In the last few years, different complementary currency systems have emerged (Seyfang and Longhurst 2013a; Blanc 2011; Hughes 2005), such as local currencies, barter markets and time banks (TB hereafter). In his typology of complementary currencies, Blanc (2011: 9) describes TBs as schemes that pursue a community purpose and principally aim to contribute to the “well-being, empowerment, autonomy and social exchanges of a given community”. As such, the main difference with other community currencies is that TBs are seen as social innovation because they address specific social needs and enhance social aspects of well-being (Seyfang and Longhurst 2013a, 2013b; Blanc 2011; Seyfang 2004).


The functioning of TBs is simple: users provide services to other users thus earning time credits that may be used later to obtain a service that they need (Clary 2008); in turn, the recipient has a debt in time credits and ‘repays’ by providing a service to the same or a different member of the TB. In this way, time is ‘banked’ and may be used when the member needs it. Thus, reciprocity is indirect and multilateral in TBs and exchanges are not dyadic, but chain-generalised (Ekeh 1974) or network-generalized (Yamagishi and Cook 1993). These exchanges include a variety of services such as cooking, babysitting and dog walking, among others (Collom, Lasker and Kyriakou 2012; Ozanne and Ozanne 2011; Seyfang 2006). In TBs, time is understood as an alternative type of currency operating as a store of value and a medium of exchange (Boyle 2014). Because time banking is based on tenets of equality, all services are usually equally valued regardless of the service provided, that is, an hour’s work for an hour’s work (Seyfang and Longhurst 2013b; Dittmer 2013; Collom, Lasker and Kyriakou 2012; Ozanne and Ozanne 2011). However, this also means that exchanges are often limited to services, since it is complicated to define goods’ value in time and trade them in TBs (Dittmer 2013; North 2003).

TBs have been limitedly examined in the literature, especially compared to other forms of community currencies (Dittmer 2013) and to our knowledge there is no paper addressing the phenomenon in Spain. Yet, the number of TBs in Spain has grown considerably over the past years until reaching 200 in 2012 (Del Moral 2013) or, according to other sources, 250 (Seyfang and Longhurst 2013a) or 328 (Vivir Sin Empleo 2014). The three main political Spanish parties, the Spanish Socialist Worker Party (PSOE), the People’s Party (PP) and the United Left (IU) included the commitment to create TBs in their political agenda, albeit with different aims–youth development, the work-life balance and alternative economy development, respectively (Del Moral 2013). Spanish TBs have appeared frequently in the national and international media in the last two years, where they are presented as an alternative economy in times of recession that allows the unemployed to counteract the negative effects of the crisis (Del Moral 2013; see, inter alia, stories by Eunjung Cha 2012 and Frayer 2012).

Two main streams of research on TBs can be identified. A first group of authors have developed conceptual papers about TBs exploring their potential in a transition to sustainability and the degrowth paradigm (e.g., Dittmer 2013; Seyfang 2006; Hughes 2005). A second group of authors have studied specific TBs, usually one at a time (with the exceptions of Seyfang and Smith 2002 and Collom, Lasker and Kyriakou 2012). Most research has been conducted in English-speaking countries. In the United States, Collom (2007; 2008; 2011) analyzed participants’ motivations and benefits, TBs’ ability to create social capital, and the results obtained as a tool of inclusion for the elderly. Dubois, Schor and Carfagna (2014) examined the transformatory potential of TBs focusing on the Boston Trade Circle TB. In the UK, Seyfang (2002; 2003) examined TBs as a tool for social inclusion. In New Zealand, Ozanne (2010) and Ozanne and Ozanne (2011) studied how TBs helped to strengthen community ties and the types of capital created. Finally, Molnar (2011) evaluated the achievements and challenges of a TB in Sweden. All these authors describe the aims of TBs in these countries, their organisation and management, and users’ experience. TBs are said to be chameleonic given that they are instrumental for different purposes in different countries (Collom, Lasker and Kyriakou 2012). Consequently, they are also organized differently in different countries (Seyfang and Longhurst 2013a).

This paper reviews the existing literature to describe the role TBs play in other countries as well as their organisation, drivers and barriers for participation. The results of our empirical study comprising interviews with time brokers of 27 Spanish TBs and of an online survey of Spanish TBs users are then presented. A comparison of Spanish TBs with those of other countries is provided in order to assess similarities and differences.

