In the analysis of five structured interviews, I try to give an adequate description of the constitution and growth of “ShareCom”, a co-operative society in Zürich. Its members have share of cars and other objects since 1987. To become a member you have to buy a share of the co-operative, pay an annual fee and a tax for the use of the object. In the case of cars all costs are included in a price per kilometer. Some members already shared a car for several years before the founding of ShareCom. Nearly all the 16 founding members knew each other as friends for years. For this reason they could rely on their common moral and environmental attitude. There was no need to specify the use of the objects. Meanwhile the co-operative grows and is open to anyone. It has furthermore a goal to build a network all over Switzerland which makes cars available not only in the core areas but also at remoter places in connection with railway or bus stops. The co-operative will no longer be a morally integrated group, but rather a more anonymous system of interactions. The informal social control by morality and various personal contacts will be substituted by formal rules. My interview partners all dislike strict forms of social control, but fear as well the exploitation of the system. In what sense could such a co-operative be regarded as a model for the dominant structures of consumption in a ecolgically sustainble society? We can hardly estimate the effect of share co-operatives on the attitudes towards the environment, because ecological awareness seems to be the main reason for membership. The co-operative offers a viable alternative to satisfy mobility needs. In principle the success of ShareCom is based on the reduced but nevertheless efficient use of resources by sharing them. The same consumption level can be realized comparatively cheaper. “It does not hurt” someone said. But the anonymous system is open to a materialistic definition of quality of life. It does not exclude the idea of having everything anytime at one’s disposal. Considering the use of resources we cannot be sure of having gained anything else but time, as long as consumption is only reduced and rationalized. Only by the shift towards life forms, which are no longer based on the turn over and disposal of material goods in the same manner as today, does the possibility of an ecologically sustainable economy become conceivable. The model of share co-operative societies could be a starting point and an episode which one has to go through on the way to these future life-forms. I maintain, that the concepts of human conduct, which presently dominate environmental policies and campaigns, obstruct the recognition of processes of social self-organization similar to the constitution of ShareCom, as forms of ecologically minded actions, which could be supported by organizations that share the same ecological aims. Too often we face the opinion that changes of behaviour have to be brought about. In this sense individuals are considered to be directable in a causal manner and their relevant behaviour is seen as isolated, regardless all the other related unique actions and routines, that build the pattern of the fabric that I call a ‘life-form’. Certainly in Switzerland the policies which are based on regulations and prescriptions are perceived as offences against personal freedom and amplify the growth of an extreme nationalistic-populistic opposition. Information campaigns and moral appeals suffer as well from a decreasing marginal utility. In this situation the support of self-initiated projects and experiments, could, in the long run, represent a considerable ecological potential. But it certainly cannot be a substitute for traditional environmental policies.