Emerging Ownership Revolution: Difference between revisions

From P2P Foundation
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 20: Line 20:


Read a 30-page excerpt of the book, including the Foreword by David Korten, Prologue, and first chapter, via  http://www.bkconnection.com/static/Owning_Our_Future_EXCERPT.pdf
Read a 30-page excerpt of the book, including the Foreword by David Korten, Prologue, and first chapter, via  http://www.bkconnection.com/static/Owning_Our_Future_EXCERPT.pdf
==Foreword==
David Korten:
"Of all the important elements lacking from much progressive thought and
action, the issue of ownership design is perhaps the most foundational.
Marjorie Kelly illuminates this crucial topic in a way that can drive it home
to everyone. Owning Our Future offers the most thorough and properly
nuanced treatment of the subject I’ve seen anywhere.
Most of the great political struggles of the past 5,000 years can be
reduced to a simple question: who will own land, water, and the other
essentials of living—and to what end? In the earliest human societies, ownership
of the essentials of living was held in common by members of a tribe
and included responsibilities of sacred stewardship. We might describe this
as a form of shared ownership that confers shared responsibility.
As societies transitioned to centralized power structures, ownership of
land, water, and other essential means of production was monopolized by
the few. Even with the movement toward democracy, ownership of wealth
has remained largely in the hands of an elite. Today, debilitating debt,
bankruptcies, and foreclosures are a reminder of how little has changed
and how many among us—including young people burdened by student
loans—live under the power of those who control the issuance of credit.
Behind the workings of our economy lies an invisible issue that few of
us focus on—the issue of ownership. During my years working in Africa,
Asia, and Latin America, I came to realize that what we call “development”
is in fact a process of transferring control over the basic resources essential
to daily life from the people who depend on them to foreign corporations,
whose primary interest is fi nancial gain. Ownership of corporations is, in
large part, in the hands of the wealthiest 10 percent.
Our well-being, indeed our future as a species, depends on restoring
our relationships to one another and with the land, the water, the sky, and
the other generative resources of nature that indigenous people tradition
ally considered it their obligation to hold and manage in sacred trust. The
architecture of ownership is key.
The defi ning debates of the 20th century were crudely framed as a
choice between two simplistically defi ned economic models: private
ownership (capitalism) and public ownership (socialism/communism).
Neither capitalism nor socialism ever achieved its ideal, but each came suffi
ciently close to reveal that both failed. Both support a concentration of
the power of ownership in the hands of an oligarchy.
In Owning Our Future, Marjorie shows that a new model of ownership
is arising and spreading in our time, which she calls generative ownership.
It’s most often private ownership, but with a purpose of serving the common
good. Generative ownership models include cooperatives, employeeowned
fi rms, community land trusts, community banks, credit unions,
foundation-owned companies, and many other models that root control
in the hands of people who have a natural interest in the health of their
communities and local ecosystems. These are in contrast to the dominant
ownership models of capitalism, which Marjorie calls extractive.
She offers a simple pattern language to describe what makes these
two different models of ownership work. Extractive ownership features
Absentee Membership and the rapid speculative trading of Casino
Finance, built around the purpose of maximizing the extraction of fi nancial
wealth. This creates a disconnect between the common good and the
global banks, corporations, and fi nancial markets that control the means
of living. Extractive ownership is at the root of most of the social and ecological
ills we face today.
In Marjorie’s prophetic words: “Ownership is the gravitational fi eld
that holds our economy in its orbit, locking us all into behaviors that lead
to fi nancial excess and ecological overshoot.”
Generative ownership, by contrast, has the purpose of creating the
conditions for the fl ourishing of life. It features Rooted Membership, in
the living hands of employees, families, communities, and others connected
to the real economy of jobs and homes and human life. It features
Mission-Controlled Governance that keeps fi rms focused on social mission,
Stakeholder Finance that allows capital to be a friend, and Ethical
Networks that provide collective support for social and ecological
norms. Most of these enterprises are profi t making, but they’re not profi t
maximizing.
Since her groundbreaking book The Divine Right of Capital, Marjorie
has focused her attention as a writer on how to resolve the foundational
issue of ownership, and in Owning Our Future, she shares the story of her
personal journey of discovery. The book is written as a travelogue, with
detailed accounts of her visits to each of the major initiatives she profi les.
Marjorie combines the perspective of a tenacious reporter, the writing
skills of an accomplished novelist, and the open and inquiring mind of
a thoughtful and critical economic theorist. Her central theme is that the
architecture of ownership defi nes the business purpose of the enterprise
and largely determines whether it will operate in a generative or extractive
mode. It is the design of ownership that creates the essential framework for
the capitalist economy that is beginning to break down—and for a potentially
new generative economy we can bring into being.
This is one of the most important books of our time. I found it so
informative and inspiring that reading it literally brought tears of joy to
