- JoPP-Public - lists.ourproject.org

Now, the Commons
by Mathieu ONeil 04 Jun '17

04 Jun '17

JOPP#10: NOW, THE COMMONS As the Journal of Peer Production reaches its tenth issue, it is timely to reflect on what it set out to do, what it has achieved, and what it should do next. The Journal of Peer Production represents an attempt to emulate FOSS by circumventing the academic press system, where researchers do all the work – conceiving and disseminating calls for papers, producing and documenting research, selecting contributions, writing up research, etc – and are ‘paid’ in the form of 60-day free subscriptions to for-profit journals which their university libraries already subscribe to, at exorbitant rates. In contrast, consider the core principles of science first identified by Robert Merton in 1942: universalism, disinterestedness, organised scepticism, and communism (later changed to communalism). ‘The communism of the scientific ethos’, wrote Merton, ‘is incompatible with the definition of technology as “private property” in a capitalistic economy’ (275). One of the editors of this tenth issue was invited recently to edit a special issue of an academic journal on ‘open collaboration’. This served as a useful reminder of the mindlessness of reviewers’ work only benefiting authors: an essential part of knowledge creation, the considered advice of domain specialists, was purposely hidden from view. After working in more transparent conditions for several years, this seemed really strange and outdated. Aside from making original submissions and reviews available, we have also introduced a ‘signaling’ system whereby reviewers can indicate their appreciation of a completed article. This has the benefit of shortening publication time and widening the range of publishable articles whilst protecting the journal’s reputation. It also avoids the invisible cost of managing peer review for articles that are ultimately rejected. The volunteers who have contributed to the Journal of Peer Production should be congratulated: we have published landmark issues on a wide range of topics. We have made our own rules, and operated by them. We have been resilient in the face of human and infrastructural adversity. We continue to attract new contributors and editors. But after this well-deserved pat on the back, we need to remind ourselves and our colleagues that our engagement must extend beyond publishing in, and supporting the work of, open-access journals, as useful and necessary as this may be. The Journal of Peer Production was born at the 2009 Oekonux Conference in Manchester, an event that brought together researchers and activists. Oekonux was the original actor in the dynamic German commons movement, whose characteristic is the attempt to unite ‘offline and online, tangible and intangible, old and new, green and social commons with the explicit aim of transforming society’ (Euler, 2016: 95). Accordingly the Journal of Peer Production was intended to be a strategic tool for discussing ‘new perspectives on the implication of peer production for social change’. In the face of the continuing destruction of the Earth by industry, and of the exploitation and domination of humanity by oligarchs, we need to ask a familiar question: what should be done (what can we do)? Echoing Oekonux, Nick Dyer-Witheford put it best: ‘If the cell form of capitalism is the commodity, the cellular [seed] form of a society beyond capital is the common. A commodity is a good produced for sale, a common is a good produced, or conserved, to be shared’ (Dyer-Witheford 2007: 82). For the most part, the Journal of Peer Production has eschewed visions of future social arrangements and focused on concrete and practical concerns, such as the effectiveness, justice and sustainability of ethical-modular assemblages and organisations. Future issues on peer urbanism (JoPP#11, October 2017) and the institutionalisation of shared machine shops (JoPP#12, April 2018) represent exciting developments of this perspective. Such investigations need to be pursued, but also articulated with a new direction. Indeed, we believe it is now time for the Journal of Peer Production to expand its reach, beyond an exclusive focus on the institutions of the commons. We have the means to clearly articulate persuasive ideas. As a journal and as a community of engaged scholars and activists we are in a unique position to research and develop the ecology, regulations and culture which can grow the commons. If we are serious about social change, we should strive to make the commons a core part of the collective understanding of what it means to be human. We outline four overlapping areas of research and activism, ranging from cultural norm change to policies. 1. CHAMPIONING THE COMMONS In order to instil new cultural standards, we need to popularise champions of the commons. Elinor Ostrom’s (1933-2012) focus on social and institutional forms which enable the sharing of common resources and rights, showing how necessary it was to protect forests and rivers, are clearly more relevant now than ever. Traditional communities, in existence for many centuries, may conform to the Ostrom model, but restrict access to the resource based on family belonging, with entry gained through marriage: an inclusive, global dimension should always be incorporated. In ideological terms Ostrom contradicts how the first modernity (16th -18th Century) conceives the world, a view which still dominates our education system. By mixing law, technology and economy, ‘science’ became normalised as the act of dissipating non-renewable natural resources. We still live in a world where private property is better protected than common property: a concerted