March 2016 - P2P-Foundation - lists.ourproject.org

Fwd: News on survey on education on commons and announcement of new calls
by Michel Bauwens 14 Mar '16

14 Mar '16

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: IASC <iasc(a)mailservice.iasc-commons.org> Date: Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 9:16 PM Subject: News on survey on education on commons and announcement of new calls To: michelsub2004(a)gmail.com Dear colleague, Given your interest in commons and related issues, we would like to inform you personally about a number of activities organised by the *International Association for the Study of the Commons (IASC).* If you want to know more about these or other related issues, do not hesitate to get in touch (for contact details see the colofon underneath this message)! *Tell us what you teach: survey on commons-education * To strengthen scholarship and the sharing of scientific information on commons among peers and with students, the IASC wants to create an overview of courses and trainings given across the globe on commons. We are conducting a survey together with colleagues from the *LandAcademy* <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…>, who focus in particular on land governance. As many commons are dealing with issues of land governance, there might be some overlap with commons-issues, but we also intend to include commons which are not dealing with land or any other natural resources in our overview. A more detailed explanation is provided on the first page of the survey itself, see *https://nl.surveymonkey.com/r/DTYK9ZG* <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> Your response to this survey would be most appreciated! The results will be presented at the next *European IASC conference in Bern (May, 2016)* <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> (see underneath). Afterwards the results will also be shared via the IASC-website. Please send us your response before the 31st of March 2016! *Call for Contributions to Practitioners’ Labs for the European IASC-meeting in Bern (May 2016) * To promote the exchange of experience and ideas between academic scholars and expert practitioners, the IASC now issues a call directed specifically at practitioners working on commons. In the past, practitioners’ meetings have been organized at several IASC-conferences, offering an excellent opportunity to exchange knowledge and expertise between practitioners and academic scholars interested in commons. The IASC hopes scholars and practitioners will also use this opportunity at the European *IASC-Conference in Bern* <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> (10-13 May 2016) to mutually benefit from each other’s expertise and experience throughout all future IASC-meetings. The IASC calls on commons-practitioners to present their initiative at the conference as well as to formulate topics and questions they would like to see addressed at one of the practitioners’ labs. The labs offer the opportunity to engage in discussions between other practitioners and scholars on specific topics. In order to prepare and facilitate this process, practitioners are asked to provide the organizers with a description of their initiative/organization and/or a number of questions they would like to see addressed in the discussions. *You can find the call* <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> here. Questions and/or descriptions should be received before 1 April 2016 *via the IASC-Conference Module* <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> . *Please note that IASC-members can register at a substantially lower conference fee*. Not a member yet? Go to *https://membership.iasc-commons.org* <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> and join the IASC! *Registration 4th European Meeting IASC open now* Europe has been a major driver of “glocal” processes. Therefore, the 4th Regional European Meeting of the IASC is devoted to global connections and local responses. It provides a space to advance our understanding of ongoing “glocal” processes and to analyse historically how commons in Europe have evolved and adapted to “glocal” changes. By integrating political ecology with approaches of New Institutionalism and Critical Theory in Anthropology, Human Geography, Political Science and History, we propose to investigate the impacts of external changes on the perception and evaluation of resources by actors related to the commons. This raises the question of local bargaining power, ideologies and discourses, and of the selection and crafting of institutional designs, which in turn affect the access to common‐pool resources, as well as the distribution of benefits related to the management of these resources. Registration for this conference is open now via the Conference Module; Early Bird rates apply until 1 April 2016. For registration, please go to *http://conferences.iasc-commons.org/index.php/iasc/IASC_Europe_Bern2016* <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…>. *Please note that IASC-members can register at a substantially lower conference fee. *Not a member yet? Go to *https://membership.iasc-commons.org* <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> and join the IASC! *Call for Papers 3rd Thematic IASC-Conference on Commons (Paris, 20-21 October 2016) – deadline 15 April 2016* On 20 and 21 October 2016, SciencesPo Paris will be hosting the 3rd Thematic IASC-Conference on Knowledge Commons. Building upon the successful *2012* <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> and *2014* <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> thematic IASC conferences on knowledge commons, this third conference aims to look at the normative effects and institutionalization of the many initiatives based on knowledge commons and how commons provide new legal tools, public policy choices, and forms of social, economic and governance innovations. To this purpose the conference aims to take stock of the latest developments in public policies and legal initiatives around knowledge commons, as well as how the attempts to give a proper legal definition of commons in different countries bring changes in law and property regimes. The key questions that this conference will cover are the sustainability of knowledge commons that could be achieved by giving normative effects to the relationships and collectiveness they create, the possible articulation between grassroots commons movements and public policy, To such end, examples of governance models or legal revisions organizing commons in diverse countries will be studied, particularly as far as knowledge commons are concerned. Abstracts should be submitted ultimately by 15 April 2016 via the *IASC Conference Module* <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…>. You can find the full text of the call *via this link <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…>* . *Elinor Ostrom Award on Collective Governance of the Commons – Nominations deadline 31 March 2016* The Elinor Ostrom Award on Collective Governance of the Commons is the IASC-award aiming to honor and develop the legacy of Elinor Ostrom, and to acknowledge and promote the work of practitioners, young scholars, and senior scholars involved in the field of the commons by biennially awarding nominees from each category. In line with Ostrom’s large legacy the scope of the Award aims to be broad, including academic and applied work on traditional commons (forests, water bodies, pasture lands, fisheries, etc.), local commons, interlinked commons (forests and watersheds, fisheries and coastlines, etc), global commons, knowledge, cultural and virtual commons. Nominations can be submitted until the 31st of March 2016. More info and the nomination requirements are to be found on the website of the Elinor Ostrom Award: *http://elinorostromaward.org/* <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> . *In short…* *Survey on **education on commons* <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> *31 March 2016* *Nominations deadline Elinor Ostrom Award on Collective Governance of the Commons* <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> *31 March 2016* *Call for Contributions to Practitioners’ Labs, 4th European IASC-Conference (Bern, 10-13 May 2016)* <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> *1 April 2016* *Registration (Early Bird) 4th European IASC-Conference (Bern, 10-13 May 2016)* <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> *1 April 2016* *Call for Papers 3rd Thematic IASC-Conference (Paris, 20-21 October 2016)* <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> *15 April 2016* *4th European IASC-Conference* <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.ph…> *Bern, 10-13 May 2016* *Call for Papers XVI Biennial Conference (Utrecht, 10-14 July 2017)* *1 June 2016* *3rd Thematic IASC-Conference on Knowledge Commons* *Paris, 20-21 October 2016* *Please also note …* that later on this year the IASC will also be issuing a call for the biennial IASC-conference (to be held in 2019) and Regional and Thematic conferences (to be held in fall 2017 and 2018). Kind regards René van Weeren, Executive Director IASC Tine De Moor, President IASC This e-mail was sent to michelsub2004(a)gmail.com by iasc(a)mailservice.iasc-commons.org. The International Association for The Study of the Commons. Secretariat: Drift 6, 3512 BS, Utrecht, The Netherlands Formal address 513 N Park Ave. Bloomington, IN 47480-3829 United States The International Association for the Study of the Commons (IASC) is devoted to bringing together multi-disciplinary researchers, practitioners and policymakers for the purpose of improving governance and management, advancing understanding, and creating sustainable solutions for commons, common-pool resources, or any other form of shared resource. Visit our webpage to find out more: www.iasc-commons.org. You receive this e-mail because you are member or you have subscribed in the past to one of the services of the association. If you no longer wish to receive e-mail messages, please select the following link: Unsubscribe <https://membership.iasc-commons.org/index.php?q=civicrm/mailing/optout&rese…> -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