my eyes. It gets my very highest recommendation."
==Prologue==
"In a way that many of
us rarely notice, ownership is the underlying architecture of our economy.
It’s the foundation of our world. How ownership is framed is more basic
to our daily lives than the shape of democracy. Economic relations defi ne
the tenor of our days: where we work for 40 hours (or more) each week
or whether we work at all. How owners wield their power over companies
determines whether we’re empowered or belittled by our work, how much
anxiety we suffer over our debts, whether we’re able to own a home or
be secure in retirement. Questions about who owns the wealth-producing
infrastructure of an economy, who controls it, whose interests it serves, are
among the largest issues any society can face. Issues of who owns the sky in
terms of carbon emission rights, who owns water, who owns development
rights, are planetary in scope.
The multiplying crises we face today are entwined at their root with
the particular form of ownership that dominates our world—the publicly
traded corporation, in which ownership shares trade in public stock
markets. The revenue of the largest 1,000 of these corporations represents
roughly 80 percent of global industrial output.6 Stripped of regulatory
overlay, the design of these corporations is the bare design of capitalism.
As a way of organizing an economy, this model made a certain amount
of sense when the industrial age was unfolding. The modern age might
not have come to be, without the emergence of corporations and capital
markets. But as we make the painful turn into a new era—characterized
by climate change, water shortages, species extinction, vast unemployment,
stagnant wages, staggering differentials in wealth, and bloated debt loads—
the industrial-age model of ownership is beginning to make less sense.
Getting our arms around this large issue can seem diffi cult. Unable to even
approach it, politicians instead fi xate on how to jumpstart the economy and
get growth moving again. But it’s time to move beyond growth, to recognize
that the economy as we once knew it will never return. Nor should it.
As the dominant form of ownership continues to spin off crisis after
crisis in our time, alternative forms are at the same time emerging in
largely unsung, disconnected experiments all over the world. We’re at the
beginning of an unseen ownership revolution. In this book, I visit places
where this hopeful future is welling up like cold springs. It’s a journey into
the territory of the possible, a kind of advance scouting expedition for the
collective journey of our global culture.
It’s a book about deep change. It’s about hope. It’s about the real possibility
that a fundamentally new kind of economy can be built, that this
work is further along than we suppose, and that it goes deeper than we
would dare to dream. It’s about economic change that is fundamental and
enduring: not greenwash or all the other false hopes fl ung in our faces for
too long. The experiments I’m talking about are not silver bullets that will
solve all our problems. They have fl aws and limitations. But they nonetheless
represent change that is fundamental and enduring because it involves
ownership. That is to say, what’s at work is not the legislative or presidential
whims of a particular hour, but a permanent shift in the underlying
architecture of economic power.
...
New models are emerging today, not from the head of some new Adam
Smith or Karl Marx but from the longing in many hearts, the genius of
many minds, the effort of many hands to build what we know instinctively
that we need.
In both the United States and the United Kingdom, there’s burgeoning
interest in social enterprises, which serve a primary social mission while they
function as businesses—like Greyston Bakery in Yonkers, New York, an $8
million profi t-making business started by Zen monks with an aim of creating
jobs for the homeless.10 Community development fi nancial institutions
(CDFIs)—which in the United States provide fi nancial services to under
served low-wealth communities—are growing by leaps and bounds. In
little over a decade, assets have climbed from $5 billion to $42 billion, with
new funds coming from depositors, investors, and government grants.
Emerging experiments with catch shares, ownership rights in marine
fi sheries, have been found to halt or reverse catastrophic declines in fi sh
stocks.12 Conservation easements now cover tens of millions of acres,
allowing land to be used and farmed even as it’s protected from development,
preserving it for future generations both human and wild.13
There’s a growing movement to protect the commons, honoring areas
of our common life that need shielding from market forces. And there’s
the viral world of entities like Wikipedia, owned by no one and run
collectively.
Revolutionary lawyers are busy crafting new models through law—like
the community interest corporation, created in UK law.14 And the low-profi t,
limited liability company (L3C) in the United States, intended to facilitate
more social investments by foundations. In the space of only a few years,
this model has been enacted or come under consideration by nearly 20
states.15 And there’s the notable success of the Bank of North Dakota, the
only state-owned bank in the United States, which in the initial fi nancial
crisis enjoyed record profi ts even as private-sector banks lost billions. Its
unexpected resilience has led some 14 states to begin considering legislation
to create their own banks.16 (State banks are not privately owned,
but they do represent alternative ownership focused on the common good
rather than on maximizing profits.)
In Quebec and Latin America, among other places, there’s a growing
movement for the solidarity economy—consisting of cooperatives and nonprofi
ts—which in Quebec has gained formal recognition and government
funding as a distinct sector of the economy.17 And a surprising number of