Such research is timely in the Spanish context because as said above, they have been featured in the media, been included in political agendas, and grown in number. Furthermore, we have examined different types of TBs, some of which have emerged from the recent 15M movement. The narratives of TB managers show that they expect important outcomes from the creation of a TB. Yet our findings provide evidence that the number of exchanges is very limited and that most participants have never carried out a transaction. The main conclusion of this research is that TBs in Spain enjoy more symbolic than material importance, corroborating Dittmer’s (2013) claims for TBs’ limited potential. This paper will ultimately suggest possible explanations for this contradiction. Given the state of the literature, this paper should be considered exploratory. The findings indicate research lines that should be addressed in future studies. 


TBs were created in the US in the 1980s by the civil rights lawyer Edgar Cahn in response to the erosion of informal neighborhood networks (Seyfang 2002). Cahn’s main purpose was to “make social welfare more effective and humane” through what he called “co-production” (Dittmer 2013: 6). His ideas served as basis for the global expansion of the phenomenon, although they first appeared in Japan (Gregory 2012).

Cahn’s basic principles (in Seyfang 2006: 6) for TB functioning are: “recognising people as assets and that everyone has skills to share; redefining work to include the unpaid ‘core economy’ of work in the neighborhood and community; nurturing reciprocity and exchange rather than dependency; growing social capital; encouraging learning and skills-sharing; involving people in decision making”. However, they vary in terms of their origins, functioning and purpose.

Boyle (2014) identified different streams of TBs around the world that either emerge from complementary currency initiatives (e.g., German) or from reciprocal volunteering systems (e.g., the UK, Japan and the US). This origin influences the expectations or goals attributed to time banking. We can differentiate three main purposes: social, political, and economic.

In the US and the UK, TBs have been traditionally promoted among the unemployed and other socially excluded groups (e.g., the elderly and the disabled) as a means to foster inclusion and equality (Del Moral 2013; Collom 2008; Kimmel 2008). Also, in Japan (Boyle 2014) TBs or Fureai Kippu date back to the 1970s and were linked principally to the participation and support of the elderly and retired (Boyle 2014; Hayashi 2012; Miller 2008).

Research suggests that they have targeted socially excluded and marginalized groups (Seyfang 2006b; Seyfang 2004; Seyfang and Smith 2002). In a similar line, the Accorderie model1 of time banking, developed in Quebec and then expanded in France, aimed at fighting social exclusion and poverty (Fare 2012). In the US, many TBs were created to facilitate access to services among the elderly in order to increase their well-being (Seyfang and Pearson 2000). In the UK, Seyfang (2002) depicts TBs as part of the social economy and as an improvement over volunteering, since they have attracted socially excluded groups more successfully than traditional volunteering. Research shows that TBs may improve employability by acquiring new skills at no cost, build members’ self-confidence and self-worth by putting in use their skills set and foster empowerment among members (Molnar 2011; Seyfang 2003).

Yet the possible social objectives of TBs are not limited to social inclusion. In Spain and Italy a large number of TBs emerged out of the feminist movement as municipal TBs (Boyle 2014; Del Moral 2013; Blanc and Fare 2013; Amorevole, Colombo and Grisendi 1998) to foster the work-life balance (Gisbert 2010). Their purpose largely focused on creating social capital and mutual assistance among older people (Blanc and Fare 2013; Miller 2008). In New Zealand they were fostered as a tool to strengthen ties among neighbors (Ozanne 2010; Ozanne and Ozanne 2011). Research on TBs in Sweden and UK concludes that they have proven successful as a tool to create social capital (Collom 2008; 2007; Molnar 2011).

In addition, time banking is presented as a political project. Cahn (2001) contended that time banking would promote co-production, recognising that everybody has skills to offer to the community especially when related to social and community services such as health and education. Time banking tried to fill one of the problems created by the current neoliberal model: the erosion of the Economy of Care, the impossibility of reaching full employment and the lack of social and political recognition of unpaid jobs (Gregory 2012; Kimmel 2008). Time banking challenges the system by promoting an entirely different set of principles than those found in the neoliberal paradigm (Seyfang 2006). For example, the principle of egalitarian remuneration is thought as a critique to how value and time are priced in the neoliberal capitalist market.