cultural shift, primarily disseminated through schools and popular culture, must be made to change this value system. Ostrom’s contribution should inform (and ultimately direct) the governance of our global environmental commons. Identifying and researching the commons around us, such as built ones (schools and libraries), natural ones (air and sunlight) as well as communal islands in family, friendship and cooperative circles demonstrates that the commons are alive and well. 2. WORKING LESS André Gorz (1923-2007) is less well-known but is no less important. Gorz, one of the radical founders of political ecology and of the notion of ‘degrowth’ (décroissance), emphasised the increasing divorce between what is produced and what is needed. Some of his proposals have already been partially implemented: the reduction of working time was adopted by France’s Socialist Government in the late 1990s with the introduction of the 35-hour work week. This measure has led to issues with overtime pay and has proved unpopular with some categories of workers who wish to earn more. Nonetheless it persists, and the Socialist candidate in the 2017 French Presidential election proposed to reduce it further to 32 hours. In order for peer production to grow, initiatives such as these should be analysed and criticised. 3. A UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME Another of Gorz’s proposal, a Universal Basic Income (UBI), goes further. The advent of automatization has prompted approving parliamentary reports on a UBI in France and Australia; UBIs are about to be or are already being tried out in Finland, the Netherlands and Scotland. Its embrace by some conservative politicians and high-profile technology entrepreneurs could lead us to suspect that a UBI is a plot to remove social benefits for the most vulnerable by replacing them with a single income. On the other hand, a UBI could also operate as a feminist advance since ‘having children markedly intensifies gender inequities in time allocation by increasing specialisation and women’s workload’ (Craig, 2006). Indeed a UBI would be particularly useful for single mothers, whose income is the most adversely impacted by childbirth. It would address a longstanding concern of Marxist feminists such as Mariarosa Dalla Costa and Selma James (1972) who identified the vast amount of monetarily unacknowledged but economically essential household labour done for free. Without the invisible (to male theorists) unpaid or reproductive process of caring, cooking, etc, paid labour power would not be ready for work in the morning. We invite reflections on the articulations of UBIs with local, regional and national currencies. 4. PROMOTING GOOD USES OF FREE SERVICES Not only should deregulators wanting to privatise public services such as healthcare and education be opposed: we should also document and support efforts to make services such as public transport, public housing, and public health and education free. New institutional arrangements may be necessary. Finland has inaugurated the co-production of public services such as education, neighbourhood associations, support for drug and gambling addicts, home care, etc. (Botero et al., 2012). There also needs to be a recognition that not all uses of free services should be equal. For example, why should a cubic metre of water used for domestic work cost the same as cubic metre used to fill a private pool (Ariès, 2007)? The idea that there are ‘mis-uses’ of commons needs to be discussed and popularised. Good uses should be free, bad uses expensive. And to prevent rich people simply buying wasteful mis-use, should a maximum income be debated alongside a universal basic income? We have outlined four areas of investigation and action: diffusing widely the cultural conception of the commons; reducing work time; adopting a universal basic income; making public services free, and distinguishing between their use and mis-use. Measures such as the reduction of work time and UBI point to an uncoupling of work and labour. They represent an alternative to the dominant discourse that sees jobs, however badly-paid and/or unnecessary and/or environmentally destructive and/or boring, as essential to progress. Free public services and a UBI may be complementary; they may be antinomic. The point is not to envisage a society where all these measures interact perfectly, but to research, develop and publicise one or several, as tactical and strategic opportunities arise, so that actual progress is made. We call on Journal of Peer Production researchers and practitioners to consider, criticise, improve or supersede these areas of investigation and action, and to document their articulation with peer projects. For the Journal of Peer Production: Mathieu O’Neil, Johan Söderberg, Maurizio Teli, and Stefano Zacchiroli WORKS CITED Ariès, P. (2007) Le Mésusage : Essai sur l’hypercapitalisme. Parangon, Paris. Botero, A., Paterson, A., & Saad-Sulonen, J. (2012). Towards peer production in public services: Cases from Finland. Helsinki: Aalto University publication series Crossover. Craig, L. (2006) Children and the revolution. A time-diary analysis of the impact of motherhood on daily workload. Journal of Sociology, 42(2): 125-143. Dalla Costa, M. & James, S. (1972) The power of women and the subversion of the community. Bristol: Falling Wall Press. Dyer-Witheford, N. (2007) Commonism. Turbulence, 1: 81-87 (online). Euler, J. (2015) Commons-creating Society On the Radical German Commons Discourse Review of Radical Political Economics Vol 48, Issue 1, pp. 93 – 110. Merton, R. K. (1973) [1942], ‘The normative structure of science’, in Merton, R. K., The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

