Rechercher par propriété

Cette page fournit une simple interface de navigation pour trouver des entités décrites par une propriété et une valeur nommée. D’autres interfaces de recherche disponibles comprennent la page recherche de propriété, et le constructeur de requêtes « ask ».

Liste de résultats

• Chargement/Site  + (<h2>Interview with Joan Subirats – B … <h2>Interview with Joan Subirats – Barcelona, April 20, 2017</h2></br><p><strong>Alain Ambrosi and Nancy Thede </strong></p></br><blockquote><p><i>The pro-independence government of Catalonia recently sparked a political crisis in Spain by proposing to call a referendum on independence by the end of 2017 with or without the approval of the central government. In contrast, « Catalonia in common » defines itself as an innovative political space of the Catalan left. Initiated by Barcelona in Comú a little less than a year after its election to city hall, the initiave was launched in October 2016. A short manifesto explained its raison-d’être and presented an « ideario politico » (a political project) of some 100 pages for broad discussion over 5 months which culminated in a constituent assembly last April 8.</i></p></br><p><i>This new political subject defines itself as « a left-wing Catalan organisation that aims to govern and to transform the economic, political and social structures of the present neo-liberal system. » Its originality in the political panorama of Catalonia and of Spain is its engagement with « a new way of doing politics, a politics of the commons where grassroots people and communities are the protagonists. » In response to those who see its emergence only in the context of the impending referendum, it affirms: « We propose a profound systemic, revolutionary change in our economic, social, environmental and political model. » </i></p></br><p><i>We interviewed Joan Subirats a few days after the Constituent Assembly of Catalunya en Comú took place. Joan is an academic renowned for his publications and his political engagement. A specialist in public policy and urban issues, he has published widely on the Commons and on the new municipalism. He is one of the artisans of Barcelona in Comú and has just been elected to the coordinating body of the new space named recently « Catalunya en comú ».</i></p></blockquote></br><h3>The Genesis of a New Political Subject</h3></br><p><b>NT —</b> Tell us about the trajectory of the development of this new initiative: a lot of people link it to the 15-M, but I imagine that it was more complex than that and started long before.</p></br><p><img decoding="async" loading="lazy" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-4740" src="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Joan_Subirats_2013_cropped.jpg" alt="Joan_Subirats_2013_(cropped)" width="423" height="526" /><br /></br><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3AJoan_Subirats_2013_(cropped).jpg">By Directa (youtube) [CC BY 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons</a></p></br><p><b>JS —</b> At the outset there was Guanyem, which was in fact the beginning of Barcelona en Comú: the first meetings were in February-March 2014. Who was involved? this is quite simultaneous with the decision by Podemos to compete in the European Parliament elections in May 2014. Podemos organises in February 2014; Guanyem begins organising in February- March 2014 to compete in the municipal elections of May 2015.</p></br><p>Going farther back, there is a phase of intense social mobilisation against austerity policies between 2011 and 2013. If we look at the statistics of the Ministry of the Interior on the number of demonstrations, it is impressive, there were never as many demonstrations as during that period, but after mid-2013 they start to taper off. There is a feeling that there are limits and that demonstrations can’t obtain the desired changes in a situation where the right-wing Popular Party (PP) holds an absolute majority. So the debate emerges within the social movements as to whether it’s a good idea to attempt to move into the institutions.</p></br><p>Podemos chooses the most accessible scenario, that of the European elections, because these elections have a single circonscription, so all of Spain is a single riding, with a very high level of proportionality, so with few votes you get high representation because there are 60-some seats, so with one million votes they obtained 5 seats. And people vote more freely in these elections because apparently the stakes are not very high, so they are elections that are good for testing strategies. In contrast, here in Barcelona, we chose the municipal elections as the central target because here there is a long history of municipalism.</p></br><p>So this sets the stage for the period that began in 2014 with Guanyem and Podemos and the European elections and in May 2015 with the municipal elections where in 4 of the 5 major cities – Barcelona, Madrid, Valencia and Zaragoza – alternative coalitions win that are not linked to either of the two major political parties (PP and the Socialist Party – PSOE) that have dominated the national political scene since the return to democracy in 1977. And in the autonomous elections<sup id="cite_ref-1" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-1">[1]</a></sup>, a new political cycle also begins, in which we still are. If we go farther back, to 2011 – there are a couple of maps that show the correlation between the occupation of plazas in the 15-M with the number of alternative citizen canadidacies at the municipal level.</p></br><p>So Podemos and all the alternative citizen coalitions all refer to the 15M as their founding moment. But the 15M is not a movement, it was a moment, an event. You must have heard the joke about the stranger who arrives and wants to talk to the 15M – but there is no 15M, it has no spokespersons and no address. But everyone considers it very important because it transformed the political scene in its wake . But what was there before the 15M?</p></br><p>There were basically 4 major trends that converged in the 15-M :<br /></br>First the anti-globalisation movement, the oldest one, very interesting because a large number of the new political leaders have come out of it, with forms of political mobilisation different from the traditional ones.</p></br><p>Then there was the « Free Culture Forum » linked to issues regarding internet which was very important here in Barcelona – with Simona Levy and Gala Pin, who is now a municipal councillor – that is important because here digital culture, network culture, was present from the very beginning, something that didn’t occur in other places.</p></br><p>The third movement was the PAH (Platform for People Affected by Mortgages) which emerges in 2009 and had precedents with Ada Colau and others who organised « V for vivienda » (like the film « V for vendetta », but in this case vivienda – housing), an attempt to demonstrate that young people were excluded from social emancipation because they didn’t have access to housing. Their slogan was « you’ll never have a house in your whole f’king life ». And the forms of mobilisation were also very new, for example, they occupied IKEA because at that time IKEA’s advertising slogan was « the independent republic of your home », so they occupied it and slept in the beds there. So this was more youthful, alternative, more of a rupture, but then in 2009 with the creation of the PAH they started to try to connect with the immigrant sector and people who were losing their houses because of the mortgage hype, it was very important because it’s the movement that tries to connect with sectors outside of youth: the poor, immigrants, working class… with the slogan ‘this is not a crisis, it’s a sting’. So the PAH is very important because it’s the movement that connects with sectors of the population outside of youth: workers, immigrants, the elderly… For example, here in Plaza Catalunya in 2011 the only major poster rallying people who weren’t youth was that of the PAH.</p></br><p>And the fourth movement – the most ‘authentic’ 15M one – was that of the « Youth without future ». People who organised mainly in Madrid, typical middle-class university sector with post-grad studies, who suddenly realised that they wouldn’t find jobs, that it wasn’t true that their diplomas would open doors for them, they were in a precarious situation.</p></br><p>So those were the four major currents that converged in the basis of the 15M. But what made it ‘click’ was not just those 4 trends, but the fact that huge numbers of other people recognised the moment and converged on the plazas and overwhelmed the movements that started it. The most surprising thing about the moment was that those 4 movements – that were not all that important – were rapidly overwhelmed by success of the movement they started and new people who spontaneously joined. That was what really created the phenomenon, because if it had been just those 4 movements, if it had been like ‘Nuit debout’ in Paris where people occupied the plaza but without the sensation that people had steamrollered the leaders. So, when the plazas are evacuated, the idea becomes ‘Let’s go to the neighbourhoods’. So all of a sudden, in the neighbourhoods of Barcelona and Madrid, assemblies were organised where there was a mixture of the old neighbourhood associations that were no longer very active and whose members were older (my generation) and new people who brought new issues like ecology, energy, bicycle transport, cooperatives, water and a thousand different things and who created new spaces of articulation where people who had never thought that they would meet in the neighbourhoods began to converge.</p></br><p>I think this explains the re-emergence of municipalism that followed: people begin to see the city as a place where diverse social changes can be articulated on a territorial basis: many mobilisations are taking place in isolation, in a parallel manner and don’t have a common meeting-point. Water as a common good, energy transition, sustainable transport, public health, public space, infant education… All of a sudden there was something that brought people together which was to discuss the city, the city we want – David Harvey mentions in an article that the modern-day factory is the city. That is, we no longer have factories, the city is now the space where conflicts appear and where daily life becomes politicised: issues like care, food, schooling, transport, energy costs – and this creates a new space for articulating these issues that hadn’t been previously envisaged.</p></br><p>So I think this is the connection : 15-M as a moment of overwhelming, the end of a cycle of mobilisation – remember that there had been a petition of a million and a half signatures to change the mortgage legislation, that Ada Colau presented in the national Congress, where she accused the PP deputies of being assassins because of what they were doing – but that mobilisation had no effect in the law. A PP deputy declared ‘If these people want to change things, then they should get elected’. So people started thinking ‘OK, if that’s the way it is, then let’s get ourselves elected’. This is the initial change of cycle in 2014. So the 4 movements were present in the meetings of Guanyem and BComun, as well as some progressive intellectuals and people from other issue areas like water, transport, energy etc. That was the initial nucleus here in Barcelona – in Madrid it was different. There the Podemos generation had a different logic. Here, from the beginning, we wanted to create a movement from the bottom up and to avoid a logic of coalition of political parties, this was very clear from the outset. We didn’t want to reconstruct the left on the basis of an agreement amongst parties. We wanted to build a citizen movement that could impose its own conditions on the parties. In the case of Podemos it was different: it was a logic of a strike from above – they wanted to create a strong close-knit group with a lot of ideas in a very short period and as a result an electoral war machine that can assault the heavens and take power. Here, on the other hand, we foresaw a longer process of construction of a movement where we would start with the municipalities and after that, we’ll see.</p></br><p>So Guanyem was created in June 2014, 11 months prior to the municipal elections, with a minimal program in 4 points:</p></br><ol></br><li>we said, we want to take back the city, it’s is being taken away from the citizens, people come here to talk about a ‘business-friendly global city’ and they are taking it away from the citizens, we have lost the capacity to control it, as the first point;</li></br><li>there is a social emergency where many problems don’t get a response;</li></br><li>we want people to be able to have decision-making capacity in what happens in the city, so co-production of policy, more intense citizen participation in municipal decisions;</li></br><li>moralisation of politics. Here the main points are non-repetition of mandates, limits on salaries of elected officials, anti-corruption and transparency measures, etc.</li></br></ol></br><p>So we presented this in June 2014 and we decided that we would give ourselves until September to collect 30,000 signatures in support of the manifesto and if we succeeded, we would present candidates in the municipal elections. In one month we managed to get the 30,000 signatures! Besides getting the signatures on internet and in person, we held a lot of meetings in the neighbourhoods to present the manifesto – we held about 30 or 40 meetings like that, some of them small, some more massive, where we went to the neighbourhoods and we said « We thought of this, what do you think? We thought of these priorities, etc’. » So, in September of 2014 we decided to go ahead; once we decided that we would present a slate, we began to discuss with the parties – but with the strength of all that support of 30,000 people backing us at the grassroots, so our negotiating strength with respect to the parties was very different. In Dec 2014 we agreed with the parties to create Barcelona en Comun – we wanted to call it Guanyem but someone else had already registered the name, so there was a lot of discussion about a new name, there were various proposals: Revolucion democratica, primaria democratica, the term Comu – it seemed interesting because it connected with the Commons movement, the idea of the public which is not restricted to the institutional and that was key. It was also important that in the previous municipal elections in 2011 only 52% of people had voted, in the poorer neighbourhoods a higher number of people abstained and that it was in the wealthier neighbourhoods where a larger proportion of people had voted. So we wanted to raise participation by 10% in the poor neighbourhoods more affected by the crisis and we thought that would allow us to win. And that was what happened. In 2015, 63% voted, but in the poor areas 40% more people voted. In the rich areas, the same people voted as before.</p></br><p>So it was not impossible to think we could win. And from the beginning the idea was to win. We did not build this machine in order to participate, we built it in order to win. We didn’t want to be the opposition, we wanted to govern. And as a result, it was close, because we won 11 of 41 seats, but got the most votes so we head the municipal council, the space existed. From the moment Guanyem was created in June 2014, other similar movements began to be created all over Spain – in Galicia, in Andalucia, in Valencia, Zaragoza, Madrid… One of the advantages we have in Barcelona is that we have Ada Colau, which is a huge advantage, because a key thing is to have an uncontested leader who can articulate all the segments of the movement – ecologists, health workers, education professionals…. If you don’t have that it’s very difficult, and also the sole presence of Ada Colau explains many things. In Madrid they found Manuela Carmena, who is great as an anti-franquista symbol, with her judicial expertise, very popular but who didn’t have that tradition of articulating movements, and as a result now they are having a lot more problems of political coordination than here.</p></br><h3>A New Political Subject for a New Political Era</h3></br><p><b>AA —</b> So now Catalunya en comu defines itself as a new political space on the left for the whole of Catalonia. But in recent Catalan history that’s nothing really new: there have been numerous political coalitions on the left, such as the PSUC<sup id="cite_ref-2" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-2">[2]</a></sup> in 1936 followed by many others. So what is different about this initiative?</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> If we open up our perspective and look at things more globally, I think that what justifies the idea that this is a new political space is the fact that the moment is new, we’re in a new phase so it’s very important to understand that if this new political moment reproduces the models and the conceptual paradigms of the old left and of the Fordism of the end of the 20th century, we won’t have moved ahead at all. The crisis of social democracy is also a crisis of a way of understanding social transformation with codes that no longer exist. As a result the measure of success of this new political space is not so much in to what extent it can bring together diverse political forces, but rather its capacity to understand this new scenario we find ourselves in – a scenario where digital transformation is changing everything, where we no longer know what ‘labour’ is, where heterogeneity and social diversity appear as factors not of complexity but of values, where the structure of age no longer functions as it used to – where everything is in transformation, so we can no longer continue to apply ideas – to use a phrase coined by Ulrich Beck – ‘zombie concepts’, living dead, no?, we forge ahead with our backpacks full of 20th-century concepts, applying them to realities that no longer have anything to do with them. It’s easy to see the defects of the old, traditional concepts, but it’s very difficult to construct new ones because we don’t really know what is happening nor where we are headed. The example of the debate in France between Valls and Hamon – at least, I read the summary in Le Monde, where Valls maintained that it would be possible to come back to a situation of full employment and Hamon said that is impossible, that it’s necessary to work towards the universal basic income; in the end, Hamon is closer to the truth than Valls, but Hamon isn’t capable of explaining it in a credible way – and it is very difficult to explain it in a credible way.</p></br><p>Here, we are working at one and the same time on the Commons and the non-institutional public sphere, we are demanding greater presence of the public administration when probably it wouldn’t really be necessary, but since we don’t have a clear idea of how to construct this new thing, we are still acting sort of like slaves of the old. So that’s where I think the concept of the Commons, of the cooperative, the collaborative, new ideas regarding the digital economy, are more difficult to structure, because we’re also conscious that capitalism is no longer only industrial or financial but now it’s digital capitalism, and it controls all the networks of data transmission and at the same time the data themselves, probably the wealth of the future. So, sure we can do really interesting things in Barcelona, out of Barcelona en Comun, but we have GAFAM (Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft), and GAFAM has its own logics and that complicates things. So we have to create a new political subject – and it’s obvious that we need something new – but what isn’t so obvious is what are the concepts we need to create this new subject. So if you look at the documents published by Un Pais en Comu<sup id="cite_ref-3" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-3">[3]</a></sup> that’s what you’ll see: a bit of different language, a different way of using concepts, but at the same time a trace of the heritage of the traditional left. The journal ‘Nous Horitzons’ has just published a new issue on ‘Politics in Common’<sup id="cite_ref-4" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-4">[4]</a></sup> which brings together a lot of these elements. The impression that some of us had in the assembly the other day in Vall d’Hebron (the inaugural assembly of the movement) was that the old ways were still weighing us down, that there was a difficulty to generate an innovative dynamic.</p></br><p><b>NT —</b> That was clear in the composition of the audience.