Fwd: Hitting the road
by Michel Bauwens 14 Mar '16

14 Mar '16

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: <douglas(a)rushkoff.com> Date: Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 10:05 AM Subject: Hitting the road To: rushkoff(a)simplelists.com I've been crazy busy with media and writing - all to help birth the new book. Occasionally I look up from the email to look at the TV screen and the way reality TV has taken over politics. As far as I'm concerned, this all started when Dan Quayle took on fictional character Murphy Brown, but that's a lot of history and media analysis to go into at this hour. Suffice to say, the Republican party's subtext has risen, through Trump, to the level of direct assault. This is ultimately the way a digital media environment brings out the truth. I've always thought of digital media like a kind of truth serum. In the long run, it exposes the underlying dynamics of almost any system that touches it. That doesn't mean it makes things better, but it certainly makes them apparent. The digital economy is no exception. We may not like the impact of an Uber or Amazon on the distribution of prosperity - but we can sure see it in action. That's why I wrote my book, and why I think it's hit such a nerve. What would have once been one man's opinion or prognostication is now pretty evident to everyone. I've done a whole lot over the past couple of weeks. No room or need to post it all here, but two of my favorites are the conversation I had at Civic Hall with New America's Director of Technology Projects, George Bullen. The video will be on CSPAN BookTV in the coming weeks, and the audio is here: https://www.newamerica.org/nyc/how-growth-became-the-enemy-of-prosperity/ Among my favorite articles of the past week, here's an piece from Quartz, one from Fast Company, and one by me from The Atlantic. I'll try to write more about what's going on - and on the election - soon. Looking forward to seeing many of you at SXSW next Saturday morning! --Douglas *QUARTZ* *Silicon Valley is broken and heading for social unrest, argues media theorist* by Olivia Goldhill People are angry at Silicon Valley. In recent years, protestors have slashed the tires of buses hired to transport Google employees. They’ve occupied Airbnb’s headquarters and participated in worldwide demonstrations against Uber. These tech titans stand accused of destroying industries and livelihoods, sucking up wealth for themselves while failing to distribute any wider benefits to the rest of us. And they’re guilty, according to media theorist Douglas Rushkoff, author of the forthcoming book *Throwing Rocks at the Google Bus: How Growth became the Enemy of Prosperity*. He argues that unless Silicon Valley’s fundamental model changes, we’re heading for mass social unrest. Rushkoff points out that basic economy theory, as laid out economist and philosopher Adam Smith, recognizes three factors of production: Land, labor, and capital. But in the current digital economy, only capital is valued. “The venture capitalist puts down his money and he’s the only one that gets the return,” says Rushkoff. “The land doesn’t get the return—the neighborhoods affected by Airbnb aren’t getting return on that operation. The Uber drivers don’t get return—they’re unemployed people looking for a gig to try and get by another day.” Today’s start-ups aim for quick and massive growth, so that they can get sold and give original investors a return on their capital. These business practices have been in place since the industrial age. But Rushkoff says they cannot be sustained for much longer. “It doesn’t work as well when we reach the limits of our planet, the limits of people’s time and attention,” says Rushkoff. “The ability of big companies to make money with their money has been steadily declining for 75 years.” Rushkoff argues that several major tech companies operate with intentionally unsustainable business models. Amazon and Uber, he says, work by destroying marketplaces and then using their leverage to move into another area. So while Amazon doesn’t make much money off books, the original industry it disrupted, that’s not a concern for them. They make the bulk of their revenue from other products. “The Uber model doesn’t work as a long-term taxi business—all the drivers would just go broke,” says Rushkoff. “But that’s not the intent. The intent of Uber is to create a monopoly in the taxi business so they can then hop over into something else like logistics or delivery or drones or robotic cars.” Then there are companies like Tumblr, sold to Yahoo for a billion dollars despite the fact that it generated comparatively little revenue. (Yahoo has since admitted that it overpaid for the blogging platform.) “It didn’t actually do anything, so there was no actual business,” says Rushkoff. “What is that—is that a success or a failure? It’s a success for the original investors who got a billion dollars of money.” Google was once an innovative search engine, Rushkoff says. But he argues that since morphing into Alphabet, it’s essentially become a holding company that buys and sells technology companies. He’s also skeptical of Facebook. In order for the tech company to fulfill its growth promises, Rushkoff argues that it will have to generate an enormous amount of ad revenue of the United States. “The thing I wonder about is, if everything we do is supposed to be advertising-based, then who’s left to sell anything?” he tells Quartz. Rushkoff recommends several changes that could save the digital economy. For one thing, he thinks we needs more peer-to-peer platforms such as eBay, Etsy and Kickstarter. Such companies effectively distribute the means of production and allow people to trade with each other. He also argues that tech workers need real living wages, and that they should have at least partial ownership of the companies they work for. And startups need to do more to share the benefits of their success. This would create sustainable prosperity, in which companies grow wealth among their employees and the neighborhoods where they operate–thus allowing more spending and further growth. Rushkoff has a history of making accurate predictions about our digital futures. He wrote on viral media in 1994 and is credited with coining the term “digital natives.” He also wrote a book on the internet in 1992 that was rejected by its original publisher, based on the belief that the online phenomenon would be over by 1993. This time, he says Silicon Valley CEOs and board directors seem to be receptive to alternative ways of doing business, and are looking for ways to become more sustainable. “Over the next ten years, I think we’ll see either a significant movement in that direction, or we’ll be in a bad place,” he says. And what sort of “bad place” might we expect if Silicon Valley fails to change course? “Basically everybody working for 16 to 20 hours a day for very little pay, doing repetitive tasks that for one reason or another, computers can’t do,” Rushkoff says. “And these will be the lucky people, because at least they’re employed.” DOES THIS MAKE MY CUSTOMER RICH? BUSINESS TIPS FOR THE FUTURE STEADY-STATE ECONOMY Originally published at *Fast Company*. <http://www.fastcoexist.com/3057263/does-this-make-my-customers-rich-busines…> by MORGAN CLENDANIEL First God created Heaven and Earth. Then He created The Market. If you prefer your creation myths more scientific, you might say that after the Big Bang, market forces became the natural law of the universe. This, of course, is not true. In America’s plutocratic economy where net worth is held up as the greatest achievement, there isn’t much that we think the market can’t solve. We say the market is setting low wages for workers, that the market enables Amazon and Walmart decimate local businesses, and even that ideas to help the world’s poor should be market-based. Douglas Rushkoff’s new book, *Throwing Rocks at the Google Bus*, reminds us to stop shrugging our shoulders and using the market as an excuse for society’s ills. The market was created—and it can change. “All I ask is that people at the very least acknowledge that the venture capital/startup/financially-driven operating system is a choice, not a preexisting condition of nature,” he says. “The market is a construction. God didn’t make the market.” To forestall an economic collapse that he sees coming if we keep up business as usual, Rushkoff says we need to “develop local, resilient, human-scaled enterprises that work in a variety of economic landscapes.” The book serves as a sort of prescription for how we might do that. From solutions to the mass unemployment being wrought by automation to alternate currencies designed to keep money circulating locally to new ways to generate value for investors without needing an “exit event,” the book offers examples of what a new economy might look like and how you—no matter what industry you’re in—might help move yourself and your company toward it. The underlying theme is a new way of economic thinking that eschews the occasional startup whose value explodes in favor of what Rushkoff calls the steady-state economy. The one edict that should govern all businesses: “Does this make my customers rich? If I’m making other people wealthy, then I am supporting the ecosystem that will keep my business alive.” Right now, our economy is set up to ask the entire opposite question: Does this make our investors rich? Instead of valuing and rewarding the creation of a sustainable economy, we value growth above all other things. Venture capital infuses companies with enough cash that they can expand astronomically and make their founders incredibly wealthy. Look at Twitter, currently besieged by open letters about how to improve its business as its stock tanks. This is the prime example of an economy with the wrong priorities—and the mistakes founders can make by giving into a mindset that growth is the only meaningful goal of business. “Their $500-million a quarter in revenue company is considered a failure by Wall Street. If you make $2 billion a year on 140-character messages, that is such a home run,” he says. Instead, stock holders are demanding more growth, in order to increase the stock price so they can sell; they’re not interested in owning part of a company whose technology has been the underpinning of so much global change, they’re interested in making a profit on the market. Twitter is just one company, but multiply this attitude across the entire economy and things get scary: To continue growing at a rate that will satisfy their investors, companies are forced to find more and more extractive modes of generating revenue. Eventually, with enough companies mindlessly creating new revenue streams to continue to justify their valuations or appease shareholders, they’ll suck consumers of their remaining cash. This extraction is creating a human toll to the damaging economic system: The digital revolution that was supposed to make our lives easier. But as it’s forced to squeeze more and more value from its users, it’s doing the opposite. “This is why you see Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump alike rising. People are doubly disillusioned. Technology is making us work harder and we earn less. It’s not going well. …But then the double anger is that these companies rose on the pretense of being on our side,” says Rushkoff. And to do that requires rejecting the idea that the market is a rule of nature that can’t be changed. CEOs need to find ways to operate their company without acquiescing to shareholder demand for constant growth. You (and Milton Friedman) might argue that that is, in fact, the only thing a company should be doing, but in making that argument, you’re buying into a system that doesn’t need to exist the way it currently: “You can’t ignore the development of the modern marketplace. The market has rules that were written by people, in certain moments in history. … Who made that rule? Why did they make it? Who does it favor and who does it disempower?” The rules, Rushkoff argues, were made not by God, but by aristocrats around the 11th century, intent on preventing the peasants from creating a vibrant economy not controlled by the ruling class. Today, the rules can be whatever we want them to be. Rushkoff doesn’t want a revolution, just a rethinking. “They worked really well for 700 years of colonial expansion,” he says, “but they could use a tweak or two.” Can we actually get there? Will the people made rich by the current economic system listen to his prophecies and realize their success is built on a crumbling foundation and alter their business models—and the very system that made them successful in the first place? Rushkoff says he thinks we can, and that it won’t take economic collapse or violent revolution, but just common sense (he admits, he’s having an optimistic week). He writes in the book that CEOs he talks to are exhausted by being forced into the short term thinking of quarterly growth, and says that as people are reading the book, they’re relieved, because the solutions within give them a path to a better business model: “I’m getting emails from CEOs from Fortune 50-sized companies saying, ‘I can use this, it’s going to work.’ Because these CEOs have been looking for ways to reconfigure to this slow-growth, new normal economy that we’re actually in without getting fired or sued.” So just remember, human beings made this system, and human beings can change it. And one thing we all can agree on is that the system isn’t working: “Big business and small business, extreme libertarians and Bernie Sanders people all are looking toward the same solution. … We’re realizing that we don’t really care about our ideologies as much as about the fact that we’ve let a system get out of control.” THE ATLANTIC: TWITTER IS NOT A FAILURE To listen to Wall Street tell the story, Twitter is an abject failure. The stock is down more than 50 percent since co-founder Jack Dorsey took over as CEO last year. User growth and revenue prospects have stagnated, and investors see little chance of a major turnaround. Yet only in the twisted logic of the startup economy could a company with around $500 million of revenue per quarter—and more, most recently—be called a failure. That’s half a billion dollars for a tiny application that simply lets people send out 140 characters to each other. The economic activity it has generated is nothing short of miraculous. But that’s not enough for investors who expect recoup 100 or even 1,000 times their original investment in the company. To do that, Twitter must grow. Somehow, it must turn itself from a simple, popular, and profitable way for more than 300 million people to broadcast messages into something still bigger—even if it has to risk killing what people love about Twitter in order to do so. This is why I couldn’t help but grimace that morning I saw Twitter’s founders smiling on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange as the company celebrated its IPO and each of them became billionaires. Among them, these guys had upended journalism with Blogger, and credit with Paypal and Square. Here they were throwing in with the biggest industry of them all. When you get to ring the opening bell on the exchange and bask in the applause of the traders on the floor, it’s not because you have “disrupted” something. It’s because you have confirmed that—at least for a few—the game is still working. As the dealer is sure to cry out at the casino for all to hear, “We have a winner!” But becoming such a winner—even playing the startup game to begin with—condemns the founders of a company to chase growth above all else. That’s the core command of the highly accelerated digital economy. This is why a company like Uber can’t simply be satisfied helping people get rides. It must instead establish a monopoly in the taxi business so it can “pivot” to another vertical such as delivery services, logistics, or robotic transportation. Airbnb can’t just help people find places to stay, but must colonize city after city and deregulate its entire sector. A social media platform like Facebook must pivot to become a data miner; a messaging app Snapchat must try to become a news service; even a giant like Google must accept that its once-inspiring stream of innovations pales in comparison to what it can earn as a new holding company, Alphabet. For Twitter, this command means finding a way to grow a business that may already be full-grown. What if half a billion dollars a quarter really is all the world wants to spend on tweets? But that is not an option. Instead, the company must pivot toward new potential growth areas, at the expense of the market it already has. And so Twitter users are confronted with a news reader through which they’re supposed to glean the headlines. Or a new, annoying feature called “Twitter moments”—an algorithmically derived stream of greatest hits, which is little more than a thinly veiled opportunity to fold in “Sponsored Moments,” meaning commercial messages masquerading as organic content. Now the company is working on live-streaming video ads, again valuing growth over user experience. Maybe it’s this very drive toward growth that is pushing users away. For the first time Twitter’s user base has begun to decline, from 307 million users down to 305. It’s just a tick, of course, but in the wrong direction. If Twitter were to value the sustainability of its enterprise over the growth prospects of its shares, it wouldn’t have to invest so much of its revenue in new, outlandish features, and would have a lot more to show in profit. Heck, it might even be able to offer a dividend. Last week, Dorsey told investors on his conference call that he wants Twitter to become “the planet’s largest daily connected audience.” That’s supposed to give them hope for the future. But when the hope of a company is based on it becoming the biggest thing in the whole world, chances are the opportunity for genuine prosperity has already been lost. ---- This is RushkoffList, a monthlyish update and advance look at work in progress. Feel free to forward to your friends as long as you include this footer. To subscribe, use this link: http://www.simplelists.com/subscribe/rushkoff To unsubscribe: http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=grdK4Lvi7veNxafT2DxZrw1oAyoTFsEc -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