1 0

Search not working
by Stefan Meretz 31 May '17

31 May '17

Hi all, concerning the website it seems that the internal search is not working. Example: http://peerproduction.net/?s=flok (homepage appears). Best Stefan -- Start here: www.meretz.de OpenPGP-ID: 0x1D4BB160

2 1

articles feed
by fauno 10 May '17

10 May '17

hi, i can't remember if i mentioned this before, but the articles don't appear on the site's feed, would it be possible to? this means i don't get the articles as soon as they're published on my feed reader :) http://peerproduction.net/feed/ -- https://endefensadelsl.org/

1 0

JoPP#10 update
by Mathieu ONeil 09 May '17

09 May '17

Hi all A quick update on where we (Zack and I) are re. JoPP#10 Work and peer production. The issue was scheduled for release in March/April but there have been and continue to be delays owing to circumstances outside our control. We are aiming for a late April/early May release. Four out of five peer reviewed papers have been copy-edited and revised by eds. We are about to send these out to reviewers for signals and comments. It would be greatly appreciated if these could be expedited asap. cheers, Mathieu

3 3

The Political Economy of Hacking – Accelerate, Augment, or Abolish the Markets?
by Mathieu ONeil 05 May '17

05 May '17

Hi all Posting on behalf of Johan. cheers Mathieu PS. I approved today Johan's original post which required admin authorisation on 20 April (apologies for delay Johan) BUT its in the list archive... dated 2 May!? The Political Economy of Hacking – Accelerate, Augment, or Abolish the Markets? Circle 6: Appropriating Technology for Societal Change 26th of July - 2nd of August, Saulkrasti, Latvia Deadline for applications: sun 14th of May Theme of the symposium Technology disrupt markets. It is open to debate, however, what this implies for the future of the market economy. Some hackers and activists look forward to the day when technological progress has abolished the need for market exchanges. For instance, self-acclaimed pirates strive to make intellectual property unenforceable with file sharing protocols. Hobby-engineers develop self-reproducing 3D printers under the slogan: “wealth-without-money”. The digital currency Faircoin has been launched as a more equitable alternative to the existing monetary system. Peer production, exemplified in free software development, is showcased as a non-coercive model for organizing work. Towering above these initiatives is basic income as a redistributive principle, arguably better adjusted to the age of full automation. The post-capitalist future envisioned by some hackers and activists contrasts with the “accelerationist” vision. According to the latter viewpoint, it is not markets but monopolies, guild privileges, and state regulations that are unsettled by technological breakthroughs. Virtual reality paves the way for “augmented property”, block-chain technology unlocks new areas of the lifeworld to just-in-time monetary flows, and computerization allows work to be parceled up in ever finer tasks and micropayments. Whose utopia will carry the day – you are invited to take part in the discussion! Relevant themes for presentations may include, but is not limited to, the following questions: • Is peer production still on the agenda after the rise of the “sharing economy”? • Is basic income the answer to automation and jobless growth? • What are the identities of future workers: employees, turkers, makers? • How is wealth distribution affected by platform capitalism? • What new avenues of marketization will be opened-up with block-chain technology? • Can alternative currencies be designed to fix the monetary system? • Historical perspectives on the rise of peer production/platform capitalism/sharing economy • Theoretical perspectives at the intersection of hacking, high-tech markets, and labour Format of the presentation Presentation of work: We wish to facilitate debates and therefore encourage free oral presentation rather than reading from a paper. A presentation should aim for 20-30 min., leaving time for discussions. Text: You can offer to present a text (own writing or a published text) which has been distributed beforehand to the participants. The text should not exceed 25 pages. The presentation must give a short introduction of the argumentation allowing participants to engage in discussion. Submit via email. Deadline, 14th of May, 2017: 1. A written proposal (ca 350 words) with a title, its format its duration. 2. A short bio (ca 100 words). Submit to: johan.soderberg(a)sts.gu.se<mailto:[email protected]> and gustav.eek(a)fripost.org<mailto:[email protected]> If you would like to attend the symposium without presenting, please email a short bio. Participants with presentations will be given priority. Preliminary program will be announced on 15th of May on www.nordic.university<http://www.nordic.university/>. Late submissions will continued to be considered, until the maximum number of participants is reached. Application process and registration The application process has two steps: (1) Application to coordinators for acceptance of presentation or participation without presentation. (2) After you have been accepted, the next step is registration and payments, which closes on 1st of June. All registration and payment will be done electronically. Note if you apply for participating late, payment must still be completed 1st of June. Keynote speakers at NSU Sigridur Thorgeirsdottir, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Iceland. Cecilia Malmström Olsson, freelance dance researcher, writer, lecturer. Cost and accommodation The NSU summer session is held from 26th of July to 2nd of August 2017 in Minhauzena Unda, Saulkrasti (Latvia) For more information about the place, please visit: https://nsu2017.wordpress.com/ Total cost per adult person, including accommodation and full pension, ranges from 200-550 € depending on the accommodation of choice. Grant and scholarship are available under certain conditions. See further on combination of categories and prices here: https://payment.nsuweb.org/ To Doctorate Candidates Despite its name, Nordic Summer School is not a summer school targeting doctorate candidates. It invites participants on all levels of the university as well as from outside academia. That being said, doctorate student is on request awarded 5 credits for participation and presentation at NSU. -----

1 0

Extended deadline: The Political Economy of Hacking, 26/7-2/8, Latvia
by Johan Söderberg 02 May '17

