economic emancipation. Cooperative co-working spaces such as Condiviso in Italy, Casaco in France, and Most of them are also supporting their members through the establishment of specific Working Groups involving experts across sectoral domains (such as in the case of CG Fifth, the cooperative governance makes a great contribution to the diversity of entrepreneurial models rooted in the collaborative economy, providing new forms
	organization of farmers and agri-cooperatives), Euro Coop KnowledgeWorkers in Denmark engage communities of SCOP, Cogeca and Cooperatives Europe). Some actions through which digital technologies and data can be used
	(European community of consumer cooperatives), Rescoop. freelance workers in collaborative design and delivery have specifically engaged people at risk of exclusion in in more responsible, accountable and reliable ways. The
	eu (European Federation of renewable energy cooperatives), Co-operative Housing Ireland (Irish Federation of the co-of solutions, with the overall goal of improving their individual and collective professional capacities. In the collaborative entrepreneurial initiatives aimed at tackling collective needs, such as the access to housing for older ongoing platform cooperatives movement, initiated by Trebor Scholz and Nathan Schneider in 2014 23 , is nowadays
	operative housing movement). Cooperative entrepreneurs cultural field, online platforms such as 1DLab in France people and disabled people (e.g. the action carried out global in scope and scale, witnessing the extent to which
	were involved from the following sectors and European enable artists, citizens, entrepreneurs and administrations by Co-operative Housing in Ireland). Finally, cooperative cooperatives over the world are experimenting with
	countries: mobility (Cotabo, Italy, and Partago, Belgium), to valorize cultural resources through co-production of entrepreneurial initiatives like eLands in Malta have innovative models of ownership and governance at the basis
	consumers (Fairmondo, Germany, and France Barter, cultural contents, relying on a multi-stakeholder and public-contributed to the development of an entrepreneurial of peer exchanges. In this respect, cooperative platforms
	France), freelance workers (Condiviso, Italy), health (Midata, private governance model. As for mobility, car-sharing spirit at the scale of a community, involving a diversity of have been developed to conciliate online services with
	Switzerland), cultural and creative industry (1D Lab, France, platforms such as Partago in Belgium and Som Mobilitat actors from both urban and rural areas for the collective traditional sectors: examples include platforms developed
	"The cooperative movement at the forefront of change" and Resonate, Germany), agriculture (SAOS, UK), tourism (eLands, Malta), finance (Cera, Belgium). Importantly, not all these cooperative businesses fully fall under the definition of collaborative economy provided in Section 1; nonetheless, they all show valuable approaches around specific aspects of the collaborative economy, such as the combination between digital technologies and cooperative governance to empower large forms of participation and sharing of assets. Although the consultation highlighted a number of different point of views and concerns, which may reflect the specific challenges that are perceived as the most urgent within the different sectors covered, the collaborative economy is indeed a priority in both political agendas and business strategies. Interestingly, if the collaborative economy brings risks of increased inequalities, dismantlement of rights and concentration of wealth, the consultation has shown an ongoing effort to tackle them, using the cooperative model either as a mitigation and, more often, as a transformative means. in Spain engage citizens in creating a pool of electric cars "A priority in both made available for their communities, supporting them in by taxi companies, such as Cotabo (Italy) and Alpha (France), management of the territory in the tourism sector. or by music artists such as Resonate (Ireland). In addition, political agendas and business strategies" acquiring, maintaining and renting electric vehicles, but also collectively deciding about the management of the service. Second, cooperative models have demonstrated the capacity to capitalize on collaborative economy approaches to experiment, develop and upscale new consumption models. New forms of supermarkets such as INNOVATIVE CONSUMPTION Fourth, cooperatives are able to harness the collaborative economy to anticipate upcoming economic and social other cooperative projects are tackling the issue of data ANTICIPATING ownership. Midata (Switzerland) is pioneering an innovative TRANSITIONS data-driven business model that harnesses the cooperative transitions, exploiting the triangulation between platform-form to enhance user's role in the control and management based models, digital technologies and the cooperative of personal health data, while boosting community building structure to provide effective solutions to pressing societal processes among people with the same diseases, as well challenges. On the labour side, experiences like Condiviso as between them and health researchers. Similarly, the in Italy and SMart in France are championing innovative Scottish Agricultural Organization Society (SAOS, UK) have BeesCoop (Belgium) or La Louve (France) are steering fairer, greener and cheaper food consumption through innovative organization of human resources mixing employment and volunteering. New banks are being founded, such as NewB (Belgium) and Cooperative for Ethical Financing (Croatia), creating (online) spaces for collaborative governance developed, thanks to a public-private partnership, a service organizational forms for freelance workers, allowing them enabling a democratic management and ownership over to make the most of the cooperative model to increase peer agricultural data by farmers, in order to improve efficiency collaboration and exchange, get a reliable framework of and sustainability as well as transparency towards public rights, and decrease significantly the costs of bureaucracy administrations. and administration. On the environmental sustainability enabling members to decide how their savings should be used and invested. New streaming platforms such as 1DLab (France) are based on the co-creation of musical offer involving artists, consumers and public actors, so to foster diversity of cultural offer while ensuring fairer remuneration of producers. side, car-sharing cooperatives such as Partago in Belgium, or ride-sharing as Ridygo in France, pursue a strong sustainability-centered mission, involving stakeholders Finally, cooperatives are able to embed local development within a globalized economy, adopting networked cooperative alliances and federations to expand to new (workers and/or users) as co-owners of the cooperative. markets and reach effective scales, while keeping strong Collaborative economy applied to business-to-business attention to the local dimension. Fairmondo, Partago, Midata relations has also proven to boost adaption of existing and Cotabo are all examples of cooperative businesses
	A COOPERATIVE LANDSCAPE First, cooperatives COMMUNITY BUILDING Third, cooperatives stimulate wide and diffused entrepreneurship within the collaborative economy, enabling in particular marginalized and disadvantaged groups as well as rural areas to take active part. In this respect, many national cooperative associations are intensively supporting new entrepreneurship initiatives, establishing currently engaged in an internationalization or -in the case of organizations to a fast evolving market. Cooperatives such as Aldia (Italy) have established innovative frameworks for Cotabo -scaling up at national level, looking at partnerships the pooling of resources among organisations, in order to 23 In 2014, Trebor Scholz, Associate Professor for Culture & Media at The New improve the quality and accessibility of care services. B2B collaborative economy models can also take innovative School in New York City, proposed the idea of Platform Cooperativism (Scholz,	INCLUSIVE ENTREPRENEURSHIP
	dedicated incubators, accelerators and investment funds

