[p2p-research] Fwd: UK...big society small gov't

[Michel Bauwens]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 11:36 AM
Subject: Re: UK...big society small gov't
To: Gordon Cook <cook at cookreport.com>
Cc: Andy Robinson <ldxar1 at gmail.com>


Hi Gordon,

I have been following, but not closely enough, how the UK 'right' is also
taking up p2p approaches, partly inspired by the Red Toryism of Phillip
Blond,

however, as indicated below, people on the left are understandably weary
that this is a front for saving on public expenditures, similar to
outsourcing self-service by businesses ... and this not just from the
statist left but also from the p2p left ...

see for some political background: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens/P2P-Right

(the prehistory of conservative approaches to civil society are here:
http://p2pfoundation.net/Reinventing_Civil_Society )

For a participative/cooperative alternative on the left side of UK politics
(to the 'Big Society' approach), see
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/may/27/lambeth-council-cooperation-consultation


democracy/participation initiatives are followed at
http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Politics and policy via
http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Policy

I'm copying Andy Robinson, who once formulated a critique of the
conservative p2p approaches,

Michel

  On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 9:57 PM, Gordon Cook <cook at cookreport.com> wrote:

> Hi Michel,,
>
> please take a look at this.  It fits i think with p2p.  Tim cowen is the ex
> general counsel of british telecom for 18 years.... he left to to [policy
> work focused in part on wise gov't use of tech.
>
> Note tim's involvement in  http://www.respublica.org.uk/
>
> any one in your community who should be invited to join in?
>
> anything in the p2p wiki relevant?
>
> This could be an important opportunity to spread new ideas in arch econ
>
>
>
>    =============================================================
> The COOK Report on Internet Protocol, (PSTN) 609 882-2572 (Skype-in) 609
> 643-4067
> Back Issues:
> http://www.cookreport.com/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=37&Itemid=61
>
>  Cook's Collaborative Edge Blog http://gordoncook.net/wp/
>  Subscription info:
> http://www.cookreport.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=54&Itemid=65
> =============================================================
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>  *From: *"tim cowen " <tim.cowen at hotmail.com>
> *Date: *June 11, 2010 10:00:37 AM EDT
> *To: *"larry podmore " <larry.podmore at xtra.co.nz>, "Sara Wedeman " <
> sara at behavioraleconomics.net>, "Arch econ " <arch-econ at cookreport.com>
> *Subject: **Re: [Arch-econ] an inquiry from the "list mom"*
> *Reply-To: *Economics of IP Networks <arch-econ at cookreport.com>
>
> The discussion about localisation to the level of municipality and city is
> echoed in some things happening here in the UK. There is a debate going on
> here in the UK about the extent to which the Coalition's "Big Society",
> through which private enterprise is being encouraged to get involved in the
> provision of public services, and increased localisation, requires new
> technology. The idea is that more should be done at a local and community
> level.
>
> The coalition government has embraced the philosophy of private
> "mutualisation" of socially beneficial activity. The press here has
> lampooned this as a cost saving excercise to get people to volunteer, and do
> it for them selves. Things like parents being able to take schools private
> or start new ones are on the agenda. The full extent of how radical the
> government could be, with new, privatly financed social entities becoming a
> major feature in social provision, is not grasped. ( See
> http://respublica.org.uk and the discussion about the Venture Society for
> thinking on this and urther thinking on mutualisation-I am a Fellow of Res
> Publica, and have written about this on the Disraeli Room blog).
>
> This week the UK's CIO talked about 'mutualisation' as the way forward.
>
> Such mutualisation is essentially a co-operative approach that requires a
> new way of working and the newer technologies that enable local involvement
> will need to be adopted.
>
> The UK CIO's plan of record is to create a UK government Cloud or "G-Cloud"
> on a service oriented architecture together with an "apps store". This would
> support inceased localisation, but one compnent would be higher quality
> access and comms links. BT has made public commitments to upgrade the
> network, and is currently in the throes of striking over pay. Its not clear
> whether the upgrades that have been offered will be enough in a short enough
> period of time. Much still to be done.
>
> The challenge has a number of dimensions: for example, to date government
> purchasing has taken place on a departmental basis. In order to get cost
> savings and economies of scale, similar requirements need to be identified
> and purchased on a volume or other value for money/discounted basis for
> government as a whole. That tends to suggest centralised specification and
> purchasing. However, the starting point is problematic given that there is
> no central purchasing in UK government, and currently the UK government is
> characterised by departmental purchasing units, departmental financial
> control, and departmental processes and differing requirements by
> department.
>
> Some cross departmental financial control is being introduced (for the
> first time: surprisingly this has never happened before because each
> department of state and each minster is constitutionally responsible to
> parliament). The new "Office of Budget Responsibility" might act as a