02 May '17

Deadline for applications extended to Sunday 14th of May of the following event: [cid:[email protected]] The Political Economy of Hacking – Accelerate, Augment, or Abolish the Markets? Circle 6: Appropriating Technology for Societal Change 26th of July - 2nd of August, Saulkrasti, Latvia Deadline for applications: sun 14th of May Theme of the symposium Technology disrupt markets. It is open to debate, however, what this implies for the future of the market economy. Some hackers and activists look forward to the day when technological progress has abolished the need for market exchanges. For instance, self-acclaimed pirates strive to make intellectual property unenforceable with file sharing protocols. Hobby-engineers develop self-reproducing 3D printers under the slogan: “wealth-without-money”. The digital currency Faircoin has been launched as a more equitable alternative to the existing monetary system. Peer production, exemplified in free software development, is showcased as a non-coercive model for organizing work. Towering above these initiatives is basic income as a redistributive principle, arguably better adjusted to the age of full automation. The post-capitalist future envisioned by some hackers and activists contrasts with the “accelerationist” vision. According to the latter viewpoint, it is not markets but monopolies, guild privileges, and state regulations that are unsettled by technological breakthroughs. Virtual reality paves the way for “augmented property”, block-chain technology unlocks new areas of the lifeworld to just-in-time monetary flows, and computerization allows work to be parceled up in ever finer tasks and micropayments. Whose utopia will carry the day – you are invited to take part in the discussion! Relevant themes for presentations may include, but is not limited to, the following questions: · Is peer production still on the agenda after the rise of the “sharing economy”? · Is basic income the answer to automation and jobless growth? · What are the identities of future workers: employees, turkers, makers? · How is wealth distribution affected by platform capitalism? · What new avenues of marketization will be opened-up with block-chain technology? · Can alternative currencies be designed to fix the monetary system? · Historical perspectives on the rise of peer production/platform capitalism/sharing economy · Theoretical perspectives at the intersection of hacking, high-tech markets, and labour Format of the presentation Presentation of work: We wish to facilitate debates and therefore encourage free oral presentation rather than reading from a paper. A presentation should aim for 20-30 min., leaving time for discussions. Text: You can offer to present a text (own writing or a published text) which has been distributed beforehand to the participants. The text should not exceed 25 pages. The presentation must give a short introduction of the argumentation allowing participants to engage in discussion. Submit via email. Deadline, 14th of May, 2017: 1. A written proposal (ca 350 words) with a title, its format its duration. 2. A short bio (ca 100 words). Submit to: johan.soderberg(a)sts.gu.se<mailto:[email protected]> and gustav.eek(a)fripost.org<mailto:[email protected]> If you would like to attend the symposium without presenting, please email a short bio. Participants with presentations will be given priority. Preliminary program will be announced on 15th of May on www.nordic.university<http://www.nordic.university>. Late submissions will continued to be considered, until the maximum number of participants is reached. Application process and registration The application process has two steps: (1) Application to coordinators for acceptance of presentation or participation without presentation. (2) After you have been accepted, the next step is registration and payments, which closes on 1st of June. All registration and payment will be done electronically. Note if you apply for participating late, payment must still be completed 1st of June. Keynote speakers at NSU Sigridur Thorgeirsdottir, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Iceland. Cecilia Malmström Olsson, freelance dance researcher, writer, lecturer. Cost and accommodation The NSU summer session is held from 26th of July to 2nd of August 2017 in Minhauzena Unda, Saulkrasti (Latvia) For more information about the place, please visit: https://nsu2017.wordpress.com/ Total cost per adult person, including accommodation and full pension, ranges from 200-550 € depending on the accommodation of choice. Grant and scholarship are available under certain conditions. See further on combination of categories and prices here: https://payment.nsuweb.org/ To Doctorate Candidates Despite its name, Nordic Summer School is not a summer school targeting doctorate candidates. It invites participants on all levels of the university as well as from outside academia. That being said, doctorate student is on request awarded 5 credits for participation and presentation at NSU.

1 0

CfP: The Political Economy of Hacking - Accelerate, Augment of Abolish the Markets? NSU 26/7-2/8, Latvia
by Johan Söderberg 20 Apr '17