, either facilitating new processes of collaboration and sharing within pre-existing communities, as well as boosting the creation of new ones. Whether 'old' or 'new', communities benefit from new tools and approaches that enable them to collaborate and organize answers around collective needs. When built on cooperative governance, such models empower individuals to actively contribute to a (such as CoopVenture in France, Coopcity in Belgium and CoopUp in Italy), capacity building programmes (such as Coopstartup in Italy and Co-operative Housing Ireland), and specific crowdfunding platforms (such as Microgenius in the UK and JeFinanceUnProjectCooperatif.fr in France). forms such as in the case of France Barter, which organizes exchange of tangible and intangible assets among member enterprises. Inspiring initiatives are emerging at European and international levels to untap and upscale the potentials of B2B collaborative economy, such as in the agriculture (Cogeca) or banking sectors (CIBP Grace16).

Cooperatives Europe therefore calls for an ambitious European project for the collaborative economy, grounded on the following three objectives:

	and transparent measurement of socio-economic impacts
	of their activities. A transparent and effective follow-up of
	the number and size of registered European Cooperative
	Societies should also be implemented to better assess
	the emergence of transnational collaborative economy
	initiatives;
	1. Encourage the development of a Implement awareness-raising activities to promote community-led collaborative economy towards EU, national responsible, inclusive and community-and local policy-makers and public administrations. Such led collaborative economy; activities should in particular aim for a better understanding 2. Foster socio-economic experimentations from governments and administrations about the diversity stemming from the collaborative of collaborative economy models, and the specificities economy, as a way to anticipate the and potentials of collaborative economy models based on transition to a digital society; 3. Make collaborative economy policies cooperative enterprises.
	a driver for a renewed and more Develop an enabling environment for the ambitious EU project, by establishing a emergence and development of community-led modernized Single Market in line with a collaborative economy models. In this respect, EU sound social project. institutions should:
	UNDERSTAND & RECOGNIZE

Shift the debate from 'more regulation' to 'well-suited environment

	'. Policy-makers should especially have in
	mind that regulatory burdens and legal uncertainty favor
	large, non-European companies over European community-
	based enterprises;

Foster the development of coordinated and enabling regulations

	calling for national and local legislations ensuring
	diversity of economic players and encouraging
	the development of businesses with demonstrate
	positive social impact;
	DEVELOP AN ENABLING ENVIRONMENT
	suited for a community-led collaborative
	economy, which includes the establishment of a level-
	playing field for cooperatives. Special attention should be
	put on:
	-tackling obsolete regulations preventing the
	emergence of a cooperative-based collaborative
	economy, such as outdated national cooperative laws
	and undue administrative burdens on cooperative
	entrepreneurs;
	-promoting a 'profits are taxed where they are
	generated' approach, to prevent dumping strategies
	from non-European companies;
	-enhancing coordination and convergence of national
	regulations, in particular by identifying regulatory
	best practices enabling effective development of
	community-led collaborative economy;
	-discouraging aggressive strategies aiming to
	reach monopolistic positions, in particular by

Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0271, par. 11.

Ibid., par. 9.

Como et al., ibid.

Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0271, par. 52.

Ibid., par. 57.