> financial controller, but the appointment of Alan Budd, a macroeconomist, is
> a sign that it may instead act as an economic forecaster.
>
> The CIO should get the power to mandate requirements. This will allow
> greater control of cross-government spend, and a Service Oriented
> Architechture is going to be introduced as part of the G-cloud strategy
> which should help drive value for money on a cross-government basis. "How?"
> is now the big unanswered question. What has happened in other countries?
>
> It is still unclear what interfaces and specifications will be used to
> define the gateways between the government SOA platform/cloud and the rest
> of the world. It is fine in theory for government to run an "apps store" but
> how governement will specify how apps will run on proprietary hardware such
> as mainframes remains to be worked out.
>
> Neelie Kroes indicated in a speech in Brussels yesterday that
> interoperability between legacy technology and new services will be
> critical, and that legislation may be needed to force those with "pervasive"
> technology that lock-in government, to open up interfaces (Microsoft
> currently does this under its settlement with the Commission in December
> last year, but other computer companies are in the firing line).
>
> Neelie is expected to launch a review of net neutrality here next week or
> the week after, with national consultation running over July and August.
>
> So far, in the UK, spending has been suspended and any deal over a certain
> value has been placed under much closer scrutiny. There is a review of
> existing contracts taking place and the fact that in the past 2/3 years it
> became government practice to insert "termination for convenience"
> provisions in contracts has not been lost on suppliers, many of whome fear
> the axe.
>
> Smart and coordinated specification could mean that smart government is
> possible. Increased interoperability may happen. Incrased localisation may
> happen. Short term cost savings are easier to achieve if less complicated
> things are done, and I am taking no bets as to the outcome.
>
> What has been done/is being done in other countries would be good to
> understand: can the list look at this?
>
> Regards
>
> Tim
>
> Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: larry podmore <larry.podmore at xtra.co.nz>
> Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 08:19:23
> To: <sara at behavioraleconomics.net>; <arch-econ at cookreport.com>
> Subject: Re: [Arch-econ] an inquiry from the "list mom"
>
> ?
> http://www.onecommunity.org/
>
> Hi Sara
> I agree that City States need to be aligned to national objectives, I am a
> little biased as we(nz) go from city regions direct to federal government
> making it easier to align to national agendas.. If Philli is bad what is
> your view of good US cities with good governace and transparency..I was
> hugely impressed by Scott ORourke and his team at One Cleveland....
>
> Your views on understanding the Economic Geography of digital connections
> creating hotspots of activity is interesting
>
> I have seen many people undertake 'the build it and they will come view'
> like Softopia in Japan, Dubai Digital city, Fusionpolis in Singapore, These
> seem very artificial to me trying to design a 24/7 gen y cities ...
>
> Cities need loal communities to take control of their enviromnents and
> build off local cultures and features.....
>
> I would really appreciate your views on what makes a good city.....and can
> the creative city, smart city, intelligent community exist in todays topsy
> turvey world...
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Sara Wedeman <mailto:sara at behavioraleconomics.net<sara at behavioraleconomics.net>>
>
> To: Economics of IP Networks <mailto:arch-econ at cookreport.com<arch-econ at cookreport.com>>
>
> Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 2:49 AM
> Subject: Re: [Arch-econ] an inquiry from the "list mom"
>
> John,
>
> This is no summary note: it's a book outline! Thanks for sharing your rich
> and well-considered thoughts. I feel you have opened the discussion
> immeasurably.
>
> The notion of technology-enabled economic, social, political flows is a
> fascinating one. As you point out, our implicit world view has always given
> a very high priority to geography. Increased global connectivity has changed
> that to some extent, but the brain changes very, very slowly. Our
> consciousness is strongly rooted in time and place.
>
> The notion of the city-state strikes me as downright horrific--not a good
> alternative to the nation-state at all. Cities have been badly abused in the
> US. The one in which I live (Philadelphia) is broke, corrupt, and has been
> so for much of its history. In fact, one of our erstwhile congressmen, Ozzie
>
>  Meyers <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Myers_%28politician%29> ,
> famously said "money talks and b.s. walks" as he was being 'stung' in the
> 'Abscam' sting many years ago. If the city state is the future, I'd better
> find someplace else to live!
>
> When I was doing a lot of work in mapping, I became very interested in the
> relationship between topography, connectivity, and economic vitality.
> Traditionally, cities have formed at critical junctures of waterways--which
> were, of course, the first highways. There are many reasons for this, not
> the least of which was the natural protection afforded by the walls of the
> river valley. What will the flows of information look like, and what will be
> their relation to geography?
>
> I know I have pulled us in a slightly off-topic direction, but your piece
> is very thought-provoking, and these are some of my initial thoughts.
>
> Sara
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 6:16 AM, John Wilson <johnrichardwilson at gmail.com<