large corporations have adopted mission-controlled designs. Among these
are the foundation-owned corporations common throughout northern
Europe, such as Novo Nordisk, a Danish pharmaceutical company with
$11 billion in revenue, as well as Ikea, Bertelsmann, and other large companies.
Also included in mission-controlled designs are family-controlled
companies with a strong social mission, such as S. C. Johnson and the New
York Times.
More exotic designs are also popping up, like Grameen Danone, a
social business in which village women in Bangladesh sell yogurt through
a joint venture between multinational yogurt maker Groupe Danone and
Grameen Bank, the fi rst microfinance lender. The enterprise is designed to
improve the nutrition of the poor as it aims to pay investors a modest, 1
percent dividend.
Two pioneers in the field of emerging economic architectures have
received Nobel prizes—Muhammad Yunus, who founded Grameen Bank
and helped create Grameen Danone, and Elinor Ostrom of Indiana University,
who studies economic governance of the commons. She and her colleagues
have found communities all over the world that have spontaneously devised
effective ways to govern fi sh stocks, pastures, forests, lakes, and groundwater
basins in ways that preserve rather than harm those ecosystems.
Emerging ownership models are new members of an older family
of designs that include cooperatives, employee-owned firms, and government-
sponsored enterprises. In the UK, these include the John Lewis
Partnership—the largest department store chain in the country—which is
100 percent owned by its employees and has an employee house of representatives
in addition to a traditional board of directors.
As a class, these alternatives represent an emerging family of design.
If industrial-age ownership is based on a monoculture model, emerging
designs are as rich in biodiversity as a rainforest. Through studying these,
grafting pieces of them together to create still more models, we just might
create the greenhouse of design experimentation where the future of our
economy could be grown.
These social architectures are harbingers of something profoundly
new. They aren’t yet fully formed, not yet ready to serve as the framework
of a new social order. But their growing profusion is a signal. It tells us that
we’re entering one of the most creative periods of economic innovation
since the Industrial Revolution. For what’s at work isn’t economic innovation
as it’s usually meant, which is about better and better ways to make
more and more money. This innovation is almost unimaginably more
profound. It is a reinvention at the level of organizational purpose and
structure. It is about creating economic architectures that are self-organized
around serving the needs of life."
==The Patterns of Life==
"Extractive ownership has a Financial Purpose: maximizing profi ts.
Generative ownership has a Living Purpose: creating the conditions for
life. While corporations today have Absentee Membership, with owners
disconnected from the life of enterprise, generative ownership has Rooted
Membership, with ownership held in human hands. While extractive ownership
involves Governance by Markets, with control by capital markets on
autopilot, generative designs have Mission-Controlled Governance, with
control by those focused on social mission. While extractive investments
involve Casino Finance, alternative approaches involve Stakeholder Finance,
where capital becomes a friend rather than a master. Instead of Commodity
Networks, where goods are traded based solely on price, generative economic
relations are supported by Ethical Networks, which offer collective
support for social and ecological norms. Not every ownership model has
every one of these design patterns. But the more generative patterns are
employed, the more effective the design.
In key ways, this book is a continuation of my previous one, The
Divine Right of Capital. That book looked at the myths upholding the
rights of capital, particularly the myth that wealth holders have needs
that come before everyone else’s needs. It also explored principles of economic
democracy. In the decade since it was published, the ownership
structures of our economy—the intertwined institutions of corporations
and capital markets, and the perpetual growth and rising profi ts they
require—have contributed to unprecedented new crises, such as climate
change. It no longer seems suffi cient to speak of economic democracy as
the solution.
A more appropriate frame of reference may be the living system of the
planet. The ultimate patterns that all systems must employ are living patterns—
the patterns of organization that nature has evolved to support life.
Systems thinking, which arose in physics and is spreading to other disciplines,
offers a robust language for speaking about living patterns and processes.
It’s a language that applies equally to biological systems and social
systems. Through systems thinking, we can see that the task of redesigning
ownership is part of the larger task of bringing human civilization into
harmony with the earth.
We know the next economy will require things like wind turbines,
limits on carbon emissions, and sustainably managed forests. The questions
that remain largely unanswered are about who will own these, who
will control them, and who will fl ourish in the world they create. We need
innovation not only in physical technologies but also in social architectures.
30 If physical technologies are about the what of the economy, social
architectures are about the who: who will make economic decisions, and
how, using what kinds of organizing structures? Social architectures are
the blueprints of human relations, how we organize ourselves to do things.
Will we continue to rely on economic architectures organized around
growth and maximum income for the few? Or can we shift to new architectures
organized around keeping this planet and all its inhabitants thriving?
This book is a quest for answers.