40

The voice of cooperative enterprises in Europe


Neil Gaiman

Stephen King

Haruki Murakami

ALITHILA David Taquet

Réalité Virtuelle

Virtual Reality

Karen Coats

Dave Mckean

Espaces intertextuels et virtuels dans trois récits de jeunesse de

Dans cet article, nous proposons d'explorer les transitions entre espaces physiques et virtuels dans Des loups dans les murs (The Wolves in the Walls) de Neil Gaiman, La petite fille qui aimait Tom Gordon (The Girl who Loved Tom Gordon) de Stephen King, et L'Étrange Bibliothèque (Fushigina Toshokan) de Haruki Murakami. Se jouant des attentes du lecteur, l'ancrage intertextuel de ces récits se substitue à l'ancrage spatial, incertain et confus. En effet, l'absence -ou du moins l'indifférence -des parents poussent les jeunes protagonistes à quitter l'espace familier et civilisé vers une quête identitaire les rapprochant de l'âge adulte. Ils s'engagent ainsi dans des espaces physiques oppressifs, aux allures de conte dédaléen. Le passage de l'espace familier vers l'étrange et l'inquiétant est accompli grâce à des transitions multidirectionnelles, voire chtoniennes. À l'intérieur même du nouvel espace physique aux connotations intertextuelles, une seconde transition a lieu, menant à un monde virtuel qui offre aux enfants une fuite temporaire, un sursis de cette cruelle réalité. Ce mouvement s'effectue à l'aide de catalyseurs, sous la forme d'objets utilitaires qui permettent aux héroïnes et aux héros de se transporter dans un espace imaginaire parallèle, ou bien même d'en invoquer un adjuvant dont le rôle est de guider les jeunes protagonistes à franchir les obstacles du monde physique.

Introduction : une familiarité étrange et effrayante

Le gothique de jeunesse vend très bien, nous explique Karen Coats, mais interroge de façon différente aux récits destinés aux adultes. En effet personne ne se demande, si un récent roman d'horreur pour adultes est trop effrayant pour ses lecteurs, alors que nous posons cette question pour les livres destinés aux enfants 1 . La peur gothique (isolation, abandon) catalyse le départ vers une quête dans un espace fantastique dont le résultat est un passage vers l'âge adulte, avec des conclusions complexes et mitigées. Dans cet article, nous étudierons trois oeuvres dont les protagonistes ont des situations initiales similaires, tout en offrant cependant des aspects caractéristiques de leurs auteurs. Des loups dans les murs 2 de Neil Gaiman, La petite fille qui aimait Tom Gordon 3 de Stephen King, et L'Étrange Bibliothèque 4 de Haruki Murakami. Nos trois jeunes héros font partie d'un espace familial inachevé et imprécis qui les pousse vers un fantastique intertextuel cruel et qui présente de multiples épreuves dangereuses. Paradoxalement, c'est en surmontant ces défis qui leur sont uniques que les protagonistes retournent la situation à leur avantage et réintègrent l'espace familier, tout en se rapprochant de l'âge adulte.

Un espace familial instable, incomplet, et confus

Une absence physique et narrative qui rompt le lien de confiance

Marah Gubar, spécialiste de littérature de jeunesse à l'Institut de Technologie du Massachussetts (MIT) propose la prévalence de trois modèles théoriques d'écriture de l'enfant : différence, manque, et parenté 5 . Dans nos trois récits, les familles des enfants refusent de leur donner une voix, de leur offrir un espace narratif et choisissent donc de traiter les jeunes protagonistes comme des êtres différents et incomplets. Les auteurs eux, élisant de leur donner un potentiel narratif, ce que Gubar nomme « agency », ont choisi le modèle de parenté qui a va permettre aux enfants de surmonter les transitions spatiales, une contradiction entre l'intra et l'extradiégétique qui propulse l'intrigue. Divorce, isolation physique ou morale, abandon du rôle de parent ; voici ce qui attend les trois protagonistes dans leurs situations initiales. Chez Neil Gaiman, Lucy vit dans une vielle maison entourée 12 DALMASO Karen, « The Gothic in American Children's Literature » dans Neil Gaiman in the 21st century: essays on the novels, children's stories, online writings, comics and other works, Tara Prescott (éd.), Jefferson, McFarland & Company, Inc., 2017, p. 29-38. 13 George W. BEAHM, The Stephen King companion: four decades of fear from the master of horror, 1. ed, New York, Thomas Dunne Books, 2015, p. 350. 14 Haruki MURAKAMI, Kafka on the shore., Random House USA, 2005. 15 Betiel WASIHUN, « the name "kafka": evocation and resistance in haruki murakami's kafka on the shore », mln, vol. 129, no 5, 2014, p. 1199

Les enfants entament une quête de croissance au dénouement incertain

Lucy s'engage dans une quête de crédibilité dont les transitions spatiales sont latérales et son éloignement étant différent de celui des deux autres héros. En un instant, les loups sortent des murs, pénétrant dans l'espace familier, tandis que la famille en est exclue. En effet, plus qu'une séparation marquée par une distance physique (nous pensons par exemple à Trisha qui marche plusieurs centaines de kilomètres dans les bois), il s'agit là d'une séparation émotionnelle et de vérité. Ignorée, Lucy ne parvient à persuader sa famille et ne peut tout d'abord que se résigner devant son impuissance dans sa quête de crédibilité, une impuissance qui la rapproche de fait du garçon de la fable d'Esope qui aperçoit les loups. Sa quête n'est cependant pas vaine puisqu'elle réintègre finalement à la fois le foyer et l'espace de crédibilité narrative auquel sa famille lui avait interdit l'accès sous prétexte de son imagination débordante. Il s'agirait donc d'une fin heureuse pour la petite fille, si ce n'est qu'un jour elle entend des barrissements dans les murs. « Tu crois que je devrais leur dire ? » demande la petite fille à son cochon en peluche, qui réplique ironiquement « Je suis sûr qu'ils s'en rendront compte très vite » 24 . Gaiman se sert de cette prosopopée pour laisser au lecteur un dilemme : les parents auront-ils retenus la morale de l'histoire ? La transition spatiale récurrente du familier vers le sauvage, la dilatation de l'espace sont accompagnées par une contraction introspective, en particulier dans le roman de King. En effet, privé de contact humain, Trisha songe à sa famille, au divorce de ses parents, à son idole, et entame surtout une quête spirituelle et religieuse, profondément

Le nouvel espace est cruel mais solidaire

Chaque transition évoque en nos protagoniste un sentiment de perte, de danger, voire de mort mais paradoxalement ces nouveaux espaces permettent aux protagonistes de rencontrer des alliés dans leur quête.

