[p2p-research] Resource Management - Nature, Depth, Collaboration, and Learning

[Alex Rollin]

I was wondering if there are others interested in the discussion about how
the 'nature' of a resource, as Samuel describes below, influences management
of the resource.

A system of resource co-governance needs a way to recognize the nature

of the resource (rival, non-rival, excludable, non-excludable), which

then gives grounding for the logic about how it is tracked/measured.

It's as much a social dilemma as it is a technical problem

I have noticed this design need in several cases, as I am sure others have
as well.  Perhaps it is easy enough to say that

1.  Once a co-governance has the ability to recognize a resource
2.  The resource can be managed appropriately

This comes off as simplistic, though.  First we have issues of the 'nature.'
 Then, how deep are we 'recognizing'?  1000 years, 7 generations, or the
expected durability/lifetime of a (seemingly discrete) product/object?

1.  What is the nature of the resource, and by what standard do you make
this judgement?
2.  How deep are you looking in the management of this resource, insuring
renewal?  What standard?
3.  How can your form of resource co-governance be as appropriate as
possible to the management of the specific resource under examination?
4. How can you learn from other (dis)similar management efforts?


I have had to simplify in so many instances by narrowing my research set by
drawing all sorts of somewhat r boundary conditions.

For example, I am studying the management protocol and legal environment
that empowers a stichting, a Dutch non-profit legal form, to aid the
owner/members of the stichting as co-residents of an apartment building to
care for commons spaces and resource sin the building while maintaining
their collective relationship with the Dutch government and tax authority.

In this set, the groups, or individual stichtings, are 2-5 persons, and have
roughly similar budgets per capita.  Their horizon is roughly similar,
generally, at 5 years or so, during which time they are interested in
getting a good return on their money and maintaining the care of the
buildings commons areas.

While not facile, it is possible to walk through the bulk of the
transactions and interpersonal exchanges required during a business year and
understand what this group does in relation to the outcomes it is seeking.
 It is also possible to generalize this, and even systematize it to a
certain degree.  Indeed, this is even expected if only because the stichting
is a required entity for all co-habitations that have commons areas in
Holland and the Dutch government, in order to minimize costs and increase
(mandatory) compliance works to systematically educate these "maintainers"
of the "enclosed Commons."

In effect, the government has set down a number of responses to the
questions I listed above.

1.  Nature - Co-habitations, 2 or more units in a building or set of
buildings, with (any) common space.
2. Depth - The legal person owners of the buildings/units and their
particular interests.  Annual tax cycle horizon at minimum.
3.  Collaboration/Co-Governance - Default legal composition on file for
stichtings, amended easily.
4.  Learning - Free consulting from the government, classes, and online
information.

In many ways the Dutch government is answering the questions for more and
more collaborative efforts every day, and handing out 'default settings' to
those who wish to apply them.  By forcing mandatory adoption of the vehicle
the populace is getting a crash course (since 2007) in the defaults, if
nothing else.  Far more is possible if you go beyond the defaults of course,
but the defaults will work well for many...or they wouldn't be the defaults.

One of the points in writing today is to ask if others are interested in the
standards, here, and how those standards influence collaboration.  Surely
the habitual training the Dutch government is enforcing, for managing common
areas, is better than... no management.  So, how do we use standards to talk
about the next step?  How are 'classes' of resources a potential source of
information for the next steps?  How can we identify more situations like
this one where a people have been receiving training in 'commons
management'?

Alex
http://alexrollin.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20100405/1e862906/attachment.html>