Therefore, as several authors advocate (Collom 2008; Seyfang 2006; Seyfang and Pearson 2000), TBs also hold political importance: they are a glimpse into an economy based on ethical values (Kimmel 2008). It is not surprising that they have been linked to the global justice movements (Del Moral 2013; Collom 2008) and have been traditionally seen as a form of disengagement from the market and of resistance to global capitalism. However, Hughes (2005) argued that these alternative trading spaces should be understood as reformist rather than radical building on previous work by Lee et al. (2004). Likewise, Dittmer (2013: 7) offers a more critical view of the potential of TBs as a tool in degrowth economies, as he contends that they are not well suited to advance alternative livelihoods or eco-localisation. At most, they can help strengthen ties in the community, and at worse, they may be a “cover for the neoliberal dismantling of the welfare state” or even contribute to the commodification of personal relations.

Finally, regarding the economic project, TBs are often depicted as a way of having access to services that users otherwise cannot afford (Collom, Lasker and Kyriakou 2012; Seyfang 2003). Also, as previously mentioned, recently the press has often conveyed the idea of time banking as an alternative market for those hit by the recession. Boyle (2014) argued that in Italy and Austria, TBs attract those better-off but still hit by the crisis. On a different note, Del Moral (2013) explained that TB users may suffer from time poverty and look to cover real needs that emerge from their busy schedules (e.g., babysitting for working mothers). Yet although participants may be attracted by the possibility of obtaining material gains, different authors argue that TBs are ill-suited for this goal, given that there is no trade of goods and the limited availability of services (Dittmer 2013; Seyfang 2006; Lee et al. 2004). As Dittmer (2013: 9) suggested, TBs “do not support autonomy from formal employment” for their users, as for example a LETS may partially do.

Studies of TB members have also suggested this potential threefold role of TBs. The three main motives for joining a TB are political or ideological (e.g., fighting the current economic paradigm), economic (e.g., receiving services that they could not otherwise afford) and social (e.g., helping others and improving the neighborhood) (Collom, Lasker and Kyriakou 2012; Collom 2008; 2007; Seyfang 2002).

The profile of participants may largely define the purpose, level and type of activity of the TB, because of the skills they bring and because of their motives and preferences (Dubois, Schor and Carfagna 2014). For example, in Miller’s thesis on Japanese TBs, it is argued that (2008, p.208): “the relative affluence of the aged in Japan, where retirees hold the greater share of private wealth, may mean that older Japanese draw more on time banks as a source of friends and pursuits to fill their time than as an alternative form of funding for help in any future dependency situation”. Similarly, in other studies carried out in relatively affluent neighborhoods such as the first TB in New Zealand (Ozanne 2010), the Italian TB of Modena (Del Moral 2013) or the Boston Time Trade Circle (Dubois, Schor and Carfagna 2014), the focus of the TB was not so much on co-production, but on strengthening the community and neighbors’ relations.

Although TBs usually operate according to the same basic principles, there are differences in their organization and management. Molnar (2011) differentiates between person-to-person, person-to-agency, and agency-to-agency models. In most countries, the person-to-person model is the most frequent, but in the US, the UK and Sweden the person-to-agency model also exists (Collom 2007), coherent with the purpose of improving the efficacy of social welfare (Ozanne 2010). These agency-based TBs are similar to what Boyle (2014) calls a reward-based TB: people earn time credits from a sponsoring organization that may be a charity or a public service organization. The sponsoring organization defines the goals, activities and resources. TB users earn credits by helping other members and can spend these credits on rewards such as food banks and sports centers that also form part of this circle. Other variations could be found such as the Accorderie model that includes individual and collective exchanges such as community credit programs and members pooling their buying power together to negotiate directly with producers (Fare 2012). In addition, some schemes allow the participation of for-profit organizations (Dittmer 2013).

In the US and UK, there is also often a paid time-broker facilitating exchanges and invigorating the TB. In this case, TBs depend on public funds. Furthermore, in the US and the UK TB person-to-person exchanges are tax-exempt as they are considered as volunteerism (Dittmer 2013; Collom, Lasker and Kyriakou 2012), whereas in Sweden they are not (Molnar 2011). Therefore, a further consideration as regards the degree of support that TB may receive from the government, TBs are seen as schemes that encourage citizens’ active participation in line with the ´Big Society´ notion (Halsall et al. 2014; Del Moral 2013; North 2011).


