Moneko

Community Currency·Active·Loire-Atlantique, France

Citizen-managed local complementary currency pegged 1:1 to the euro circulating only in Loire-Atlantique. Democratically governed by association members, with euro reserves deposited at ethical banks to finance local Social and Solidarity Economy projects.

M69 Score

Methodology →

2.6

Weakly aligned

Monetary Sovereignty

2.3

Civilizational Durability

2.4

Universal Adoption

3.5

Framework v0.2-alphaRated 1mo ago

M69 Verdict

Moneko is a citizen-managed local complementary currency operating in the Loire-Atlantique department of western France (Nantes Métropole, Pays de Retz, Pornic, Saint-Nazaire, Guérande peninsula, Clisson/Vignoble, Pays d'Ancenis). Born on April 30, 2020 from the merger of two earlier local currencies — SoNantes (a 2015 municipal initiative of the City of Nantes) and Retz'l (a 2013 grassroots currency from Bouguenais) — Moneko is operated by the nonprofit association MLC44 ("Monnaie Locale Complémentaire de Loire-Atlantique") under France's 1901 association law and Article 16 of the 2014 Social and Solidarity Economy (ESS) Law. The currency operates at fixed 1:1 parity with the euro (1 mk = 1 €), available as physical coupons (0.5, 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 44 mk denominations) and a digital format via mobile app inherited from the SoNantes infrastructure. Approximately 350,000 monekos circulate today, with 1.4 million monekos exchanged in 2025 across a network of ~240 professional members; in 2023 Moneko became the second French local currency (after the Eusko in the Basque Country) to cross the symbolic threshold of one million euros exchanged on a rolling 12-month basis. Late 2025 saw the absorption of Le Rozo (the Saint-Nazaire/Guérande local currency) into Moneko, consolidating Loire-Atlantique's complementary currency landscape into a single department-wide instrument. From an M69 alignment perspective, Moneko exhibits the same architectural pattern as other French and European complementary currencies: a 100% euro-backed voucher system whose monetary sovereignty is structurally borrowed from the euro. The euro reserves backing every circulating moneko are deposited at three ethical banks (Crédit Coopératif, La Nef, La Banque Postale) and the deposits are deliberately used to finance Social and Solidarity Economy (ESS) projects in the territory — a "double dividend" model that is socially innovative but does nothing to free the currency from euro and French regulatory dependency. Strengths include a genuinely democratic, multi-stakeholder governance model (1 member = 1 vote, four-college Collectif d'Orientation), a clear charter of values requiring social/environmental/economic commitments, an organic citizen-led origin story, the recent successful consolidation with Rozo (demonstrating capacity to absorb peer initiatives), and an emerging anchoring role in concrete local programs such as the department's first Caisse Commune Alimentaire (common food fund) supported by ADEME. Weaknesses are the structural ones common to all euro-pegged complementary currencies: total fiat dependency, single-jurisdiction exposure (France/ACPR), a custodial Cyclos-style digital backend with full operator visibility, mandatory KYC with national ID for digital accounts, no on-chain or cryptographic enforcement of monetary rules, and no demurrage or anti-concentration mechanism. Compared with the larger Eusko, Moneko is younger (~6 years vs. 13), smaller (~240 vs. ~1,400 professionals), and earlier in its institutional maturation, but follows essentially the same architectural template.

Key Findings

Strongest category: Traction (3.7)

Born in April 2020 from the merger of two predecessor currencies (SoNantes 2015, Retz'l 2013) and now ranked 2nd-largest French local currency by transaction volume, Moneko has converted six years of effort into ~350,000 monekos in circulation, 1.4M exchanged in 2025, ~240 professional members, the recent absorption of Le Rozo (Saint-Nazaire/Guérande), and a new institutional role as the monetary tool of Loire-Atlantique's first Caisse Commune Alimentaire. The project has clearly cleared the "still here, still growing" threshold that defeats most local currencies in their first decade.

Standout strength: Distribution of economic benefits (IN-04: 5)

Moneko's most distinctive M69-relevant feature is its explicit "double dividend" model: euro reserves are not just held passively — they are deliberately placed at three ethical banks (Crédit Coopératif, La Nef, La Banque Postale) so the deposits actively finance ESS projects in the territory. Combined with one-member-one-vote governance, no founder/token allocation, and nonprofit status, this makes the seigniorage and benefit-distribution profile cleaner than most monetary projects of any kind.

