Difference between revisions of "Political Economy of the Commons"

From P2P Foundation
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with " '''* Essay: The Political Economy of the Commons. By Yochai Benkler.''' URL = https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/11363061 [http://www.benkler.org/Upgrade-Novatica%20Commons....")
 
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
 
'''* Essay: The Political Economy of the Commons. By Yochai Benkler.'''  
 
'''* Essay: The Political Economy of the Commons. By Yochai Benkler.'''  
  
Line 41: Line 40:
  
 
     - a open physical layer, with open wireless networks, spectrum commons
 
     - a open physical layer, with open wireless networks, spectrum commons
     - a open logical layer, i.e. preference for oen protocols and open platforms
+
     - a open logical layer, i.e. preference for open protocols and open platforms
 
     - a open content layer, i.e. we must roll back to restrictive IP legislation
 
     - a open content layer, i.e. we must roll back to restrictive IP legislation
  
Line 48: Line 47:
 
[[Category:Commons]]
 
[[Category:Commons]]
 
[[Category:Commons Economics]]
 
[[Category:Commons Economics]]
 +
[[Category:Bauwens Reading Notes Project]]

Latest revision as of 08:39, 1 May 2021

* Essay: The Political Economy of the Commons. By Yochai Benkler.

URL = https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/11363061 pdf


Summary

Michel Bauwens, reading notes 2005:

Benkler defines the Commons as an institutional space free from the constraints of the market, but governed by different constraints, in particular the absence of property.


He distinguishes four types of Commons, according to 2 parameters.

   - open commons vs limited access commons
       - open: air, highway systems, oceans
       - limited: traditional pastures, irrigation systems, subject to common property regimes


   - regulated vs un-regulated
       - non-regulated: intake of air
       - regulated: sidewalks and streets


Elinor Ostrom has most intensely studied the sustainability of the commons, as against the 'tragic' conceptions

Carol Rose makes the claim that resources that have increasing returns to scale on the demand side, like roads, i.e. have positive network externalities, are the most ideal candidate for such commons-based approaches. Commons are also most necessary for innovation, as incumbents try to restrain it.


YB sees 3 layers of conflict:

   - 1. ownership (physical layer)
   - 2. protocols (logical layer)
   - 3. content (IP regime)


Thus what we need to establish is a "Core Commons Infrastructure", consisting of:

   - a open physical layer, with open wireless networks, spectrum commons
   - a open logical layer, i.e. preference for open protocols and open platforms
   - a open content layer, i.e. we must roll back to restrictive IP legislation