Category:P2P Market Approaches

From P2P Foundation
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Introduction

  • Michel Bauwens:
  1. The basic orientation of p2p theory towards societal reform: transforming civil society, the private and the state
  2. To the Finland Station: the political approach of P2P Theory



The P2P Foundation approach to re-embedding markets and making them work for the commons

Michel Bauwens

"First of all, we distinguish markets from capitalism, and we see markets as having both disadvantages and advantages, as have the 3 other main modes of allocation, for example as described in the Structure of World History by Kojin Karatani, and Alan Page Fiske's 'Structure of Social Life'.

We see that different historical periods have different configurations and 'dominations' of one mode above the others .... Capitalism, because of its extractivism and externalities is now hugely problematic, but it is hard to see how to eliminate markets completely without totalitarian coercion.

Thus it makes more sense in our view to focus on 2 interlocking strategies

1) the first is to re-embed markets in reciprocity mechanisms and as supporting the commons, and in fact we see this emerging and discuss this in our manuscript; we believe change does not descend ex nihilo from people who look at the system from outside and describe how they believe the world should work, but from actual praxis, and it is this praxis we examine. And what we see is commons-based productive communities aiming to re-discpline markets to their needs

2) second, we believe the role of the market will likely drastically diminish, on the condition we can export the current coordination mechanisms for immaterial work, which can already largely operate outside the market (free software , open design), to actual physical production, which will require both the development of open and contributory accounting, of other stigmergic mechanisms, but also shared and open supply chains; this will give the material basis of gradually increasing the mutual coordination of production outside of market mechanisms.

While the first is well underway, the second has hardly started, and so, in this transition period, the focus will be in our opinion on expanding the commons, and re-embedding markets under reciprocity mechanims, ie. de-capitalizing the markets if you like, but while this proceeds, the conditions for the second strategy gradually improves."

Characteristics of Alternative Economies

Proposed by Marvin Brown [1]:


  • They are more concrete and local than our current global financial economy.
  • They are more specific about wealth than the abstract measurement of GDP or even the accumulation of assets.
  • They focus more on the provisions of everyday life, such as food, housing, clothing, health, and entertainment instead of stocks and bonds.
  • They rely more on relationships of trust than the self-interest of disconnected individuals.
  • They are more contextual than most traditional economic thought.
  • They include people and the planet in their vision instead of focusing only on profit maximization.
  • They recognize the limits of growth.
  • They elicit the participation of all instead of only property owners.
  • They see themselves as belonging to the earth rather than the earth belonging to them.
  • They are part of the future, if we are to have one.


The 5 T’s of a Regenerative and Distributive Market Mechanisms

Ralph Thurm:

"If rightsholdership functions on a nano level, what would be the corresponding effects in macroeconomics, and how would it help to create System Value? At r3.0 we summarize it as the Five Ts: True Costing, True Benefiting, True Pricing, True Compensation, and True Taxation.


We believe it is the interplay and simultaneous effects of these five fundamental shifts that allow markets to steer in the direction of a System Value Economy.


Here’s how:


  • True Costs cover the actual impacts on nature and humanity, eliminating the perverse “externalization” of negative effects only and “internalization” of positive effects only;
  • True Benefits: balances “depreciation” with “appreciation” of positive effects;
  • True Prices: Price aligns with sustainable impact, with unsustainable products and services rising beyond affordability;
  • True Compensation: Link incentives to sustainable outcomes, including sustainable levels of income and benefits;
  • True Taxes: Levy adverse impacts (resource overuse, pollution) and liberate positive impacts (labor) from taxation."

(https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/big-sustainability-illusion-goodbye-esg-lalaland-hello-ralph-thurm/)


Characteristics of Generative Ownership Forms

from http://www.marjoriekelly.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Kelly-OOF-PR-Final.pdf (visited 2016-12)

THE DESIGN OF ECONOMIC POWER — The Architecture of Ownership

EXTRACTIVE OWNERSHIP GENERATIVE OWNERSHIP
1. Financial Purpose: maximizing profits in the short term 1. Living Purpose: creating the conditions for life over the long term
2. Absentee Membership: ownership disconnected from the life of the enterprise 2. Rooted Membership: ownership in human hands
3. Governance by Markets: control by capital markets on autopilot 3. Mission-Controlled Governance: control by those dedicated to social mission
4. Casino Finance: capital as master 4. Stakeholder Finance: capital as friend
5. Commodity Networks: trading focused solely on price and profits 5. Ethical Networks: collective support for ecological and social norms

Quotes

Chris Smaje: Markets yes, Capitalism no

"It’s often said nowadays that the old divisions between left-wing and right-wing politics are breaking down, which I think is true in many ways. I find class versus state approaches to capitalist development quite helpful in thinking through this reconfiguration.