Des espaces cruels et menaçants

Conclusion :

  de ses parents et de son frère, tous très occupés. C'est ici que réside la première dissonance : sa famille ne prête pas attention à la petite fille. Trisha, l'héroïne de King, est quant à elle victime de l'explosion du cocon familial du fait du divorce de ses parents, qui cependant existent narrativement à l'inverse du garçon de L'étrange bibliothèque au père inexistant et dont la mère reste muette. Cette absence se manifeste visuellement tout au long du récit de Gaiman, illustré par Dave McKean. Les divisions spatiales faisant écho aux divisions familiales, certains panneaux du livre illustré se présentant comme un collage de papiers, alors que d'autres utilisent des méthodes plus conventionnelles. Le langage visuel est clair : la famille de Lucy ne la regarde qu'à peine, leurs regards fixés sur les objets qui les obsèdent : les pots de confiture pour la mère, le trombone pour le père, et les devoirs du frère. L'unité spatiale apparente de la famille n'est qu'une illusion dont la réalité se dévoile au travers de l'étude du langage visuel et Lucy ne parvient pas à partager ses préoccupations quant aux bruits étranges qui resonnent dans la maison. Ce sont surement des souris dit sa mère, ou bien des rats selon son père, et même des chauves-souris pense son frère. Cette famille se contente de répéter le même adage qui est censé rendre l'inquiétude de Lucy caduque : c'est impensable qu'il y ait des loups dans les murs, car : « Si les loups sortent des murs, alors c'est la fin » 6 . Malgré les demandes d'explication réitérées de Lucy, sa famille refuse d'expliquer l'adage, excluant Lucy qui ne peut se retourner que vers sa peluche. La séparation est plus flagrante encore pour Trisha. Les raisons du divorce sont incertaines mais impliquent une séparation émotionnelle puis physique. Malgré les protestations de son frère Pete, leur mère qui a obtenu la garde des enfants, insiste pour déménager. L'instabilité spatiale ne fait qu'empirer du fait de son insistance de faire des escapades hebdomadaires dans le but de renforcer la nouvelle unité familiale qui exclut le père, en dépit des attentes des enfants. La mère surcompense mais ne fait que créer plus de confusion spatiale, et traumatise Trisha. Ses souhaits et ses protestations sont ignorées, même lorsqu'elle prie pour que sa mère et son frère cessent de se quereller.