The research adopted a method-mixed approach (Johnson and Onwuegbuzie 2004), including a two-phase data collection. First, a qualitative study of time brokers was carried out and second, a survey was distributed to members of TBs. Throughout the project, the researchers also followed the Facebook pages of four TBs, joined the Spanish Association for TB development and took part in two regional meetings of TB managers.

In the first stage, semi-structured interviews were conducted with time brokers of different TBs in Spain. The time brokers of our sample are not always employed unlike previous research in the US that shows that this is common in younger TBs (Collom, Lasker and Kyriakou 2012). Instead, some of the time brokers were TB users that would receive their payment in time credits or would have rotating shifts. A total of 28 interviews were conducted representing 28 different TBs. This decision was taken for two reasons. First, it allowed establishing rapport with the TB managers/time-brokers, the TB “gatekeepers” who facilitated the second phase of the fieldwork. In most cases, time brokers sent the questionnaire to the TB members and encouraged them to participate, while some forwarded it to other TBs with which they were in contact. Second, it allowed contextualizing the findings of the survey by understanding how TBs are managed.

For the selection of TBs, heterogeneous sampling was employed by identifying different characteristics to construct the sample (Patton 2002). Specifically, while most of the sample came from big cities such as Madrid or Barcelona, some TBs are located in smaller cities such as Girona and Tenerife or smaller villages (e.g., Ribagorza). Most TBs in our sample (around 64%) were created in the last 5 years, while the oldest was created in 2003. In terms of membership, very different cases were included; from TBs with 4000 members to others with 10 members. At the time of writing the paper, two of the TBs in our sample have closed down (TB4, TB9); both originating from the 15M movement. Table 1 provides a description of TBs in terms of their characteristics.

To carry out the interviews with TB managers, a topic guide was developed to allow for more spontaneity and flexibility in information gathering; this guide became more detailed as the fieldwork proceeded. This was also necessary to ensure consistency as the interviews were carried out simultaneously by two different researchers. Interviews lasted from 30 minutes to one hour and took place during the months of January, February and March 2013.

In the second phase, self-administered questionnaires were sent to TB members, principally by email (via time brokers, TB Facebook pages and on the webpage of the Association for TB development). Targeting TB users via email was suggested by TB managers since it was usually the habitual means of communicating with members. Questionnaires were distributed during a meeting of the TB in only one case.

A total of 295 questionnaires were returned, of which 270 were valid. There are no studies that have quantified or described the universe (users of TB) with certainty. According to rough estimates by Boyle (2014), TB users in Europe may reach up to 200,000 members, whereas information provided by Julio Gisbert reveals 328 Spanish TBs but no specific information about the total number of users (Vivir Sin Empleo 2014).

According to the survey, the prototypical profile of their TB is a middle-aged woman with higher education (see Table 3 in Results). This confirms the information provided by TB managers in the interviews. Compared to the total Spanish population (according to Spanish Statistical Office data), women, the middle-aged, highly educated individuals and members of NGOs are overrepresented in the sample. A disadvantage of this sampling method is the risk of self-selection: it is likely that the most committed users will answer the questionnaire, and the inactive or uncommitted will be underrepresented. Although other sampling methods were considered (e.g., handing out the questionnaires during meetings, snowball sampling, etc.), according to the time brokers interviewed, the results were likely to be similar. In the sample, 20% of all respondents had never engaged in a TB exchange. This percentage is lower than the figure put forward by most TB managers (ranging from 40% to 80% depending on the TB). Therefore, it should be mentioned that the sample is likely to be biased towards the most active users.

Finally, the questionnaire included an initial six questions about engagement with the TB. Users were asked to report the month and year they joined the bank (tenure), the number of transactions carried out, the date of their last transaction and the services supplied and demanded.

Second, users were asked whether they engaged in other actions related to collaborative consumption (such as swapping and local currencies), volunteerism, or political participation (e.g., participation in social or civic associations). Third, consumers were presented with a list of goals and asked to recall and report what goals they were pursuing when they joined the TB. A modified version of the Taxonomy of Human Goals (Ford and Nichols 1987) was used (see Table 4 in Results). 


