[P2P-F] first draft of: The Evolution of Research at the P2P Foundation

[Michel Bauwens]

(for responses: only use the reply address of the list you belong to,
thanks)

dear all, I have just written a first draft note on how I see the research
focus on the P2P Foundation evolving. Comments are very welcome:

Michel Bauwens:

Is there some kind of emerging logic in the research of the P2P Foundation,
I believe that, with hindsight, there is, and here is my attempt to
summarize these insights of where we have been, where we are, and where we
may be going.

The first phase was an investigation of past historical transitions and the
particular dialectic that we believe we can see between the prefigurative
construction of seed forms, the interconnection of them in subsystems, and
the 'coming to fruition' of the new social norms after major social and
political conflicts. This is roughly a phase I would place in the period
2003-2006, before the creation of our online presence.

In the second phase, we focused on peer to peer dynamics and the creation
of contemporary commons, mostly by observing the 'three-in-one'
institutional dynamics of digital commons and their surrounding economies.
I would say this is roughly the period 2007-2010.

Thus emerged a need for more deep investigation which focused on the
creation of ethical livelihoods and especially the interaction between the
commons and the market; how to avoid extractive relations and create market
forms that are commons-compatible and commons-friendly, which culiminated
in quite specific ideas on commons-market institutional design. Roughly the
period 2010-2014. It was expressed succinctly in our study Value in the
Commons Economy.

2014 was the year of an important pivot in our work as we were asked to
examine the transition of the nation-state of Ecuador towards a social
knowledge economy. Invited by three institutions, we focused on how to
create shared knowledge commons for each domain of social and economic
life, and what the material and immaterial conditions were for their
realization. What we could not do for lack of mandate and means, was
looking at actual material commons. But this is exactly what we did in
Ghent in the spring of 2017, which was a investigation focusing on the very
material urban commons that are growing exponentially in European cities,
and are building alternatives for the allocation of value in nearly all
vital provisioning systems. Our focus both in Ecuador and Ghent has been on
institutional design for public-commons cooperation. This is roughly the
period, 2014-2017.

I think that with the combination of our insights in commons-market and
commons-public institutional design, we have a handle on the emerging forms
of cooperation between these three vital domains of economic, social and
political life, i.e. the civil society of commoners, the ethical
entredonneurial market coalitions, and the enabling and facilitating
partner state.

But note that these material commons allocate already produced resources,
they are not yet making them. So a parallel tracked was developed around
DGML (Design Global, Manufacture Local), also called cosmo-local
production, with the help of our substantial P2P Lab and other researchers
like Jose Ramos in Melbourne. This parallel track on the conditions for
sustainable commons-oriented physical production brings us naturally to our
next phase of research, which is symbolized by our publication, the
Thermo-Dynamic Efficiencies of Peer Production, written by Celine Piques
and Xavier Rizos, which looks at the underlying bio-physical conditions and
capacities. How can the social construct of the political economy of the
commons, know the limits of its resource base, is a key research area for
the next few years, and we are working with experts such as James Quilligan
and Sharon Ede (AUDAcities) to help us progress on that front.

The above description does not exhaust our interests. For example, we have
been struggling quite a bit on the intersection between the commons and the
care economy, and the inherent gender inequality of a dominant system which
doesn't recognize vital care as valued contributions, and therefore how to
imagine solidarity and welfare systems that can cover the risks of all
contributions. For the next three years, I will work with SMart, the fast
growing European cooperative and mutualist labour mutual, which has
developed working solutions for precarious autonomous workers, by creating
salaries with welfare benefits. An important line of investigation for
myself will be looking at the welfare systems of tomorrow, i.e. those that
are no longer tigthly linked to salaried jobs that require the
subordination through labour contracts, but also build rights and benefits
around contributions, this includes life-long learning, engagement with
care, but also contributions to nonprofit activities and the commons. Will
this also include a universal basic income requirement, is one of the
possibilities we need to investigate ...

So imagine three circles representing the three major societal
institutions, but under it, the ecological and social requirements that we
all need to make such a system work. I feel we have a good handle on the
superstructure, but a lot more work needs to be done on these underlying
requirements.

https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Evolution_of_Research_at_the_P2P_Foundation

-- 
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/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20171125/cde84fb8/attachment.html>