Weakest categories: Fiat Independence (1.3) and Sovereignty (1.7)

These are not bugs but architectural choices. Moneko is a 100%-euro-backed, hard-pegged voucher operating under French law with French banks and ACPR oversight; full identity is required for digital accounts; the digital backend is custodial; there is no smart contract or cryptographic enforcement of monetary rules. These scores cannot improve without a fundamental redesign.

Notable strength: Governance design (3.0)

The Collectif d'Orientation with four stakeholder colleges (individuals, professionals, networks/public institutions, local groups), one-member-one-vote at the General Assembly, two co-presidents, four salaried staff, four commissions, and three local groups represent unusually mature multi-stakeholder governance for a six-year-old organization. The 2025 absorption of Rozo without visible internal turbulence is concrete evidence the structure works.

Notable gap: No anti-concentration / no demurrage

Unlike Gesell-inspired currencies (Chiemgauer's 6% annual demurrage) Moneko has no structural mechanism to penalize hoarding or accelerate circulation. Cultural pressure to "recirculate rather than reconvert" is the only soft equivalent. For a project whose explicit purpose is to keep value circulating in the local economy, the absence of a velocity-incentive mechanism is a meaningful design conservatism.

Big takeaway

Moneko is a textbook Eusko-template French local currency — six years younger, roughly one-fifth the user-base size, but architecturally identical. Its own innovations sit in the ESS-financing dividend model, the Caisse Commune Alimentaire integration, and a particularly clean democratic governance structure. From an M69 standpoint, it confirms what the Eusko rating already showed: this entire family of projects demonstrates that values-driven, charter-based, citizen-governed local currencies can work in practice and grow steadily, but they sit fundamentally outside M69's vision because they are built as euro-wrappers under nation-state regulatory regimes rather than as fiat-independent, cryptographically enforced, censorship-resistant money. The lessons worth importing are organizational (multi-college governance, charter-based onboarding, double-dividend reserves), not architectural.

M69 Score

M69 Alignment2.6

Weakly aligned

1.02.03.04.05.0

Monetary Sovereignty2.3

Issuance (3x) + Stability (2x) + Fiat Indep. (2x)

Civilizational Durability2.4

Sovereignty + Governance + Resilience

Universal Adoption3.5

Traction (2x) + Inclusivity

Iss Mod3x

2.8

Stability2x

2.4

Fia Ind & Int2x

1.3

Traction2x

3.7

Sovereignty

1.7

Governance

3.0

Resilience

2.6

Inclusivity

3.1

Scored against the Money2069 Manifesto — see methodology. Higher = more aligned.

Detailed Rating Breakdown

Issuance Model3x

2.8

Code	Question	Score
IM-01	Is issuance permissionless?Issuance is fully restricted to the MLC44 association, which alone can mint new monekos when users deposit euros at exchange counters or via bank transfer. Users cannot independently create supply; the issuing authority is a single nonprofit. [1][2]	1
IM-02	Is new supply created through debt?New monekos are created through a 1:1 exchange of euros — a purchase/voucher model, not a lending model. No debt is involved; received euros are placed into guarantee deposits at ethical banks. The system is debt-free in its issuance mechanism. [1][2]	5
IM-03	Is issuance tied to measurable real-world economic activity?Issuance is indirectly tied to local economic activity since monekos are only created when someone deposits euros with the intent to spend in the local network. There is no algorithmic or quantitative real-economy index; supply depends entirely on voluntary euro deposits, with charter-based qualitative anchoring (ESS values). [1][2]	2
IM-04	Does the issuance model have a supply cap or hard ceiling?Supply is elastic with no hard cap and no algorithmic ceiling — it expands when users deposit euros and contracts when they (or businesses) reconvert monekos back to euros. There is no demurrage and no automatic contraction mechanism, so the elasticity is one-directional in practice. [1][2]	3
IM-05	Can supply contract (burn/redemption) as well as expand?Contraction happens when businesses or members request reconversion of monekos into euros (currently advertised as fee-free for businesses via comptabilite@moneko.org, with the model encouraging recirculation rather than reconversion). No demurrage, no automatic decay, and no protocol-level contraction; contraction is fully user-initiated. [1][2]	3