  chose, il doit aller le chercher à la bibliothèque 10 , un rôle dont on pourrait argumenter qu'il incombe aux parents. Le garçon se préoccupe d'ailleurs plus d'une inquiétude virtuelle et espérée de sa mère que du sort cruel qui l'attend dans sa geôle souterraine, une réaction inattendue et en apparence absurde dont nous verrons qu'elle n'est pas la seule. Eût-elle été réciproque, cette angoisse aurait pu constituer un idéal attendu de la relation parent-enfant et apporter au garçon une semblance de lien affectif et familial. Manque d'attention chez Gaiman, disputes chez King ou silence absolu chez Murakami produisent cependant le même résultat : l'exclusion de l'espace familial et la rupture des liens de confiance et de crédibilité entre famille et protagonistes. Que faire donc de ces attentes déçues, de cet espace familial incomplet et imparfait ? Substitution de l'espace familial L'intrigue met en évidence la manière dont les enfants cherchent des alternatives au réconfort familial qui leur fait défaut. Lucy dispose de « pig puppet », son cochon en peluche auquel elle se confie, et pour qui elle n'hésite pas à retourner dans la maison qui est maintenant occupée par les loups. Trisha n'utilise pas de peluche mais son lecteur de radiocassette (walkman) qui joue le rôle de corde de sécurité qui rattache la jeune fille à la civilisation, et à son idole, Tom Gordon, joueur de baseball dont Trisha et son père regardent ou écoutent les matchs. Son walkman, symbole d'un espace sûr et civilisé est un objet qu'elle révère et utilise de manière religieuse « avec autant de respect qu'un prêtre pendant l'eucharistie » 11 . Chez Murakami la substitution s'effectue au travers des livres qui ont une place particulière dans son oeuvre, les protagonistes se référant souvent aux récits écrits afin de comprendre les liens entre l'Histoire du Japon du XXème siècle et leur rôle dans la trame narrative. Encourage par sa mère, le garçon se rend donc fréquemment dans cet espace de substitution. Privés d'espace familial et émotionnel et donc de place narrative, les enfants sont donc contraints de fuir vers un nouvel espace plus complexe et dangereux mais qui implique, plus qu'une progression narrative, un rite de passage vers l'âge adulte. La fuite vers un espace intertextuel Une famille occupée dans une vieille maison, une mère divorcée qui entraine ses enfants pour une excursion dans les bois, un jeune garçon dans sa bibliothèque locale : les auteurs nous rappellent que le fantastique est basé sur sa proximité au réel, au mondain, puis d'une rupture brusque et brutale de ce lien. Le passage du réel au fantastique devient une métaphore commune à de nombreux récits de jeunesse : le passage de l'enfance à l'âge adulte. Ce mouvement de la réalité vers le fantastique est un puissant outil littéraire qui capture la complexité et les nuances du voyage vers l'âge adulte. Nous assistons à un voyage initiatique qui est parsemé de liens intertextuels reflétant la complexité de l'identité littéraire des textes et de l'identité personnelle des protagonistes. Les nouveaux espaces puisent sur les contes et mythes. Les auteurs ont recours aux contes et mythes de la tradition européennes afin d'en subvertir les attentes, utilisant leurs portées allégoriques pour propulser l'intrigue et entrainer les protagonistes dans de nouveaux espaces dont ils ressortiront grandis. Comme nous l'avons précédemment établi, Trisha s'engage dans une quête de crédibilité qui se joue de nos attentes concernant l'intertexte de la fable d'Esope, l'enfant qui criait au loup. La morale originale : l'honnêteté et la crédibilité sont des vertus cruciales, et les mensonges répétés peuvent entraîner la perte de confiance et des conséquences graves. Malgré ce retournement intertextuel, le résultat final est le même : tout comme le garçon anonyme de la fable, Lucy ne parvient pas à convaincre les adultes du danger imminent malgré son honnêteté. La disparition de la voix narrative, « agency », se retrouve dans une seconde référence intertextuelle. Description absente du récit écrit, la couleur jaune des murs apparait évidente dans le livre illustré. Une référence spatiale et visuelle qui, selon Dalmaso, n'est pas sans rappeler un court récit aux éléments gothiques de 1892 de Charlotte Perkins Gilman, The Yellow Wallpaper 12 . La référence intertextuelle est ici claire : les protagonistes féminines sont ignorées, et isolées émotionnellement par leur entourage qui crédite ces visions sur le compte d'une imagination enfantine pour Lucy, et d'une fatigue nerveuse pour Jane, l'héroïne de Perkins Gilman. L'utilisation de l'intertexte est tout aussi claire, et même revendiquée chez King, qui dans un communiqué à la presse dit de son roman qu'il voulait réécrire le conte de Hansel et Gretel, mais sans Hansel 13 . La sorcière du conte est ici remplacée par le dieu des perdus : une bête élusive qui poursuit perfidement Lucy et dont les seules traces sont des restes de biche à moitié dévorée, ou des troncs d'arbre détruits. Une dissonance narrative s'établit entre Lucy et le lecteur qui comprend que ce dieu est probablement un ours, fréquemment présent dans les contes. De plus, l'onomastique, l'étude des noms propres, nous permet de remarquer un détail intéressant : le nom de jeune fille de la mère de Trisha est Andersen, nom qu'elle a repris à la suite du divorce et qui pourrait faire référence à Hans Andersen. Cette mère, bien qu'elle soit facteur de confusion spatiale, renforce de fait la création d'un intertexte appartenant à l'univers des contes, ayant enseigné à sa fille les rudiments de la survie en forêt, et l'aide ainsi dans sa quête, telle une adjuvante. Murakami s'éloigne de l'univers des contes pour pénétrer celui de la littérature moderne et des mythes grecques. L'espace de la bibliothèque est à la fois kafkaïen et mythologique, un aspect récurrent dans l'oeuvre du romancier japonais. Murakami, dont l'oeuvre la plus célèbre est le roman Kafka sur le Rivage 14 est un grand admirateur de l'écrivain austro-hongrois. En 2006, Murakami a par ailleurs remporté le prix littéraire éponyme dédié à cet écrivain. Dans son étude onomastique, Betiel Wasihun nous dit ainsi que Murakami floute les limites entre fiction et réalité avec son utilisation du nom « Kafka » et capture de fait son aspect liminaire 15 . Ainsi, la réaction Kafkaïenne du