20 Apr '17

[cid:[email protected]] The Political Economy of Hacking – Accelerate, Augment, or Abolish the Markets? Circle 6: Appropriating Technology for Societal Change 26th of July - 2nd of August, Saulkrasti, Latvia Deadline for applications: 1st of May Theme of the symposium Technology disrupt markets. It is open to debate, however, what this implies for the future of the market economy. Some hackers and activists look forward to the day when technological progress has abolished the need for market exchanges. For instance, self-acclaimed pirates strive to make intellectual property unenforceable with file sharing protocols. Hobby-engineers develop self-reproducing 3D printers under the slogan: “wealth-without-money”. The digital currency Faircoin has been launched as a more equitable alternative to the existing monetary system. Peer production, exemplified in free software development, is showcased as a non-coercive model for organizing work. Towering above these initiatives is basic income as a redistributive principle, arguably better adjusted to the age of full automation. The post-capitalist future envisioned by some hackers and activists contrasts with the “accelerationist” vision. According to the latter viewpoint, it is not markets but monopolies, guild privileges, and state regulations that are unsettled by technological breakthroughs. Virtual reality paves the way for “augmented property”, block-chain technology unlocks new areas of the lifeworld to just-in-time monetary flows, and computerization allows work to be parceled up in ever finer tasks and micropayments. Whose utopia will carry the day – you are invited to take part in the discussion! Relevant themes for presentations may include, but is not limited to, the following questions: · Is peer production still on the agenda after the rise of the “sharing economy”? · Is basic income the answer to automation and jobless growth? · What are the identities of future workers: employees, turkers, makers? · How is wealth distribution affected by platform capitalism? · What new avenues of marketization will be opened-up with block-chain technology? · Can alternative currencies be designed to fix the monetary system? · Historical perspectives on the rise of peer production/platform capitalism/sharing economy · Theoretical perspectives at the intersection of hacking, high-tech markets, and labour Format of the presentation Presentation of work: We wish to facilitate debates and therefore encourage free oral presentation rather than reading from a paper. A presentation should aim for 20-30 min., leaving time for discussions. Text: You can offer to present a text (own writing or a published text) which has been distributed beforehand to the participants. The text should not exceed 25 pages. The presentation must give a short introduction of the argumentation allowing participants to engage in discussion. Submit via email. Deadline, 1st of May, 2017: 1. A written proposal (ca 350 words) with a title, its format its duration. 2. A short bio (ca 100 words). Submit to: johan.soderberg(a)sts.gu.se<mailto:[email protected]> and gustav.eek(a)fripost.org<mailto:[email protected]> If you would like to attend the symposium without presenting, please email a short bio. Participants with presentations will be given priority. Preliminary program will be announced on 15th of May on www.nordic.university. Late submissions will continued to be considered, until the maximum number of participants is reached. Application process and registration The application process has two steps: (1) Application to coordinators for acceptance of presentation or participation without presentation. (2) After you have been accepted, the next step is registration and payments, which closes on 1st of June. All registration and payment will be done electronically. Note if you apply for participating late, payment must still be completed 1st of June. Keynote speakers at NSU Sigridur Thorgeirsdottir, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Iceland. Cecilia Malmström Olsson, freelance dance researcher, writer, lecturer. Cost and accommodation The NSU summer session is held from 26th of July to 2nd of August 2017 in Minhauzena Unda, Saulkrasti (Latvia) For more information about the place, please visit: https://nsu2017.wordpress.com/ Total cost per adult person, including accommodation and full pension, ranges from 200-550 € depending on the accommodation of choice. Grant and scholarship are available under certain conditions. See further on combination of categories and prices here: https://payment.nsuweb.org/ To Doctorate Candidates Despite its name, Nordic Summer School is not a summer school targeting doctorate candidates. It invites participants on all levels of the university as well as from outside academia. That being said, doctorate student is on request awarded 5 credits for participation and presentation at NSU.

1 0

Call for Workshop Papers - Collaborative Economies: From Sharing to Caring
by Maurizio Teli 07 Apr '17