Spending Power Stability2x

2.4

Code	Question	Score
SPS-01	What mechanism does the protocol use to target spending power stability?2× Stability is achieved through a fixed 1:1 euro peg with full reserve backing — every circulating moneko is matched by an equivalent euro held at partner banks. The mechanism is passive (reserve-based), not algorithmic; there is no on-chain logic or active stabilizer beyond the redemption guarantee. [1][2]	2
SPS-02	What benchmark is used to measure spending power?2× The benchmark is the euro — a single fiat currency. The 1:1 parity means monekos inherit the euro's inflation. Among fiat references the euro is relatively stable but still delivers meaningful long-term inflation, and there is no independent purchasing power measure. [1]	2
SPS-03	How transparent and verifiable is the stability measurement?1× The mechanism is conceptually simple and the partner banks (Crédit Coopératif, La Nef, La Banque Postale) are publicly disclosed, so reserve backing is verifiable in principle through association accounts presented at the General Assembly. There is no continuous on-chain proof of reserves and no independent published audit comparable to the Cour des comptes' Eusko review. [1][2]	3
SPS-04	What is the protocol's historical deviation from its stability target?2× The 1:1 euro peg has held continuously since launch in April 2020 (~6 years) without any reported depegging event, supported by the full-reserve model. Track record vs. the euro target is solid but short, and this measures peg stability, not real purchasing power, which has eroded with eurozone inflation since 2022. [1][2]	4
SPS-05	Does the protocol distinguish between short-term volatility and long-term purchasing power drift?1.5× The euro peg delivers near-perfect short-term price stability against the euro but the protocol makes no distinction between short-term volatility and long-term purchasing-power drift. Eurozone inflation passes through directly, with no demurrage, no indexation, and no countermeasure. [1]	1
SPS-06	Is the stability mechanism accessible globally?1× Stability is restricted to Loire-Atlantique by design — accessing the mechanism requires an MLC44 membership, an exchange counter located in the department, and the ability to onboard with a French ID and bank. The system is regionally bounded; non-residents have no meaningful access. [1][2]	2

Fiat Independence & Interoperability2x

1.3

Code	Question	Score
FI-01	What is the protocol's unit of account?2× Moneko is hard-pegged 1:1 to the euro by design — all amounts (membership fees, accounting, denominations) are denominated as 1 mk = 1 €. The unit of account is fully borrowed from the euro; only the name is distinct. [1][2]	1
FI-02	What is the fiat composition of the protocol's collateral or reserves?2× 100% euro reserves. Every moneko in circulation is backed by an equivalent euro held in guarantee accounts at three banks (Crédit Coopératif, La Nef, La Banque Postale). No non-fiat assets are held. [1][2]	1
FI-03	Does the protocol depend on fiat banking infrastructure to function?1× Banking is critical: euro reserves are held at partner banks, digital top-ups go through standard French bank transfers, the legal basis is the French Monetary and Financial Code (ACPR oversight applies to local currencies under the 2014 ESS law), and reconversion to euro is a bank operation. Without banking access the digital side ceases to function; only paper coupons could circulate offline. [1][2]	1
FI-04	Are the protocol's price feeds and oracles fiat-denominated?1× There are no oracles in the crypto sense; the entire valuation is hard-coded as 1 mk = 1 €. All price discovery is fiat-denominated by definition; there is no independent price feed. [1][2]	1
FI-05	What happens to the protocol if the primary fiat currency it references collapses or depegs?1× If the euro collapses, Moneko collapses with it: a 100% euro-backed instrument with hard 1:1 parity has no recovery, diversification, or independence path from euro systemic risk. Reserves denominated in euros lose value in lockstep. [1]	1
FI-06	Does the project have a credible transition path from fiat-dominated adoption to fiat-independent operation?1× Fiat independence is not a project goal — Moneko is explicitly designed as a complementary currency operating alongside and atop the euro, with the express purpose of redirecting euro reserves into local ESS finance rather than escaping the euro. No transition path exists or is contemplated. [1][2]	1
FI-07	Can local or sectoral currencies be denominated in or settle against this currency?2× Moneko itself is the local currency, not a base layer for further sub-currencies. It does, however, function as the monetary tool for at least one sectoral application — the department's Caisse Commune Alimentaire (common food fund) launching in 2025 — which represents a sectoral expression on top of the moneko unit. There is no interoperable settlement against other local currencies, only the absorption of Rozo. [1][2]	2
FI-08	Does the protocol define open standards for interoperability with other monetary systems?1.5× No open monetary interoperability standard is published. Moneko shares technological lineage with the SoNantes Cyclos-based backend, and the broader French local currency movement (Mouvement Sol, Lokavaluto) provides shared software stacks that create de facto technical compatibility, but no protocol-defined cross-system settlement standard exists. The Rozo absorption demonstrates merger capability rather than interoperability. [1][2]	2