  1216, [en ligne], doi: 10.1353/mln.2014.0101 [Consulté le 01/07/2023] garçon lors de sa décente dans les sous-sols de l'étrange bibliothèque est typique de Murakami, un mélange d'apathie et de cynisme quant à l'absurdité de la situation incongrue et à liminalité de l'espace, s'étonnant ainsi qu'une bibliothèque locale ait les moyens de construire un « labyrinthe » malgré le manque de subventions d'état 16 . L'étroitesse et la verticalité de ce labyrinthe, espace illogique, se confronte à l'espace en apparence infini de la forêt dans laquelle Trisha se perd. Mais, comme le remarque Strecher, les références dont Murakami parsèment ces récits et fusionnent les cultures en mélangeant habilement la mythologie grecque classique et japonaise ancienne, effaçant ainsi les frontières entre les traditions 17 . Unheimlichkeit et liminalité Le passage vers ces espaces intertextuels ne se fait pas brusquement et implique une transition, une liminalité. Concept pensé par Jentsch, puis développé par Freud en 1919, le phénomène de Unheimlichkeit est aussi parfois appelé étrange familiarité. Freud suggère que cette sensation d'étrangeté apparait lorsque ce qui aurait dû rester secret, et caché devient manifeste, telle des doubles ou des mannequins prenant vie 18 . Cependant, c'est la proximité au réel plus que son éloignement qui renforce cet effet, rendant les détails réalistes d'autant plus essentiels, notamment lorsqu'il s'agit d'un lieu en apparence ordinaire, telle que la bibliothèque de Murakami dont le sous-titre de la version Japonaise de 2014 est très marquant : Die Unhemliche Biblothek 19 . C'est ainsi qu'avant que la maison de Lucy ne soit envahie par des loups, une transition auditive s'effectue qui marque l'étrange familiarité. Elle entend les loups dans les murs, mais le narrateur hésite entre la peur et la comédie, utilisant un ton qui reste donc aussi comique qu'effrayant ; répétitions et allitérations créant un rythme enjoué, d'autant plus renforcé par la grande variété dans la langue anglaise, d'onomatopées : « C'étaient des cracs et des boums » 20 . Plusieurs nuits d'affilées, elle entend ces bruits, allant crescendo, auxquels personne d'autre ne semble prêter attention. Un silence absolu est suivi de l'éruption des loups des murs, évènement qui met fin à la période liminaire. C'est ici que les doubles apparaissent et parodient les habitants humains, exagérant de ce fait leurs traits quotidiens : un loup joue bruyamment du trombone, un autre se goinfre des confitures que la mère de Lucy a consciencieusement mises en pot, alors même qu'un troisième loup bat les records de jeux vidéo du frère. Dans chaque cas, le style visuel de McKean reflète cette dualité, et met en lumière ce que le récit de Gaiman évoque. Des illustrations au crayon pour les loups, tels qu'ils sont représentés dans les contes pour enfants, et photocollages réalistes pour les objets représentant les objets de la famille. Curieusement, aucun loup ne semble parodier Lucy, signalant sa singulière capacité de naviguer sans effort entre deux espaces, comme le montre son intrusion non détectée dans la maison lorsqu'elle récupère sa peluche. Plus qu'un mouvement vers l'étrange, Trisha se rapproche du sauvage. Il ne s'agit plus d'une étrange familiarité, mais d'un sous-genre du gothique américain. Jeffrey Andrew Weinstock note en effet que la forêt fait partie de ce qu'il définit comme la « Gothicized American Wilderness » : S'y rendre, c'est laisser derrière soi la civilisation, abandonner foi et famille, et revenir transformé, si l'on revient un jour 21 . Comme pour Lucy, la transition est partiellement auditive : l'absence de sons humain, le bruit du vent, et des moustiques sont autant d'indice d'une progression vers l'espace sauvage. Cette progression, qui suit les manches d'un match de baseball, s'effectue sur quatre chapitres, soit le tiers du roman, et va de pair avec les leçons de sa mère concernant la vie sauvage. Elle a partagé son savoir avec sa fille : les plantes à éviter, les baies comestibles, et même comment aller aux toilettes dans la nature.Il semble donc que malgré la distance physique, Trisha se rapproche de sa mère, à l'inverse de l'éloignement que l'on constate chez Murakami. À la différence du mouvement latéralintérieur vers extérieur de la maison-chez Gaiman, ou horizontal -de la lisière de la forêt vers son centre -chez King, Murakami nous offre une transition chtonienne : labyrinthique et verticale. Suivant les pas du bibliothécaire vers ce qu'il pense être une salle de lecture, le garçon est ainsi surpris de découvrir un couloir aux multiples détours et ramifications 22 , puis, toujours plus étonné qu'effrayé, il nous décrit un espace aux connotations gothiques : un lourd verrou, une porte qui grince, et il entame enfin la descente d'un très long escalier sans aucune lumière 23 . Une fois dans le nouvel espace, chaque enfant s'engage à sa façon sur un chemin, un axe qui les rapproche d'une certaine caractéristique de l'âge adulte : crédibilité, spiritualité, et savoir.

  marquée par une conversation avec son père concernant l'existence d'une force généralement bienveillante. Cette quête présente des similitudes avec la nouvelle de Nathaniel Hawthorne, Young Goodman Brown (1835), dans laquelle la forêt joue également le rôle d'allégorie de la perte d'innocence, tout en symbolisant les peurs et les épreuves qui transforment le protagoniste. Curieusement, et contrairement à la plupart de ses récits dans lesquels les enfants sont à la fois protagonistes et victimes, Stephen King donne une fin heureuse à Trisha. Malgré une double pneumonie, elle survie à sa quête dans la forêt, sa famille réunis au complet à son chevet de lit d'hôpital impliquant que l'espace familial est reconstitué, du moins temporairement. Le garçon de Murakami s'engage seul sur le chemin du savoir. Il fait preuve d'une érudition inquisitive peu commune pour un enfant comme le démontrent les livres qu'il rend à la bibliothèque : des livres tels que « comment construire un sous-marin », « mémoires d'un berger ». Son avenir est malgré tout autrement plus tragique. Parvenant à échapper au sort cruel qui lui était réservé, il se retrouve seul dans une bibliothèque déserte. De retour chez lui, et donc dans un espace familier, après avoir disparu trois jours, il n'échange qu'un « bonjour » 25 avec sa mère qui ne commente en rien son absence et lui sert son petit déjeuner, une mère qui mourra de façon inexpliquée un mardi. Le narrateur se remémore ces évènements, doutant même de leurs véracités (la perte de ses nouvelles chaussures pour seule preuve) et déclare sa solitude absolue, dans un espace d'exclusion, à l'inverse des deux héroïnes précédentes qui peuvent elles se réjouir d'un retour dans un espace à la fois familier et familial.