07 Apr '17

Apologies for cross posting Workshop at Communities and Technologies 2017 (http://comtech.communities) Université de Technologie de Troyes, France, 26 (or 27) June 2017 Digital platforms, often labeled as part of the “sharing economy”, are becoming increasingly relevant to both the daily lives of private individuals and to researchers. As these tools are transforming various communities (of interest, place, practice and circumstance) to establish new forms of connection, welfare, labour and service, there emerge fundamental questions around the perils of creation and use. In response to this disruptive trend, this workshop brings together perspectives and cases from researchers and practitioners across various disciplines to interrogate how different forms of collaborative economy might be imagined and created based on the ethics and logic of care, as an answer to these perils. This workshop will serve as an open and active forum for participants - we plan to include up to 20 practitioners, designers, and researchers involved in related fields. We welcome all methodological, practical, and speculative approaches to considering the relations between sharing, caring and the collaborative economy. Key topics of interest include, but are not limited to: Platform cooperativism; Environmental sustainability and ecological concerns (such as Ethnography after Human Exceptionalism, Hacker Farm and Food Connect); Peer-to-peer learning and production (such as Mothership Hackermoms, Coder Dojo and Free Software); Citizen science (e.g. Quantum Moves); Related social, political, cultural, and health domains and implications (including issues around rising precarity, homelessness, self-care and mutual aid); Initiatives calling for digital social innovation and design for change (such as CAPS projects, the DESIS network or the Enabling the Future network); Digital currencies and finance, (e.g. Freecoin). We are aiming to: - create a space for discussion about new and ongoing work in the field, and open up debates about the direction of research and practice across diverse fields related to collaborative economy. - bring together researchers and practitioners in related fields to identify current challenges around the sharing economy and reflect critically on what could be done to resist these trends. - discuss existing cases or examples of communities, technologies, and practices directed at facilitating a sharing caring economy. - reflect critically on questions involved in the design of technologies with and for care, to build more just and livable futures. As a follow up to the workshop, we aim to produce an edited publication (journal special issue), considering some of the workshop contributions in extended form. Discussions have begun with CoDesign: International Journal of CoCreation in Design and the Arts. We will include a maximum of 20 participants. Interested participants should submit 800 word position papers to the organisers, outlining the following: A brief biography of each contributor, touching on their current research and/or practice, including any existing work in this area, from old sharing and caring traditions to explorations of the potential futures of this domain; and What would they like to gain from/bring to the workshop. Participants will be selected to ensure overall disciplinary and geo-cultural diversity. The position papers will be sent as PDFs via email to Peter Lyle <peter.lyle at m-iti.org> before 5pm GMT on 24 April 2017. For more details, please check the workshop website: https://collaborativeeconomiesworkshop.wordpress.com/ Workshop Organisers Gabriela Avram, University of Limerick Jaz Choi, Queensland University of Technology Stefano De Paoli, Abertay University Ann Light, University of Sussex Peter Lyle, Madeira Interactive Technologies Institute Maurizio Teli, Madeira Interactive Technologies Institute

1 0

Fw: CFP + Practitioner Commentaries JoPP #12: Shared Machine Shop Institutionalization
by Mathieu ONeil 09 Feb '17