Revision as of 10:19, 30 June 2012

* Book: Majorie Kelly. Owning Our Future: The Emerging Ownership Revolution. Journeys to a Generative Economy. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2012

URL = http://www.OwningOurFuture.com

"ownership design is the most foundational" (David Korten)

Description

"As long as businesses are set up to focus exclusively on maximizing financial income for the few, our economy will be locked into endless growth and widening inequality. But now people across the world are experimenting with new forms of ownership, which Kelly calls generative: aimed at creating the conditions for all of life to thrive for many generations to come. These designs may hold the key to the deep transformation our civilization needs.

To understand these emerging alternatives, Kelly reports from across the globe, visiting a community-owned wind facility in Massachusetts, a lobster cooperative in Maine, a multibillion-dollar employee-owned department-store chain in London, a foundation-owned pharmaceutical in Denmark, a farmer-owned dairy in Wisconsin, and other places where a hopeful new economy is being built. Along the way, she finds the five essential patterns of ownership design that make these models work.

As financial and ecological crises multiply and linger in our time, many people remain grim adherents of the TINA school of thought: There Is No Alternative to capitalism as we know it. Yet emerging alternative designs show that there is a real and workable alternative, which goes beyond the dusty 19th century categories of capitalism vs. socialism. It’s “yet to be recognized as a single phenomenon because it has yet to have a single name,” Kelly writes. “We might try calling this a family of generative ownership designs. Together they form the foundation for a generative economy” – an economy whose fundamental architecture tends to create beneficial rather than harmful outcomes. A living economy that has a built-in tendency to be socially fair and ecologically sustainable.