</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> Yes, well, the Podemos people weren’t there, of course… they didn’t come for various reasons, because probably not everybody was in agreement with Albano-Dante<sup id="cite_ref-5" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-5">[5]</a></sup> but they saw there was a lot of disagreement and so they preferred not to come, and that’s a type of public that, as well as filling the hall, also changes the type of dynamic – so it was more the traditional-style organisations that were there (Iniciativa or EUIA<sup id="cite_ref-6" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-6">[6]</a></sup>), there was more of the old than the new probably. Perhaps that’s inevitable, but what we have to do now is to see if we can change that dynamic.</p></br><p><b>AA —</b> When one reads the ‘Ideario politico’ (the political project of Un Pais en Comu) it’s a sort of lesson in political economy, political philosophy as well, but also a vast programme, and the left has never put forward this type of Commons-inspired programme before, be it in Catalunya or in Spain or probably internationally. How do you see its contribution in the context of the Commons ecosystem? There have been experiences of the Commons without the Commons label, as in Latin America …</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> Yes, in Catalunya the anarcho-sindicalist movement…</p></br><p><b>AA —</b> Of course, but more recently, the idea of ‘Buen Vivir’ …</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> Yes, but when you go to Latin America and you talk about that, it all revolves around the State. But here, we try not to be state-centric. We are trying to avoid the idea that the only possible transformation needs to depend on the State.</p></br><p><b>AA —</b> But in the ‘Ideario’ a lot of discussion is devoted to public services as well, this implies that the State has to exist. And in the Commons vocabulary there is the concept of the ‘partner-state’, but it doesn’t appear in the Ideario…</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> Yes, there’s a margin there: the resilience of the new politics depends more on the capacity to create ‘muscled’ collective spaces – public, collective, common – than on the occupation of the institutions. But without the occupation of the institutions, it’s very difficult to construct those spaces. The example that comes to mind for me is from Copenhagen: there it was the cooperatives of the workers’ unions that built the big housing coops that exist now; also, the municipal government when the left was in power built a lot of public housing; then when a right-wing government came to power, it privatised all the public housing but it couldn’t privatise the cooperatives. So in the end, things that are strictly state-based are more vulnerable than when you build collective strength. So if we are able to benefit from these spaces in order to build ‘collective muscle’, using our presence in the institutions, this will end up being more resilient, more stable over time than if we put all our eggs in the State basket. So the Barcelona city government has civic social centres that are municipal property, but what is important is to succeed in ensuring that these centres are controlled by the community, that each community make them its own despite the fact that the property is officially that of the municipality, but they must be managed through a process of community management. So you need to build in the community a process of appropriation of institutions that ends up being stronger than if it were all in the hands of the State.</p></br><p>Now we are discussing citizen heritage, how the city government can use its property – houses, buildings – and it can cede them for a certain period in order to construct collective spaces. For example, 8 building sites that belong to the municipality have been put up for auction on 100-year leases for community organisations to build housing cooperatives. This doesn’t take property away from the public sphere and at the same time it generates collective strength. But a certain sector of the political left here, the CUP, criticises this as privatisation of public space. They think Barcelona en Comun should build public housing instead, state-owned housing. That’s a big difference. And people are aware of that, but at the same time there are doubts about whether this makes sense, whether there is sufficient strength within the community so that this can work. Or, for example, the most common criticism is that “you have an idea of the public, the collective, the Commons, that implies capacities in the community that are only present in the middle classes that have the knowledge, the organisational capacity… so it’s a very elitist vision of the collective because the popular sectors, without the backing of the State, won’t be able to do this. » Well, we’re going to try to combine things so it can work, but we don’t want to keep converting the public into the ‘state’.</p></br><p>Nancy Fraser wrote an article on the triple movement – looking at Polanyi’s work on the ‘double movement’ in the Great Transformation, that is the movement towards mercantilisation, and the opposite movement it stimulated towards protection. Polanyi talks about the confrontation of these 2 movements in the early 20th century, and the State – in its soviet form or in its fascist form – as a protectionist response of society which demands protection when faced with the uncertainty, the fragility the double movement engenders. Nancy Fraser says that all that is true, but we’re no longer in the 20th century, we’re in the 21st century where factors like individual emancipation, diversity, feminism are all very important – so we shouldn’t be in favour of a protectionist movement that continues to be patriarchal and hierarchical. We need a movement for protection that generates autonomy – and there resides what I think is one of the keys of the Commons movement. The idea of being able to get protection – so, a capacity of reaction against the dynamics of the market attacks – without losing the strength of diversity, of personal emancipation, of feminism, the non-hierarchical, the non-patriarchal, the idea that somebody decide for me what I need to do and how I will be protected. Let me self-protect myself too, let me be a protagonist too of this protection. And this is contradictory with the state-centric tradition.</p></br><h3>A Commons Economy, Participation and Co-production of Policy</h3></br><p><b>AA —</b> The first theme of the ‘Ideario’ is the economy – you are an economist, amongst other things – how do you see this proposal in terms of the Commons? For example, there is a lot of discussion now about ‘open cooperativism’, etc. What you were saying about the cooperative movement here, that it is very strong but not sufficient…</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> In some aspects no. For example, the city wanted to open a new contract for communications (telephone, internet) – now there are the big companies Telefonica, Movistar, Vodafone, Orange, etc: there’s a cooperative called ‘Som Connexion’ (We are connection)- or ‘Som Energia’ (We are energy) that’s a lot bigger – it has 40,000 members – but these cooperatives, it would be fantastic if the city were to give them the contract for energy or for communication, but they aren’t capable of managing that at the moment. So if they take it, we’d all have big problems: faulty connections, lack of electrical power – because they’re growing for sure but they don’t yet have the ‘muscle’, the capacity they need to take this on.</p></br><p>So we have to continue investing in this, it’s not going to take care of itself. On the other hand, in other areas, like home services for the elderly, we do have very strong cooperatives, Abacus for example is a cooperative for book distribution that has 800 000 members, so that is a coop that’s very powerful, and there are others. But in general, the more powerful the coop, the less politicised it is – they tend to transform themselves into big service companies. But now they are understanding that perhaps it would be in their interest to have a different vision; there has been a very politicised movement in the grassroots level coops that is contradictory with the entrepreneurial trend in the big coops. So we’re in this process right now: yes, there are very big, very strong coops and there are also smaller, more political ones but they don’t have sufficient muscle yet.</p></br><p><b>AA —</b> When we look at issues of participation, co-production of policy and such, it is also a question of culture, a culture of co-production that doesn’t exist. In the neighbourhoods, yes there is a trend to revamping participation, but when we talk to people in the local-level committees they say ‘Sure, people come to the meetings, but because they want a tree planted here…’ and they don’t have that vision of co-creation. So first there has to be a sort of cultural revolution ?</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> There are places where there has been a stronger community tradition that could well converge with this. Some neighbourhoods like Roquetes for example, Barceloneta or Sants, have very strong associational traditions. If you go to Roquetes to the meeting of the community plan, everybody is there: the people from the primary medical services centre, the doctors, the schools are there, the local police, the social workers – and they hold meetings every 2 weeks and they know everything that goes on in the area, and they transfer cases amongst themselves: “we detected this case, how do we deal with it?” etc. The community fabric in those neighbourhoods functions really well. So what can you add to that fabric so that it can go a bit further? On the other hand, in other neighbourhoods like Ciutat Meridiana, in 5 years 50% of the population has changed, so it’s very difficult to create community where the level of expulsion or change is so high. In Sants, in Ca Batlló, there was a very interesting experience where people want to create a cooperative neighbourhood – it’s a bit polemical – they want to create a public school without using public funds, instead using money from the participants themselves, because the coop tradition in Sants is very anarchist, libertarian – so they promote the idea of a public school, open to all, but not using public funds. And it would have its own educational philosophy, that wouldn’t have to submit to standard educational discipline. And groups have appeared in different neighbourhoods dedicated to shared child-raising where there are no pre-schools for children between 0 and 3 years, or people prefer not to take the kids to public pre-schools because they find them too rigid, so they prefer generating relationships amongst parents. So what should the role of the city government be with respect to such initiatives? Should it facilitate or not? There’s a debate about how to position the municipality with respect to these initiatives that are interesting but then when, inside Barcelona en Comú or Catalunya en Comú, the person who is in charge of these issues comes with a more traditional union perspective and says “This is crazy, what we need to do is to create public schools with teachers who are professional civil servants. These experiments are fine for gentrified zones, but in reality…’” And they are partly right. So we’re in that sort of situation, which is a bit ambivalent. We’re conscious that we need to go beyond a state-centric approach, but at the same time we need to be very conscious that if we don’t reinforce the institutional role, the social fragilities are very acute.</p></br><h3>The Commons and Issues of Sovereignty, Interdependence and the « Right to Decide »</h3></br><p><b>AA —</b> Another high-profile issue is that of sovereignty. The way it’s presented in the Ideario is criticised both by those who want a unified Spain and by those who want Catalan independence. Sovereignty is simply another word for independence in the view of many people. But the way it’s presented in the Ideario is more complex and comprehensive, linked to autonomy at every level …</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> Exactly: it’s plural, in lower case and plural: sovereignties. The idea is a bit like what I said earlier about the city, that we want to take back the city. We want to recover the collective capacity to decide over what affects us. So it’s fine to talk about the sovereignty of Catalonia, but we also need to talk about digital sovereignty, water sovereignty, energy sovereignty, housing sovereignty – sovereignty in the sense of the capacity to decide over that which affects us. So we don’t have to wait until we have sovereignty over Catalonia in order to grapple with all this. And this has obvious effects: for example, something we are trying to develop here: a transit card that would be valid on all forms of public transit – like the “Oyster” in London, and many other cities have them – an electronic card that you can use for the train, the metro, the bus: the first thing the Barcelona city government did on this was to ask the question “Who will own the data? “. That’s sovereignty. The entity that controls the data on who moves and how in metropolitan Barcelona has an incredible stock of information with a clear commercial value. So will it belong to the company that incorporates the technology? or will the data belong to the municipality and the municipality will do with it what it needs? At the moment, they are installing digital electricity metres and digital water metres: but to whom do the data belong? because these are public concessions, concessions to enterprises in order that they provide a public service – so who owns the data?</p></br><p>This is a central issue. And it is raised in many other aspects, like food sovereignty. So, we want to ensure that in the future Barcelona be less dependent on the exterior for its food needs, as far as possible. So you need to work to obtain local foodstuffs, control over the products that enter – and that implies food sovereignty, it implies discussing all this. So, without saying that the sovereignty of Catalonia isn’t important, we need to discuss the other sovereignties. Because, suppose we attain the sovereignty of Catalonia as an independent state, but we are still highly dependent in all the other areas. We need to confront this. I don’t think it’s a way of avoiding the issue, it’s a way of making it more complex, of understanding that today the Westphalian concept of State sovereignty no longer makes much sense. I think we all agree on that. We are very interdependent, so how do we choose our interdependencies? That would be real sovereignty, not to be independent because that’s impossible, but rather how to better choose your interdependencies so that they have a more public content.</p></br><p><b>AA —</b> Talking of interdependence, there is the issue as well of internationalism. Barcelona en Comú puts a lot of emphasis on that, saying ‘There is no municipalism without internationalism’ etc. From the very outset of her mandate, Ada Colau in 2015 in her inaugural speech as mayor said that ‘we will work to build a movement of cities of the Mediterranean’, and as time goes on the approach is becoming clearer, for example with the participation of Colau and the vice-mayor Gerardo Pisarello in the major international city conferences. What do you see as the importance of this internationalism within the Commons ecosystem?</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> There are 2 key aspects for me. First, cities are clearly the most global political space and zone of social convergence that exists. Apparently when we talk about cities we’re talking about something local, but cities are actually very globalised. Benjamin Barber wrote a book about ‘Why Mayors should govern the world’. And he set out an example I think is very good: if the mayor of Montreal meets with Ada and the mayor of Nairobi and the mayor of Santiago de Chile and the mayor of say Hong-Kong, after 5 minutes together they’ll all be talking about the same things. Because the problems of cities are very similar from one place to another despite their different sizes. Questions of energy, transport, water, services, food… If we try to imagine that same meeting between Heads of State, the complexity of the political systems, cultural traditions, constitutional models and all will mean that the challenge of coming to a common understanding will be much more complex. That doesn’t mean that cities are the actors that will resolve climate change, but certainly the fact that Oslo, Copenhagen, Amsterdam, Barcelona and Paris agree that in 2025 there will no longer be cars circulating that use diesel will have more impact than a meeting of Heads of State. With AirBnB Barcelona is in constant confrontation, the city has fined them 600 000 euros, but Barcelona on its own can’t combat AirBnB. But New York, Paris, London, Amsterdam and Barcelona have come to an agreement to negotiate jointly with AirBnb: those 5 cities together can negotiate with them. But it isn’t the problem for States, it’s much more a problem for cities than for States. And AirBnB uses digital change to enter spaces where there is a lack of precision – it’s what happens too with Uber, Deliveroo and other platforms of so-called ‘collaborative economy’, which is really extractive economy, but which use the reglamentary voids. The people who work for Uber or Deliveroo aren’t employees, they are independent entrepreneurs but they work in 19th century conditions. Tackling this problem from the level of the city can produce new solutions.</p></br><p>I think when we decided in 2014-2015 to attempt to work at the municipal level in Barcelona, we were aware that Barcelona isn’t just any city: Barcelona has an international presence and we wanted to use Barcelona’s international character to exert an influence on urban issues worldwide. Ada Colau participated in the Habitat conference in Quito in October 2016, before that in the meeting of local authorities in Bogota, she is now co-president of the World Union of Municipalities. So there’s an investment that didn’t start just with us but that started in the period when Maragall<sup id="cite_ref-7" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-7">[7]</a></sup> was mayor, a very high investment by Barcelona in participating in this international sphere of cities. This reinforces Barcelona in its confrontations with the State and with private enterprise as well. It plays an important role. There is an international commission within Barcelona en Comú, they are constantly working with other world cities – they have been in France, they have a strong link with Grenoble and will be going to a meeting of French cities in September to talk about potential collaboration, they often go to Italy, they’ve gone to Belgrade, to Poland. In June they’re organising a meeting of Fearless Cities, with the participation of many mayors from major cities in Europe and around the world.<br /></br>So there is a very clear vision of the global aspect. So the global dimension is very present, and at the level of Spain as well. The problem there is that there is political interference, for example in Madrid, which is very important as a city, but within the municipal group “Ahora Madrid” they’re very internally divided, so sometimes you speak to one and the others don’t like it. We have really good relations with Galicia: A Coruña and Santiago de Compostela, also with Valencia, but Valencia also has its own dynamic. Zaragoza. Each city has its own dynamic, so sometimes it’s complicated to establish on-going relations.</p></br><p><b>AA —</b> What about Cadiz?</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> Of course, Cadiz is also part of this trend, but the group there is part of the Podemos anti-capitalist faction, so there are nuances.</p></br><p><b>NT —</b> You mentioned 2 points regarding internationalism…</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> Yes, first there was the general global perspective on cities and the second is Barcelona’s own concrete interest. So the first is more global, that is, any city in the world today has many more possibilities if it looks at its strategic global role and if it wants to strengthen its position, it has to work on the global level. In the case of Barcelona specifically, there is also a will that’s partly traditional, because it was begun by Maragall, you have to remember that here in Barcelona there are 10 districts, and during the war of the Balkans, Maragall created District 11, which was Sarajevo: city technicians went to Sarajevo to work with them, and still today there are municipal technicians who travel regularly to Gaza to work there, or with La Havana – in other words there’s a clearly established internationalist stance in the municipality. Also, the headquarters of the World Union of Local Governments is in Barcelona. The international headquarters of Educating Cities is in Barcelona, so there has constantly been a will to be present on the international scene since Maragall, and now this is continuing but with a new orientation as well. Perhaps there used to be the idea of exporting the Barcelona model, branding Barcelona, but that is no longer the case.