Fwd: [NetworkedLabour] On #Occupy, Suppression of #Dissent, Power Politics, problems of representation and the #BernieSanders Campaign
by Michel Bauwens 14 Mar '16

14 Mar '16

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Orsan Senalp <orsan1234(a)gmail.com> Date: Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 12:50 PM Subject: [NetworkedLabour] On #Occupy, Suppression of #Dissent, Power Politics, problems of representation and the #BernieSanders Campaign To: Nw Labour discuss <networkedlabour(a)lists.contrast.org>, squares < squares(a)lists.takethesquare.net>, WSF discuss < WorldSocialForum-Discuss(a)openspaceforum.net> By VladT So the last 24 hours have been quite interesting in the world of Occupy and activism and this is going to be a rather long post. It all started when we saw that Occupy Wall Street was hosting an event in zuccotti, which is awesome, I don’t think Occupy Wall Street hosted an event in Zuccotti in a very long time. But there was a problem — the event was a campaign event for Bernie Sanders, a telethon in fact. Now a lot of us, me included are supporting Bernie to win the nomination, and eventually the presidency. In this world of limited choices, he is obviously the only choice. However, there is something wrong with campaigning for him in name of #occupy — namely when we started this movement, back when we were in the thouthands, we all agreed that to stop cooption of this concept by any political party we will adopt a statement of Autonomy — which basically says that we will not become a tool of any one party, and we will not endorse any one candidate. This has a lot to do with our ideas of leaderless movements. You can’t discredit an idea by discrediting the leader if there are many, tying yourself to one candidate can be problematic. In a sense the social movement will become absorbed by the political parties and by their hierarchical nature Beyond that a lot of us wanted to build an alternative to the 2 party system, give people more direct power in their lives — direct democracy was our dream. we experimented with general assemblies, with spokes and so on. So what happened? How did #OWS go from this statement of autonomy, embracing of different voices and tolerance to becoming an extension of a presidential campaign? well that is a long story, but in a nutshell once we were all evicted out of our camps, a small group of activists started working to consolidate all the twitter accounts and Facebook pages under their control. Some of these methods were super problematic — for example the main twitter account of occupy wall street nyc (@occupywallstnyc <https://medium.com/r/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Foccupywallstnyc>) was hijacked by a person who changed all the passwords and locked everyone out. he then when faced with an actual lawsuit related to the theft punted the account to one of his accomplices, and we didn’t have time or resources to really go after the 2nd person…. so we just let it lie and focused on our own organizing work over the last year. But to get some idea of what went down you might want to read these 2 links: http://occupywallstreet.net/story/wolf-occupy-wall-street-statement-justin-… <https://medium.com/r/?url=http%3A%2F%2Foccupywallstreet.net%2Fstory%2Fwolf-…> http://globalrevolution.tv/blog/568 <https://medium.com/r/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fglobalrevolution.tv%2Fblog%2F568> The underlying theme here is that a new “model” has emerged — for lack of a better term we can call it capitalistic social media activism. This activism relies on having access to large social media networks, controll of large movement social media accounts a necessary ingridient, parachuting into disaster areas and using that media power to setup ngo type organizations that raise money and provide “services”. Now the key point here is parachuting it — true to the existing old ngo model they dont actually create local, empowering organizing — no these efforts are controlled by chiefs who have access to these large diffusion pools, and they use these to suck resources and space that would have been available for local groups and activists to enrich themselves and the organizations they control. Now these people decided they will engage in electoral politics in context of occupying the democratic party — great idea actually. but why do it in name of #OWS when there was this whole big deal made from the get go not to do this in name of #OCCUPY? well they said hell with it we control all the accounts, so we will just speak for the movement. And hence the big conflict about representation was born. Rest of the text: https://medium.com/@vladteichberg/2f196a31dbbb _______________________________________________ NetworkedLabour mailing list NetworkedLabour(a)lists.contrast.org http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