  Comme nous l'avons vu précédemment le ton des Loups dans les Murs est tantôt effrayant, tantôt parodique, mais jamais terrifiant. Malgré l'utilisation des loups comme antagonistes, il n'est jamais question d'être attaqué ou dévoré, comme c'est bien souvent le cas dans les contes. Lucy n'a donc pas peur pour elle-même mais craint de perdre les deux choses qui lui tiennent le plus à coeur : sa maison et son cochon en peluche. En apparence, la perte de la maison, de l'espace domestique et d'une peluche semblent bien moins cruelles que les sorts qui attendent Trisha et le garçon. Cependant comme le rappelle Danièle Henky, qui prend Blanche Neige comme exemple dans son article concernant le deuil dans la littérature de jeunesse, la perte de l'espace domestique représente en ellemême une mort symbolique 26 . Une page sombre du livre illustré est consacrée à cette inquiétude : on y voit Lucy, recroquevillée sur le gazon, imaginant un loup difforme avalant sa peluche, faisant écho au sort réservé aux cochons dans le conte The Three Little Pigs de James Halliwell. La peur joue un rôle prédominant dans l'intrigue chez King et Murakami, et devient un outil de manipulation dont se servent les antagonistes. Trisha n'est pas seulement traquée par l'ours. Déshydratée et fiévreuse, elle rencontre aussi une figure encapuchonnée dont le visage est un essaim de guêpes. Il s'agit du prêtre du Dieu des perdus, qui la prévient du sort tragique qui l'attend : terrifiée par cette créature insaisissable, elle n'en sera que plus tendre et délicieuse. 27 Cet espace mystique disparait bientôt, et le narrateur prolonge le fantastique alors qu'il ne confirme, ni ne déni son existence : c'étaient peut-être les baies qu'elle a ramassées qui auraient rendu Trisha délirante. La cruauté de l'espace souterrain où se trouve la geôle du garçon de Murakami aurait aisément sa place dans un conte de Perrault. Le bibliothécaire établit ainsi les termes de la captivité du jeune garçon : en un mois, il devra apprendre par coeur les trois épais volumes concernant la collecte des impôts dans l'empire ottoman s'il veut être libéré, faute de quoi le bibliothécaire lui dévorera le cerveau. Une tromperie narrative, nous affirme son esclave l'homme-mouton, indiquant que le bibliothécaire/ogre souhaite juste engraisser le garçon car les jeunes cerveaux instruits sont délicieux. Les menaces ne sont pas seulement destinées au garçon puisque l'homme-mouton sera enfermé dans un pot rempli de dix milles chenilles pendant trois jours s'il n'obéit pas au maitre des lieus. Alors que King nous laisse entendre que c'est la peur ressentie par la proie la rend plus gouteuse et qui affame l'ours, le bibliothécaire engraisse métaphoriquement le garçon de connaissances afin de mieux le dévorer. Des adjuvants atypiques Selon son schéma actanciel 28 , Greimas propose que l'adjuvant dans un récit soutient le héros dans sa quête en lui fournissant conseils, compétences et réconfort. Cela peut être un mentor bienveillant, un compagnon fidèle ou même un objet magique qui aide le héros à surmonter les obstacles et atteindre son objectif. Lucy trouve dans l'expérience de réalité virtuelle, adaptation directe du récit de Gaiman, un adjuvant atypique et inattendu : le lecteur/joueur. Tout comme le livre illustré permet au dessinateur de mettre en valeur ce que l'auteur suggère à l'écrit, cette adaptation en réalité virtuelle permet au joueur de vivre et ressentir les éléments majeurs du récit au travers de l'apport technologique. Tout est fait pour nous permettre de pénétrer l'espace diégétique : nous pouvons interagir avec Lucy et l'environnement claustrophobique de la maison, alors que nous cherchons des traces, des preuves de l'existences des loups au travers d'une séries d'activités ludiques. Malgré le danger, et l'incrédulité de ses parents, Lucy trouve grâce à la réalité virtuelle un lien de confiance, et d'égalité 29 . Il n'en reste pas moins que notre existence même est remise en question par les parents pour lesquels nous ne sommes que l'ami imaginaire de Lucy, au même titre que son cochon en peluche. Illusion, ou vision, Tom Gordon apparait à Trisha à plusieurs reprises lors de son aventure dans la forêt. Il représente un lien familial avec son père et devient littéralement une idole à laquelle la petite fille peut prier, sachant que le Dieu auquel elle avait précédemment prié ne peut ou ne semble pas vouloir l'aider. Prolepse ou voeu pieu, elle conditionne sa survie à la victoire de Tom Gordon dans le match qu'elle écoute à la radio 30 . Alliés hétéroclites du garçon de Murakami, la jeune fille muette aux cheveux brillants pourrait être un d'Arianne guidant Thésée vers la sortie du labyrinthe, et l'homme mouton est étrangement similaire aux animaux doués de parole dans les contes de fées. Ces alliés démontrent que malgré cet enfermement, cet espace aux multiples facettes n'est pas qu'un espace de privation complet. En effet, le garçon trouve les repas que ses nouveaux amis lui servent excellents, qui incluent même des saucisses de Toulouse 31 . Alors même qu'il est terrifié par le bibliothécaire, l'homme-mouton, communique de précieuses informations au garçon qui l'aideront à échafauder un stratagème pour s'échapper. Lors de son évasion en compagnie de ses adjuvants, le garçon confronte une dernière fois le bibliothécaire et ses menaces hyperboliques 32 . La jeune fille, nous la retrouvons sous la forme d'un étourneau qui se sacrifie pour permettre au garçon d'échapper au bibliothécaire infernal et à son compagnon, un chien rouge-brun qui, faute d'être tricéphale tel Cerbère, possède six griffes à chaque patte. Tout comme Orphée, notre héro sort seul de l'espace chtonien laissant derrière lui la jeune fille dont il était tombé amoureux.