<br /></br>There’s very intense organisation globally, probably if Ada accepted all the invitations she receives, she’d be travelling all the time.</p></br><p><b>AA —</b> Coming back to the issue of sovereignty vs independence and “the right to decide”, how does this play out?</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> The issue of independence is internally very complex with different positions. I think there is a general agreement on 3 things, ie:</p></br><ol></br><li>Catalonia has its own demos and therefore is a political subject which must be recognised,</li></br><li>it has to be able to decide how to articulate itself with the other political subjects in Spain and in Europe, it has to have the right, the capacity to decide;</li></br><li>this requires the construction of a State of its own.</li></br></ol></br><p>It is on the fourth point that we are not in agreement: whether that State should be independent or whether it should be in some way linked, allied, confederated with the rest of the Iberian Peninsula or with Europe. These 3 initial points are sufficiently important and they are the basis for the fact that Catalunya en Comú or Barcelona en Comú is part of the broad sovereigntist space in Catalonia. What it isn’t part of is the independentist space in Catalonia. Despite the fact that I would say some 30-40% of the members are pro-independence, but the rest not. And that is an issue which divides us. But what we are trying to do is to work out this debate on the basis of our own criteria, not on those of other movements. The criteria of the others are ‘you are independentist or you are not independentist’. Our own criteria are: yes, we are sovereigntists, we discuss sovereignties and we’ll see. Since we agree on what is the most important (that is – an autonomous political subject, the right to decide, an autonomous State), let’s discuss how we can articulate. We have fraternal relations with 4 million people in the rest of Spain who agree with us on the first 3 criteria. So the key question probably would be: Does Catalonia want to separate from the rest of Spain or from this Spain? The standard response would be “We have never known any other. We’ve always seen the same Spain, so there is no other Spain”. So the debate we can have is over “Yes, another Spain is possible”. Sort of like the debate right now over whether to leave Europe: do we want to leave Europe of leave this Europe? But is another Europe possible or not?</p></br><h3>The Challenges of Scale</h3></br><p><b>NT —</b> I am struck by the fact that every time we refer to the initiative of Catalunya en Comú, you respond by giving the example of what’s happening in Barcelona: do you see Barcelona as the model for Un Pais en Comú?</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> No, it’s not that it’s the model, there is even some reticence within Barcelona en Comú that this new political initiative may have negative consequences for Barcelona en Comú. The Barcelona in Comú experiment has worked really well: within BeC political parties continue to exist (Podemos, Iniciativa, EUIA, Guanyem) and all agree that it’s necessary to create this subject, because it’s clear – there’s a phrase by a former mayor of Vitoria in the Basque country who said “Where my capacities end, my responsibilities begin” – that is, clearly, cities are developing roles that are more and more important, but their capacities continue to be very limited and especially their resources are very limited – so there’s an imbalance between capacities and responsibilities. Between what cities could potentially do and what they really can do. Refuge-cities – a thousand things. So within Barcelona en Comú there is an understanding of the interest of creating Catalunya en Comú in order to have influence in other levels of government. And to present candidates in elections in Spain with En Comú Podem because to be represented in Madrid is also important. But of course, sometimes this expansion can make us lose the most original aspect, that is the emphasis on municipalism, in the capacity to create these spaces – so there’s a certain tension. And obviously, when you go outside Barcelona in Catalonia, the local and territorial realities are very different, you find… you no longer control what kind of people are joining and so you can end up with surprises – good and bad ones – so there are some doubts, some growing pains. You have to grow, but how will that affect what we have so far? our ways of working and all that… I always refer to Barcelona en Comú because we have existed for longer, we have a sort of ‘tradition’ in the way we work, and on the contrary, the other day we held the founding assembly of Catalunya en Comú and – where are we headed? how long will we be able to maintain the freshness, avoid falling into the traditional vices of political parties? Xavi (Domenech) is a very good candidate, he has what I call a Guanyem DNA, but it’s not evident that we can pull this through. That’s the doubt.</p></br><p><b>NT —</b> How do you assess the results of the founding assembly of Catalunya en Comú? Are you happy with what came out of it?</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> Yes, I’m satisfied, although I don’t think the results were optimal, but we are squeezed by a political calendar that we don’t control. It’s very probable that there will be elections this year in Catalonia, so if that happens… what would have been preferable? To reproduce the Barcelona en Comú model, take more time and work more from the bottom up, hold meetings throughout the territory – we did hold about 70 or 80, but a lot more would have been better – do things more slowly and look around, build links with local movements, the same ones as in Barcelona but on the level of Catalonia – energy, water, etc: reconstruct the same process. But sure, they’re going to call elections or a referendum in 2 days. What is clear is that we can’t do the same thing as with ‘Catalunya si que es pot’<sup id="cite_ref-8" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-8">[8]</a></sup>, which was a coalition but it didn’t work. So all this has meant that the process – despite the fact that I think it has been carried out well, is not optimal: within the realm of the possible, I think it was done with great dignity.</p></br><p><b>NT —</b> And with respect to the deliberative process that was used to arrive at the final document?</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> Basically the same thing: it could have been done better, with deeper debates in each area, it was done very quickly, a lot of issues in a short period of time. The task was very complex, and I think the result is worthy. We tried to avoid standardised jargon and parameters, to make it a bit different. So now we’ll see – yesterday the Executive met for the first time, and on May 13 will be the first meeting of the coordinating group of 120 people<sup id="cite_ref-9" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-9">[9]</a></sup>. So we’ll have to see how this all is gotten underway. I am not convinced that it will all be functional in time for the Catalan elections, for me the key date is May 2019 which are the next municipal elections. Then we’ll see if this has really jelled and if we can have a significant presence throughout the territory. This territorial vision is very important in order to avoid a top-down construction. The key thing in Catalonia is to do it with dignity and not to become entrapped in this dual logic of independence or not, to be capable of bringing together a social force that is in that position.</p></br><div class="" style="font-size: .8em;"></br><p>NOTES</p></br><ol class="references"></br><li id="cite_note-1"><span class="mw-cite-backlink"><a href="#cite_ref-1">↑</a></span> <span class="reference-text">Autonomous elections are those held in the 17 Autonomous Communities of Spain created by the 1978 Constitution. Catalunya is one of them.</span></li></br><li id="cite_note-2"><span class="mw-cite-backlink"><a href="#cite_ref-2">↑</a></span> <span class="reference-text">The Unified Socialist Party of Catalonia or PSUC: Founded in 1936, it allied the main parties of the Catalan left around the Communist Party. It was dissolved in 1987.</span></li></br><li id="cite_note-3"><span class="mw-cite-backlink"><a href="#cite_ref-3">↑</a></span> <span class="reference-text">« A country in common ». The process, carried out in a transparent and well-documented manner, began with a negotiation with certain left-wing parties and movements, and encouraged discussion and new proposals at popular assemblies throughout the region and in online discussion open to the public. More than 3,000 people participated in 70 assemblies and more than 1,700 proposals and amendments were made online with the webpage registering nearly 130,000 hits. The Assembly discussed and voted on the various amendments and agreed on a transitional structure composed of a coordinating body of 120 members and an executive committee of 33 members, each with a one-year mandate to propose an ethical code, statutes, an organizational structure and political options in the unfolding conjuncture. </span></li></br><li id="cite_note-4"><span class="mw-cite-backlink"><a href="#cite_ref-4">↑</a></span> <span class="reference-text">« La Politica de Comù » in Nous horitzons (New Horizons) No. 215, 2017. Originally titled Horitzons, the magazine was founded in 1960 in clandestinity and published in Catalan abroad by intellectuals linked to the PSUC. It has been published in Catalonia since 1972. It recently opened its pages to other progressive political tendencies. </span></li></br><li id="cite_note-5"><span class="mw-cite-backlink"><a href="#cite_ref-5">↑</a></span> <span class="reference-text">Albano Dante Fachin, member of the Catalan parliament, is the head of Podem (the Catalan wing of the Podemos party). He opposed the participation of his party in the constituent assembly of Un Pais en Comù thus creating a crisis in the ranks of Podemos at both the Catalan and national levels. Party leader Pablo Iglesias did not disown him, but delegated his national second-in-command Pablo Echenique to represent him in the assembly. </span></li></br><li id="cite_note-6"><span class="mw-cite-backlink"><a href="#cite_ref-6">↑</a></span> <span class="reference-text">Coalitions of the Catalan left since the transition period of the 1970s have been numerous and complex for the uninitiated. « Iniciativa for Catalonia Verts » dates from 1995 and was composed of the Green party with Iniciativa for Catalonia, itself a 1987 coalition of the left parties around the PSUC and the former Catalan Communist Party. EUIA (United and Alternative Left) is another coalition in 1998 which includes the first two and all the small parties of the radical left. EUIA is the Catalan branch of Izquierda Unida (United Left) the new name of the Spanish Communist Party. </span></li></br><li id="cite_note-7"><span class="mw-cite-backlink"><a href="#cite_ref-7">↑</a></span> <span class="reference-text">Pasqual Maragall, member and later president of the Catalan Socialist Party, became mayor of Barcelona in 1982 with the support of the elected members of the Unified Socialist Party of Catalonia (PSUC). He remained in this position for almost 15 years without ever having a majority in the municipal council. He then became President of the Catalan government in 2003.</span></li></br><li id="cite_note-8"><span class="mw-cite-backlink"><a href="#cite_ref-8">↑</a></span> <span class="reference-text">Catalunya Sí que es Pot (CSQP, « Yes Catalonia Is Possible ») is a left-wing coalition created in view of the Catalan elections in the autumn of 2015. Barcelona en Comù, itself a municipal coalition, was elected in May 2015 but decided not to run in the autonomous elections. </span></li></br><li id="cite_note-9"><span class="mw-cite-backlink"><a href="#cite_ref-9">↑</a></span> <span class="reference-text">The election result was no surprise: ‘A country in common’ founder Xavier Domenech will preside the Executive Committee and Ada Colau, the current mayor of Barcelona, is president of the coordinating body. The membership, via an internet vote, chose on May 20 a new name preferring « Catalunya en Comù » to « En Comú podem », thus distinguishing itself from the 2015 Catalan coalition with Podemos, also called « En comu podem » and signalling a reinforcement of the « Barcelona en Comù » wing with respect to the supporters of Podemos in the new entity. The rejection of the earlier name ‘Un Pais en Comu’ may also denote a desire to distance itself from a pro-independence stance.</span></li></br></ol></br></div>i> </ol> </div>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p><a href="https://www.remixthec … <p><a href="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Move-North-South-Water.jpg"><img decoding="async" loading="lazy" class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-4194" src="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Move-North-South-Water-198x300.jpg" alt="Move North South Water" width="198" height="300" /></a></p></br><p>Le « Nan Shui Bei Diao » – littéralement Sud Eau Nord Déplacer – est le plus gros projet de transfert d’eau au monde, entre le sud et le nord de la Chine. Sur les traces de ce chantier colossal, le film d’Antoine Boutet dresse la cartographie mouvementée d’un territoire d’ingénieur où le ciment bat les plaines, les fleuves quittent leur lit, les déserts deviennent forêts, où peu à peu des voix s’élèvent, réclamant justice et droit à la parole. Tandis que la matière se décompose et que les individus s’alarment, un paysage de science-fiction, contre nature, se recompose.</p></br><p>Sud Eau Nord Déplacer sortira mercredi 28 janvier 2915 dans les salles de cinéma. Si vous souhaitez vous associer à une de ces projections, contactez la salle de cinéma concernée ou la distribution du film : mdecout@zeugmafilms.fr. Si vous souhaitez accompagner une projection dans une ville où le film n’est pas encore programmé, contactez-nous : hague.philippe@gmail.com</p>film n’est pas encore programmé, contactez-nous : hague.philippe@gmail.com</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p><a href="https://www.remixthec … <p><a href="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Move-North-South-Water.jpg"><img decoding="async" loading="lazy" class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-4194" src="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Move-North-South-Water-198x300.jpg" alt="Move North South Water" width="198" height="300" /></a></p></br><p>The « Nan Shui Bei Diao » – literally South North Water Move – is the largest water transfer project in the world, between the southern and northern China. In the footsteps of this colossal project, the film stands by Antoine Boutet eventful mapping a territory where cement beats plains, rivers leave their beds, deserts become forests, which gradually voices are in demand of justice and the right to speak. While the material decomposes and individuals are alarmed, a landscape of science fiction, against nature, is recomposed.</p></br><p>Move North South Water released Wednesday, January 28th. If you want to associate yourself with one projection, contact the respective theater or distribution of the film: mdecout@zeugmafilms.fr. And if you want to support a projection in a city where the film is not yet scheduled, contact us: hague.philippe@gmail.com</p> where the film is not yet scheduled, contact us: hague.philippe@gmail.com</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p><iframe loading="lazy" src="// … <p><iframe loading="lazy" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/a0J2gj80EVI?rel=0" width="400" height="225" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p></br><p>« Sans Lendemain », est un film d’animation sur l’exploitation des énergies fossiles et des ressources naturelles et leurs conséquences sur la vie humaine sur la planète. Il est réalisé par Dermot O’ Connor et produit par Incubate Pictures. en 35 minutes, il aborde de façon très intelligible toute une série de problématiques liées à la croissance de notre système économique et à notre façon de consommer.</p></br><p>Réalisation : Dermot O’ Connor (35 minutes, 2012).<a href="http://www.idleworm.com">http://www.idleworm.com</a><br /></br><a href="http://www.incubatepictures.com">http://www.incubatepictures.com</a> – <a href="http://www.angryanimator.com">http://www.angryanimator.com</a></p></br><p>Information et documentation sur le site <a href="http://sansLendemain.mpOC.be">http://sansLendemain.mpOC.be</a>.</p></br><p>Titre original étasunien : There’s no tomorrow.<br /></br><a href="https://www.youtube.com/redirect?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DVOMWzjrRiBg&redir_token=PRF4kw9bwKfWe7SJ5S33XwpWSiZ8MTQwMTM2NzY0MEAxNDAxMjgxMjQw">https://www.youtube.com</a></p></br><p>Version française 2013 due à l’initiative du groupe de Liège du mpOC, Mouvement politique des objecteurs de croissance (le mpOC n’est pas un parti politique).</p></br><p>Avec le soutien de :<br /></br>Amis de la Terre Belgique, ASPO.be (section belge de l’Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas), GRAPPE (Groupe de Réflexion et d’Action Pour une Politique Ecologique), IEW (Inter-Environnement Wallonie), Imagine demain le monde, mpOC.</p></br><p>Traduction : Francis Leboutte.<br /></br>Voix : Caroline Lamarche.<br /></br>Mixage voix : Margarida Guia.<br /></br>Sous-titres en néerlandais, allemand, anglais, français, espagnol et italien.</p>aduction : Francis Leboutte.<br /> Voix : Caroline Lamarche.<br /> Mixage voix : Margarida Guia.<br /> Sous-titres en néerlandais, allemand, anglais, français, espagnol et italien.</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p><iframe loading="lazy" src="// … <p><iframe loading="lazy" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/6t0csmTRkck?rel=0" width="400" height="225" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p></br><p>Les questions sur la «propriété» ou sur le droit de bénéficier de l’héritage indigène sont au cœur des débats politiques, économiques et éthiques en cours aux niveaux local, national et international. Quand il s’agit de la recherche dans ce domaine, la vision des peuples autochtones sur la façon dont les études relatives à leur patrimoine sont gérés, est généralement peu prise en compte. De plus en plus cependant, des efforts sont faits pour décoloniser les pratiques de recherche en favorisant des relations plus équitables entre les chercheurs et les peuples autochtones, fondées sur la confiance mutuelle et la collaboration.</p></br><p>Dans cette présentation, George Nicholas critique les débats sur la «propriété» du patrimoine autochtone et fournit des exemples de nouvelles pratiques de recherche qui sont à la fois plus éthiques et plus efficaces. Ces modèles de recherche en collaboration, dans lesquels la communauté mène la recherche, mettent en évidence de nouvelles orientations importantes dans la protection du patrimoine des peuples autochtones.</p></br><p>IPinCH (Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage) est un projet international de recherche participative autour de la réappropriation de l’héritage culturel par les communautés ancestrales. A qui appartient le passé ? A qui bénéficie-t-il ? quelles sont les conceptions culturelles de l’héritage culturel (de la mémoire) ? Comment distinguer accaparement et emprunts culturels (cultural borrowings) ? Ce projet croise des questions sur le domaine public, la nature de la recherche conduite par les communautés (et non pour elles) et sur les connaissances ancestrales (et culturelles en général). Il montre un éventail de processus de gestion collective des connaissances des communautés et tire des principes applicables à la recherche et pour comprendre les questions étudiées. Enfin, il propose l’usage de la <a href="http://www.localcontexts.org/">Traditional Knowledge licence</a> et un <a href="http://www.sfu.ca/ipinch/outputs/blog/appropriation-month-midterm-exam">questionnaire </a>pour évaluer accaparement ou emprunt culturel.