Fwd: [New post] 2016 Robert Steele: The Ultimate Hack – Resilient Villages, Smart Cities, Prosperous Nations at Peace — and Unlimited Clean Water
by Michel Bauwens 14 Mar '16

14 Mar '16

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Robert Steele <robert.david.steele.vivas(a)gmail.com> Date: Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 8:18 PM Subject: Fwd: [New post] 2016 Robert Steele: The Ultimate Hack – Resilient Villages, Smart Cities, Prosperous Nations at Peace — and Unlimited Clean Water To: Robert Steele <Robert.David.Steele.Vivas(a)gmail.com> With all appropriate humility for my past failings, this may be the most useful document I have ever created. I would be glad to have your help in sharing it. A tiny url now exists: http://tinyurl.com/EIN-BRICS-OSEE. Editor posted: " This briefing has been prepared for the BRICS + Indonesia and Iran -- and other nations such as Brunei, Malaysia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) -- as a means of fostering a conversation about the future of Earth and humanity -- there are solutions" New post on *Public Intelligence Blog* <http://www.phibetaiota.net/?author=2> 2016 Robert Steele: The Ultimate Hack – Resilient Villages, Smart Cities, Prosperous Nations at Peace — and Unlimited Clean Water <http://www.phibetaiota.net/2016/03/2016-robert-steele-the-ultimate-hack-res…> by Editor <http://www.phibetaiota.net/?author=2> [image: Click on Image to Enlarge] <http://www.phibetaiota.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Slide1.jpg> Click on Image to Enlarge This briefing has been prepared for the BRICS + Indonesia and Iran -- and other nations such as Brunei, Malaysia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) -- as a means of fostering a conversation about the future of Earth and humanity -- there *are* solutions that are affordable, interoperable, and scalable. PPT (21 Slides with Notes): EIN BRICS Ultimate Hack Lite <http://www.phibetaiota.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/EIN-BRICS-Ultimate-Ha…> *All Graphics and Notes in Full Text (Translatable) Below the Fold* Read more of this post <http://www.phibetaiota.net/2016/03/2016-robert-steele-the-ultimate-hack-res…> *Editor <http://www.phibetaiota.net/?author=2>* | March 6, 2016 at 8:00 am | Categories: Collective Intelligence <http://www.phibetaiota.net/?taxonomy=category&term=collective-intelligence>, Commercial Intelligence <http://www.phibetaiota.net/?taxonomy=category&term=commercial-intelligence>, Cultural Intelligence <http://www.phibetaiota.net/?taxonomy=category&term=cultural-intelligence>, Earth Intelligence <http://www.phibetaiota.net/?taxonomy=category&term=earth-intelligence>, Gift Intelligence <http://www.phibetaiota.net/?taxonomy=category&term=gift-intelligence>, Peace Intelligence <http://www.phibetaiota.net/?taxonomy=category&term=peace-intelligence> | URL: http://wp.me/p5sNjR-uA3 Unsubscribe <https://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=60d987ff6e969ab611d59fe1fab28d3c&email…> to no longer receive posts from Public Intelligence Blog. Change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions <https://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=60d987ff6e969ab611d59fe1fab28d3c&email…>. *Trouble clicking?* Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://www.phibetaiota.net/2016/03/2016-robert-steele-the-ultimate-hack-res… -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

Fwd: [NetworkedLabour] Commoning – perspectives on conviviality
by Michel Bauwens 14 Mar '16

14 Mar '16

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Orsan Senalp <orsan1234(a)gmail.com> Date: Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 3:43 PM Subject: [NetworkedLabour] Commoning – perspectives on conviviality To: Nw Labour discuss <networkedlabour(a)lists.contrast.org> COMMONS INSTITUT (GERMANY) <https://www.opendemocracy.net/author/commons-institut-germany>, BRITTA ACKSEL <https://www.opendemocracy.net/author/britta-acksel>, JOHANNES EULER <https://www.opendemocracy.net/author/johannes-euler>, LESLIE GAUDITZ <https://www.opendemocracy.net/author/leslie-gauditz>,SILKE HELFRICH <https://www.opendemocracy.net/author/silke-helfrich>, BIRGITTE KRATZWALD <https://www.opendemocracy.net/author/birgitte-kratzwald>, STEFAN MERETZ <https://www.opendemocracy.net/author/stefan-meretz>, FLAVIO STEIN <https://www.opendemocracy.net/author/flavio-stein>, and STEFAN TUSCHEN <https://www.opendemocracy.net/author/stefan-tuschen> 6 March 2016 https://www.opendemocracy.net/britta-acksel-johannes-euler-leslie-gauditz-s… Members of the Commons Institut (Germany) contribute to the debate around the Convivialist Manifesto and on Mother’s Day offer a new approach to reproduction. _______________________________________________ NetworkedLabour mailing list NetworkedLabour(a)lists.contrast.org http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

Fwd: [commoning] Ostrom Award on Collective Governance / call open until March 31
by Michel Bauwens 14 Mar '16

14 Mar '16

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Silke Helfrich <silke.helfrich(a)gmx.de> Date: Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 3:51 PM Subject: [commoning] Ostrom Award on Collective Governance / call open until March 31 To: COMMONING LIste engl <commoning(a)lists.commons-institut.org> Cc: Stein Felix <felix.stein(a)posteo.de> Call is open until March 31 http://www.iasc-commons.org/blog/elinor-ostrom-award-collective-governance-… As the IASC is an institutional supporter of the Elinor Ostrom Award on Collective Governance we would like to draw your attention to the call for nominations for this award for 2015-2017. The Council of the Elinor Ostrom Award has opened the call to nominate outstanding scholars or practitioners in the field of commons to receive the Elinor Ostrom Award on Collective Governance of the Commons. The Award will be given in three categories: - Practitioners (either formally or not formally constituted groups), - Young Scholars (less than 10 years after having received their PhD), - Senior Scholars (over 10 years of having received their PhD). The call for nominations will be open until 31 March 2016. Information on the nomination, evaluation, and selection procedures can be found on the Elinor Ostrom Award website, or contact the Award Council via ostromaward(a)gmail.com. Website Elinor Ostrom Award http://elinorostromaward.org/ Go ahead, submit proposals! Greetings Silke -- Silke Helfrich www.commonsblog.de _______________________________________________ Commoning mailing list Commons-Institut e.V. Germany Commoning(a)lists.commons-institut.org https://lists.schokokeks.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/commoning -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

a good video production about p2p via queens uni in belfast
by Michel Bauwens 13 Mar '16

13 Mar '16

1 0

Fwd: A unique opportunity for our Sydney members and friends
by Michel Bauwens 12 Mar '16

12 Mar '16

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Kenneth McLeod <kjmcleod(a)gmail.com> Date: Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 9:39 AM Subject: A unique opportunity for our Sydney members and friends To: kenneth.mcleod(a)uts.edu.au This is a unique opportunity to explore the relationship between the rapidly changing environment of the Anthropocene and our inner world experienced through body awareness and movement. *For more information and to book go to:* https://www.eventbrite.com.au/e/bodyweather-for-the-anthropocene-led-by-tes… -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

Fwd: [NetworkedLabour] Commons Collaborative Economies: Policies, Technologies and City for the People // March 11-12-13th, 2016 // Barcelona
by Michel Bauwens 11 Mar '16