Traction2x

3.7

Code	Question	Score
TR-01	Is the project still active?2× Fully active and growing in 2025: ~350,000 monekos in circulation, 1.4M exchanged in 2025, network expanding through the Rozo merger (June 2025) into Saint-Nazaire and Guérande, new Moneko Estuaire local group, ADEME-funded staff position for sustainable food, and active hiring (job listings on the site). [1][2]	5
TR-02	How long has the project been in existence?1× Founded April 30, 2020 — approximately 6 years of continuous operation. Predecessor currencies (Retz'l 2013, SoNantes 2015) provide deeper roots for the underlying network and infrastructure but Moneko itself sits in the 5-10 year band. [1][2]	4
TR-03	How many active users does the project have?2× Specific individual user counts are not publicly published; reported metrics focus on ~240 professional members and 1.4M monekos exchanged in 2025. Combined with the absorbed Rozo network, total individual + professional members is plausibly in the low thousands, placing Moneko in the 1K-10K active-users band. [1][2]	2
TR-04	How many businesses or organizations accept the project's currency?2× Approximately 240 professional members (shops, restaurants, producers, artisans, associations) accept moneko, with reported recruitment of ~6 new merchants per month and recent expansion through Rozo. Sector coverage skews heavily toward food/agriculture (~90% of network is groceries, restaurants, producers). This places it in the 100–1,000 band. [1][2]	3
TR-05	Is the currency used as a unit of account?3× Within the network, prices are quoted in moneko at 1:1 euro parity; participating businesses display moneko prices and Moneko is operationally used as the unit of account for the Caisse Commune Alimentaire and for paying employees/suppliers in part. External pricing remains euro-dominated and the unit is numerically identical to the euro, so unit-of-account use is community-bounded. [1][2]	4
TR-06	Is the founder or core team still actively working on the project?1× Strong and clearly distributed leadership: co-presidents Sarah Rouas and Jean-François Pilet, treasurer Matthieu Piquerez, four salaried staff plus a part-time contractor, four commissions, and an elected Collectif d'Orientation. Founders being a "collective of citizens" (rather than a single individual) makes succession less of an issue, and current team is publicly listed and active. [1][2]	5
TR-07	What partner organizations or institutions support or integrate the project?1× Multi-sector partner ecosystem: three banks (Crédit Coopératif, La Nef, La Banque Postale), Les Écossolies (regional ESS network), ADEME Pays de la Loire (3-year funding for sustainable food officer), Caisse Commune Alimentaire pilot, multiple municipalities, the Rozo absorption, and integration into the Mouvement Sol of French local currencies. Comfortably in the 5-10+ partner range. [1][2][3]	5
TR-08	Is the project covered or recognized by credible external sources?1× Coverage by France 3 Pays de la Loire (regional public broadcaster), Boursorama, France Bleu, Les Autres Possibles, Saint Nazaire News, blog ESS et Société, and academic discussion within the broader French local-currency literature (Mouvement Sol). Cited as the 2nd-largest French local currency by transaction volume. Specialist + regional press coverage rather than peer-reviewed academic focus. [1][2]	4
TR-09	Is adoption organic — not dependent on subsidies, incentives, or mandates?1× Adoption is primarily organic — users join voluntarily for ideological and community reasons (supporting local economy, ESS values, ecological transition). Membership fees are paid by users and businesses, not the other way around; there are no token incentives or yield. ADEME co-funding supports staff capacity but not user incentives. [1][2]	4
TR-10	What is the growth trend over the past 12 months?1× Strong recent growth: ~232,000 digital monekos exchanged at end-2020 vs. ~350,000 in circulation today and 1.4M exchanged in 2025; network expansion through the Rozo merger; new Caisse Commune Alimentaire deployment; new ADEME-funded position; consistent professional-member recruitment. Multiple positive indicators with no decline. [1][2]	4
TR-11	Does the project have a coherent narrative and cultural identity that drives long-term commitment?1.5× Clear narrative around social/ecological/economic transition, citizen reappropriation of money, short supply chains, and territorial resilience, anchored in a published Charter of Values and the broader French Mouvement Sol culture. The "double dividend" ESS-financing story and the Caisse Commune Alimentaire partnership add concrete cultural weight beyond vague slogans, though cultural identity is less centuries-deep than that of the Eusko (which is anchored in Basque language/identity). [1][2]	4

