Updating the method v 2.0 (Istanbul 2012)
According to Pablo (from hackitectura):
We are a proposing a method to define the commons in five steps:
- To Discuss commons based on Negri & Hardt’s Commonwealth thesis.
- To Select a set of commons.
- To Define a chart of parameters for each common (as here).
- To Produce a 3-5 minutos video to explain each common (as here).
- To Integrate already defined commons on a online mapping platform (as here).
Working notes for a mapping [taxonomy?] of the commons v 1.0 Athens 2010-
According to Osfa (from hackitectura):
“The idea would be to generate a set of issues that would help us understand and orient ourselves within the world of commons, traditional and emerging…
Once identified we could try to translate them into parameters, that we could represent in charts / tables , and that in a next step we can map / visualize in different configurations… For the charts it would be indeed interesting to actually “parametrize” the data, so that they can be represented in a visual intuitive map-like way.
The list is based basically on self-experience and the reading of Yochai Benkler , Hardt and Negri , and several comments on the works of Elinor Ostrom.
As Benkler points out [2005: 406] we could think [or not] of a certain kind of commons that are not generated as such [public creation, not bottom-up] but that actually perform as commons [parks, sidewalks, highways…].
These would bring us to use the following tools:
- spreadsheets / charts
Then again, we probably shouldn’t go for an exhaustive mapping of existing commons, but probably to a selection of representative situations of the diversity and complexity of the socio-economic-cultural emerging panorama and its critical relation to the network society…
The general goal would be to show the power and wealth of commons produced / dependent goods, services, knowledge, environments… and their key relevance to contemporary network society.”