11 Mar '16

Dear Vasilis, Can you also introduce this event on our blog ? Michel ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Mayo Fuster Morell <mayo.fuster(a)eui.eu> Date: Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 5:25 AM Subject: [NetworkedLabour] Commons Collaborative Economies: Policies, Technologies and City for the People // March 11-12-13th, 2016 // Barcelona To: networkedlabour(a)lists.contrast.org, communia-associates(a)lists.communia-association.org, okfn-discuss(a)lists.okfn.org Hola! I hope of interest of people in this list, Mayo English - Català - Castellano Commons Collaborative Economies: Policies, Technologies and City for the People *An encounter which aims to highlight the relevance of the commons-oriented approach of peer production and collaborative economy, while proposing public policies and providing technical guidelines to build platforms for collaborative communities. * www.procomuns.net Contact: info(a)dimmons.net *WHEN & WHERE* During the weekend of March 12-13th, 2016, with a locally-oriented event taking place on Friday, March 11th, 2016. *Barcelona Activa <http://www.barcelonactiva.cat/> *(Carrer Llacuna, 162 -164, 08018 Barcelona) *GOALS* 1. Highlight the *relevance of the commons-oriented model within the collaborative economy*, and project internationally the relevance of commons – oriented production in Barcelona and Catalonia. 2. Build *policy recommendations for public administrations*, specifically to be sent to the Plan of Municipal Action (PAM) for the next 4 years of the Barcelona City Council, and the consultation process of the European Commission, on public policies of promotion and regulation of the collaborative economy and the model of city. 3. Provide *technical guidelines to build free and open software and decentralized technologies for collaborative communities.* *ORGANIZERS * The is organized by Barcelona Activa – Department of “Other Economies and proximity” with the BarCola – Node on collaborative economy and commons production in Barcelona (associated to the Social and Solidarian Economy Commission of the Barcelona City Council), and the P2Pvalue European project <http://www.p2pvalue.eu/> (locally by Dimmons <http://www.dimmons.net/>– Digital Commons Research at the Internet Interdisciplinary Institute of the Open University of Catalonia (Dimmons.net @ IN3-UOC) and the Institute of Govern and Public Policies of the Autonomous University of Barcelona ( IGOPnet.cc <http://igopnet.cc/> @ UAB). Organizers collaborators of the event are Guifi.net <https://guifi.net/>, Goteo <https://ca.goteo.org/>, Pangea <https://pangea.org/>, Free Knowledge Institute (with the Digital DIY project <http://www.didiy.eu/>), the Reutilitza.cat <https://www.reutilitza.cat/en> and eReuse.org <http://www.ereuse.org/en/> projects, Amical Viquipedia <https://www.wikimedia.cat/>, and OuiShare <http://ouishare.net/>, among others. *DEPARTING DIAGNOSTIC AND DIRECTION * In the last two decades we have seen the emergence of Internet-enabled collaborative communities building shared and common resources. *Commons-based Peer Production is rapidly growing*, not just for the disruptive and very successful cases of software (with free and open software) and encyclopedias (Wikipedia) but also for information (OpenStreetMap, Wikihow), hardware (FabLabs, Open Source Ecology), accommodation (Couchsurfing) and currency (local coins). More recently, we have also seen the *emergence and growth of hybrid models which retain some similar organizational logic, such as being based on collaborative principles, but privatizing others*. This is the case in corporate-based peer production such as Uber or Airbnb. Are they truly collaborative economies?. This issue opens up a series of debates and opportunities about how to *retain the commons and socially transformative dimension in the collaborative economy through the recognition of the distinctive values of these modes of production*, beyond value approaches which focus on monetization, and new forms of open/peer/platform cooperativism. However, public debate mainly focuses on the controversies around large corporations entering the collaborative economy. Thus, the public is mostly aware of peer production through these few large corporations. There is a *growing need to organize and raise the visibility of the commons and socially-oriented model*, and to address which are the conditions that should be present in order to characterise an economy or enterprise as “collaborative”. Additionally, recent technological developments, such as emergent blockchain technologies, have opened up new avenues of commons production, *management and distribution through more decentralized governance structures*, which also open up very promising avenues for the evolution of the collaborative economy. The more important commons-based peer production becomes, the more that controversies emerge, attracting the interest of public administrations. Still, it remains largely unclear *what the role of public administrations might be, which Public-Commons partnerships could be established, and what policy approach could be the most productive and beneficial*. The event main goal is to highlight the *relevance of the commons-oriented model within the collaborative economy*, and build policy and technical resources to promote its scalability. The encounter will *mix plenaries with unconference / open space working groups* to achieve the targeted outcomes. Participants will have the chance to suggest other activities. *Antecedents * The event will follow up on the previous workshop FLOSS4P2P <http://www.p2pvalue.eu/floss4p2p-workshop-agenda>, organized by the P2Pvalue <http://www.p2pvalue.eu/> european project, this time expanding the focus to policy. It will provide an opportunity for policy people to interact with the technical teams of Free/Libre/Open Source Software (FLOSS) platforms for commons-based peer production communities, and to get a “deep dive” into how to promote the commons approach to collaborative economy from institutions. *TOPICS* *Policy* - Good experiences and policy recommendations for commons-oriented peer production and collaborative economy - Cities and commons - Value and commons-oriented peer production and collaborative economy *Areas of collaborative economy* - Open knowledge - Industrial Commons and open design - Digital DIY - Internet of Things - Open Source Hardware - Peer cooperativism - Feministing collaborative economy - Circular Economy *Tech* - Decentralized technologies and blockchain - Free and Open Source Software (FLOSS) platforms for communities in the collaborative economy - FLOSS proposals for boosting commons communities participation, growth and resilience (e.g. architectures, reward models) - Methodologies to integrate stakeholders in the development of platforms for communities (design thinking, agile, lean) - FLOSS alternatives to “walled gardens” (in communication or collaboration), especially if decentralized ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: CATALÀ Economies Col·laboratives Procomuns: Polítiques, Tecnologies i Ciutat per a les Persones *Economies Col·laboratives Procomuns és una trobada que pretén posar de manifest la rellevància del model procomú de l’economia col·laborativa, proposar el co-disseny de polítiques públiques de promoció d’aquest model i avançar propostes tècniques per a la construcció de plataformes col·laboratives*. www.procomuns.net Contacte: info(a)dimmons.net *QUAN I ON* 11, 12 i 13 de març de 2016 *Barcelona Activa <http://www.barcelonactiva.cat/>* (Carrer Llacuna, 162-164, 08018 Barcelona) *OBJECTIUS* 1. Ressaltar la* rellevància del model procomú* dins l’economia col·laborativa, i projectar internacionalment la importància de la producció orientada al procomú a Barcelona i Catalunya. 2. Obrir el debat sobre quin model a impulsar des de les administracions (procomú/local/cooperativista versus corporatiu/deslocalitzat/privatiu), generant una *Carta de recomanacions polítiques*, més en concret per al Pla d’Acció Municipal (PAM) de l’Ajuntament de Barcelona i a la consulta de la Comissió Europea. 3. Proporcionar directrius tècniques per a la construcció de *programari obert i descentralitzat*. *ORGANITZADORS* Els principals organitzadors i patrocinadors de la trobada “Economies col·laboratives procomuns: Polítiques, tecnologies i ciutat” són Barcelona Activa – Departament Altres Economies i proximitat i BarCola – Grup de treball sobre economia col·laborativa i producció procomú a Barcelona (vinculat al Comissionat d’economia Social i Solidaria de l’Ajuntament de Barcelona), i el projecte europeu P2Pvalue <http://www.p2pvalue.eu/> (amb els grups locals Dimmons <http://www.dimmons.net/> @ Institut Interdisciplinar d’Internet de la Universitat Oberta de Catalunya i el Institut de Govern i Polítiques Públiques de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona IGOPnet.cc <http://igopnet.cc/> @ UAB). Les organitzacions col·laboradores de l’esdeveniment són Guifi.net <https://guifi.net/>, Goteo <https://ca.goteo.org/>, Pangea <https://pangea.org/>, Free Knowledge Institute (amb Digital DIY project <http://www.didiy.eu/>), els projectes Reutilitza.cat <https://www.reutilitza.cat/en> i eReuse.org <http://www.ereuse.org/en/> de la Universita Politecnica de Catulynya, Amical Viquipedia <https://www.wikimedia.cat/>, i OuiShare <http://ouishare.net/>, entre altres. *DIAGNOSTIC I DIRECCIO* Les últimes dues dècades hem comprovat com gràcies a Internet sorgien comunitats col·laboratives i noves possibilitats d’utilitzar recursos comuns. *La producció procomú està creixent ràpidament*, no només en l’àmbit del programari (lliure i obert) i del coneixement (projectes enciclopèdics, educatius i lingüístics com la Viquipèdia), sinó també per obtenir informació (OpenStreetMap, Wikihow), maquinària (FabLabs, Open Source Ecology), allotjament (Couchsurfing) o divises (monedes locals). Més recentment, també hem vist l’*aparició i creixement de models híbrids que presenten lògiques d’organització similars, basades en principis de col·laboració, però privatitzant-ne d’altres*. És el cas de la producció entre iguals de base corporativista com Uber o Airbnb. Però són aquestes realment les economies de col·laboració? El problema obre una sèrie de debats i oportunitats sobre com *conservar el procomú i la dimensió de transformació social en l’economia col·laborativa* a través del reconeixement dels valors propis d’aquests modes de producció, més enllà dels enfocaments de valor que es centren en