This section presents the main findings of the study and is structured into two main subsections: illusions and delusions. First, a description of TB is provided (goals and management of TBs and profile of users) and compared to other TBs described in the literature. The second section critically evaluates the articulation of TB in Spain, by explaining the main challenges found during the study.


This study provides a broad description of Spanish TBs on various levels: in terms of their design and functioning (organizational-meso level) and in terms of participants, their goals and engagement with the TB (micro level). Both dimensions are important in order to understand how the TB project is positioned in the current political and social context of Spain.

In terms of organization, a taxonomy of Spanish TBs is offered along three dimensions: according to the promoter, according to their functioning and according to their means of communication. The findings show that TB are heterogeneous and their differences affect the way they operate and the potential continuance of the project. We have also brought attention to TBs that emerged from the 15M movement as a response to the current social situation in Spain.

The findings of this study show that Spanish TBs share some similarities with those in other countries, but retain specific features. For example, the agency model of TB is not found. Similarly to previous research on TBs, our findings emphasize the social dimension of time banking in Spain: TBs are more oriented towards social capital creation and specifically to improving the social fabric of the neighborhood. This is the dominant role of Spanish TBs: to provide a structure to develop social networks, build trust, and reinforce social ties.

In line with the criticisms regarding the limited economic potential of TBs (Dittmer 2013), the utilitarian view of time banking does not seem that prominent in Spain. Collom, Lasker and Kyriakou (2012) found that members of some TBs use them mainly for practical reasons to cover real needs. However, other authors, such as Seyfang (2002) and Del Moral (2013), coincide with our findings: TBs are used partially to cover specific needs such as repairs, but not principally. The profile of the TB members in our study also confirms this. Moreover, this study contends that users do not see TBs as a source of use value for various reasons, thus jeopardizing the social and political value of the project.

This seems to be a paradox: users join because they are attracted by the social and political dimension of the project, but unless TBs become a way of meeting users’ needs and solving problems, they will not fulfill their potential and ensure their continuance. Here is where the delusion arises: the belief that TBs can continue to exist in their current form and that they are providing mutual support, when they are actually doing so in a very limited way. To some degree, our findings confirm previous claims that the majority of services are not highly skilled (Dittmer 2013), meaning that TB users have easy access to informal services such as babysitting or massages. Most importantly, however, we found that time banking is not a salient option for users who might opt for the market when they have a real need. This may happen either because they seek professional services or because TB exchanges involve a more complicated and time-consuming process. Furthermore, we found that many TB users offer their services but do not request any, thus violating the notion of reciprocity (see, for example, Collom, Lasker and Kyriakou 2012; Molnar 2011). This suggests that they may see TBs as spaces for volunteering where they can ‘provide’ their services guided by altruistic motives, but do not perceive themselves to be ‘in need’ or as potential recipients in TB exchanges.

Time banking may be seen as another space for civic engagement that participants use to distance themselves from the market––understood not as a space for satisfying needs, but as the metonym of the neoliberal system and its values of competition, individualism, selfishness, and so on. In line with other authors (Forno and Graziano 2014; Castells, Caraca and Cardoso 2012), participants seem to look for meaning in different aspects of their daily lives. Thus, their participation holds more of a symbolic significance rather than a functional utility: by joining a TB users may feel they are symbolically fighting the current neoliberal globalization, since TBs stand for “anti-neoliberal” values, such as care, inclusiveness or equality (Alberich 2014). Nevertheless, such a view may be criticized since TBs can be promoted in line with the notion of the ‘Big Society’, but they place more responsibility on citizens and local communities while the welfare state is dismantled (Del Moral 2013; North 2011).

Future research should explore the dynamic interrelation of these spaces with other social actors such as other grassroots movements, peer pressure groups or local government authorities. A challenge is whether TBs are a passing fad or whether they will continue expanding in the near future. In that sense, it remains to be seen whether they are spaces of transition between social paradigms to a lesser or greater extent. 


Carmen Valor, Lecturer at the Universidad Pontificia Comillas (Spain). Her work focuses on sustainable consumption. Previous research by the author has been published in Journal of Business Ethics, Journal of Consumer Policy and Journal of Marketing Management, inter alia.

Eleni Papaoikonomou, Lecturer of Marketing at Rovira and Virgili University. Her work has been published in the Journal of Business Ethics, Journal of Consumer Culture and International Journal of Consumer Studies, among others.