[p2p-research] The nature of apple trees (was: Re: [ox-en] apples and moonfruits)

[Stan Rhodes]

I looked at your booklist (thanks for making it, might check some of
them out), and have a few perspectives I would recommend exploring:

1) Elinor Ostrom and related commons researchers.  If Ostrom had
something to do with it, it's probably worth getting.  Seminal work is
Governing the Commons, which covers common-pool resources (rival
goods).  More recently she has also tackled non-rival goods
(information commons).

2) Gene Sharp and associated nonviolence researchers.  His basic
theory of power relates to
monopolizations of power in other realms: all commons.  Monopolizers
of commons rule by explicit or implicit consent, but peer production
can (doesn't always, but can) undermine that power.  For a quick
taste, see http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/bmartin/pubs/89jpr.html
For further material, see http://www.aeinstein.org/

3) Chris Cook. Most of his presentations run with the same idea of
open corporates as a legal form of social enterprise, but the
"approachableness" has been improving:
http://www.feasta-multimedia.org/
http://www.slideshare.net/ChrisJCook

4) Muhammad Yunus' Creating a World Without Poverty.  Particularly,
the story of the company Grameen Danone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_xlYHm_BEs  Evolving social enterprise
is a path to a new socioeconomic form.  Compare and contrast with
Cook, they should be very similar.

5) The Toyota Way, Liker.  Has been a fad in business for about a
decade, but the core of standardization with small-but-rigorous
trial-and-error experimentation is key to better businesses.  This
scientific method approach to business can also catch some of the
biases identified by behavioral economics, leading to potentially
better decision making.

-- Stan

On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 3:18 PM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Stan and Kevin:
>
> All very interesting to me.  Interesting arguments.  I would like to meld
> some of this thinking into the collaborative principles piece I am working
> on, but I am having a tough time boiling down your complex thoughts into
> assertions/ideals.
>
> It is as now more explanatory than actionable.
>
> Any help or pointers on that would be appreciated--even if it is a
> discouragement to the idea of organizational governance.
>
> My own personal action research agenda is trying to futurize evolution of
> the current system assuming increasing p2p framework impact.  That is, I am
> not trying to explain the past or theorize an ideal, but rather trying to
> see how things will evolve.
>
> Ryan
>
> Ryan Lanham
>