Kelly writes: “This is a book about deep change. It’s about hope. It’s about the real possibility that a fundamentally new kind of economy can be built, that this work is further along than we suppose, and that it does deeper than we would dare to dream. It’s about economic change that is fundamental and enduring: not greenwash or all the other false hopes flung in our faces for too long. The experiments I’m talking about are not silver bullets that will solve all our problems. They have flaws and limitations. But they nonetheless represent change that is fundamental and enduring because it involves ownership. That is to say, what’s at work is not the legislative or presidential whims of a particular hour, but a permanent shift in the underlying architecture of economic power.” (http://www.marjoriekelly.com/wordpress/?page_id=712)


Excerpts

Read a 30-page excerpt of the book, including the Foreword by David Korten, Prologue, and first chapter, via http://www.bkconnection.com/static/Owning_Our_Future_EXCERPT.pdf


Foreword

David Korten:

"Of all the important elements lacking from much progressive thought and action, the issue of ownership design is perhaps the most foundational. Marjorie Kelly illuminates this crucial topic in a way that can drive it home to everyone. Owning Our Future offers the most thorough and properly nuanced treatment of the subject I’ve seen anywhere.

Most of the great political struggles of the past 5,000 years can be reduced to a simple question: who will own land, water, and the other essentials of living—and to what end? In the earliest human societies, ownership of the essentials of living was held in common by members of a tribe and included responsibilities of sacred stewardship. We might describe this as a form of shared ownership that confers shared responsibility. As societies transitioned to centralized power structures, ownership of land, water, and other essential means of production was monopolized by the few. Even with the movement toward democracy, ownership of wealth has remained largely in the hands of an elite. Today, debilitating debt, bankruptcies, and foreclosures are a reminder of how little has changed and how many among us—including young people burdened by student loans—live under the power of those who control the issuance of credit.

Behind the workings of our economy lies an invisible issue that few of us focus on—the issue of ownership. During my years working in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, I came to realize that what we call “development” is in fact a process of transferring control over the basic resources essential to daily life from the people who depend on them to foreign corporations, whose primary interest is fi nancial gain. Ownership of corporations is, in large part, in the hands of the wealthiest 10 percent.

Our well-being, indeed our future as a species, depends on restoring our relationships to one another and with the land, the water, the sky, and the other generative resources of nature that indigenous people tradition ally considered it their obligation to hold and manage in sacred trust. The architecture of ownership is key.

The defi ning debates of the 20th century were crudely framed as a choice between two simplistically defi ned economic models: private ownership (capitalism) and public ownership (socialism/communism). Neither capitalism nor socialism ever achieved its ideal, but each came suffi ciently close to reveal that both failed. Both support a concentration of the power of ownership in the hands of an oligarchy. In Owning Our Future, Marjorie shows that a new model of ownership is arising and spreading in our time, which she calls generative ownership.

It’s most often private ownership, but with a purpose of serving the common good. Generative ownership models include cooperatives, employeeowned fi rms, community land trusts, community banks, credit unions, foundation-owned companies, and many other models that root control in the hands of people who have a natural interest in the health of their communities and local ecosystems. These are in contrast to the dominant ownership models of capitalism, which Marjorie calls extractive. She offers a simple pattern language to describe what makes these two different models of ownership work. Extractive ownership features Absentee Membership and the rapid speculative trading of Casino Finance, built around the purpose of maximizing the extraction of fi nancial wealth. This creates a disconnect between the common good and the global banks, corporations, and fi nancial markets that control the means of living. Extractive ownership is at the root of most of the social and ecological ills we face today.

In Marjorie’s prophetic words: “Ownership is the gravitational fi eld that holds our economy in its orbit, locking us all into behaviors that lead to fi nancial excess and ecological overshoot.”

Generative ownership, by contrast, has the purpose of creating the conditions for the fl ourishing of life. It features Rooted Membership, in the living hands of employees, families, communities, and others connected to the real economy of jobs and homes and human life. It features Mission-Controlled Governance that keeps fi rms focused on social mission, Stakeholder Finance that allows capital to be a friend, and Ethical Networks that provide collective support for social and ecological norms. Most of these enterprises are profi t making, but they’re not profi t maximizing.