Sovereignty

1.7

Code	Question	Score
SO-01	Can any single entity shut down the project?2× The French regulator (ACPR/Banque de France) could materially impair the project by revoking the local-currency exemption, and the partner banks holding euro reserves could withdraw cooperation. The MLC44 association itself could also be wound up by its General Assembly. Multiple shutdown vectors exist; none are individually trivial but each is realistic. [1][2]	2
SO-02	Is the project's core infrastructure permissionless and self-hostable?1× The digital backend descends from SoNantes' Cyclos-style architecture, similar to other French local currencies. The Cyclos platform is open-source / self-hostable in principle, but the specific Moneko deployment, configuration, member database and operational keys are centralized at MLC44. Public source repositories specific to Moneko are not prominent. [1][2]	2
SO-03	Is the project subject to the jurisdiction of a single nation-state?1× Fully subject to French jurisdiction. MLC44 is a French 1901 association; the legal basis is Article 16 of France's 2014 ESS law and the French Monetary and Financial Code; ACPR oversight applies; reserves are at French banks. There is no multi-jurisdictional structure. [1][2]	1
SO-04	Does the project control or custody user funds?2× Primarily custodial: digital balances are held in MLC44's centralized backend, and euro reserves backing all monekos sit in association-controlled bank accounts. Paper coupons (a meaningful share of circulation) are self-custodied by holders, providing partial non-custodial fallback. Users cannot self-custody digital monekos. [1][2]	2
SO-05	Is the project resilient to key-person risk?1× Authority is meaningfully distributed: collective citizen-driven origin, two co-presidents, treasurer, four salaried staff, four commissions, an elected Collectif d'Orientation across four stakeholder colleges, and three local groups. No single individual is structurally indispensable; the organization could survive losing any one person. [1]	4
SO-06	Does the project depend on any third-party service that could be revoked?1× Critical third-party dependencies: the three partner banks (reserve accounts), ACPR exemption status under French law, and the hosted digital backend (mobile app + Cyclos-derived infrastructure). Bank account closure or regulatory change is the most realistic single point of failure; no documented redundancy or fallback infrastructure. [1][2]	1
SO-07	Can the project be censored — can specific users or transactions be blocked?1.5× The centralized digital backend gives the operator the technical ability to freeze accounts, block transactions, and revoke memberships (the FAQ explicitly states accounts will be blocked for non-payment of cotisations). The charter conditions on businesses also create grounds for exclusion. Capability exists; no evidence of arbitrary use, but technical and organizational levers are present. [1][2]	2
SO-08	Does the protocol protect transaction privacy as a monetary right?1.5× Limited privacy. The digital backend records every transaction, with the operator having full visibility; KYC (national ID) is required to open an account. Paper coupons offer cash-like anonymity for in-person trades but exchange counters can record purchases. French/EU GDPR rules apply but provide regulatory rather than protocol-level privacy. [1]	2
SO-09	Does the technology enforce the project's monetary rules such that governance cannot silently override them?2× No technological enforcement of monetary rules. The 1:1 parity, reconversion terms, charter, and any future fee changes are organizational decisions of MLC44, configurable in the central backend. There are no smart contracts, no immutable code, and no cryptographic constraints. Rules are policy documents enforced by governance and bookkeeping, not by code. [1][2]	1