</p></br><p>Speaker: George Nicholas<br /></br>Event: SFU Public Square<br /></br>Date: April 2, 2014</p>;/p> <p>Speaker: George Nicholas<br /> Event: SFU Public Square<br /> Date: April 2, 2014</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p><img decoding="async" loading= … <p><img decoding="async" loading="lazy" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-4963" src="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/pla_barcelona_digital_city_in-2.jpg" alt="" width="600" height="300" /><br /></br>In the last elections in May, Barcelona en Comù has formed an alliance with the Catalan Socialist Party to form a new municipal government with a common agenda and Ada Colau was re-elected for another 4-year term. The first term of office 2015-2019 was held with a minority government and in a regional and national context that was politically and ideologically unfavourable to the development of a « new municipalism of the commons » and an « alternative way of doing politics » that Barcelona claimed to be « en Comù ».</p></br><p>The time has come to take stock and, of course, many will have something to say about the achievements made by comparing them to the initial programme. But when we see on the one hand the concrete achievements that often go beyond or question the competences of a municipality (housing, mobility, civic income, health, immigration, tourism, feminisation of politics, energy and technological sovereignty, etc) and on the other hand, what has been done to put transparency in the relationship between the institution, the social movements and the neighbourhood assemblies and the research, for a co-production of policies, we can affirm that the results are generally positive.</p></br><p>The commons movement members and the supporters of a new municipalism, can be pleased that, thanks to a coalition of social movements, that has had the courage (and it is necessary) to invest an institution impregnated with neo-liberal practices and a logic of political parties fights, that is often far from the needs and realities of residents, Barcelona remains one of the most dynamic laboratories of urban commons and a model to which to refer.</p></br><p>The <a href="https://ajuntament.barcelona.cat/digital/sites/default/files/pla_barcelona_digital_city_in.pdf_barcelona_digital_city_in.pdf">review of the digital plan</a> implemented during the first mandate proposed here is characteristic of the achievements, critical path and creativity of this laboratory.</p></br><p>Here is how the city summarizes the principles of its action:</p></br><blockquote><p>Establish itself as a global reference point as a city of commons and collaborative production<br /></br>End privatisation and transfer of public assets in private hands, while promoting remunicipalisation of critical urban infrastructures<br /></br>Massively reduce the cost of basic services like housing, transport, education and health, in order to assist those in the most precarious strata of the population<br /></br>Institute a citizens basic income focused on targeting proverty and social exclusion Barcelona Digital City Plan (2015-2019)<br /></br>Build data-driven models of the economy, with real inputs (using real time data analytics) so that participatory democracy could model complex decisions<br /></br>Prefer and promote collaborative organisations over both the centralised state and the market solutions (start investing higher percentages of public budget in innovative SMEs and the cooperative sector)<br /></br>Build city data commons: decree that the networked data of the population generated in the context of using public services cannot be owned by services operators</p></blockquote></br><p>These principles are embodied in an action programme, the effects of which are detailed in this document. In addition to the emblematic 13,000 policy proposals from the inhabitants, of which 9.245 (72%) have been accepted, there have been 126 cases of corruption reported through the Transparency mailbox since 2017 or the inclusion of gender differences in the STEAM education and technological training programme.</p></br><p>Finally, Barcelona, here as in other areas, is building on and strengthening city networks. It initiated – with New York and Amsterdam – the Coalition of Cities for Digital Rights and launched the campaign « 100 Cities in 100 Days » to defend 5 principles of digital policy:</p></br><blockquote></br><ul></br><li>Equal and universal access to Internet and computer literacy Barcelona Digital City Plan (2015-2019)</li></br><li>Privacy, data protection and security</li></br><li>Transparency, accountability and non-discrimination in data, content and algorithms</li></br><li>Participatory democracy, diversity, and inclusion</li></br><li>Open and ethical digital service standards</li></br></ul></br></blockquote></br><p>The cities of the Coalition are developing common roadmaps, laws, tools, actions and resources to protect the digital rights of residents and visitors.</p></br><p><strong>Alain Ambrosi and Frédéric Sultan</strong></p></br><p><em>For a more exhaustive assessment see the sector-by-sector assessment on the <a href="https://barcelonaencomu.cat/es">Barcelona Joint Site (in Spanish)</a> </em></p> protect the digital rights of residents and visitors.</p> <p><strong>Alain Ambrosi and Frédéric Sultan</strong></p> <p><em>For a more exhaustive assessment see the sector-by-sector assessment on the <a href="https://barcelonaencomu.cat/es">Barcelona Joint Site (in Spanish)</a> </em></p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p>As we are preparing a public meet … <p>As we are preparing a public meeting on the 16th. of September in Paris, with Michel Bauwens and Bernard Stiegler, on issues of free knowledge as commons and ecological, social and economic transition, we present here the translation into French of the interview conducted by Richard Poynder, with Michel Bauwens about FLOK Society project. This interview was published when the summit FLOK society was started in Quito in May 2014. It was published under the original title: <a href="http://poynder.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/working-for-phase -transition-to-open.html "> Working for a phase of transition to an open commons-based knowledge society: Interview with Michel Bauwens. Michel Bauwens FLOK Society presents the project and the expected outcomes in Ecuador and more generally for the P2P movement, without concealing the difficulties he and his research team met.</a></p></br><p>Richard Poynder is a well knowed independent journalist and blogger, following the Open Access movement for a long time ago, specialised in scientific communication and open science, information technology and intellectual property. His <a href="http://poynder.blogspot.co.uk">Blog </a> is a mine of gold for every body who is interested in these issues.</p></br><p>The interview is under Licence : CC BY NC ND. The translation has been made by Frédéric Sultan.</p></br><p>Tuesday, May 27, 2014</p></br><figure style="width: 400px" class="wp-caption alignleft"><img decoding="async" loading="lazy" src="http://i.vimeocdn.com/video/177863970_640.jpg" alt="" width="400" height="225" /><figcaption class="wp-caption-text">Michel Bauwens – Berlin 2012 Remix The Commons</figcaption></figure></br><div><i>Today a </i><a href="http://cumbredelbuenconocer.ec/"><i>summit</i></a><i> starts in Quito, Ecuador that will discuss ways in which the country can transform itself into an open commons-based knowledge society. The team that put together the proposals is led by Michel Bauwens from the </i><a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/"><i>Foundation for Peer-to-Peer Alternatives</i></a><i>. What is the background to this plan, and how likely is it that it will bear fruit?  With the hope of finding out I spoke recently to Bauwens.</i></div></br><div>One interesting phenomenon to emerge from the Internet has been the growth of free and open movements, including free and open source software, open politics, open government, open data, citizen journalism, creative commons, open science, open educational resources (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_educational_resources">OER</a>), open access etc.</div></br><div>While these movements often set themselves fairly limited objectives (e.g. “<a href="http://cogprints.org/1702/">freeing the refereed literature</a>”) some network theorists maintain that the larger phenomenon they represent has the potential not just to replace traditional closed and proprietary practices with more open and transparent approaches, and not just to subordinate narrow commercial interests to the greater needs of communities and larger society but, since the network enables ordinary citizens to collaborate together on large meaningful projects in a distributed way (and absent traditional hierarchical organisations), it could have a significant impact on the way in which societies and economies organise themselves.</div></br><div>In his influential book <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wealth_of_Networks"><i>The Wealth of Networks</i></a>, for instance, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yochai_Benkler">Yochai Benkler</a> identifies and describes a new form of production that he sees emerging on the Internet — what he calls “<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commons-based_peer_production">commons-based peer production</a>”. This, he says, is creating a new <a href="http://www.slideshare.net/macloo/networked-information-economy-benkler">Networked Information Economy</a>.</div></br><div>Former librarian and Belgian network theorist <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Bauwens">Michel Bauwens</a> goes so far as to say that by enabling peer-to-peer (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_peer-to-peer_processes">P2P</a>) collaboration, the Internet has created a new model for the future development of human society. In addition to peer production, he <a href="http://poynder.blogspot.co.uk/2006/09/p2p-blueprint-for-future.html">explained to me in 2006</a>, the network also encourages the creation of peer property (i.e. commonly owned property), and peer governance (governance based on civil society rather than representative democracy).</div></br><div>Moreover, what is striking about peer production is that it emerges and operates outside traditional power structures and market systems. And when those operating in this domain seek funding they increasingly turn not to the established banking system, but to new P2P practices like crowdfunding and social lending.</div></br><div>When in 2006 I asked Bauwens what the new world he envisages would look like in practice he replied, “I see a P2P civilisation that would have to be post-capitalist, in the sense that human survival cannot co-exist with a system that destroys the biosphere; but it will nevertheless have a thriving marketplace. At the core of such a society — where immaterial production is the primary form — would be the production of value through non-reciprocal peer production, most likely supported through a basic income.”</div></br><h2>Unrealistic and utopian?</h2></br><div> So convinced was he of the potential of P2P that in 2005 Bauwens created the <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/">Foundation for Peer-to-Peer Alternatives</a>. The goal: to “research, document and promote peer-to-peer principles”</div></br><div>Critics dismiss Bauwens’ ideas as unrealistic and utopian, and indeed in the eight years since I first spoke with him much has happened that might seem to support the sceptics. Rather than being discredited by the 2008 financial crisis, for instance, traditional markets and neoliberalism have tightened their grip on societies, in all parts of the world.</div></br><div>At the same time, the democratic potential and openness Bauwens sees as characteristic of the network is being eroded in a number of ways. While social networking platforms like Facebook enable the kind of sharing and collaboration Bauwens sees lying at the heart of a P2P society, for instance, there is a growing sense that these services are in fact exploitative, not least because the significant value created by the users of these services is being monetised not for the benefit of the users themselves, but for the exclusive benefit of the large corporations that own them.</div></br><div>We have also seen a huge growth in proprietary mobile devices, along with the flood of apps needed to run on them — a development that caused <i>Wired’s</i> former editor-in-chief <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Anderson_%28writer%29">Chris Anderson</a> to <a href="http://www.wired.com/2010/08/ff_webrip">conclude</a> that we are witnessing a dramatic move “from the wide-open Web to semi closed platforms”. And this new paradigm, he added, simply “reflects the inevitable course of capitalism”.</div></br><div>In other words, rather than challenging or side-lining the traditional market and neoliberalism, the network seems destined to be appropriated by it — a likelihood that for many was underlined by the recent <a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-net-neutrality-20140114-story.html#page=1">striking down</a> of the US net neutrality regulations.</div></br><div>It would also appear that some of the open movements are gradually being appropriated and/or subverted by commercial interests (e.g. the <a href="http://poynder.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/the-state-of-open-access.html">open access</a> and open educational resources movements).</div></br><div>While conceding that a capitalist version of P2P has begun to emerge, Bauwens argues that this simply makes it all the more important to support and promote social forms of P2P. And here, he suggests, the signs are positive, with the number of free and open movements continuing to grow and the P2P model bleeding out of the world of “immaterial production” to encompass material production too — e.g. with the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_design">open design</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_hardware">open hardware</a> movements, a development encouraged by the growing use of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3d_printing">3D printers</a>.</div></br><div>Bauwens also points to a growth in mutualisation, and the emergence of new practices based around the sharing of physical resources and equipment.</div></br><div>Interestingly, these latter developments are often less visible than one might expect because much of what is happening in this area appears to be taking place outside the view of mainstream media in the global north.</div></br><div>Finally, says Bauwens, the P2P movement, or commoning (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bollier">as some prefer to call it</a>), is becoming increasingly politicised. Amongst other things, this has seen the rise of new political parties like the various <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate_Party">Pirate Parties</a>.</div></br><div>Above all, Bauwens believes that the long-term success of P2P is assured because its philosophy and practices are far more sustainable than the current market-based system. “Today, we consider nature infinite and we believe that infinite resources should be made scarce in order to protect monopolistic players,” he says below. “Tomorrow, we need to consider nature as a finite resource, and we should respect the abundance of nature and the human spirit.”</div></br><h2>Periphery to mainstream</h2></br><div>And as the need for sustainability becomes ever more apparent, more people will doubtless want to listen to what Bauwens has to say. Indeed, what better sign that P2P could be about to move from the periphery to the mainstream than an invitation Bauwens received last year from three Ecuadorian governmental institutions, who asked him to lead a team tasked with coming up with proposals for transitioning the country to a society based on free and open knowledge.</div></br><div>The organisation overseeing the project is the FLOK Society (free, libre, open knowledge). As “commoner” <a href="http://bollier.org/about">David Bollier</a> <a href="http://bollier.org/blog/bauwens-joins-ecuador-planning-commons-based-peer-production-economy">explained</a> when the project was announced, Bauwens’ team was asked to look at many interrelated themes, “including open education; open innovation and science; ‘arts and meaning-making activities’; open design commons; distributed manufacturing; and sustainable agriculture; and open machining.”</div></br><div>Bollier added, “The research will also explore enabling legal and institutional frameworks to support open productive capacities; new sorts of open technical infrastructures and systems for privacy, security, data ownership and digital rights; and ways to mutualise the physical infrastructures of collective life and promote collaborative consumption.”</div></br><div>In other words, said Bollier, Ecuador “does not simply assume — as the ‘developed world’ does — that more iPhones and microwave ovens will bring about prosperity, modernity and happiness.”</div></br><div>Rather it is looking for sustainable solutions that foster “social and territorial equality, cohesion, and integration with diversity.”</div></br><div>The upshot: In April Bauwens’ team published a series of <a href="http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Pl">proposals</a> intended to transition Ecuador to what he calls a sustainable civic P2P economy. And these proposals will be discussed at a summit to be held this week in the capital of Ecuador (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quito">Quito</a>).</div></br><div>“As you can see from our proposals, we aim for a simultaneous transformation of civil society, the market and public authorities,” says Bauwens. “And we do this without inventing or imposing utopias, but by extending the working prototypes from the commoners and peer producers themselves.”</div></br><div>But Bauwens knows that Rome wasn’t built in a day, and he realises that he has taken on a huge task, one fraught with difficulties. Even the process of putting the proposals together has presented him and his team with considerable challenges. Shortly after they arrived in Ecuador, for instance, they were told that the project had been defunded (funding that was fortunately later reinstated). And for the moment it remains unclear whether many (or any) of the FLOK proposals will ever see the light of day.</div></br><div>Bauwens is nevertheless upbeat. Whatever the outcome in Ecuador, he says, an important first stab has been made at creating a template for transitioning a nation state from today’s broken model to a post-capitalist social knowledge society.</div></br><div>“What we have now that we didn’t have before, regardless of implementation in Ecuador, is the first global commons-oriented transition plan, and several concrete legislative proposals,” he says. “They are far from perfect, but they will be a reference that other locales, cities, (bio)regions and states will be able to make their own adapted versions of it.”</div></br><div>In the Q&A below Bauwens discusses the project in more detail, including the background to it, and the challenges that he and the FLOK Society have faced.</div></br><h2>The interview begins</h2></br><div><b><i>RP:  We last spoke in 2006 when you discussed your ideas on a P2P (peer-to-peer) society (which I think </i></b><a href="http://www.bollier.org/"><b><i>David Bollier</i></b></a><b><i> refers to as “commoning”). Briefly, what has been learned since then about the opportunities and challenges of trying to create a P2P society, and how have your thoughts on P2P changed/developed as a result?</i></b></div></br><div><b>MB:</b> At the time, P2P dynamics were mostly visible in the process of “immaterial production”, i.e. productive communities that created commons of knowledge and code. The trend has since embraced material production itself, through <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_design">open design</a> that is linked to the production of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_hardware">open hardware</a> machinery.</div></br><div>Another trend is the mutualisation of physical resources. We’ve seen on the one hand an explosion in the mutualisation of open workspaces (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hackerspace">hackerspaces</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fab_lab">fab labs</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coworking">co-working</a>) and the explosion of the so-called sharing economy and collaborative consumption.</div></br><div>This is of course linked to the emergence of distributed practices and technologies for finance (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crowdfunding">crowd funding</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_lending">social lending</a>); and for machinery itself (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3d_printing">3D printing</a> and other forms of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_manufacturing">distributed manufacturing</a>). Hence the emergence and growth of P2P dynamics is now clearly linked to the “distribution of everything”.