l’obtenció d’ingressos, i les noves formes de cooperativisme obert, entre iguals i en plataformes. Tot i això, el debat públic es centra principalment en les controvèrsies al voltant de grans corporacions que irrompen en l’economia col·laborativa. Així doncs, l’opinió pública està majoritàriament al corrent de la producció entre iguals a través d’aquestes poques grans corporacions. És per aquest motiu que hi ha una creixent *necessitat d’organitzar i augmentar la visibilitat del procomú i del seu model d’orientació social*, i de definir quins criteris són els que caracteritzen una economia o empresa com a “col·laborativa”. A més a més, recents progressos com les tecnologies emergents *blockchain* han obert noves vies de producció, gestió i distribució procomú a través de *models de governança més descentralitzats*, que també obren noves vies molt prometedores per a l’evolució de l’economia col·laborativa. Com més important esdevé l’economia col·laborativa, més controvèrsies sorgeixen, i més s’atrau l’interès de les administracions públiques. Tot i així, encara no està clar *quin podria ser el paper d’aquestes administracions públiques, quins nexes públics-procomú es podrien establir i quin enfocament de polítiques podria ser el més productiu i beneficiós*. En aquest sentit, l’esdeveniment té per objectiu ressaltar la *rellevància del model procomú dins l’economia col·laborativa* i generar recursos de polítiques públiques i tècnics per la seva escalabilitat. La trobada planteja *combinar sessions plenàries amb models participatius de desconferència (**unconferences)*, així com sessions obertes a grups de treball per aconseguir els resultats previstos. Els participants tindran l’oportunitat de suggerir activitats. *Antecedents* L’esdeveniment representa el seguiment del *workshop* FLOSS4P2P <http://www.p2pvalue.eu/floss4p2p-workshop-agenda>, organitzat pel projecte europeu P2Pvalue <http://www.p2pvalue.eu/>, aquest cop amb l’ampliació a l’àmbit de les polítiques públiques. Tanmateix, proporcionarà una oportunitat perquè les persones responsables de les polítiques puguin interactuar amb experts i equips tècnics de FLOSS (*Free/Libre/Open Source Software)* per aconseguir una “immersió profunda” en la forma de promoure l’enfocament del procomú per economia col·laborativa per part de les institucions. *TEMES* *Polítiques* - Bones pràctiques i recomanacions de polítiques per al foment de producció procomú entre iguals i l’economia col·laborativa - Ciutats i procomú - Valor i procomú *Àrees d’economia col·laborativa* - Coneixement obert - Procomuns industrials i disseny obert - Digital DIY o “fes-ho tu mateix” - Internet de les coses - Maquinari open source - Cooperativisme entre iguals - Economia col·laborativa i feminisme - Economia circular *Tecnologia* - Tecnologies descentralitzades i blockchain - Plataformes Free and Open Source Software (FLOSS) per l’economia col·laborativa - Propostes FLOSS per la promoció de la participació de les comunitats, el creixement i la resiliencia (per exemple arquitectures, models de recompenses, etc) - Metodologies per a integrar els actors implicats en el desenvolupament de plataformes col·laboratives (Design Thinking, Agile, Lean) - Alternatives FLOSS per a sol·lucions tancades (o “walled gardens”), amb un enfocament en la descentralització ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: *CASTELLANO* *Economías Colaborativas del Procomún: Políticas, Tecnologías y Ciudad para las Personas* *Un encuentro que pretende poner de manifiesto la relevancia del modelo procomún de la economía colaborativa, proponer el co-diseño de políticas públicas de promoción de este modelo y avanzar propuestas técnicas para la construcción de plataformas colaborativas. * www.procomuns.net Contacto: info(a)dimmons.net *CUÁNDO Y DÓNDE* 11, 12 y 13 de marzo de 2016 *Barcelona Activa <http://www.barcelonactiva.cat/> *(Carrer Llacuna, 162-164, 08018 Barcelona) *OBJETIVOS* 1. Resaltar la relevancia del *modelo procomún* dentro de la economía colaborativa, y proyectar internacionalmente la relevancia de la producción orientada al procomún en Barcelona y Cataluña. 2. Abrir el debate sobre qué modelo a impulsar desde las administraciones (procomún/local/cooperativista versus corporativo/deslocalizado/privativo), generando un *Carta de recomendaciones políticas*, para hacer llegar al PAM del Ayuntamiento y a la consulta que está llevando a cabo la Comisión Europea. 3. Proporcionar directrices técnicas para la construcción de software abierto y descentralizado *ORGANIZADORES* El encuentro “Economías colaborativas del procomún: Políticas, tecnologías y ciudad para las personas” está organizado por el Departamento Otros Economías de Barcelona Activa (Ayuntamiento de Barcelona) junto con BarCola – Grupo de trabajo sobre economía colaborativa y producción procomún en Barcelona, P2Pvalue European project <http://www.p2pvalue.eu/> (grupo Dimmons <http://www.dimmons.net/> @ IN3-UOC & IGOPnet.cc <http://igopnet.cc/> @ UAB). Las organizaciones colaboradoras del evento son Guifi.net <https://guifi.net/>, Goteo <https://goteo.org/>, Pangea <https://pangea.org/>, Free Knowledge Institute (desde Digital DIY project <http://www.didiy.eu/>), los proyectos Reutilitza.cat <https://www.reutilitza.cat/en> y eReuse.org <http://www.ereuse.org/en/> de la Universitat Politecnica de Catulynya, Amical Wikimedia <https://www.wikimedia.cat/> y OuiShare <http://ouishare.net/>, entre otras. *DIAGNOSTICO Y DIRECCION* Las últimas dos décadas hemos comprobado cómo gracias a Internet han surgido comunidades colaborativas y nuevas posibilidades de utilizar recursos comunes. *La producción procomún está creciendo rápidamente*, no sólo en el ámbito del software (con software libre y abierto) y del conocimiento (enciclopedias como Viquipèdia), sinó también para obtener información (OpenStreetMap, Wikihow), hardware (FabLabs, Open Source Ecology), alojamiento (Couchsurfing) o divisas (monedas locales). Más recientemente, también hemos asistido a *la aparición y al crecimiento de modelos híbridos que presentan lógicas de organización similares, basadas en principios de colaboración, pero privatizando otros*. Es el caso de la producción entre iguales de base corporativista como Uber o Airbnb. ¿Pero son estos realmente casos de economía colaborativa? El problema abre una serie de debates sobre cómo *conservar el procomún y la dimensión de transformación social en la economía colaborativa* a través del reconocimiento de los valores propios de estos modos de producción, más allá de los enfoques de valor que se centran en la obtención de ingresos, y las nuevas formas de cooperativismo abierto, entre iguales y en plataformas. Aún así, el debate público se centra principalmente en las controversias alrededor de grandes corporaciones que irrumpen en la economía colaborativa. Así, la opinión pública está mayoritariamente al corriente de la producción entre iguales a través de estas pocas grandes corporaciones. Por ese motivo hay una creciente *necesidad de organizar y aumentar la visibilidad del procomún y de su modelo de orientación social*, y de definir qué criterios son los que caracterizan una economía o empresa como “colaborativa”. Además, recientes adelantos como las tecnologías emergentes *blockchain*, han abierto nuevas vías de producción, gestión y distribución procomún a través de *modelos de gobernanza más descentralizados*, que también abren nuevas vías muy prometedoras para la evolución de la economía colaborativa. Cuanto más importante deviene la economía colaborativa, más controversias surgen, atrayendo el interés de las administraciones públicas. Aún así, todavía no está claro *cuál podría ser el papel de estas administraciones públicas, qué partenariados públicos-procomún se podrían establecer y qué enfoque de políticas podría ser el más productivo y beneficioso*. El evento tiene por objetivo resaltar la *relevancia del modelo procomún dentro de la economía colaborativa*, y crear recursos de políticas públicas y tecnicos para apoyar su escalabilidad. El encuentro se plantea *combinar sesiones plenarias con modelos participativos tipo “unconference”*, así como sesiones abiertas a grupos de trabajo para conseguir los resultados previstos. Los participantes tendrán la oportunidad de sugerir actividades. *Antecedentes* El evento representa la continuación del workshop FLOSS4P2P <http://www.p2pvalue.eu/floss4p2p-workshop-agenda>,organizado por el proyecto europeo P2Pvalue <http://www.p2pvalue.eu/>, esta vez con la ampliación al ámbito de las políticas públicas. Además, proporcionará una oportunidad para que personas responsables de las políticas puedan interactuar con expertos y equipos técnicos de Free/Libre/Open Source Software (FLOSS) para conseguir una “inmersión profunda” en la forma de promover el enfoque del procomún de la economía colaborativa por parte de las instituciones. *TEMAS* *Políticas* - Buenas prácticas y recomendaciones para políticas que fomenten la producción procomún y la economía colaborativa - Ciudades y procomún - Valor y procomún *Áreas de economía colaborativa* - Conocimiento abierto - Procomunes industriales y diseño abierto - Digital DIY - Internet de las cosas - Hardware open source - Cooperativismo entre iguales - Economía colaborativa y feminismo - Economía circular *Tecnología* - Tecnologías descentralizadas y blockchain - Plataformas Free and Open Source Software (FLOSS) para la economía colaborativa - Propuestas FLOSS para la promoción de la participación de las comunidades, el crecimiento y la resiliencia (por ejemplo arquitecturas, modelos de recompensas, etc) - Metodologías para integrar actores implicados en el desarrollo de plataformas colaborativas (Design Thinking, Agile, Lean) - Alternativas FLOSS para soluciones cerradas (o “walled gardens”), con un enfoque en la descentralización -- «·´`·.(*·.¸(`·.¸ ¸.·´)¸.·*).·´`·» «·´¨*·¸¸« Mayo Fuster Morell ».¸.·*¨`·» @Lilaroja «·´`·.(¸.·´(¸.·* *·.¸)`·.¸).·´`·» Faculty Affiliated. Berkman Center for Internet and Society. Harvard University. Director research on digital commons. Internet Interdisciplinary Institute. Open University of Catalonia. Researcher. Institute of Government and Public Policies. Autonomous University of Barcelona. Ph.D European University Institute Website: http://www.onlinecreation.info Phone: 0034-648877748 The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. _______________________________________________ NetworkedLabour mailing list NetworkedLabour(a)lists.contrast.org http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