09 Feb '17

Hi all See CFP for new issue below Please send on also but document here Thanks Mathieu ________________________________ From: Mathieu ONeil Sent: citams(a)list.citams.org ICT and society; Association for Cultural Studies; fibreculture(a)listcultures.org <Apologies for cross-posting> ============================================ ///////////////////// Call for Papers + Practitioner Commentaries Journal of Peer Production #12: Shared Machine Shop Institutionalization URL: http://bit.ly/SharedMachineInst Editors: Kat Braybrooke, Adrian Smith Contact: sharedmachines(a)peerproduction.net<mailto:[email protected]> ////// ABSTRACTS + PROPOSALS DUE 30 MAR, 2017 Two years ago, a special issue of the Journal of Peer Production on shared machine shops described them as the "occupied factories of peer production theory". The authors of that issue compiled an empirically informed analysis of member-owned spaces like hacklabs, hackerspaces and makerspaces -- spaces that first appeared to be signalling the power of an emerging democratic revolution in community-based design and manufacturing, but which on closer look also revealed the many contradictions of peer production movements themselves. This special issue builds on these efforts by taking a deeper look into the complex contradictions and possibilities of making, hacking, fabrication and commons-based practices -- practices that are themselves increasingly characterised by institutional interventions. The dilemmas of institutionalisation (regarding both the formalization of practices and the fact that many practice-based spaces are now being embedded within larger organizations like museums, municipalities and businesses) provide us with an opportunity to critically examine networks, spaces and futures that may be assembling in this new phase. We invite papers that provide theoretically-informed empirical research aimed at advancing our understanding of dilemmas and contradictions in institutionalisation of shared machine shops. Contributions are particularly encouraged that examine what has changed regarding the practices, user experiences and regional networks that surround these sites of institutionalisation -- not only in the last few years, but also across shared community histories around the world, drawing upon stories of similar digital spaces, like art-based media labs, that have preceded today’s shared machine shops. Contradictions between the so-called agencies and revolutions introduced by digital design and fabrication tools within these sites will be explored along with the structures of control and power that surround them. What do these continued contradictions and struggles tell us about the promised futures of peer production? Because this issue looks not only at theory but also at practice, we also invite practitioner commentaries and/or photo series from key makers and thinkers working in the field, reflecting on what happens when communities of peer-based making and production attract increased attention from mainstreamed entities, including schools, galleries, tech companies, local authorities, and agencies promoting entrepreneurship. Such attention brings with it ambivalent and complicated opportunities linked to outside agendas. These institutional encounters additionally bring to the surface multiple political dilemmas regarding digital fabrication itself. After all, these are technologies whose computer numerically-controlled histories include the displacement of skilled workers and the undermining of historic manufacturing communities. Are practices in maker communities today actually transforming development processes, or are they simply refreshing new inputs for business as usual? Educational institutions seek ways of building public understanding about technosciences and job opportunities. Local governments get excited about entrepreneurial possibilities. Corporations see easy design prototypes offered up by the free labour of skilled fans. How are economies of labour redefined? How transformational, precisely, are these new peer productions? This