</div></br><div>There is today no place we go where social P2P initiatives are not developing and not exponentially growing. P2P is now a social fact.</div></br><div>Since the crisis of 2008, we are also seeing much more clearly the political and economic dimension of P2P. There is now both a clearly capitalist P2P sector (renting and working for free is now called sharing, which is putting downward pressure on income levels) and a clearly social one.  First of all, the generalised crisis of our economic system has pushed more people to search for such practical alternatives. Second, most P2P dynamics are clearly controlled by economic forces, i.e. the new “netarchical” (hierarchy of the network) platforms.</div></br><div>Finally, we see the increasing politicisation of P2P, with the emergence of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate_Party">Pirate Parties</a>, network parties (Partido X in Spain) etc.</div></br><div>We have now to decide more clearly than before whether we want more autonomous peer production, i.e. making sure that the domination of the free social logic of permissionless aggregation is directly linked to the capacity to generate self-managed livelihoods, or, if we are happy with a system in which this value creation is controlled and exploited by platform owners and other intermediaries.</div></br><div>The result of all of this is that my own thoughts are now more directly political. We have developed concrete proposals and strategies to create P2P-based counter-economies that are de-linked from the accumulation of capital, but focused on cooperative accumulation and the autonomy of commons production.</div></br><div><b><i>RP: Indeed and last year you were </i></b><a href="http://bollier.org/blog/bauwens-joins-ecuador-planning-commons-based-peer-production-economy"><b><i>asked to lead a team</i></b></a><b><i> to come up with proposals to “remake the roots of Ecuador’s economy, setting off a transition into a society of free and open knowledge”. As I understand it, this would be based on the principles of open networks, peer production and commoning. Can you say something about the project and what you hope it will lead to? Has the Ecuadoran government itself commissioned you, or a government or non-government agency in Ecuador? </i></b></div></br><div><b>MB:</b> The project, called <a href="http://floksociety.org/">FLOKSociety.org</a>, was commissioned by three Ecuadorian governmental institutions, i.e. the <a href="http://www.conocimiento.gob.ec/">Coordinating Ministry of Knowledge and Human Talent</a>, the <a href="http://www.senescyt.gob.ec/web/guest">SENESCYT</a> (Secretaría Nacional de Educación Superior, Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación) and the <a href="http://iaen.edu.ec/">IAEN</a> (Instituto de Altos Estudios del Estado).</div></br><div>The legitimacy and logic of the project comes from the <a href="http://www.unosd.org/content/documents/96National%20Plan%20for%20Good%20Living%20Ecuador.pdf">National Plan of Ecuador</a>, which is centred around the concept of Good Living (<a href="http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/blog/buen-vivir-philosophy-south-america-eduardo-gudynas">Buen Vivir</a>), which is a non-reductionist, non-exclusive material way to look at the economy and social life, inspired by the traditional values of the indigenous people of the Andes. The aim of FLOK is to add “Good Knowledge” as an enabler and facilitator of the good life.</div></br><div>The important point to make is that it is impossible for countries and people that are still in neo-colonial dependencies to evolve to more fair societies without access to shareable knowledge. And this knowledge, expressed in diverse commons that correspond to the different domains of social life (education, science, agriculture, industry), cannot itself thrive without also looking at both the material and immaterial conditions that will enable their creation and expansion.</div></br><h2>FLOK summit</h2></br><div><b><i>RP: To this end you have put together a transition plan. This includes </i></b><a href="http://bollier.org/blog/ecuador%E2%80%99s-pathbreaking-plan-commons-based-peer-production-update"><b><i>a series of proposals</i></b></a><b><i> (available </i></b><a href="https://floksociety.co-ment.com/text/"><b><i>here</i></b></a><b><i>), and a main report (</i></b><a href="http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan"><b><i>here</i></b></a><b><i>). I assume your plan might or might not be taken up by Ecuador. What is the procedure for taking it forward, and how optimistic are you that Ecuador will embark on the transition you envisage?</i></b></div></br><div><b>MB:</b> The transition plan provides a framework for moving from an economy founded on what we call “cognitive” and “netarchical” capitalism (based respectively on the exploitation through IP rents or social media platforms) to a “mature P2P-based civic economy”.</div></br><div>The logic here is that the dominant economic forms today are characterised by a value crisis, one in which value is extracted but it doesn’t flow back to the creators of the value. The idea is to transition to an economy in which this value feedback loop is restored.</div></br><div>So about fifteen of our policy proposals apply this general idea to specific domains, and suggest how open knowledge commons can be created and expanded in these particular areas.</div></br><div>We published these proposals on April 1^st in <a href="http://www.co-ment.com/">co-ment</a>, an open source software that allows people to comment on specific concepts, phrases or paragraphs.</div></br><div>This week (May 27^th to 30^th) the crucial <a href="http://cumbredelbuenconocer.ec/">FLOK summit</a> is taking place to discuss the proposals. This will bring together government institutions, social movement advocates, and experts, from both Ecuador and abroad.</div></br><div>The idea is to devote three days to reaching a consensus amongst these different groups, and then try and get agreement with the governmental institutions able to carry out the proposals.</div></br><div>So there will be two filters: the summit itself, and then the subsequent follow-up, which will clearly face opposition from different interests.</div></br><div>This is not an easy project, since it is not possible to achieve all this by decree.</div></br><div><b><i>RP: Earlier this year you made a series of </i></b><a href="http://bollier.org/blog/flok-society-vision-post-capitalist-economy"><b><i>videos</i></b></a><b><i> discussing the issues arising from what you are trying to do —  which is essentially to create “a post-capitalist social knowledge society”, or “open commons-based knowledge society”. In one video you discuss three different value regimes, and I note you referred to these in your last answer — i.e. cognitive capitalism, netarchical capitalism and a civic P2P economy. Can you say a little more about how these three different regimes differ and why in your view P2P is a better approach than the other two?</i></b></div></br><div><b>MB:</b> I define cognitive capitalism as a regime in which value is generated through a combination of rent extraction from the control of intellectual property and the control of global production networks, and expressed in terms of monetisation.</div></br><div>What we have learned is that the democratisation of networks, which also provides a new means of production and value distribution, means that this type of value extraction is harder and harder to achieve, and it can only be maintained either by increased legal suppression (which erodes legitimacy) and outright technological sabotage (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights_management">DRM</a>). Both of these strategies are not sustainable in the long term.</div></br><div>What we have also learned is that the network has caused a new model to emerge, one adapted to the P2P age, and which I call netarchical capitalism, i.e. “the hierarchy of the network”. In this model, we see the direct exploitation of human cooperation by means of proprietary platforms that both enable and exploit human cooperation. Crucially, while their value is derived from our communication, sharing and cooperation (an empty platform has no value), and on the use value that we are exponentially creating (Google, Facebook don’t produce the content, we do), the exchange value is exclusively extracted by the platform owners. This is unsustainable because it is easy to see that a regime in which the creators of the value get no income at all from their creation is not workable in the long; and so it poses problems for capitalism. After all, who is going to buy goods if they have no income?</div></br><div>So the key issue is: how do we recreate the value loop between creation, distribution, and income? The answer for me is the creation of a mature P2P civic economy that combines open contributory communities, ethical entrepreneurial coalitions able to create livelihoods for the commoners, and for-benefit institutions that can “enable and empower the infrastructure of cooperation”.</div></br><div>Think of the core model of our economy as the Linux economy writ large, but one in which the enterprises are actually in the hands of the value creators themselves. Imagine this micro-economic model on the macro scale of a whole society. Civil society becomes a series of commonses with citizens as contributors; the shareholding market becomes an ethical stakeholder marketplace; and the state becomes a partner state, which “enables and empowers social production” through the commonication of public services and public-commons partnerships.</div></br><h2>Challenges and distrust</h2></br><div><b><i>RP: As you indicated earlier, it is not an easy project that you have embarked on in Ecuador, particularly as it is an attempt to intervene at the level of a nation state. Gordon Cook has </i></b><a href="http://www.cookreport.com/newsletter-sp-542240406/current-issues/287-cook-report-for-may-june-2014"><b><i>said</i></b></a><b><i> of the project: “it barely got off the ground before it began to crash into some of the anticipated obstacles.” Can you say something about these obstacles and how you have been overcoming them?</i></b></div></br><div><b>MB:</b> It is true that the project started with quite negative auspices. It became the victim of internal factional struggles within the government, for instance, and was even defunded for a time after we arrived; the institutions failed to pay our wages for nearly three months, which was a serious issue for the kind of precarious scholar-activists that make up the research team.</div></br><div>However, in March (when one of the sides in the dispute lost, i.e. the initial sponsor <a href="http://www.elciudadano.gob.ec/new-left-review-se-presento-en-ecuador/">Carlos Prieto</a>, rector of the IAEN), we got renewed commitment from the other two institutions. Since then political support has increased, and the summit is about to get underway.</div></br><div>As for Gordon, he became a victim of what we will politely call a series of misinterpreted engagements for the funding of his participation, and it is entirely understandable that he has become critical of the process.</div></br><div>The truth is that the project was hugely contradictory in many different ways, but this is the reality of the political world everywhere, not just in Ecuador.</div></br><div>Indeed, the Ecuadorian government is itself engaged in sometimes contradictory policies and is perceived by civil society to have abandoned many of the early ideas of the civic movement that brought it to power. So, in our attempts at broader participation we have been stifled by the distrust many civic activists have for the government, and the sincerity of our project has been doubted.</div></br><div>Additionally, social P2P dynamics, which of course exist as in many other countries, are not particularly developed in their modern, digitally empowered forms in Ecuador. It has also not helped that the management of the project has been such that the research team has not been able to directly connect with the political leaders in order to test their real engagement. This has been hugely frustrating.</div></br><div>On the positive side, we have been entirely free to conduct our research and formulate our proposals, and it is hard not to believe that the level of funding the project has received reflects a certain degree of commitment.</div></br><div>So the summit is back on track, and we have received renewed commitments. Clearly, however, the proof of the pudding will be in the summit and its aftermath.</div></br><div></div></br><div>Whatever the eventual outcome, it has always been my conviction that the formulation of the first ever integrated Commons Transition Plan (which your readers will find <a href="http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan">here</a>) legitimised by a nation-state, takes the P2P and commons movement to a higher geopolitical plane. As such, it can be seen as part of the global maturation of the P2P/commons approach, even if it turns out not to work entirely in Ecuador itself.<b><i></i></b></div></br><div><b><i>RP: I believe that one of the issues that has arisen in putting together the FLOK proposals is that Ecuadorians who live in rural areas are concerned that a system based on sharing could see their traditional knowledge appropriated by private interests. Can you say something about this fear and how you believe your plan can address such concerns?</i></b></div></br><div><b>MB:</b> As you are aware, traditional communities have suffered from systematic <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/biopiracy">biopiracy</a> over the last few decades, with western scientists studying their botanical knowledge, extracting patentable scientific results from it, and then commercialising it in the West.</div></br><div>So fully shareable licenses like the GPL would keep the knowledge in a commons, but would still allow full commercialisation without material benefits flowing back to Ecuador. So what we are proposing is a discussion about a new type of licensing, which we call <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Peer_Production_License">Commons-Based Reciprocity Licensing</a>. This idea was first pioneered with the Peer Production License as conceived by <a href="http://www.dmytri.info/">Dmytri Kleiner</a>.</div></br><div>Such licences would be designed for a particular usage, say biodiversity research in a series of traditional communities. It allows for free sharing non-commercially, commercial use by not-for-profit entities, and even caters for for-profit entities who contribute back. Importantly, it creates a frontier for for-profits who do not contribute back, and asks them to pay.</div></br><div>What is key here is not just the potential financial flow, but to introduce the principle of reciprocity in the marketplace, thereby creating an ethical economy. The idea is that traditional communities can create their own ethical vehicles, and create an economy from which they can also benefit, and under their control.</div></br><div>This concept is beginning to get attention from open machining communities. However, the debate in Ecuador is only starting. Paradoxically, traditional communities are today either looking for traditional IP protection, which doesn’t really work for them, or for no-sharing options.</div></br><div>So we really need to develop intermediary ethical solutions for them that can benefit them while also putting them in the driving seat.</div></br><h2>Fundamental reversal of our civilisation</h2></br><h2></h2></br><div><b><i>RP: In today’s global economy, where practically everyone and everything seems to be interconnected and subject to the rules of neoliberalism and the market, is it really possible for a country like Ecuador to go off in such a different direction on its own? </i></b></div></br><div><b>MB:</b> A full transition is indeed probably a global affair, but the micro-transitions need to happen at the grassroots, and a progressive government would be able to create exemplary policies and projects that show the way.</div></br><div>Ecuador is in a precarious neo-colonial predicament and subject to the pressures of the global market and the internal social groups that are aligned with it. There are clear signs that since 2010 the Ecuadorian government has moved away from the original radical ideas expressed in the Constitution and the National Plan, as we hear from nearly every single civic movement that we’ve spoken with.</div></br><div>The move for a social knowledge economy is of strategic importance to de-colonialise Ecuador but this doesn’t mean it will actually happen. However, the progressive forces have not disappeared entirely from the government institutions.</div></br><div>As such, it is really difficult to predict how successful this project will be. But as I say, given the investment the government has made in the process we believe there will be some progress. My personal view is that the combination of our political and theoretical achievements, and the existence of the policy papers, means that even with moderate progress in the laws and on the ground, we can be happy that we will have made a difference.</div></br><div>So most likely the local situation will turn out to be a hybrid mix of acceptance and refusal of our proposals, and most certainly the situation is not mature enough to accept the underlying logic of our Commons Transition Plan <i>in toto</i>.</div></br><div>In other words, the publication and the dialogue about the plan itself, and some concrete actions, legislative frameworks, and pilot projects, are the best we can hope for. What this will do is give real legitimacy to our approach and move the commons transition to the geo-political stage. Can we hope for more?</div></br><div>Personally, I believe that even if only 20% of our proposals are retained for action, I think we can consider it a relative success. This is the very first time such an even partial transition will have happened at the scale of the nation and, as I see it, it gives legitimacy to a whole new set of ideas about societal transition. So I believe it is worthy of our engagement.</div></br><div>We have to accept that the realities of power politics are incompatible with the expectations of a clean process for such a fundamental policy change. But we hope that some essential proposals of the project will make a difference, both for the people of Ecuador and all those that are watching the project.</div></br><div>For the future though, I have to say I seriously question the idea of trying to “hack a society” which was the initial philosophy of the project and of the people who hired us. You can’t hack a society, since a society is not an executable program. Political change needs a social and political basis, and it was very weak from the start in this case.</div></br><div>This is why I believe that future projects should first focus on the lower levels of political organisation, such as cities and regions, where politics is closer to the needs of the population. History though, is always full of surprises, and bold gambles can yield results. So FLOK may yet surprise the sceptics.</div></br><div><b><i>RP: If Ecuador did adopt your plan (or a significant part of it), what in your view would be the implications, for Ecuador, for other countries, and for the various free and open movements? What would be the implications if none of it were adopted?</i></b></div></br><div><b>MB:</b> As I say, at this stage I see only the possibility of a few legal advances and some pilot projects as the best case scenario. These, however, would be important seeds for Ecuador, and would give extra credibility to our effort.</div></br><div>I realise it may surprise you to hear me say it, but I don’t see this as crucial. I say this because, we already have thousands of projects in the world that are engaged in peer production and commons transitions, and this deep trend is not going to change. The efforts to change the social and economic logic will go on with or without Ecuador.</div></br><div>As I noted, what we have now that we didn’t have before, regardless of implementation in Ecuador, is the first global commons-oriented transition plan, and several concrete legislative proposals. They are far from perfect, but they will be a reference that other locales, cities, (bio)regions and states will be able to make their own adapted versions of it.</div></br><div>In the meantime, we have to continue the grassroots transformation and rebuild commons-oriented coalitions at every level, local, regional, national, global. This will take time, but since infinite growth is not possible in a finite economy, some type of transition is inevitable. Let’s just hope it will be for the benefit of the commoners and the majority of the world population.