Since her groundbreaking book The Divine Right of Capital, Marjorie has focused her attention as a writer on how to resolve the foundational issue of ownership, and in Owning Our Future, she shares the story of her personal journey of discovery. The book is written as a travelogue, with detailed accounts of her visits to each of the major initiatives she profi les. Marjorie combines the perspective of a tenacious reporter, the writing skills of an accomplished novelist, and the open and inquiring mind of a thoughtful and critical economic theorist. Her central theme is that the architecture of ownership defi nes the business purpose of the enterprise and largely determines whether it will operate in a generative or extractive mode. It is the design of ownership that creates the essential framework for the capitalist economy that is beginning to break down—and for a potentially new generative economy we can bring into being.

This is one of the most important books of our time. I found it so informative and inspiring that reading it literally brought tears of joy to my eyes. It gets my very highest recommendation."


Prologue

"In a way that many of us rarely notice, ownership is the underlying architecture of our economy. It’s the foundation of our world. How ownership is framed is more basic to our daily lives than the shape of democracy. Economic relations defi ne the tenor of our days: where we work for 40 hours (or more) each week or whether we work at all. How owners wield their power over companies determines whether we’re empowered or belittled by our work, how much anxiety we suffer over our debts, whether we’re able to own a home or be secure in retirement. Questions about who owns the wealth-producing infrastructure of an economy, who controls it, whose interests it serves, are among the largest issues any society can face. Issues of who owns the sky in terms of carbon emission rights, who owns water, who owns development rights, are planetary in scope.

The multiplying crises we face today are entwined at their root with the particular form of ownership that dominates our world—the publicly traded corporation, in which ownership shares trade in public stock markets. The revenue of the largest 1,000 of these corporations represents roughly 80 percent of global industrial output.6 Stripped of regulatory overlay, the design of these corporations is the bare design of capitalism.

As a way of organizing an economy, this model made a certain amount of sense when the industrial age was unfolding. The modern age might not have come to be, without the emergence of corporations and capital markets. But as we make the painful turn into a new era—characterized by climate change, water shortages, species extinction, vast unemployment, stagnant wages, staggering differentials in wealth, and bloated debt loads— the industrial-age model of ownership is beginning to make less sense.

Getting our arms around this large issue can seem diffi cult. Unable to even approach it, politicians instead fi xate on how to jumpstart the economy and get growth moving again. But it’s time to move beyond growth, to recognize that the economy as we once knew it will never return. Nor should it.

As the dominant form of ownership continues to spin off crisis after crisis in our time, alternative forms are at the same time emerging in largely unsung, disconnected experiments all over the world. We’re at the beginning of an unseen ownership revolution. In this book, I visit places where this hopeful future is welling up like cold springs. It’s a journey into the territory of the possible, a kind of advance scouting expedition for the collective journey of our global culture.

It’s a book about deep change. It’s about hope. It’s about the real possibility that a fundamentally new kind of economy can be built, that this work is further along than we suppose, and that it goes deeper than we would dare to dream. It’s about economic change that is fundamental and enduring: not greenwash or all the other false hopes fl ung in our faces for too long. The experiments I’m talking about are not silver bullets that will solve all our problems. They have fl aws and limitations. But they nonetheless represent change that is fundamental and enduring because it involves ownership. That is to say, what’s at work is not the legislative or presidential whims of a particular hour, but a permanent shift in the underlying architecture of economic power.

...

New models are emerging today, not from the head of some new Adam Smith or Karl Marx but from the longing in many hearts, the genius of many minds, the effort of many hands to build what we know instinctively that we need.