Governance

3.0

Code	Question	Score
GO-01	How are decisions about the project made?2× Formalized association governance: General Assembly (annual, all members), elected Collectif d'Orientation across four stakeholder colleges (individuals, professionals, networks/public institutions, local groups), Bureau (co-presidents and treasurer), four working commissions, and three local groups. Decisions follow association statutes; major decisions are taken at GA. More formalized than most peer initiatives at this scale. [1]	4
GO-02	Who has voting or decision-making power, and how is that power distributed?1× Strict one-member-one-vote democracy across all members of MLC44. Multiple stakeholder colleges (individuals, professionals, networks, local groups) ensure no single category dominates. Membership base is in the low thousands, so distribution is broad relative to the project's size but small in absolute terms. [1]	4
GO-03	Is the governance process — and the monetary mechanism itself — transparent and publicly auditable?2× Statutes, governance bodies, fees, and reserve banking partners are publicly disclosed on the website; financial accounts are presented at the General Assembly. The monetary mechanism is conceptually transparent (1:1 reserve-backed). However, deliberations are not livestreamed, no on-chain record exists, and there is no published independent external audit equivalent to the Cour des comptes Eusko review. [1][2]	3
GO-04	Can governance be captured by a small group or hostile actor?1.5× The four-college Collectif d'Orientation provides structural protection against any single stakeholder category dominating. One-member-one-vote prevents plutocratic capture. With only a few thousand members however, sustained organized recruitment by a coordinated faction could shift outcomes; capture-resistance is design-level rather than mathematically enforced. [1]	3
GO-05	How are upgrades and changes to the protocol or project proposed and executed?1× Material changes (statutes, fees, charter) flow through the Collectif d'Orientation and are validated at the General Assembly. The CGU update of 1 May 2024 followed a publicly announced process. There are no formal time-locks, no veto mechanisms, and no external community discussion period beyond the standard association process. [1][2]	3
GO-06	Is there a separation between governance over monetary policy and governance over operational decisions?1× The multi-body structure (Bureau / Collectif d'Orientation / Commissions / GA) provides some functional separation, with monetary-relevant changes (fees, parity, charter) typically requiring GA approval. There is no formal constitutional separation between monetary and operational decisions; both run through the same governance pipeline. [1]	3
GO-07	Does the project have a constitution, charter, or set of immutable principles?1.5× A published Charter of Values exists, anchoring the project in social, environmental, and economic commitments and ESS values; the association statutes provide the formal constitutional basis. None of these are immutable — the GA can amend them. Principles are stated and binding while in force, but not constitutionally protected from override. [1][2]	3
GO-08	Can the project's issuance rules be changed, and are monetary policy changes subject to stronger constraints than operational changes?2× Issuance rules (1:1 parity, reserve banking partners, reconversion terms) can be changed through the standard governance process culminating at the General Assembly. There is no evidence of stronger procedural protection for monetary changes than for operational ones. The full-reserve constraint is a charter principle, not a code-enforced rule. [1][2]	2