</div></br><div>Essentially, we need to build the seed forms of the new counter-economy, and the social movement that can defend, facilitate and expand it. Every political and policy expression of this is a bonus.</div></br><div>As for the endgame, you guessed correctly. What distinguishes the effort of the P2P Foundation, and many of the FLOK researchers, is that we’re not just in the business of adding some commons and P2P dynamics to the existing capitalist framework, but aiming at a profound “phase transition”.</div></br><div>To work for a sustainable society and economy is absolutely crucial for the future of humanity, and while we respect the freedoms of people to engage in market dynamics for the allocation of rival goods, we cannot afford a system of infinite growth and scarcity engineering, which is what capitalism is.</div></br><div>In other words, today, we consider nature infinite and we believe that infinite resources should be made scarce in order to protect monopolistic players; tomorrow, we need to consider nature as a finite resource, and we should respect the abundance of nature and the human spirit.</div></br><div>So our endgame is to achieve that fundamental reversal of our civilisation, nothing less. As you can see from our proposals, we aim for a simultaneous transformation of civil society, the market and public authorities. And we do this without inventing or imposing utopias, but by extending the working prototypes from the commoners and peer producers themselves.</div></br><p><b><i>RP: Thanks for speaking with me. Good luck with the summit.</i></b></p>gt; <div>I realise it may surprise you to hear me say it, but I don’t see this as crucial. I say this because, we already have thousands of projects in the world that are engaged in peer production and commons transitions, and this deep trend is not going to change. The efforts to change the social and economic logic will go on with or without Ecuador.</div> <div>As I noted, what we have now that we didn’t have before, regardless of implementation in Ecuador, is the first global commons-oriented transition plan, and several concrete legislative proposals. They are far from perfect, but they will be a reference that other locales, cities, (bio)regions and states will be able to make their own adapted versions of it.</div> <div>In the meantime, we have to continue the grassroots transformation and rebuild commons-oriented coalitions at every level, local, regional, national, global. This will take time, but since infinite growth is not possible in a finite economy, some type of transition is inevitable. Let’s just hope it will be for the benefit of the commoners and the majority of the world population.</div> <div>Essentially, we need to build the seed forms of the new counter-economy, and the social movement that can defend, facilitate and expand it. Every political and policy expression of this is a bonus.</div> <div>As for the endgame, you guessed correctly. What distinguishes the effort of the P2P Foundation, and many of the FLOK researchers, is that we’re not just in the business of adding some commons and P2P dynamics to the existing capitalist framework, but aiming at a profound “phase transition”.</div> <div>To work for a sustainable society and economy is absolutely crucial for the future of humanity, and while we respect the freedoms of people to engage in market dynamics for the allocation of rival goods, we cannot afford a system of infinite growth and scarcity engineering, which is what capitalism is.</div> <div>In other words, today, we consider nature infinite and we believe that infinite resources should be made scarce in order to protect monopolistic players; tomorrow, we need to consider nature as a finite resource, and we should respect the abundance of nature and the human spirit.</div> <div>So our endgame is to achieve that fundamental reversal of our civilisation, nothing less. As you can see from our proposals, we aim for a simultaneous transformation of civil society, the market and public authorities. And we do this without inventing or imposing utopias, but by extending the working prototypes from the commoners and peer producers themselves.</div> <p><b><i>RP: Thanks for speaking with me. Good luck with the summit.</i></b></p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p>Every 3rd Tuesday of the month fr … <p>Every 3rd Tuesday of the month from 8pm to 9pm (CET – Paris time), Remix offers a public meeting on the model of the « community call » to address a question and share information on current projects or hot topics in the field of commons, while leaving a trace for those who are absent.</p></br><p>The appointment is structured according to the same protocol: duration 60 minutes, presentation 5 minutes, discussion of the topic of the call 45 minutes and finally, conclusion and appeal for the next call 10 minutes.Audio recording and collective note-taking on a pad (digital notepad) are done and shared after the meeting, for documenting it and keeping the memory of it.</p></br><p>The audio and text archives of the Commons Calls are accessible via the <a href="https://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php/Appel_en_commun">remix wiki </a>.</p></br><p>To be informed about future calls, send a message to the following e-mail address: <a href="mailto:info@remixthecommons.org">info@remixthecommons.org</a>.</p></br><div class="input-prepend">Remix the commons does not make any other use, nor share with anyone your personal data without your consent !</div>mix the commons does not make any other use, nor share with anyone your personal data without your consent !</div>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p>Facing economic, social and ecolo … <p>Facing economic, social and ecological crises, many of us think that we must create the conditions for a transition from a productivist industrial world to an economy based on sharing knowledge commons and collaborative and contributing productions. The first challenge is to forge new concepts to understand the effects of automation and rethink the general interest and solidarity as possible horizons. For this, the state, as local and national authorities, the University and organized civil society, must invent all together, alternatives to individualism ownership and to the governance based on the duopoly state / market. </p></br><p>In Ecuador, the government held a major study to try to clarify howto create the conditions for a transition based on the commons. Several researchers and international experts were mobilized, including Michel Bauwens and Bernard Stiegler.</p></br><p>What is the role of national and local governments in the transformation of the economy towards a production of goods and services based on the principles of the commons? What should be the legal and economic instruments invented? what are the alliances between the actors involved in alternative forms of economic and social innovation needed? How to go beyond the niches successfully developed in some sectors – such as the digital economy – and enable scaling to modes of production of goods and services based on the principles of the commons?</p></br><p><a href="http://ouishare.net/">Ouishare</a>, <a href="www.savoirscom1.info/">Savoirscom1</a> and <a href="www.vecam.org/">VECAM</a> invite you to discuss these issues with Michel Bauwens and Bernard Stiegler during a public meeting to be held September 16, 2014 from 6:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. in Salle Triangle, Centre Pompidou, Paris France. </ strong><br /></br><figure style="width: 400px" class="wp-caption alignleft"><img decoding="async" loading="lazy" alt="" src="http://i.vimeocdn.com/video/177863970_640.jpg" width="400" height="225" /><figcaption class="wp-caption-text">Michel Bauwens – Berlin 2012 Remix The Commons – Licence Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0</figcaption></figure></p></br><figure id="attachment_3924" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-3924" style="width: 398px" class="wp-caption alignright"><a href="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Stiegler-2_dans_les_années_2000.jpg"><img decoding="async" loading="lazy" src="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Stiegler-2_dans_les_années_2000.jpg" alt="By Joseph.paris — Wikimedia commons. Licence Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons " width="398" height="225" class="size-full wp-image-3924" /></a><figcaption id="caption-attachment-3924" class="wp-caption-text">Bernard Stiegler par Joseph.paris — Wikimedia commons. Licence Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons</figcaption></figure></br><p><H2><a href="https://www.eventbrite.fr/e/inscription-rencontre-publique-avec-bernard-stiegler-et-michel-bauwens-1885113425?ref=elink" target="_blank" style="color:#3BE8DC" rel="noopener noreferrer">Registration</a> is over. </H2></p></br><p>More information in the <a href="https://www.remixthecommons.org/fr/2014/07/vers-une-econo…-la-transition/ ">French version of the post</a>. </p></br><p>This conference is organized with the support of Fondation Pour le Progrès de l’Homme.</p>in the <a href="https://www.remixthecommons.org/fr/2014/07/vers-une-econo…-la-transition/ ">French version of the post</a>. </p> <p>This conference is organized with the support of Fondation Pour le Progrès de l’Homme.</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p>Les voies maritimes, une belle id … <p>Les voies maritimes, une belle idée de vidéo autour d’un projet d’aire maritime à protéger</p></br><p><iframe loading="lazy" frameborder="0" width="400" height="225" src="//www.dailymotion.com/embed/video/xu8azp" allowfullscreen></iframe><br /></br>Par <a href="http://www.aires-marines.fr/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Aires-marines-protegees</a></i></p></br><p>Trois photographes ont sillonné pendant plusieurs mois le golfe normand breton qui s’étend de l’île de Bréhat au Cap de La Hague et qui fait l’objet d’un projet de parc naturel marin. Rodolphe Marics, Denis Bourges et Xavier Desmier proposent une radiographie de cet espace marin selon trois points de vue différents et complémentaires : photos aériennes, pédestres et sous-marines. </p></br><p>Les voies maritimes est né d’un partenariat entre l’Agence des aires marines protégées et l’association Les champs photographiques. </p> des aires marines protégées et l’association Les champs photographiques. </p>)
• Chargement/Site 2  + (<p>Project « Justice transitionnelle … <p>Project « Justice transitionnelle: l’expérience Marocaine » plans to share those extremely important Moroccan experiences about transitional justice and community reparation. </p></br><p>In Morocco, from 1959 to 1999, Former King Hassan II often ruled his country with an iron fist. That period is called as the years of lead in Morocco, during which those who were considered a threat to the regime were subject to a wide range of human rights violations. Thousands were subjected to arbitrary arrest, torture, and enforced disappearance, leaving behind a bitter legacy.</p></br><p>However, starting in the early 1990s, a gradual process of dealing with the past began to take root, culminating most recently in the work of the Moroccan Equity and Reconciliation Commission (Instance Équité et Réconciliation (IER)), established by the successor to the throne, King Mohammed VI.</p></br><p>On January 7, 2004, the IER was created, which is the first truth commission in the Arab world. This also has been hailed internationally as a big step forward, and an example to the Arab world. Since that, the IER has been working on addressing the terrible legacy of this era by investigating some of the worst abuses in Morocco and arranging reparations for victims and their families.</p></br><p>Over the duration of its mandate, the IER has amassed an archive of more than 20,000 personal testimonies from victims and their families, which has been organized in a central database in Rabat. It has conducted a range of meetings, conferences, and seminars around a multitude of issues that are keys to understanding Morocco’s past and present.</p></br><p>It has also taken the monumental step of holding public hearings to give victims a platform from which to share their sufferings. Throughout its work, the Commission has aimed to document, preserve, and analyze the roots of the crisis in an attempt to help Morocco come to terms with its past. </p></br><p>Project Justice transitionnelle: l’expérience Marocaine aims to share videos about this process of transitional justice and community reparation. For Morocco, the Community Reparation Project is a huge project contributed to transitional justice. A total sum of 159 million Dirhams was mobilized and total number of completed projects was 149.</p></br><p>These videos talked about how to preserve memory of victim communities during “the years of lead” in Morocco and what kinds of public hearings took place, in fact those hearings gave the highlight of an extensive process of citizen deliberation, compassion and free expression in Morocco. They also talked about lots of stories about how community reparation project aimed to improve the living conditions of the people in victim communities and empower them. In fact, those materials mainly focused on women and children.</p></br><p>Project Justice transitionnelle: l’expérience Marocaine believes Moroccan experiences in transitional justice as commons are useful and valuable to other countries, especially to Arabic countries have the similar history of transitional justice, such as Iraq, Egypt, Tunisia, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Algeria and so on.</p></br><p>As open resources, these documentaries, videos and reports are free to use for the public goods. </p></br><h3>Futur development</h3></br><p>In the next step, Project Justice transitionnelle: l’expérience Marocaine will keep on sharing more historical videos and materials about experiences in transitional justice, such as the videos of public hearings, the videos of public seminars and conferences, historical pictures and final reports of the community reparation project.</p></br><h3>People involved</h3></br><p>Ning and Mohamed Leghtas, from Alternatives Forum in Morocco(FMAS) and Portail E-joussour take in charge of this project, which both based in Rabat, Morroco.</p></br><h3>Ressources</h3></br><p>The project Transitional Justice: the Moroccan experience is financed by the funds of the Equity and Reconciliation Commission (IER)</p></br><h3>Contribution to the projet « Justice transitionnelle</h3></br><p>Alternatives Forum in Morocco(FMAS) and Portail E-joussour take in charge of this project, which both based in Rabat, Morroco.</p>IER)</p> <h3>Contribution to the projet « Justice transitionnelle</h3> <p>Alternatives Forum in Morocco(FMAS) and Portail E-joussour take in charge of this project, which both based in Rabat, Morroco.</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p>Project « Justice transitionnelle … <p>Project « Justice transitionnelle: l’expérience Marocaine » plans to share those extremely important Moroccan experiences about transitional justice and community reparation. </p></br><p>In Morocco, from 1959 to 1999, Former King Hassan II often ruled his country with an iron fist. That period is called as the years of lead in Morocco, during which those who were considered a threat to the regime were subject to a wide range of human rights violations. Thousands were subjected to arbitrary arrest, torture, and enforced disappearance, leaving behind a bitter legacy.</p></br><p>However, starting in the early 1990s, a gradual process of dealing with the past began to take root, culminating most recently in the work of the Moroccan Equity and Reconciliation Commission (Instance Équité et Réconciliation (IER)), established by the successor to the throne, King Mohammed VI.</p></br><p>On January 7, 2004, the IER was created, which is the first truth commission in the Arab world. This also has been hailed internationally as a big step forward, and an example to the Arab world. Since that, the IER has been working on addressing the terrible legacy of this era by investigating some of the worst abuses in Morocco and arranging reparations for victims and their families.</p></br><p>Over the duration of its mandate, the IER has amassed an archive of more than 20,000 personal testimonies from victims and their families, which has been organized in a central database in Rabat. It has conducted a range of meetings, conferences, and seminars around a multitude of issues that are keys to understanding Morocco’s past and present.</p></br><p>It has also taken the monumental step of holding public hearings to give victims a platform from which to share their sufferings. Throughout its work, the Commission has aimed to document, preserve, and analyze the roots of the crisis in an attempt to help Morocco come to terms with its past. </p></br><p>Project Justice transitionnelle: l’expérience Marocaine aims to share videos about this process of transitional justice and community reparation. For Morocco, the Community Reparation Project is a huge project contributed to transitional justice. A total sum of 159 million Dirhams was mobilized and total number of completed projects was 149.</p></br><p>These videos talked about how to preserve memory of victim communities during “the years of lead” in Morocco and what kinds of public hearings took place, in fact those hearings gave the highlight of an extensive process of citizen deliberation, compassion and free expression in Morocco. They also talked about lots of stories about how community reparation project aimed to improve the living conditions of the people in victim communities and empower them. In fact, those materials mainly focused on women and children.</p></br><p>Project Justice transitionnelle: l’expérience Marocaine believes Moroccan experiences in transitional justice as commons are useful and valuable to other countries, especially to Arabic countries have the similar history of transitional justice, such as Iraq, Egypt, Tunisia, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Algeria and so on.</p></br><p>As open resources, these documentaries, videos and reports are free to use for the public goods. </p></br><h3>Futur development</h3></br><p>In the next step, Project Justice transitionnelle: l’expérience Marocaine will keep on sharing more historical videos and materials about experiences in transitional justice, such as the videos of public hearings, the videos of public seminars and conferences, historical pictures and final reports of the community reparation project.</p></br><h3>People involved</h3></br><p>Ning and Mohamed Leghtas, from Alternatives Forum in Morocco(FMAS) and Portail E-joussour take in charge of this project, which both based in Rabat, Morroco.</p></br><h3>Ressources</h3></br><p>The project Transitional Justice: the Moroccan experience is financed by the funds of the Equity and Reconciliation Commission (IER)</p></br><h3>Contribution to the projet « Justice transitionnelle</h3></br><p>Alternatives Forum in Morocco(FMAS) and Portail E-joussour take in charge of this project, which both based in Rabat, Morroco.</p>IER)</p> <h3>Contribution to the projet « Justice transitionnelle</h3> <p>Alternatives Forum in Morocco(FMAS) and Portail E-joussour take in charge of this project, which both based in Rabat, Morroco.</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p>Santiago Hoerth Moura from <a … <p>Santiago Hoerth Moura from <a href="http://www.pillku.org/">Revista Pillku</a> met Alain Ambrosi in Mexico City last November 2012 during the preparatory meeting for the <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Overview_of_the_Economics_of_the_Commons_Conference">Economics, Commons Conference</a>. They have discussed about commons and about Remix the Commons project. Santiago Hoerth Moura has published the following interview in Spanish.</p></br><h4>Entrevista con Alain Ambrosi</h4></br><h2>Remix the Commons es una plataforma de intercambio multimedia</h2></br><p>Alain Ambrosi es de Québec, la ciudad de Montreal en Canadá y trabaja para una organización que se llama COMMUNOTIC como investigador asociado, y específicamente para un proyecto que se llama Remix the Commons o Remezcla los comunes que es un proyecto internacional de plataforma en la web.</p></br><p><strong>Por Redacción Pillku</strong></p></br><p><strong>¿Cuál es tu experiencia de trabajo con los comunes?