2 1

Fwd: Farming for a Small Planet: Agroecology Now (GTN Discussion)
by Michel Bauwens 10 Mar '16

10 Mar '16

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Great Transition Network <gtnetwork(a)greattransition.org> Date: Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 10:55 PM Subject: Farming for a Small Planet: Agroecology Now (GTN Discussion) To: michelsub2004(a)gmail.com >From Sujata Dutta <sujata(a)ignou.ac.in> ------------------------------------------------------- Dear Frances Moore Lappé and GTI colleagues, To begin with, congratulations on producing such a clear and erudite addition to the repertoire of global transition to sustainability. I have been an ardent follower of GTI and am always enthusiastic to know what happens next: how we through small baby steps create and contribute to this rather exciting evolution of human civilization. I would like to share a few anecdotes from the Far Eastern world where indigenous communities managed to preserve some of the unique traditions of sustainable agriculture. This may, however, be short-lived, as they struggle to grapple with the onslaught of conventional agriculture. In Assam, we need to note that conventional industrial agriculture only penetrated through the colonial capitalism of the tea industry. Food crops were fortunately not tampered with, and communities were allowed to carry on with their traditional practices. However, it is not to say that the scourges of industrial agriculture and production of tea did not impact the local ecosystem, biodiversity, and livelihood patterns due to the indiscriminate use of chemical fertilizers for mass production. Thus, in spite of large-scale degradation of soil quality, water, and human health, what can be still salvaged is probably the invaluable indigenous knowledge of sustainable agricultural practices among the indigenous communities in areas of flood control and management, bio fertilizers, pest control, multi-cropping, seed preservation, food storage, livelihood support, and local food security. It is remarkable that most of the tribal communities inhabiting this region have been self-sustaining in terms of their social structure and economy. Starvation deaths are unheard of, and common property resources are regulated through customary laws that ensure equity, inter-generational stability, and to some extent gender equality. Popular in India, the traditional paradigm of sustainable agriculture is the organic agricultural practices underlined in the greater traditions of Hinduism and its grand narrative in texts such as Vrikshayurveda and in practices of agnihotra yajna, etc. The little traditions of the tribal folk cultures, such as those inhabiting the peripheries of Northeast India, many a times go unnoticed due to the lack of proper documentation and research in these areas. There is a great impetus in this region to go organic, given the potentials for organic farming and a growing market of citizens seeking ‘clean and pure food’ production. Undoubtedly, there is enormous potential for this region, given that it is not even halfway as polluted as the other parts of India that went for intensive agriculture during the Green Revolution, such as Punjab and Bengal. Learning from the price that was paid by the Green Revolution in terms of adverse health impacts and natural resource pollution, the current agenda is to go towards an evergreen revolution with full support of the government. Regions like Northeast India, being the last frontier to the Indian post-development planning, await this attention eagerly. But, are they ready for this? A government commissioned study as was reiterated by Guy Dauncey in Canada should be the first step. A haphazard adoption of organic farming will not only jeopardize the ethical component of going organic, but will also uproot and destabilize prospects of agroecology in one of the most deserving regions of the world. Right now, there are a number of unorganized endeavours towards organic farming by private entrepreneurs and local farmers. However, in the absence of awareness and commitment to organic food; coordination and networking between farmers and consumers; and community and institutional support for farms to be self-sustaining in terms of seeds, storage, marketing and brand building, organic farming in Assam and North East India as a whole may never see the dawn of success. In fact, even when industrial manufacturing backed by large corporations has tried to transition to sustainable practices, it has found itself bitterly overthrown. For example, in Assam in the year 2006-07, in an experiment undertaken by Dhekiajuli Tea Estate owned by Parry Agro Industries Ltd, a corporate conglomerate tried to implement sustainable agricultural practices pertaining to production techniques in tea cultivation. The initiative was taken by the local management primarily to address the hazardous impact of toxicity in the local environment, particularly soil and water quality. The impact on the health of the resident labour population made the management sit up when they found a significant rise in the number of lung diseases, skin infection, and birth deformity among workers. I first visited the tea garden in 2007 to conduct fieldwork with my students from the Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati, who had registered for my course “Concepts and Ideologies in Social Life,” where sustainability and sustainable development as a conceptual paradigm from sociological perspective was explored. The experience for us was positive, and the optimism of the management and workers was contagious and motivating for the young technocrats of future India. The management was committed to a market-driven, competitive industrial manufacturing process but steered their motivation with a parallel experiment of vermicompost, agnihotri yajna, Panchgavya or cowpathy, Amrit pani or fermented cowdung which generates about 250 kinds of beneficial bacteria and other localized and organic pest control and fertiliser techniques to promote sustainable industrial growth with low chemical impact. Sources of Indigenous knowledge such as Vrikshayurveda were systematically explored to unearth traditional organic practices in farming and agriculture. The cultural worldview of environmental sustainability embedded in our traditional knowledge about agricultural practices and farming is elabourate in its glorification of trees and tree planting. Every topic connected with the science of plant life such as procuring, preserving, and treating of seeds before planting; preparing pits for planting saplings; selection of soil; method of watering; nourishments and fertilizers; plant diseases and plant protection from internal and external diseases; layout of a garden; agricultural and horticultural wonders; groundwater resources; etc.; finds a place in these texts. The management was forced to abandon the grand project as an unfulfilled legacy, succumbing to the formidable forces driving our unsustainable existence. In spite of significant progress made towards environmental and labour health and the quality of natural capital like land, water, and soil (which started reflecting low toxin and chemical content that is disastrous and highly polluted), the Dhekiajuli Tea Estate abandoned this experiment in 2014. Apparently, the embedded externalized costs of poor health, environmental degradation, and toxic waste generation are seldom reflected into the company balance sheet. As a result, the transition towards the new paradigm of sustainable industrialization of tea manufacture was seen as a failure in terms of production cost and output. The situation will be worse in case of unorganized farmers who live in rural areas and for whom in the first place itself agriculture is economically non-viable due to small landholdings and lack of infrastructural support. Moreover, the rather inferior value attached to manual labour makes farming a very low-prestige profession which the emerging educated middle classes loathe to associate themselves with. The push factors of emerging urbanization have made rural India and all its associated riders of village life and farming as a livelihood option unattractive to the youth. This is a dangerous trend for emerging economies: the centrifugal forces of urbanization are creating havoc with the balancing of local development of rural India and preservation of its 'little and folk traditions.' In fact, what is happening is even dangerous: a booming ICT, satellite TV, mobile, and internet facility is bringing the global society into the threshold of village society, but at the cost of a great loss to the self-esteem of rural India as it finds itself dispossessed of its sustainable heritage, which includes organic farming and sustainable food cultivation. Dr Sujata Dutta Hazarika Co-founder GISDP [email protected] ********************************************************** On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 4:00 AM, Great Transition Network wrote: >From Jodi Koberinski ----- I echo Guy's praises, Frankie, the work is accessible and clear of “clutter.” I will write more thoughtfully on your piece later in the week, I have some thoughts that arise from Guy's posting I'd like to share now so others with more expertise in the issues I will raise below might wade in if it is a fruitful tangent. The need to ask "how" arises, Guy