People drawn to orthodox Brennerite class-based leftism are inclined to protest – too much, in my opinion – about small-scale private property rights, petty commerce, personal economic autonomy and so on, because they regard it as prelude to or generative of capitalism. But this is only likely to be true in situations where these features are being actively coopted by growing, centralized states forging a capitalist world order. The situation we now face is more likely one of state decline, contraction and disintegration – and in those circumstances I would, on the contrary, actively champion opportunities for widespread, accessible, secure, small-scale rural property tenure and petty marketing as critical for the possibilities of a decent life.

There are, alternatively, state-centred thinkers who take a rosy view of the capitalist state’s corporatism and technological prowess, and this usually terminates on both the political left and right in a techno-fixing rearguard commitment to the large-scale corporatist status quo in the face of present challenges – which is why to my eyes the arguments of people like Matt Ridley, Steven Pinker, Mike Shellenberger, Leigh Phillips, Mark Lynas or Nick Srnicek end up looking pretty similar, despite their different self-proclaimed positionings on a left-right axis.

Then there are people who view capitalist development as a largely malign manifestation of centralized state aggrandizement, and seek more convivial and organically local forms of socioeconomic action – a camp in which I find myself. Touchstone concepts for this way of thinking include individual and local self-reliance, autonomy, liberty, rural/small town revival, petty commerce and (primarily) local mutuality. The right-wing or conservative resonances of these concepts are perhaps obvious, but so too should be the left-wing ones – particularly once we abandon the misguided notion that selling wares at local markets or having decision-making autonomy over farm property are somehow intrinsically capitalist, or that notions of “community, magic, craftsmanship, and enchantment” as discussed by Ernie in this interesting comment are intrinsically conservative or ‘reactionary’.

- Chris Smaje [2]


David Graeber on Free Market Populism

"There have, certainly, been times and places when a kind of free market populism has emerged, where markets began operating independently of governments, at least to some degree – Medieval Islam is one famous example, and later, Ming China—but in such cases, they tended to operate in very different ways than the kind of markets we’re now familiar with, less about competition, much more about creating and maintaining relations of interpersonal trust, or for instance, profit-sharing operations instead of interest, etc etc."

- David Graeber [3]


David Graeber on Markets and States

"This is a great trap of the twentieth century: on one side is the logic of the market, where we like to imagine we all start out as individuals who don’t owe each other anything. On the other is the logic of the state, where we all begin with a debt we can never truly pay. We are constantly told that they are opposites, and that between them they contain the only real human possibilities. But it’s a false dichotomy. States created markets. Markets require states. Neither could continue without the other, at least, in anything like the forms we would recognize today." (http://p2pfoundation.net/First_Five_Thousand_Years_of_Debt)


Marvin Brown on why we need Civic Design for Civilizing the Economy

"When people say, ”We have seen the problem and the problem is us,” they deceive themselves. We are not the problem. The problem is one of design. Our current design of how we live together in unjust and unsustainable, and it is still controlled by commercial conversations without any moral foundation. Those who control financial markets are sovereign. If we expand and protect civic conversations we may, in time, participate in the solution—an economy based on civic norms making provisions for this and future generations." (http://www.civilizingtheeconomy.com/2011/12/what-is-a-citizen-and-the-civic/)


Yochai Benkler:: Not all 'markets' are markets!

"One often hear people speaking of 'a market in reputation' .. It is important to note that such statements are metaphors. Markets as actual institutional forms are a particular information process, generating information in a very particular form -- prices. Other modadlities of allowing unorganized individuals to decide on their actions without hierarchical coordination, even if they are fully distributed and automatic in style, but that rely on other institutional forms and social practices, are not 'markets', except metaphorically." (Sharing Nicely, p. 305)

Key Resources

Key Articles

  • Can We Liberate the Market through Commons Governance? By Wouter Tebbens. [4] : "In the Barcelona-based Escola dels Commons we study the commons and right now we are discussing about the market, how current markets work and how they could work, if redefined under commons logic."

Key Books

Pages in category "P2P Market Approaches"

The following 200 pages are in this category, out of 261 total.

(previous page) (next page)
(previous page) (next page)