</strong></p></br><p>Mi experiencia de trabajo en los comunes empieza en la documentación de todo lo que se hace y lo que se dice sobre los comunes desde hace ya tres años. Empezando en el Foro Social de Belém en 2009, donde tuvimos el primer Encuentro Internacional Ciencia y Democracia, donde se habló de los commons. En este tiempo se hablaba de los bienes comunes, y la declaración final de este foro social mundial de Belém integró una declaración de recuperación de los Bienes Comunes. Desde este tiempo yo hice como siguiendo un poco las manifestaciones, conferencias, que se hacían sobre los comunes, hubo después la conferencia de Berlín organizado también por el Commons Strategies Group pero con la Fundación Heinrich Böll, era el primer encuentro donde la gente de los comunes materiales y de los comunes inmateriales se encontraron por primera vez digamos. Y fue en esta ocasión que hemos pensando y lanzado la idea de un proyecto que se llama Remix the Commons.</p></br><p><strong>Entonces contamos un poco en qué consiste Remix the Commons.</strong></p></br><p>Remix the Commons es una plataforma de intercambio de difusión, de producción, de documentos multimedia sobre el tema de los comunes. Es una plataforma socio-técnica, donde preferimos hablar más de lo socio que de lo técnico, y decir que es una plataforma que es un espacio de co-creación sobre los comunes. Entonces hemos empezado con entrevistas en todas estas reuniones, foros sociales, pero estamos integrando varios documentos sobre los comunes. Pero la plataforma no es solamente una cosa que va hacer sobre internet; es realmente un espacio de trabajo de co-creación, quiere decir que ya tenemos un montón de problemas que resolver, problemas técnicos que para nosotros es algo menor, pero a nivel jurídico legal porque vamos a hacer circular imágenes, videos, lo cual es un problema grande, y a nivel económico también, porque hay que sustentar este tipo de proyectos y ya tenemos varias ideas de trabajar a nivel de los comunes, porque nosotros nos consideramos com un bien común, quiero decir el proyecto Remix the Commons, queremos funcionar como un bien común, una comunidad de “partenarios” que van a decir las reglas propias, para ir adelante con el proyecto.</p></br><p>Entonces tenemos otras dimensiones muy importantes, como la gobernanza, como cuáles reglas vamos a poner y, también, otra dimensión que me parece muy importante que es la dimensión intercultural porque es muy difícil, por ejemplo que hemos visto desde el principio en Berlín: hace dos años tenemos una serie de entrevistas, de series que hablan de los comunes en chino o en otros idiomas, y se ve que el concepto mismo de commons corresponde a algo bien profundo en todas las culturas, y a veces hay diferencias, etc., y entonces es un desafío que me parece muy grande eso, el de la interculturalidad, las traducciones, etc.</p></br><p>Remix The Commons es un proyecto colaborativo sobre obras multimedia. Su objetivo es documentar e ilustrar las ideas y prácticas en torno a la cuestión del bien común en el proceso creativo. Para conocer más su trabajo visita: <a href="https://www.remixthecommons.org">https://www.remixthecommons.org</a></p></br><p>via<a href="http://www.pillku.org/article/remix-the-commons-es-una-plataforma-de-intercambio/">Remix the commons es una plataforma de intercambio multimedia | Revista Pillku, amantes de la libertad | Cultura Libre.</a></p></a></p> <p>via<a href="http://www.pillku.org/article/remix-the-commons-es-una-plataforma-de-intercambio/">Remix the commons es una plataforma de intercambio multimedia | Revista Pillku, amantes de la libertad | Cultura Libre.</a></p>)
• Chargement/Site 2  + (<p>Santiago Hoerth Moura from <a … <p>Santiago Hoerth Moura from <a href="http://www.pillku.org/">Revista Pillku</a> met Alain Ambrosi in Mexico City last November 2012 during the preparatory meeting for the <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Overview_of_the_Economics_of_the_Commons_Conference">Economics, Commons Conference</a>. They have discussed about commons and about Remix the Commons project. Santiago Hoerth Moura has published the following interview in Spanish.</p></br><h4>Entrevista con Alain Ambrosi</h4></br><h2>Remix the Commons es una plataforma de intercambio multimedia</h2></br><p>Alain Ambrosi es de Québec, la ciudad de Montreal en Canadá y trabaja para una organización que se llama COMMUNOTIC como investigador asociado, y específicamente para un proyecto que se llama Remix the Commons o Remezcla los comunes que es un proyecto internacional de plataforma en la web.</p></br><p><strong>Por Redacción Pillku</strong></p></br><p><strong>¿Cuál es tu experiencia de trabajo con los comunes?</strong></p></br><p>Mi experiencia de trabajo en los comunes empieza en la documentación de todo lo que se hace y lo que se dice sobre los comunes desde hace ya tres años. Empezando en el Foro Social de Belém en 2009, donde tuvimos el primer Encuentro Internacional Ciencia y Democracia, donde se habló de los commons. En este tiempo se hablaba de los bienes comunes, y la declaración final de este foro social mundial de Belém integró una declaración de recuperación de los Bienes Comunes. Desde este tiempo yo hice como siguiendo un poco las manifestaciones, conferencias, que se hacían sobre los comunes, hubo después la conferencia de Berlín organizado también por el Commons Strategies Group pero con la Fundación Heinrich Böll, era el primer encuentro donde la gente de los comunes materiales y de los comunes inmateriales se encontraron por primera vez digamos. Y fue en esta ocasión que hemos pensando y lanzado la idea de un proyecto que se llama Remix the Commons.</p></br><p><strong>Entonces contamos un poco en qué consiste Remix the Commons.</strong></p></br><p>Remix the Commons es una plataforma de intercambio de difusión, de producción, de documentos multimedia sobre el tema de los comunes. Es una plataforma socio-técnica, donde preferimos hablar más de lo socio que de lo técnico, y decir que es una plataforma que es un espacio de co-creación sobre los comunes. Entonces hemos empezado con entrevistas en todas estas reuniones, foros sociales, pero estamos integrando varios documentos sobre los comunes. Pero la plataforma no es solamente una cosa que va hacer sobre internet; es realmente un espacio de trabajo de co-creación, quiere decir que ya tenemos un montón de problemas que resolver, problemas técnicos que para nosotros es algo menor, pero a nivel jurídico legal porque vamos a hacer circular imágenes, videos, lo cual es un problema grande, y a nivel económico también, porque hay que sustentar este tipo de proyectos y ya tenemos varias ideas de trabajar a nivel de los comunes, porque nosotros nos consideramos com un bien común, quiero decir el proyecto Remix the Commons, queremos funcionar como un bien común, una comunidad de “partenarios” que van a decir las reglas propias, para ir adelante con el proyecto.</p></br><p>Entonces tenemos otras dimensiones muy importantes, como la gobernanza, como cuáles reglas vamos a poner y, también, otra dimensión que me parece muy importante que es la dimensión intercultural porque es muy difícil, por ejemplo que hemos visto desde el principio en Berlín: hace dos años tenemos una serie de entrevistas, de series que hablan de los comunes en chino o en otros idiomas, y se ve que el concepto mismo de commons corresponde a algo bien profundo en todas las culturas, y a veces hay diferencias, etc., y entonces es un desafío que me parece muy grande eso, el de la interculturalidad, las traducciones, etc.</p></br><p>Remix The Commons es un proyecto colaborativo sobre obras multimedia. Su objetivo es documentar e ilustrar las ideas y prácticas en torno a la cuestión del bien común en el proceso creativo. Para conocer más su trabajo visita: <a href="https://www.remixthecommons.org">https://www.remixthecommons.org</a></p></br><p>via<a href="http://www.pillku.org/article/remix-the-commons-es-una-plataforma-de-intercambio/">Remix the commons es una plataforma de intercambio multimedia | Revista Pillku, amantes de la libertad | Cultura Libre.</a></p></a></p> <p>via<a href="http://www.pillku.org/article/remix-the-commons-es-una-plataforma-de-intercambio/">Remix the commons es una plataforma de intercambio multimedia | Revista Pillku, amantes de la libertad | Cultura Libre.</a></p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p>The <a href="https://wiki.remi … <p>The <a href="https://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php/Petit_d%C3%A9jeuner_en_commun_(Coll)">Breakfasts in-Common </a>process was initiated by Senegal’s « Centre d’Art Senegalais Kër Thiossane » and Quebec’s « Communautique », as part of the project Remix the Commons.</p></br><p>Born from a research dynamic about endogenous definitions of commons, Breakfasts in-Common bring occasions to think collectively about what commons mean, from an artistic approach. The goal of these meetings whether in Dakar or Montréal is not only to understand but also to feel the meaning difference that exists between my « I » and the « we » of a collective process. A sensitive approach that allows to craft stories able to give some meaning to the fact of living together. Stories that help maintain the community in motion and give a purpose to one’s own existence and thriving.</p></br><p><H2>First light in Dakar</H2><br /></br>From January 2012, in Dakar, in a violent pre-election context, in the midst of doubts about the constitution and the rise of citizenship awareness in all Senegal, Kër Thiossane started an exploratory work around Commons by organizing Breakfasts in-Common in a monthy cycle.</p></br><p>Three Breakfasts in-Common were organized between January and April 2012 on the subjects « The commons in African cities » ; « Commons and space » and « Languages and knowledge ».</p></br><p>These Breakfasts in-Common were moments of gathering and exchanges constituting by themselves a practice of the « in-Common », where each participates in sharing knowledge in a horizontal dynamic.</p></br><p>Each Breakfast started by viewing a film produced by the Kër Thiossane team on an artist and his or her questioning about one aspect of the Commons in the Senegalese society.</p></br><p>Some of the films and extracts from the breakfasts recordings are available online on the Kër Thiossane website, along with a toolbox of books, texts, interviews that anyone is welcomed to enrich with their own contributions via a wiki or at a breakfast in-Common.</p></br><p>Afropixel Festival<br /></br>This material, accumulated since early 2012 and the thinking initiated among the artistic community and the inhabitants was used to prepare a variety of activities, residences, workshops and performances at the time of the Afropixel festival as part of the theme « Creation, culture and knowledge in Common », that took place in may 2012.</p></br><p>Among this diverse and rich programming, Kër Thiossane gathered great African thinkers and artists to elaborate collectively on the question of « Artistic responsibility in the construction of the in-Common ».</p></br><p>All around a glass of tea, Achille Mbembe, Simon Njami, Ken Bugul, Kan-Si, Felwine Sarr, Thiat and Ibrahima Wane took part in what was not an expert group but rather a meeting where everyone’s expertise was to profit the collective thinking that was woven along the talks.</p></br><h2>Kédougou, until where is your place ?</h2></br><p>In 2013, the Breakfasts in-Common keep on with the collaboration of the collective « La companyía (http://www.lacompanyia.org/). They delocalize with a first breakfast outside Dakar in March as part of the « Night of the stars » festival organised by the Multimedia Community center of Kédougou.</p></br><p>Taking the same theme as the festival, « Kédougou, until where is your place ? », we investigated on the problematic of the Kédougou region associated with Commons. The opening of the question « where is your place » allowed to approach the questions about managing natural resources in a boundary region rich in gold and ore, as well as belonging and building of communities.</p></br><p><H3>Futur development</h3></br><p>The Breakfasts in-Common and the Afropixel festival organized so far have drawn a great interest, as much from artists and members of the civil society as from citizens, in Senegal. Seeds were sown and a real awareness of the stake of Commons invites us to continue these meetings in an even more open way, about other aspects of Commons, with the objective to enable and widen this collective thinking space.<br /></br>In 2013-2014, Kër Thiossane would like to organize other breakfasts at regular intervals and repeat more of the delocalised experiments, outside Dakar, in partnership with Senegal’s community radios network.</p></br><p>These experiments with continue to be filmed, documented and shared with Communautique in Montréal and other partners, actors of commons elsewhere in the world (Finland, Colombia…). Videos and other documents from these with be posted online on the Remix the commons platform.</p></br><h3>Collaborators</h3></br><p>Marion Louisgrand Sylla (Ker Thiossane). Susana Moliner – Marta Vallejo Herrando ( La Companiya),</p></br><h3>Financing</h3></br><p>The Breakfasts in-Common receives financial support from the « Fonds Francophone des inforoutes » through the project Remix the Commons.<br /></br>The production of the Breakfasts in-Common in Dakar was made possible thanks to the financial support from Arts Collaboratory and the « Organisation Internationale de la Froncophonie in Kër Thiossane.</p></br><h3>Contribution of Remix the Commons</h3></br><p>Remix the Commons contributed in the onset of the project and spread the word of it’s existance among commoners. Remix the Commons supports formalisation of the process and the deployement of a network of similar practices.</p>Thiossane.</p> <h3>Contribution of Remix the Commons</h3> <p>Remix the Commons contributed in the onset of the project and spread the word of it’s existance among commoners. Remix the Commons supports formalisation of the process and the deployement of a network of similar practices.</p>)
• Chargement/Site 2  + (<p>The <a href="https://wiki.remi … <p>The <a href="https://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php/Petit_d%C3%A9jeuner_en_commun_(Coll)">Breakfasts in-Common </a>process was initiated by Senegal’s « Centre d’Art Senegalais Kër Thiossane » and Quebec’s « Communautique », as part of the project Remix the Commons.</p></br><p>Born from a research dynamic about endogenous definitions of commons, Breakfasts in-Common bring occasions to think collectively about what commons mean, from an artistic approach. The goal of these meetings whether in Dakar or Montréal is not only to understand but also to feel the meaning difference that exists between my « I » and the « we » of a collective process. A sensitive approach that allows to craft stories able to give some meaning to the fact of living together. Stories that help maintain the community in motion and give a purpose to one’s own existence and thriving.</p></br><p><H2>First light in Dakar</H2><br /></br>From January 2012, in Dakar, in a violent pre-election context, in the midst of doubts about the constitution and the rise of citizenship awareness in all Senegal, Kër Thiossane started an exploratory work around Commons by organizing Breakfasts in-Common in a monthy cycle.</p></br><p>Three Breakfasts in-Common were organized between January and April 2012 on the subjects « The commons in African cities » ; « Commons and space » and « Languages and knowledge ».</p></br><p>These Breakfasts in-Common were moments of gathering and exchanges constituting by themselves a practice of the « in-Common », where each participates in sharing knowledge in a horizontal dynamic.</p></br><p>Each Breakfast started by viewing a film produced by the Kër Thiossane team on an artist and his or her questioning about one aspect of the Commons in the Senegalese society.</p></br><p>Some of the films and extracts from the breakfasts recordings are available online on the Kër Thiossane website, along with a toolbox of books, texts, interviews that anyone is welcomed to enrich with their own contributions via a wiki or at a breakfast in-Common.</p></br><p>Afropixel Festival<br /></br>This material, accumulated since early 2012 and the thinking initiated among the artistic community and the inhabitants was used to prepare a variety of activities, residences, workshops and performances at the time of the Afropixel festival as part of the theme « Creation, culture and knowledge in Common », that took place in may 2012.</p></br><p>Among this diverse and rich programming, Kër Thiossane gathered great African thinkers and artists to elaborate collectively on the question of « Artistic responsibility in the construction of the in-Common ».</p></br><p>All around a glass of tea, Achille Mbembe, Simon Njami, Ken Bugul, Kan-Si, Felwine Sarr, Thiat and Ibrahima Wane took part in what was not an expert group but rather a meeting where everyone’s expertise was to profit the collective thinking that was woven along the talks.</p></br><h2>Kédougou, until where is your place ?</h2></br><p>In 2013, the Breakfasts in-Common keep on with the collaboration of the collective « La companyía (http://www.lacompanyia.org/). They delocalize with a first breakfast outside Dakar in March as part of the « Night of the stars » festival organised by the Multimedia Community center of Kédougou.</p></br><p>Taking the same theme as the festival, « Kédougou, until where is your place ? », we investigated on the problematic of the Kédougou region associated with Commons. The opening of the question « where is your place » allowed to approach the questions about managing natural resources in a boundary region rich in gold and ore, as well as belonging and building of communities.</p></br><p><H3>Futur development</h3></br><p>The Breakfasts in-Common and the Afropixel festival organized so far have drawn a great interest, as much from artists and members of the civil society as from citizens, in Senegal. Seeds were sown and a real awareness of the stake of Commons invites us to continue these meetings in an even more open way, about other aspects of Commons, with the objective to enable and widen this collective thinking space.<br /></br>In 2013-2014, Kër Thiossane would like to organize other breakfasts at regular intervals and repeat more of the delocalised experiments, outside Dakar, in partnership with Senegal’s community radios network.</p></br><p>These experiments with continue to be filmed, documented and shared with Communautique in Montréal and other partners, actors of commons elsewhere in the world (Finland, Colombia…). Videos and other documents from these with be posted online on the Remix the commons platform.</p></br><h3>Collaborators</h3></br><p>Marion Louisgrand Sylla (Ker Thiossane). Susana Moliner – Marta Vallejo Herrando ( La Companiya),</p></br><h3>Financing</h3></br><p>The Breakfasts in-Common receives financial support from the « Fonds Francophone des inforoutes » through the project Remix the Commons.<br /></br>The production of the Breakfasts in-Common in Dakar was made possible thanks to the financial support from Arts Collaboratory and the « Organisation Internationale de la Froncophonie in Kër Thiossane.</p></br><h3>Contribution of Remix the Commons</h3></br><p>Remix the Commons contributed in the onset of the project and spread the word of it’s existance among commoners. Remix the Commons supports formalisation of the process and the deployement of a network of similar practices.</p>Thiossane.</p> <h3>Contribution of Remix the Commons</h3> <p>Remix the Commons contributed in the onset of the project and spread the word of it’s existance among commoners. Remix the Commons supports formalisation of the process and the deployement of a network of similar practices.</p>)
• Politique de l'eau en France  + (Cette vidéo réalisée par les agences de l' … Cette vidéo réalisée par les agences de l'eau à l'occasion du 6ème Forum mondial de l'eau retrace l'histoire de la politique de l'eau, les principes, les enjeux et décrit les acteurs qui la mettent en œuvre. Cette reconstruction est faite à partir des lois principales adoptées à niveau national et européen et elle essaie d'encadrer ces mesures dans l'évolution de l'économie française. La vidéo explique aussi le fonctionnement des instances de gouvernance et contrôle créées à cette fin.ouvernance et contrôle créées à cette fin.)
• Épisode 1 Croissance sobre, oxymore ou projet de société ?  + (Dans ce podcast on peut écouter Emma Haziz … Dans ce podcast on peut écouter Emma Haziza (hydrologue), Laurence Lemouzy (docteure en sciences politiques) et Eric Vidalenc (directeur régional adjoint à l'ADEME Hauts-de-France) aborder la question de la croissance économique à la lumière des urgences écologiques contemporaines. Dans cet effort de concilier incitations économiques et exigences climatiques en refléchissant à une version sobre de la croissance les intervenant.e.s questionne en particulier la place de l'eau dans le processus de transition. de l'eau dans le processus de transition.)