suggests, and the examples he gives of progressive states with greater organic production are ample proof that organic/agroecological systems can function within the capitalist system of some progressive, social democratic states. So it isn't an "if," but rather an opportunity to show what is already being demonstrated. Guy's example from his piece of fiction presumes rational actors responding to information we already have about the costs of externalities—clearly Guy and Frankie both point to the need for our movement to better articulate these costs and bring pressure to price industrial food accordingly. What is interesting is to dive a little deeper into these globally progressive states and look at the ratio of "industrial-organic" to "agroecological" approaches and see we have some way to go to move agriculture toward the kind envisioned in Frankie's piece, and then look at the degree of globalization of the food economy in these states. What I observe is a little bit like a rural homeschoolers' science club: from the outside, "organic sector" looks like a range of families with the same agendas ... until it comes time to teach evolution and the presence of distinct agendas becomes obvious. National food sovereignty and successful organic markets can be in sharp conflict with each other. Whether "sovereignty" goals and "market development" goals are compatible depends on one's critique of globalization post-WTO. Those who believe capitalism only needs a tweak will support neoliberal, export-oriented organic agriculture focusing on commodities, processed foods, and cash crops. Those who see flaws in the food system beyond production choices in the field may support post- corporate capitalist, small-scale, localized approaches to food that look at multi-functionality, like work Jose Vivero Pol is doing to make the case for "Food as Commons" policies. In my view, Frankie's analysis is tied deeply to a fundamental critique of privatization generally and the notion of food as a commodity rather than a commons. With Respect- Jodi Koberinski 2015 Oak Fellow for Human Rights ************************************** On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Great Transition Network wrote: >From Guy Dauncey ----- Dear GTN Colleagues, Thanks for this. It was easy to read Frances’ work, and my response is as if I have been invaded by a bunch of ticks - tick, tick, tick, tick, tick. >From my perspective, Frances, you are 100% on the right track, and I agree with every word you have written. And you even got methane's GWP right, at 34! Some top science journalists are still using the wrong, old numbers. So my congratulations. The most urgent question in my mind therefore becomes, how? You mention focusing far more than 1% of global agricultural research on organic farming, which is clearly needed. And in your last paragraph, you emphasize the need for democratic governance, which is also clearly needed. But many countries already have good democratic governance, without undue corporate corruption—I sympathize with GTN members living in America, which is a temporarily failed and corrupted democracy. So just as progressive states can be laboratories of change in the US, so can progressive countries, globally. If more key countries such as Sweden, Denmark (aiming at 100% organic “as soon as possible”), Bhutan (aiming to be 100% organic by 2020), Ethiopia, Lichtenstein (31% of farmland is organic), and Austria (19.5% organic) could show the world how effective small-scale organic and agro-ecological farming is, it would establish a beach-head into larger countries. (See www.fibl.org/en/themes/organic-farming-statistics.html for statistics) In my book Journey to the Future: A Better World is Possible ( www.journeytothefuture.ca) set in the year 2032, there's a dialogue between a nurse and my visitor to the future, in which she explains how all farming in Canada came to be organic. There are several chapters devoted to food and farming, but this is a relevant contribution for GTN, since it shows a way to make the switch: **** “How much of it’s organic?” All of it. All food grown in Canada is organic these days. It’s not all five-star, but three or four-star is still pretty good.” I was really surprised. Back in my time, only two percent of Canada’s farms were organic. “What made all the farmers go organic?” I asked. “And what’s the five-star system?” “Five-star means that as well as using no chemicals, the farmers build their soil, treat their farm animals with kindness, pay fair wages and take care of their wildlife. They get a star for each if they meet the requirements.” “That’s impressive.” “As to why the farmers went organic, it all happened quite quickly. Soon after the OMEGA Days the government commissioned a study to investigate the full cost of conventional farming. They looked at everything from farming’s climate impact to the loss of habitat and species, herbicide-resistant super-weeds, nitrogen pollution from fertilizers getting into the water, soil erosion, the impact on bees, the abuse of antibiotics, and negative health impacts caused by the use of pesticides and fertilizers, and the loss of essential nutrients from the soil. That includes cancer and dementia, which had been linked to the use of pesticides and nitrogen fertilizers. Maybe autism, too. Pre-natal exposure to pesticides was also contributing to ADHD, and to a fall in children’s IQ. A crop like celery was being sprayed with as many as sixty-seven different pesticides. Can you believe it? When the government saw the full social, environmental and healthcare impact they brought in a tax on pesticides and fertilizers, to recover the costs.” “Just like that? Didn’t the farmers protest?” “Oh, for sure. There was a lot of complaining. But there were many benefits to going organic. It eliminated the cost of fertilizers and pesticides, and when the farmers realized that they could save money and get better yields it became a no-brainer. Conventional yields had been falling anyway due to pesticide resistance and the spread of herbicide-resistant weeds, especially with the genetically modified crops, so the farmers didn’t need much persuading. The government gave the money back to the farmers to subsidize their transition to organic, and the rest is history.” best wishes, Guy Dauncey FRSA Author, Speaker, Futurist www.earthfuture.com Author of Journey to the Future: A Better World is Possible Author of The Climate Challenge: 101 Solutions to Global Warming Founder of the BC Sustainable Energy Association ************************************** Monday, February 29, 2016 >From Paul Raskin ----- GTN Colleagues: The MARCH DISCUSSION will focus on a key dimension of transition: the future of agriculture. I am pleased to kick it off by sharing with you Frances Moore Lappé’s GTI essay, “Farming for a Small Planet: Agroecology Now.” Please access it at www.greattransition.org/publication/farming-for-a-small-planet. Frankie’s best-selling “Diet for a Small Planet,” first published in 1971, mapped the way to better eating; her new essay points to a better way of farming. The essay sharply critiques the system design and dire consequences of industrial agriculture, and finds hope in the alternative agroecological model now gaining traction. This debate about farming systems defines a critical field of struggle for the larger Great Transition movement. The essay touches on many key questions: Is the industrial model doomed? Can ecological farming meet the nutrition needs of a large and growing world population? What’s the scope for change within the reigning political economy? What are the implications for development in poor countries? Let’s extend our winning streak of rich, animated discussions! If you work in this neck of the woods, please draw from your experience to comment on the essay and the issues it raises. The rest of us will have questions to ask and connections to make. Remember, both expansive and brief comments are appreciated. Comments are welcome through MARCH 31. Frankie’s essay and selected comments will be published in April, along with an interview with Wes Jackson and a review by Randy Hayes, both long-time leaders of the effort to forge a society in harmony with the land. Looking forward, Paul Raskin GTI Director GTI’S PUBLICATION CYCLE: ODD-NUMBERED months are for discussions of new essays or viewpoints for GTN eyes only. EVEN-NUMBERED months are for publication and distribution of the piece. You will receive discussion comments by email. You can also access them on-line at www.greattransition.org/forum/gti-forum, where you will find, as well, an archive of previous discussions. ----- Hit reply to post a message Or see thread and reply online at www.greattransition.org/forum/gti-discussions/173-farming-for-a-small-plane… Need help? Email jcohn(a)tellus.org ----- Hit reply to post a message Or see thread and reply online at www.greattransition.org/forum/gti-discussions/173-farming-for-a-small-plane… Need help? Email jcohn(a)tellus.org -- Dr Sujata Dutta HazarikaDeputy DirectorIndira Gandhi National Open University.IGNOUGuwahati ------------------------------------------------------- Hit reply to post a message Or see thread and reply online at http://www.greattransition.org/forum/gti-discussions/173-farming-for-a-smal… Need help? Email jcohn(a)tellus.org -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0