being said, it would be much too easy (and, we argue, lazy) to simply critique and dismiss. Instead, this special issue aspires to constructively scrutinize practices through critical, hands-on analyses of both discourses and practices. What remains of the original transformational aims of a digitally empowered peer production-based revolution when some of the core practices are embraced by the very powers that the revolutionary theory set itself up originally to confront? What new antitheses and innovative reactions are arising today from recent disappointments? What kinds of challenges, transformations and opportunities does institutionalization engender for a new generation’s coming of age? Most importantly, whose revolution will it now be? The papers and commentaries of this issue will aim to move beyond condemnation and/or adulation into deliberately complex and multifaceted understandings of transformation, collaboration and revolution. Contributions will address this new phase of contradictions and possibilities through three organisational themes which view shared machine shop innovations and experiences through their tensions, contradictions and possibilities. First, we will explore whether reconfigurations of new locations and sites change conceptions and understandings of making and fabrication within them, a phenomenon we refer to as “new spaces in new places”. Second, we will ask what new practices are being introduced by (and in reaction to) increased institutional advances. And thirdly, we will examine what happens when shared machine shops are situated within new urban and regional matrices and processes which bring their own expectations about how machine shops should perform. Together, papers and contributions will be organized around these thematic areas: Theme One: New kinds of spaces in new kinds of places Theme Two: New kinds of practices and experiences in new places and spaces. Theme Three: New kinds of places in (outer) spaces, from urban to regional. /////// Important dates and deadlines ///////// 5 Feb 2017: Open call goes out. 30 March 2017: Paper abstracts + proposals for alternative pieces due. 30 April 2017: Confirmed paper authors and practitioners notified. 30 July 2017: Full papers + alternative pieces due. 30 October 2017: Peer review process ends, papers returned. 30 December 2017: Revised papers due. 28 February 2018: Final acceptance / rejection of papers. 1st March 2018 - 1st April 2018: Group intros, texts + alternative pieces finalized. April 2018: JoPP Issue #12 published! /////// Submission guidelines /////// Extended paper abstracts of up to 750 words + alternative practitioner pieces are due to the editors at sharedmachines(a)peerproduction.net<mailto:[email protected]> by /// 30 March, 2018 ///. Peer reviewed papers should be no more than 8,000 words. At this time we also welcome experimental, alternative contributions from practitioners + makers, in the form of 500 word commentaries or photo series that provide reflections from the field on transformations, changes and impacts with regards to shared machine shops today. The format of these thought pieces will be discussed on a case by case basis. All peer reviewed papers will be reviewed according to Journal of Peer Production guidelines. See http://peerproduction.net/peer-review/process for details. Full papers for peer review and alternative pieces will be due by 30 July, 2017. ***** This special issue has been initiated thanks to the ideas and collaborations of the talented thinkers and makers who participated in the 4S/EASST 2016 panel “Digital fabrications amongst hackers, makers and manufacturers: whose ‘industrial revolution’?” this summer in Barcelona. ============================================

2 1

CITY issue - abstract submission due January 31st
by panayotis antoniadis 17 Jan '17

17 Jan '17

Dear all, Just a reminder that the abstract submission deadline for the issue #11 CITY is approaching soon: January 31st! http://peerproduction.net/cfp-jopp-special-issue-11-city-abstracts-due-31-j… Best, Panos.

1 0