Roberto Verzola on the Commons-Oriented Economics of Abundance
- Verzola, Robert. Abundance and the Generative Logic of the Commons. Keynote speech for Stream III of the Berlin Commons Conference: “The Generative Logic of the Commons” of the International Conference on the Commons, Berlin, Germany, Oct. 31 - Nov. 2, 2010.
- Verzola, Roberto, Studying Abundance. Available via http://rverzola.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/studying-abundance-1.pdf
- Verzola, Roberto, Undermining Abundance (Counter-Productive Uses of Technology and Law in Nature, Agriculture and the Information Sector)(July 14, 2008). INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS AND ACCESS TO KNOWLEDGE, Gaelle Krikorian and Amy Kapczynski, eds., Zone Books, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1160044
- Verzola, Robert. "Toward Global Knowledge Sharing: Examples from the Philippines" (http://www.scu.edu/sts/nexus/summer2005/VerzolaArticle.cfm)
- Verzola, Robert. 21st-Century Political Economies: Beyond Information Abundance. by Roberto Verzola
- Towards a Political Economy of Information /(Constantino Foundation, Quezon City: 2004) (http://rverzola.wordpress.com/2008/01/26/towards-a-political-economy-of-information-full-text/)
- Roberto Verzola and Stefan Meretz on the Generative Logic of the Commons: two video presentations and a discussion at the International Commons Conference, Berlin, November 1-2, 2010. See part 9-11, via http://www.boell.de/economysocial/economy/economy-commons-10451.html
- Roberto Verzola on Undermining vs. Developing Abundance; Long excerpts from the essay Undermining Abundance
See also: An overview of the most important articles and essays published on the P2P Foundation blog:
Roberto Verzola on Respecting the Nature of the Goods
"Let me go back to a common phrase "working in harmony with nature".
I will now extend it a little bit: "working in harmony with the nature of nature".
I will further modify that as follows: "working in harmony with the nature of things", where "nature" is one of those "things", the other being "non-living material goods", and the third being "non-material goods".
- "working in harmony with the nature of living goods"
- "working in harmony with the nature of non-living material goods"
- "working in harmony with the nature of non-material goods"
- "production methods in harmony with the nature of living goods"
- "production methods in harmony with the nature of non-living materials goods"
- "production methods in harmony with the nature of non-material goods"
- "modes of sharing in harmony with the nature of living goods"
- "modes of sharing in harmony with the nature of non-living materials goods"
- "modes of sharing in harmony with the nature of non-material goods"
- "forms of ownership, control and access in harmony with the nature of living goods"
- "forms of ownership, control and access in harmony with the nature of non-living material goods"
- "forms of ownership, control and access in harmony with the nature of non-material goods"
Because living goods (agriculture) are qualitatively different from non-living material goods (industry), which are in turn different from non-materal goods (information), we can expect differences to show up also in the production methods, modes of sharing, and forms of ownership, control and access.
We ignore these differences at our own risk. Today the most common problem is the misapplication of the industrial paradigm in agriculture (mechanization; the whole agrochemical industry; genetic engineering) as well as its misapplication in the information sector (products of intellectual work as private property). But it may be equally disastrous to misapply policies for non-rivalrous goods to rivalrous goods. I think this was a factor in the collapse of the Eastern bloc." (adapted from Commoning mailing list, January 2011)
Roberto Verzola on the CounterProductive Laws that Induce Artificial Scarcity
“By “counter-productive”, I refer to laws which undermine, suppress or otherwise diminish the production and exchange of goods and services. Sometimes, such laws start off with good intentions. But when some powerful economic interests get disproportionate benefits from such laws, these get expanded, enhanced, or extended far beyond their originally-modest intentions. The “intellectual property” laws discussed in earlier blog entries as well as in several essays in the book Access to Knowledge in the Age of Intellectual Property (Zone Books, 2010) are of this kind. Other counter-productive laws include those that restrict access by low-power community broadcast stations to the radio spectrum and laws that restrict the rights of farmers to commercially-distribute their seeds.
If the vested interests benefitting from them are powerful enough, these laws can become international in scope or get deeply entrenched in constitutional provisions, making it even more difficult to change them.
Developments such as Trade-Related Intellectual Property (TRIPS) Plus, the spread of plant variety protection, the introduction of software and life-form patents, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, and similar efforts indicate that such counter-productive laws continue to get expanded, enhanced and extended. The screws are getting tighter.
The book cited above includes my essay “Undermining Abundance: Counter-Productive Uses of Technology and Law in Nature, Agriculture and the Information Sector” (p.253), which explores further how law as well as technology can be used to undermine potential, incipient or actual abundance in goods and services.
Writing this essay has been life-changing for me. It led me to a deep study of artificial scarcity and the wellsprings of abundance. I saw how most of mainstream economics today sees only half the picture: it has made a very detailed study of scarcity, but has hardly touched on the concept of abundance. I found the subject so compelling that at age 56, after submitting the essay in 2008, I went to graduate school to study economics again. In school, I confirmed what I already knew from my readings: abundance seemed to have no place in mainstream economics, and scarcity remained a fundamental assumption.
Thus, the essay has grown into a thesis: that economics should be the study of scarcity and abundance.
Years from now, I hope, all schools of economics will teach the complete picture, that economies are shaped by the dynamics between scarcity and abundance and that economic development means moving from scarcity towards abundance for all.” (http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/roberto-verzola-on-counter-peerproductive-laws/2011/02/20)