In both the United States and the United Kingdom, there’s burgeoning interest in social enterprises, which serve a primary social mission while they function as businesses—like Greyston Bakery in Yonkers, New York, an $8 million profi t-making business started by Zen monks with an aim of creating jobs for the homeless.10 Community development fi nancial institutions (CDFIs)—which in the United States provide fi nancial services to under served low-wealth communities—are growing by leaps and bounds. In little over a decade, assets have climbed from $5 billion to $42 billion, with new funds coming from depositors, investors, and government grants.

Emerging experiments with catch shares, ownership rights in marine fi sheries, have been found to halt or reverse catastrophic declines in fi sh stocks.12 Conservation easements now cover tens of millions of acres, allowing land to be used and farmed even as it’s protected from development, preserving it for future generations both human and wild.13 There’s a growing movement to protect the commons, honoring areas of our common life that need shielding from market forces. And there’s the viral world of entities like Wikipedia, owned by no one and run collectively.

Revolutionary lawyers are busy crafting new models through law—like the community interest corporation, created in UK law.14 And the low-profi t, limited liability company (L3C) in the United States, intended to facilitate more social investments by foundations. In the space of only a few years, this model has been enacted or come under consideration by nearly 20 states.15 And there’s the notable success of the Bank of North Dakota, the only state-owned bank in the United States, which in the initial fi nancial crisis enjoyed record profi ts even as private-sector banks lost billions. Its unexpected resilience has led some 14 states to begin considering legislation to create their own banks.16 (State banks are not privately owned, but they do represent alternative ownership focused on the common good rather than on maximizing profits.)

In Quebec and Latin America, among other places, there’s a growing movement for the solidarity economy—consisting of cooperatives and nonprofi ts—which in Quebec has gained formal recognition and government funding as a distinct sector of the economy.17 And a surprising number of large corporations have adopted mission-controlled designs. Among these are the foundation-owned corporations common throughout northern Europe, such as Novo Nordisk, a Danish pharmaceutical company with $11 billion in revenue, as well as Ikea, Bertelsmann, and other large companies. Also included in mission-controlled designs are family-controlled companies with a strong social mission, such as S. C. Johnson and the New York Times.

More exotic designs are also popping up, like Grameen Danone, a social business in which village women in Bangladesh sell yogurt through a joint venture between multinational yogurt maker Groupe Danone and Grameen Bank, the fi rst microfinance lender. The enterprise is designed to improve the nutrition of the poor as it aims to pay investors a modest, 1 percent dividend.

Two pioneers in the field of emerging economic architectures have received Nobel prizes—Muhammad Yunus, who founded Grameen Bank and helped create Grameen Danone, and Elinor Ostrom of Indiana University, who studies economic governance of the commons. She and her colleagues have found communities all over the world that have spontaneously devised effective ways to govern fi sh stocks, pastures, forests, lakes, and groundwater basins in ways that preserve rather than harm those ecosystems.

Emerging ownership models are new members of an older family of designs that include cooperatives, employee-owned firms, and government- sponsored enterprises. In the UK, these include the John Lewis Partnership—the largest department store chain in the country—which is 100 percent owned by its employees and has an employee house of representatives in addition to a traditional board of directors.

As a class, these alternatives represent an emerging family of design. If industrial-age ownership is based on a monoculture model, emerging designs are as rich in biodiversity as a rainforest. Through studying these, grafting pieces of them together to create still more models, we just might create the greenhouse of design experimentation where the future of our economy could be grown.

These social architectures are harbingers of something profoundly new. They aren’t yet fully formed, not yet ready to serve as the framework of a new social order. But their growing profusion is a signal. It tells us that we’re entering one of the most creative periods of economic innovation since the Industrial Revolution. For what’s at work isn’t economic innovation as it’s usually meant, which is about better and better ways to make more and more money. This innovation is almost unimaginably more profound. It is a reinvention at the level of organizational purpose and structure. It is about creating economic architectures that are self-organized around serving the needs of life."