> mailto:johnrichardwilson at gmail.com <johnrichardwilson at gmail.com>> > wrote:
> In response to Gordon's call for feedback on exploring a critical
> conspectus for locating issues of telecoms-IP futures within a Globalized
> Economy and The Networked Society, may I offer a comparative perspective
> towards some conceptual clarification:
>
>
> Gordon's bearing points include:
>
>
> *
> "How feasible is it to embrace the goal of turning monopoly driven models
> of scarcity into locally controlled and empowering models for self
> sustaining innovation and entrepreneurship?"
> *
> "Will the center have to begin to collapse before the value of the public
> interest in the nation state can be returned?  Will the new kid on the block
> be the city state rather than the nation state?  Does digital technology
> have an effect that makes the city state more feasible and the nation state
> less so?"
>
>
> I note the spatial aspect of Gordon's telecoms-society imaginary,
> specifically the distinction of "national" and "city" locations of
> institutions/actors. I also note the affirmations of the view that we need
> to move beyond the telecoms sector silo to engagements with the wider
> political economy (see Jaap van Till, Sara Wedeman), and the strategic need
> for General Systems Thinking. In short therefore, an emerging consensus upon
> the need for an extension of analysis beyond sectoral-telecoms debate into
> the wider political economy landscape and the need for a structural
> framework for analysis and a critical strategic approach.
>
> I therefore bounce back at you the following comparative perspective, drawn
> from a range of academic disciplines of enquiry; a "synthetic systems
> approach 101" if you like, as I sense a set of structural homologies across
> the various lines of thinking.
>
>
> 1
> I offer the following observations towards a conceptual clarification. This
> is in a rather hasty summary note form, as a proper elaboration would
> require a fully researched issues paper with extensive citations. I refer to
> the work of a number of critical sociologists and geographers, highlighting
> an emergent structural framework in terms of global economy and society, the
> dynamics of capitalist modernity (political economy), and the centrality of
> communications infrastructure (the networked society):
>
>
> * Sociologist Manuel Castells' theorization of the networked society, with
> a distinction between "the space of place" (eg city, region) and "the space
> of flows" (global flows of capital) [ See Castells, The Network Society, the
> first part of his trilogy The Information Age (1996); and
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_society#Manuel_Castells_and_The_Network_Society]: and note, "The Space of Flows plays a central role in Castells' vision of
> the network society. It is a network of communications, defined by hubs
> where these networks crisscross. Élites in cities <
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City>  are not attached to a particular
> locality but to the space of flows. Castells puts great importance on the
> networks and argues that the real power is to be found within the networks
> rather than confined in global cities <
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City#Global_cities> . This contrasts with
> other theorists who rank cities hierarchically."
> *
> Geographer David Harvey [
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Harvey_(geographer) <
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Harvey_%28geographer%29>  ] elaborates
> upon the global spatial orders and transformations of the local space of
> place and the global space of flows; contrasting  the needs of
> settled/sustainable city governance & citizenry versus the disruptive flows
> of capital (global), and hence the counterposed logic of capital (flows) and
> "the territorial logic of the city" [ See Harvey, interview "Understanding
> the New Imperialism",p4:
> http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people4/Harvey/harvey-con4.html ]; and
> hence Harvey's recent call to action to defend "the right to the city" - in
> the wake of the financial meltdown - as a ground for local democracy and
> coalition building v the predations of the global finance system [ see pdf
> of Harvey's 2008 article the Right to the City:
> http://abahlali.org/files/Harvery_right_to_the_city.pdf ]. [See also
> Saskia Sassen, April 2009, on the current phase of "financialized
> capitalism":
> http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/too-big-to-save-the-end-of-financial-capitalism-0 :
> "The financial logic of neo-liberal capitalism has devoured the world and
> exhausted itself in the process. A new model beyond "financialisation" is
> needed" ]
> * Sociologist Zygmunt Bauman has rounded off an exceptionally long and
> sustained career of critical social enquiry to conceptualize the nature of
> "Liquid Modernity", synthesizing the insights of thinkers noted above to
> grasp the fugitive nature of today's highly accelerated phase of capitalist
> modernity [ see
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zygmunt_Bauman#Liquid_modernity ]
>
>
> 2
> I add one historical perspective, on the evolution of
> infrastructure-networks:
> * that national networks across the range of utilities and including
> telecoms, have evolved historically through local enterprise (often initial
> small scale private enterprise, and then, almost universally, larger scale
> municipal);
> * for only at a later stage of consolidation have "national networks"
> become economically viable as the economics of networks kicks in.
> * Nevertheless, taking this principle of incremental & local
> enterprise/growth as a predecessor to a succeeding and exponential phase of