Resilience

2.6

Code	Question	Score
RE-01	Has the project survived a major crisis or adversarial event?2× Moneko was launched in April 2020 at the height of the first COVID-19 lockdown — a difficult macro context that it survived and grew through. It has also successfully absorbed a peer currency (Rozo merger, 2025) without operational failure. No regulatory or financial crisis as severe as the 2018 Eusko prefecture challenge has been documented. Moderate, real but limited stress survived. [1][2]	3
RE-02	Does the project have redundancy in its critical infrastructure?1× Limited redundancy: a single centralized digital backend, though paper coupons provide an offline parallel rail (significant share of usage). Three partner banks rather than one provide modest reserve-side redundancy. Multiple exchange counters spread across the territory provide geographic distribution. No documented backup or DR plan. [1]	2
RE-03	Can the project recover from a catastrophic failure?1× The concept (1:1 voucher with charter) is simple to rebuild and the underlying Cyclos software family is open-source / well-understood, supporting partial recovery. However, account balances and member records are held in centralized systems; total data loss would erase digital balances. No documented disaster-recovery plan was found. [1][2]	3
RE-04	Is the project's design simple enough to be maintained and understood long-term?1× The core mechanism is genuinely simple: deposit € → receive mk at 1:1, spend at members, businesses can recirculate or reconvert via email. Charter values and ESS-finance double-dividend story add narrative complexity but not technical complexity. A new contributor can grasp the model in minutes. [1][2]	4
RE-05	Is the project dependent on a specific technology that could become obsolete?1× Built on a mature, mainstream stack (smartphone app, QR codes, Cyclos-style backend, standard French banking rails). The concept is essentially technology-agnostic — paper coupons require no technology at all. Migration paths to other backends exist within the French local-currency software ecosystem. [1]	4
RE-06	How does the project handle economic stress (bank runs, liquidity crises, collateral crashes, inflation/deflation shocks)?2× Full-reserve backing eliminates classical collateral-crash risk and theoretically supports orderly redemption. Survived COVID launch and 2022-23 European inflation shock without depegging. There are no explicit circuit breakers, dynamic mechanisms, or wind-down procedures, and eurozone inflation passes directly into purchasing power. [1]	3
RE-07	Does the project have sustainable funding for long-term maintenance?1.5× Funding stack: tiered membership fees (€60-€2,400/year for businesses, smaller annual cotisations for individuals), startup kits (€40-€240), the ADEME 3-year grant (70% co-funding) for the sustainable-food officer, and partnerships with public institutions. With 1.4M monekos in 2025 transaction volume and a four-person paid team, the model is plausibly sustainable in the 1-3 year band but visibly grant-dependent for staff expansion. [1][2]	3
RE-08	Can the system operate across extreme latency, disconnected networks, and multi-century timescales?1× Paper coupons function indefinitely without infrastructure (validity is "permanent" per the FAQ), giving offline resilience. The digital side requires real-time connectivity to the central backend. The system was not designed for multi-planetary or extreme-latency operation, but the local-voucher concept itself can survive multi-decade timescales (historical local currencies have done so). [1]	2
RE-09	Is the system designed for a world where AI agents are primary economic actors?1× Designed for human, in-person, locality-bound use. Mandatory KYC with national ID, association membership, and territorial residency requirements all impede or exclude AI participation. There is no public API surface aimed at machine actors; programmatic access is theoretical at best. [1]	1

Inclusivity

3.1

Code	Question	Score
IN-01	Can anyone in the world participate regardless of nationality, wealth, or status?2× Participation is restricted by design to people connected to Loire-Atlantique who can attend an exchange counter or bank-transfer in euros, and who can provide a valid front+back ID document. Non-French residents in the territory can join, but the geographic and KYC restrictions structurally exclude most of the world. [1][2]	2
IN-02	What is the minimum cost to start using the project?1× Low entry cost. Annual individual membership is on a tiered basis (a few euros to ~€20 typical, with a "tarifs accessibles" framing); businesses pay €60-€2,400/year by size. Exchanges are 1:1 (no FX markup), digital transactions are free, and reconversion to euros for businesses is also free. Not zero, but well below $10 to start. [1][2]	4
IN-03	Does the project actively serve underbanked or financially excluded populations?1× Loire-Atlantique is a relatively prosperous French department, and Moneko's design prioritizes ESS values, ecological transition, and short supply chains rather than financial inclusion of the underbanked. Paper coupons can serve those without bank accounts, and the new Caisse Commune Alimentaire program targets food-insecure populations, so there is some inclusion-oriented activity, but it is not the project's core focus. [1][2]	2
IN-04	Does the project distribute economic benefits — including seigniorage — broadly, or concentrate them among insiders?1.5× The benefit model is explicitly egalitarian: the association is nonprofit, governance is one-member-one-vote, the partner banks are ethical institutions, and the entire euro reserve is deliberately deployed to finance Social and Solidarity Economy (ESS) projects in the territory — meaning seigniorage flows to public-good outcomes rather than insiders. There are no founder allocations, no token, and no extractive layer. [1][2]	5
IN-05	Does the project treat all participants equally under the same rules?2× Identical core monetary rules apply to all participants (1:1 parity, charter requirements). Business membership fees are tiered by employee count (€60-€2,400) — a proportional operational scaling rather than a privilege difference — and one-member-one-vote applies regardless of size. No whale advantages, no preferential rates. [1][2]	4
IN-06	Does the project require identity documentation or surveillance to participate?1.5× Government-issued ID (front and back) is required to open a digital account, and ongoing transaction data is collected by the centralized backend. Paper coupons can be acquired and used more anonymously at exchange counters. The level of identity friction is moderate-to-high — government ID for digital access is a real barrier for undocumented users. [1]	2
IN-07	Does the project have mechanisms to prevent wealth concentration over time?1× Unlike Gesell-inspired demurrage currencies (e.g., Chiemgauer), Moneko has no demurrage, no progressive fee, and no UBI-style issuance. The ESS-financing model and one-member-one-vote prevent governance and seigniorage concentration but do not prevent holding-side accumulation. The cultural/operational pressure to recirculate rather than reconvert is the only soft anti-hoarding signal. [1][2]	2