lecteur se retrouve au même niveau que le protagoniste : surpris et inquiet par cet abandon. Il est intéressant de noter que la division de l'unité parentale est, contrairement à King et Gaiman, marquée par le non-dit. En effet, pas une seule mention du père du garçon dont on

  Mais, nous dit le narrateur, Dieu n'intervient pas et n'envoie que quelques moustiques. C'est ainsi que le terme « ignorer » est répété à quatre reprises lors des deux premiers paragraphes et le narrateur surnomme un peu plus loin Trisha « la fille invisible » On peut se referrer à l'article suivant pour une lecture sociale des oeuvres de Murakami: Celeste LOUGHMAN, « No place I was meant to be: Contemporary Japan in the short fiction of Haruki Murakami »,World Literature Today, vol. 71, n o 1, 1997, p. 87-94.

	7 . Présence en demi-teinte et communication imparfaite créent une atmosphère d'abandon
	et de méfiance de la part des jeunes protagonistes de King et Gaiman, à l'inverse du garçon
	de Murakami qui est marqué par la déception et la désillusion. En effet, bien que sa mère
	soit mentionnée tout au long du récit à une dizaine de reprises par son fils, narrateur
	intradiégétique, elle reste silencieuse même lorsqu'il rentre à la maison après trois nuits
	d'absence. Un fils qui est, à l'instar de nombreux héros adultes de Murakami, calmement
	confus et dépité, et dont les attentes sont déçues : « elle ne m'a rien demandé. Ni pourquoi
	je ne revenais pas de l'école, ni où j'avais passé les trois dernières nuits, […] pas une seule
	question ou remarque. Ce n'était pas du tout son genre » 8 . Dans un cadre social traditionnel
	japonais où c'est la mère qui est garante du bien-être et de l'éducation de ses enfants, le
	imagine qu'il est soit absent, soit marié à son travail, une réalité sociale chez les travailleurs
	de bureau au Japon 9 . C'est d'ailleurs sa mère qui lui a dit que s'il veut savoir quelque
	7 Stephen KING, The girl who loved Tom Gordon op. cit. p.16
	8 She didn't ask me a thing. Not why I hadn't come from school, or where I had spent the last three nights,
	[…] not a single question or complaints. It wasn't like her at all. Haruki MURAKAMI, The Strange Library,
	op. cit. ch 26.

9

Sauf indication du contraire, toutes les traductions sont les nôtres. If the wolves come out of the walls, then it's all over. Ibid., p. 6.

Haruki MURAKAMI, The Strange Library, op. cit.ch. 3.

as any priest has ever handled the eucharist. Stephen KING, The girl who loved TomGordon, op. cit., p.46.

Haruki MURAKAMI, the strange library, op. cit., ch. 5.

Matthew C STRECHER, the forbidden worlds of Haruki Murakami, Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 2014.

Heidi SCHLIPPHACKE, « The Place and Time of the Uncanny », Pacific Coast Philology, vol. 50, no 2, 2015, p. 163, [en ligne] doi: 10.5325/pacicoasphil.50.2.0163 [Consulté le 02/07/2023]

They were crinkling noises and crackling noises. Neil GAIMAN et Dave MCKEAN, The Wolves in the Walls, op. cit.

Jeffrey Andrew WEINSTOCK, The Cambridge companion to American gothic, op. cit.

Haruki MURAKAMI, The Strange Library, op. cit., ch. 5.

Ibid. ch. 5.

Do you think I should tell the rest of them? I'm sure they'll find out soon enough. Neil GAIMAN et Dave MCKEAN, The Wolves in the Walls, op. cit.

Danièle HENKY, « Deuil, initiation, résilience et leur inscription en littérature pour la jeunesse » dans L'Oiseau Bleu, Bochra Charnay et Thierry Charnay (dir.), Lille, vol II 2022.

Stephen KING, The girl who loved TomGordon, op. cit., p.90.

Algirdas Julien GREIMAS, « Éléments pour une théorie de l'interprétation du récit mythique »,Communications, vol. 8, no 8, 1966, p. 28-59. Consulté en ligne https://www.persee.fr/doc/comm_0588-8018_1966_num_8_1_1114

Lors du lancement de l'expérience, Lucy passe outre les réglages du joueur et nous convainc d'ajuster la perspective du casque, nous ramenant ainsi à sa taille.

Stephen KING, The girl who loved TomGordon, op. cit., p.72.

Haruki MURAKAMI, The Strange Library, op. cit., ch. 11.