> "national markets" once the logic of capital markets and consolidation can
> kick in, we may posit a new phase for next generation communications
> networks/ emerging technologies/ innovation/ business models that engages
> the local/regional ground.
>
>
> 3
> Following the above perspectives, once could therefore posit a number of
> convergences of interests:
> * of local-regional civil society & sustainable economic activity v the
> counterposed global order of a predatory financialized capitalism and its
> maintenance of regulatory Gordian knots
> * of local city/regional activity as a ground for democratic redress, as
> well as future infrastructive activity (and enabling General Purpose
> technologies) [ as Gordon notes, also posited by Carlota Perez]
> * and the structural role of regulatory reform (following local/regional
> democratic pressures?), as a mediator of local/global spheres of influence
>
>
>
> I hope that this summary note makes sense and adds to the list debate.
>
> John
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 9 June 2010 18:15, Gordon Cook <cook at cookreport.com <
> mailto:cook at cookreport.com <cook at cookreport.com>> > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> A time for arch econ to regroup?
> Fellow community members, our traffic in the last two weeks has fallen off
> rather significantly.  Not necessarily a bad thing. List traffic varies over
> time.  It's hard to know what, if anything, it means. do you have any
> theories? plezse flaots them publicly or privately.
> The volume here is often too much.  January through mid may were HUGELY
> busy - I suspect because  we were still anticipating the changes that the
> Obama administration would bring.
> So  now that we HAVE seen that and find ourselves stuck with title II
> "lite"  where do we go?
>  I think we are quite clearly at an inflection point.  There is a long list
> of broken "things."  I want to give a brief run down.  Then I want to ask
> you what is important to your agendas?  And conclude with some suggested
> objectives of my own.
> It would seem that some of what we have fixated on is somewhat off the
> table.  Any change will be relatively minor and the affects incremental.
> So lets take a look at what should not necessarily replace what we have
> focused on but what could supplement it. How feasible is it to embrace the
> goal of turning monopoly driven models of scarcity into locally controlled
> and empowering models for self sustaining innovation and entrepreneurship?
> I have been working with larry Podmore in Christ Church New Zealand with
> the aim of some collaboration.  More about that later today.
> But first -- what has happened?
> Huge economic problems that have not been fixed.  Perhaps half or more than
> half of the financial capital we thought was there is now gone...... No one
> really knows what is left - but what is the case is that the old global
> economic models of borrowing and spending are gone -- whether we acknowledge
> that as fact or not.   Furthermore, with zero interest rates we have the
> very foundation that set off the last asset bubble still in place.  Banks
> have a free ride.  Their shadow banking products are still in the shadows.
>  The public looking for some return has nowhere to go with its savings
> except to try its luck on investments that are not transparent and are
> increasingly risky.
> This should mean that the scarcity business model that propelled telecom
> and regulatory capture is no longer indefinitely viable.
>  the next message will offer some examples.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> =============================================================
> The COOK Report on Internet Protocol, (PSTN) 609 882-2572 (Skype-in) 609
> 643-4067
> Back Issues:
> http://www.cookreport.com/index.php?option=com_docman&amp;task=cat_view&amp;gid=37&amp;Itemid=61<http://www.cookreport.com/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=37&Itemid=61>
>
>  Cook's Collaborative Edge Blog http://gordoncook.net/wp/
>  Subscription info:
> http://www.cookreport.com/index.php?option=com_content&amp;view=article&amp;id=54&amp;Itemid=65<http://www.cookreport.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=54&Itemid=65>
> =============================================================
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Arch-econ mailing list
> Arch-econ at cookreport.com <mailto:Arch-econ at cookreport.com<Arch-econ at cookreport.com>>
>
> http://nine.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arch-econ
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Arch-econ mailing list
> Arch-econ at cookreport.com <mailto:Arch-econ at cookreport.com>
> http://nine.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arch-econ
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sara C. Wedeman, PhD
> BECG-Behavioral Economics Consulting Group
> t: 215.242.5415  mobile: 267.825.4044   skype:auroraz7
>
>
>
>
> ----------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Arch-econ mailing list
> Arch-econ at cookreport.com
> http://nine.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arch-econ
> _______________________________________________
> Arch-econ mailing list
> Arch-econ at cookreport.com
> http://nine.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arch-econ
>
>
>


-- 
P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org

Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

Think tank: http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI







-- 
P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org

Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

Think tank: http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20100613/0c147b25/attachment-0001.html>