The Patterns of Life

"Extractive ownership has a Financial Purpose: maximizing profi ts. Generative ownership has a Living Purpose: creating the conditions for life. While corporations today have Absentee Membership, with owners disconnected from the life of enterprise, generative ownership has Rooted Membership, with ownership held in human hands. While extractive ownership involves Governance by Markets, with control by capital markets on autopilot, generative designs have Mission-Controlled Governance, with control by those focused on social mission. While extractive investments involve Casino Finance, alternative approaches involve Stakeholder Finance, where capital becomes a friend rather than a master. Instead of Commodity Networks, where goods are traded based solely on price, generative economic relations are supported by Ethical Networks, which offer collective support for social and ecological norms. Not every ownership model has every one of these design patterns. But the more generative patterns are employed, the more effective the design.

In key ways, this book is a continuation of my previous one, The Divine Right of Capital. That book looked at the myths upholding the rights of capital, particularly the myth that wealth holders have needs that come before everyone else’s needs. It also explored principles of economic democracy. In the decade since it was published, the ownership structures of our economy—the intertwined institutions of corporations and capital markets, and the perpetual growth and rising profi ts they require—have contributed to unprecedented new crises, such as climate change. It no longer seems suffi cient to speak of economic democracy as the solution.

A more appropriate frame of reference may be the living system of the planet. The ultimate patterns that all systems must employ are living patterns— the patterns of organization that nature has evolved to support life. Systems thinking, which arose in physics and is spreading to other disciplines, offers a robust language for speaking about living patterns and processes. It’s a language that applies equally to biological systems and social systems. Through systems thinking, we can see that the task of redesigning ownership is part of the larger task of bringing human civilization into harmony with the earth.

We know the next economy will require things like wind turbines, limits on carbon emissions, and sustainably managed forests. The questions that remain largely unanswered are about who will own these, who will control them, and who will fl ourish in the world they create. We need innovation not only in physical technologies but also in social architectures. 30 If physical technologies are about the what of the economy, social architectures are about the who: who will make economic decisions, and how, using what kinds of organizing structures? Social architectures are the blueprints of human relations, how we organize ourselves to do things. Will we continue to rely on economic architectures organized around growth and maximum income for the few? Or can we shift to new architectures organized around keeping this planet and all its inhabitants thriving? This book is a quest for answers.


Generative vs. Extractive Ownership

"These models embody a coherent school of design a common form of organization that brings the living concerns of the human and ecologi cal communities into the world of property rights and economic power. It’s an emerging archetype yet to be recognized as a single phenomenon because it has yet to have a single name. Hannah Arendt observed that a stray dog has a better chance of surviving if it’s given a name. We might try calling this a family of generative ownership designs. Together they form the foundation for a generative economy.

In their animating intent and living impact, these ownership designs are aimed at generating the conditions where all life can thrive. From the Greek ge, generative uses the same root form found in the term for Earth, Gaia, and in the words genesis and genetics. It connotes life. Generative means the carrying on of life, and generative design is about the insti tutional framework for doing so. The generative economy is one whose fundamental architecture tends to create beneficial rather than harmful outcomes. It’s a living economy that has a builtin tendency to be socially fair and ecologically sustainable.

Generative ownership designs are about generating and preserving real wealth, living wealth, rather than phantom wealth than can evaporate in the next quarter. They’re about helping families to enjoy secure homes. Creating jobs. Preserving a forest. Generating nourishment out of waste. Generating broad wellbeing.

These designs are in contrast to the dominant ownership design of today. To make the distinction clear, that design also needs a name. We might call it extractive, for its focus is maximum physical and financial extraction. Our industrialage civilization has been powered by twin processes of extraction: extracting fossil fuels from the earth and extracting financial wealth from the economy. But these two processes are not paral lel, for finance is the master force. Biophysical damage may often be the effect of the system’s action, yet extracting financial wealth is its aim. As we begin to build what economist E. F. Schumacher called an “economy of permanence” on our fragile planet, maximum financial growth will be illsuited as a guiding purpose. In generative design, we see in practical detail how a different goal can be at the core of economic activity. Generative design shows us that a transformative shift has already begun and suggests how it might be amplified."

More Information