Frequently Asked Questions

What is Moneko (MLC44) and what problem does it solve?

How is money created in Moneko (MLC44)?

Issuance is fully restricted to the MLC44 association, which alone can mint new monekos when users deposit euros at exchange counters or via bank transfer. Users cannot independently create supply; the issuing authority is a single nonprofit.

How does Moneko (MLC44) maintain stable spending power?

2× Stability is achieved through a fixed 1:1 euro peg with full reserve backing — every circulating moneko is matched by an equivalent euro held at partner banks. The mechanism is passive (reserve-based), not algorithmic; there is no on-chain logic or active stabilizer beyond the redemption guarantee.

Is Moneko (MLC44) independent from fiat currencies?

2× Moneko is hard-pegged 1:1 to the euro by design — all amounts (membership fees, accounting, denominations) are denominated as 1 mk = 1 €. The unit of account is fully borrowed from the euro; only the name is distinct.

Who controls Moneko (MLC44) and can it be shut down?

2× The French regulator (ACPR/Banque de France) could materially impair the project by revoking the local-currency exemption, and the partner banks holding euro reserves could withdraw cooperation. The MLC44 association itself could also be wound up by its General Assembly. Multiple shutdown vectors exist; none are individually trivial but each is realistic.

How widely adopted is Moneko (MLC44) today?

2× Specific individual user counts are not publicly published; reported metrics focus on ~240 professional members and 1.4M monekos exchanged in 2025. Combined with the absorbed Rozo network, total individual + professional members is plausibly in the low thousands, placing Moneko in the 1K-10K active-users band.

Is Moneko (MLC44) still active and growing?

2× Fully active and growing in 2025: ~350,000 monekos in circulation, 1.4M exchanged in 2025, network expanding through the Rozo merger (June 2025) into Saint-Nazaire and Guérande, new Moneko Estuaire local group, ADEME-funded staff position for sustainable food, and active hiring (job listings on the site).

What are the main risks or weaknesses of Moneko (MLC44)?

Weakest categories: Fiat Independence (1.3) and Sovereignty (1.7): These are not bugs but architectural choices. Moneko is a 100%-euro-backed, hard-pegged voucher operating under French law with French banks and ACPR oversight; full identity is required for digital accounts; the digital backend is custodial; there is no smart contract or cryptographic enforcement of monetary rules. These scores cannot improve without a fundamental redesign.

What makes Moneko (MLC44) unique from an M69 perspective?

Strongest category: Traction (3.7): Born in April 2020 from the merger of two predecessor currencies (SoNantes 2015, Retz'l 2013) and now ranked 2nd-largest French local currency by transaction volume, Moneko has converted six years of effort into ~350,000 monekos in circulation, 1.4M exchanged in 2025, ~240 professional members, the recent absorption of Le Rozo (Saint-Nazaire/Guérande), and a new institutional role as the monetary tool of Loire-Atlantique's first Caisse Commune Alimentaire. The project has clearly cleared the "still here, still growing" threshold that defeats most local currencies in their first decade.

How is Moneko (MLC44)'s M69 Score calculated?

Moneko (MLC44) scores 2.6/5.0 overall. Pillar scores: Monetary Sovereignty 2.3, Civilizational Durability 2.4, Universal Adoption 3.5. Strongest: Traction (3.7). Weakest: Fiat Independence (1.3).

Related research

Book

People Money: The Promise of Regional Currencies

by Margrit Kennedy, Bernard Lietaer & John Rogers

Book

Money with a Purpose

by New Economics Foundation

Book

Creating Wealth

by Bernard Lietaer