• Projet de territoire de gestion de l'eau du bassin du Clain  + (Dans cette vidéo Christine Graval (conseil … Dans cette vidéo Christine Graval (conseillère régionale de la Vienne), Nicolas Fortin (secrétaire national Confédération Paysanne), Jean-Claude Hallouin (conseiller juridique Vienne Nature) et Jean-Pierre Coillot (vice-président UFC que choisir de la Vienne) présentent le projet territorial de gestion de l'eau du bassin du Clain. Chacun et chacune à partir de sa propre perspective (politique, juridique, sanitaire, agricole) les intervenants nous expliquent les raisons qui ont motivé le lancement de ce projet, ainsi que les défis, les enjeux et les objectifs qui concernent surtout la répartition équitable, l'accessibilité et la qualité de l'eau.e, l'accessibilité et la qualité de l'eau.)
• Co-construction d’une nouvelle structure tarifaire solidaire et environnementale  + (Dans le contexte de la mise en place de la … Dans le contexte de la mise en place de la Régie publique de l’Eau, la Métropole de Lyon et la Régie ont proposé un</br>premier cycle de travail à l’Assemblée des Usagers de l'eau sur la mise en place d’une tarification solidaire et environnementale de l’eau potable. Ce projet s’inscrit dans une réflexion plus large sur le « droit à l’eau ». La spécificité de la démarche proposée par la Métropole et la Régie à l’Assemblée a résidé dans sa volonté d’une co-construction des évolutions du cadre tarifaire entre les usagers, à travers l’Assemblée, les services de la Métropole et de la Régie et les élus. Dans ce bilan on retrouve décrit le processus qui a accompagné cette démarche, ses résultats et ses perspectives futures.ses résultats et ses perspectives futures.)
• Maison des Utopies en Expérimentation (MUE)  + (La Maison des utopies est un projet de création de lieu de refuge, de ressourcement et d'activité pour les collectifs militants engagés pour une transformation radicale.)
• GIRE locale dans les Niayes au Sénégal  + (Projet d'opérationnalisation du GRET d'une GIRE locale dans les Niayes au Sénégal : faire commun pour préserver les ressources en eaux souterraines.)
• Justice transitionnelle: l'expérience Marocaine  + (Project Justice transitionnelle, l'expérie … Project Justice transitionnelle, l'expérience Marocaine aims to share videos about the process of transitional justice and community reparation and to preserve memory of victim communities during “the years of lead” in Morocco and what kinds of public hearings took place, in fact those hearings gave the highlight of an extensive process of citizen deliberation, compassion and free expression in Morocco. They also talked about lots of stories about how community reparation project aimed to improve the living conditions of the people in victim communities and empower them. In fact, those materials mainly focused on women and children.ials mainly focused on women and children.)
• Quelle stratégie participative pour la gestion locale de l’eau avec les citoyens ? Volume 5 - Rapport final  + (« Dans le cadre du projet « Quelle stratég … « Dans le cadre du projet « Quelle stratégie participative pour la gestion locale de l’eau avec les</br>citoyens ? », cinq terrains ont été accompagnés par IRSTEA dans la construction et la mise en</br>œuvre de leur démarche participative. Ces terrains sont représentatifs de différentes zones du bassin Rhône Méditerranée Corse et de différents enjeux auxquels cherchent à répondre les gestionnaires de l’eau: restauration</br>hydromorphologique, partage de l’eau entre différentes usages, inondations et gestion intégrée.</br>L’objectif était que les retours d’expérience de ces cinq démarches participatives puissent être utiles à d’autres gestionnaires de l’eau voulant mettre en place des démarches participatives sur leurs territoires.</br>Ce document a donc été construit autour des questions que se sont posées les gestionnaires de l’eau de ces cinq terrains avant, pendant et après leurs démarches participatives. Nous avons fait l’hypothèse que d’autres gestionnaires se poseraient les mêmes questions et qu’ils seraient donc intéressés par les choix qu’ont fait les cinq terrains pour y répondre et les enseignements qu’ils en ont tiré » (p. 6) enseignements qu’ils en ont tiré » (p. 6))
• REGIRE Lac Togo  + (« Démarré en mai 2023, le projet REGIRE La … « Démarré en mai 2023, le projet REGIRE Lac Togo découle d’une étude de faisabilité conduite par le Gret et la Direction des Ressources en Eau (DRE) du Togo pour caractériser les principaux enjeux des ressources en eau dans le bassin versant du Lac Togo. Dans un contexte de fortes pressions sur les ressources en eau du bassin dues à la croissance et à la concentration démographique, la diversité des usages et les impacts des changements climatiques, les équipes du projet ont l’intention de rendre opérationnelle une gestion intégrée des ressources en eau (GIRE) au niveau local (commune) selon une approche ascendante, territoriale et inclusive. Prévu pour la période 2023-2026, le projet sera mis en œuvre dans une phase pilote dans trois communes qui sont Haho 1, Kpélé 1 et Zio 2. À terme, ce projet, exécuté par le Gret et la DRE, permettra de mettre en place des organes locaux de gestion de l’eau, de réaliser des schémas locaux de gestion de l’eau, de contribuer à l’amélioration de l’action et des politiques publiques en matière de GIRE au Togo et de créer des mécanismes locaux de redevabilité. »r des mécanismes locaux de redevabilité. »)

• À l'école des communs  + (Version française : http://www.remixthecommons.org/projet/a-lecole-des-communs-2 English version : http://www.remixthecommons.org/en/projet/a-lecole-des-communs-2)

• Chargement/Site  + (<blockquote> <div class="clearfix … <blockquote></br><div class="clearfix with-navigation">This post is a re-publication of the introduction of David Bollier’s blog from <span class="submitted">Monday 01/19/2015. David Bollier is presenting the report of a two-day workshop, “Toward an Open Co-operativism,” held in August 2014 in Germany. This post is translated in the French and available in the <a href="https://www.remixthecommons.org/fr/2015/01/the-promise-of-open-co-operativism-david-bollier/">French part of blog Remix The Commons</a>. You can read the introduction below and the original <a href="http://bollier.org/blog/promise-%E2%80%9Copen-co-operativism%E2%80%9D">there</a>. </span></div></br><div class="clearfix with-navigation"></div></br></blockquote></br><div id="main" class="clearfix with-navigation"></br><p>Is it possible to imagine a new sort of synthesis or synergy between the emerging peer production and commons movement on the one hand, and growing, innovative elements of the co-operative and solidarity economy movements on the other?</p></br><div id="content" class="column"></br><div class="section"></br><div id="content-area"></br><div id="node-1138" class="node node-type-blog node-promoted build-mode-full clearfix"></br><div class="content"></br><p>That was the animating question behind a two-day workshop, “Toward an Open Co-operativism,” held in August 2014 and now chronicled in <a href="http://bollier.org/open-co-operativism-report">a new report </a>by UK co-operative expert Pat Conaty and me.  (Pat is a Fellow of the New Economics Foundation and a Research Associate of Co-operatives UK, and attended the workshop.)</p></br><p>The workshop was convened because the commons movement and peer production share a great deal with co-operatives….but they also differ in profound ways.  Both share a deep commitment to social cooperation as a constructive social and economic force.  Yet both draw upon very different histories, cultures, identities and aspirations in formulating their visions of the future.  There is great promise in the two movements growing more closely together, but also significant barriers to that occurring.</p></br><p>The workshop explored this topic, as captured by the subtitle of the report:  “A New Social Economy Based on Open Platforms, Co-operative Models and the Commons,” hosted by the Commons Strategies Group in Berlin, Germany, on August 27 and 28, 2014. The workshop was supported by the Heinrich Böll Foundation, with assistance with the Charles Léopold Mayer Foundation of France.</p></br><p>Below, the Introduction to the report followed by the Contents page. You can download a pdf of the full report (28 pages) <a href="http://bollier.org/open-co-operativism-report">here.</a> The entire report is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (BY-SA) 3.0 license, so feel free to re-post it.</p></br><p>Read on <a href="http://bollier.org/blog/promise-%E2%80%9Copen-co-operativism%E2%80%9D">David Bollier’s blog </a></p></br></div></br></div></br></div></br></div></br></div></br></div>A) 3.0 license, so feel free to re-post it.</p> <p>Read on <a href="http://bollier.org/blog/promise-%E2%80%9Copen-co-operativism%E2%80%9D">David Bollier’s blog </a></p> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<blockquote><p>6 months after … <blockquote><p>6 months after the World Social Forum, our Documentation / Card Play tool on the commons is ready to circulate, to animate conversations and to help you to move the commons close to you!</p></blockquote></br><p><img decoding="async" loading="lazy" class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-4621" src="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/IMG_0071-1024x768-300x225.jpg" alt="IMG_0071-1024x768" width="800" height="600" /></p></br><p>C@rds in Common is a game where 2 to 5 players collaborate to build a resilient civil society that defends the commons against the forces of monopolization. Apart from the pleasure of playing, C@rds in common was conceived as a means of documenting the presence of the commons at the Commons Space, an ephemeral encounter at the World Social Forum in Montreal in August 2016. The cards that composed the game were designed by volunteers who shared their vision and experience of the commons and the game mecanism designed by Mathieu Rhéaume and his team. This experience suggests that it would be possible to use the same approach and these methodological tools to document the commons in other local contexts, alike your neighborhood, or thematics as the commons of knowledge for example. We look forward to such experiments!</p></br><p>To learn more about the game, have a look at the <a href="http://cartesencommun.cc">website</a>.</p></br><p>The game is released on demand by The Game Crafter in the US for $ 22.99 each plus shipping and customs via: <a href="https://www.thegamecrafter.com/games/c-rds-in-common">https://www.thegamecrafter.com</a></p></br><p>To reduce shipping and customs for Europeans, we are launching a bulk order and hopefully this will bring the cost of each game delivered to Europe to around US $ 30/35.</p></br><p>If you wish to participate in this first bulk order, fill in <a href="https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfVa7DsY3rbjkxPoui-KzHqpPtmhhV1_KBstEMebKWVceaPnQ/viewform?c=0&w=1">the form</a> before March 18th at 20:00 GMT.</p></br><p>You will also have to pay an advance corresponding only to the price of the game(s) ordered. The remainder to be paid (port and customs) will be asked when the order is completed, when we will know the costs of postage and customs.</p></br><p>Then, be patient! The group order will be initiated on 19 March and will arrive in Paris during the month of April. As soon as they arrive in Paris, the games will be mailed to their recipients.</p>>Then, be patient! The group order will be initiated on 19 March and will arrive in Paris during the month of April. As soon as they arrive in Paris, the games will be mailed to their recipients.</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<blockquote><p><em>Defin … <blockquote><p><em>Define the commons #5</em>, is the fifth serie of short videos of definitions of the commons, produced by Communautique and Gazibo for <a href="http://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php?title=Definir_le_bien_commun&action"><em>Define The Commons</em></a>. It contains 12 capsules presented below. This serie has been gathered at the Internationale conference <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Berlin_Commons_Conference">ECONOMICS AND THE COMMON(S): FROM SEED FORM TO CORE PARADIGM</a> , co-organized by <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Commons_Strategies_Group"> Commons Strategies Group</a>, the <a href="http://www.boell.de">Heinrich Böll</a> and <a href="http://www.fph.ch">Charles Leopold Mayer Pour le Progrès de l’Homme</a> Foundations and <a href="http://remixthecommons.org">Remix The Commons</a>, in Berlin, May 24 and 25, 2013.</p></blockquote></br><h3>Presentation</h3></br><p><a href="http://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php?title=Definir_le_bien_commun"><em>Define The Commons</em></a> is a multilingual project sharing definitions of commons. It is a process of collecting spontaneous and very brief definitions of the commons, made over several years and in different places around the world. </p></br><p>The project started in the first by interviewing people during the first <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Berlin_Commons_Conference">International Commons Conference</a>, co-organized by the Heinrich Böll Foundation and the<a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Commons_Strategies_Group"> Commons Strategies Group</a>, in Berlin November 1 and 2, 2010. The conference organizers and participants were invited to define the commons with just one sentence in their own langage. Since 2010, many other definitions have been collected during other meetings. </p></br><h3>Future developpement</h3></br><p>Collection of the definitions of the commons continues. It is open to individuals and organizations contributions to define the paradigm of the commons. Publications and uses of the collection of definitions are in preparation, such as a mapping of the definitions of the commons. This project will also contribute to the creation of a glossary of commons through the identification of the terms used in the definitions.</p></br><p>If you want to participate, please sent an email to Alain Ambrosi (ambrosia/at/web.ca) or Frédéric Sultan (fredericsultan/at/gmail.com). </p></br><h3>Collaborators</h3></br><p>This initiative is an idea of Alain Ambrosi. Join contributors in the <a href="http://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php?title=Definir_le_bien_commun&action"> wiki-page</a>.</p></br><h3>Funding</h3></br><p>The project have been launched within the framework of the prototyping phase of <em>Remix The Commons</em> supported by the International Organization of Francophonie and the Foundation for the Progress of Human (FPH).</p></br><h3>Contribution of Remix The Commons</h3></br><p>Remix The Commons is the methodological and technical support of this approach.</p>ve been launched within the framework of the prototyping phase of <em>Remix The Commons</em> supported by the International Organization of Francophonie and the Foundation for the Progress of Human (FPH).</p> <h3>Contribution of Remix The Commons</h3> <p>Remix The Commons is the methodological and technical support of this approach.</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<blockquote><p><em>Defin … <blockquote><p><em>Define the commons #3</em>, is the third serie of short videos of definitions of the commons, produced by Communautique and Gazibo for <a href="http://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php?title=Definir_le_bien_commun&action"><em>Define The Commons</em></a>. It contains 16 capsules presented below. This serie has been gathered at the Internationale conference <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Berlin_Commons_Conference">ECONOMICS AND THE COMMON(S): FROM SEED FORM TO CORE PARADIGM</a> , co-organized by <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Commons_Strategies_Group"> Commons Strategies Group</a>, the <a href="http://www.boell.de">Heinrich Böll</a> and <a href="http://www.fph.ch">Charles Leopold Mayer Pour le Progrès de l’Homme</a> Foundations and <a href="http://remixthecommons.org">Remix The Commons</a>, in Berlin, May 24 and 25, 2013.</p></blockquote></br><h3>Presentation</h3></br><p><a href="http://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php?title=Definir_le_bien_commun"><em>Define The Commons</em></a> is a multilingual project sharing definitions of commons. It is a process of collecting spontaneous and very brief definitions of the commons, made over several years and in different places around the world. </p></br><p>The project started in the first by interviewing people during the first <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Berlin_Commons_Conference">International Commons Conference</a>, co-organized by the Heinrich Böll Foundation and the<a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Commons_Strategies_Group"> Commons Strategies Group</a>, in Berlin November 1 and 2, 2010. The conference organizers and participants were invited to define the commons with just one sentence in their own langage. Since 2010, many other definitions have been collected during other meetings. </p></br><h3>Future developpement</h3></br><p>Collection of the definitions of the commons continues. It is open to individuals and organizations contributions to define the paradigm of the commons. Publications and uses of the collection of definitions are in preparation, such as a mapping of the definitions of the commons. This project will also contribute to the creation of a glossary of commons through the identification of the terms used in the definitions.</p></br><p>If you want to participate, please sent an email to Alain Ambrosi (ambrosia/at/web.ca) or Frédéric Sultan (fredericsultan/at/gmail.com). </p></br><h3>Collaborators</h3></br><p>This initiative is an idea of Alain Ambrosi. Join contributors in the <a href="http://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php?title=Definir_le_bien_commun&action"> wiki-page</a>.</p></br><h3>Funding</h3></br><p>The project have been launched within the framework of the prototyping phase of <em>Remix The Commons</em> supported by the International Organization of Francophonie and the Foundation for the Progress of Human (FPH).</p></br><h3>Contribution of Remix The Commons</h3></br><p>Remix The Commons is the methodological and technical support of this approach.</p>ve been launched within the framework of the prototyping phase of <em>Remix The Commons</em> supported by the International Organization of Francophonie and the Foundation for the Progress of Human (FPH).</p> <h3>Contribution of Remix The Commons</h3> <p>Remix The Commons is the methodological and technical support of this approach.</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<blockquote><p><em>Defin … <blockquote><p><em>Define the commons #2</em>, is the second serie of 10 videos of definitions of the commons, (presented below), produced by Communautique and VECAM for <a href="http://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php?title=Definir_le_bien_commun"><em>Define The Commons</em></a>. This serie has been gathered at the World Science and Democracy Forum, organized at Dakar in February 2011, </p></blockquote></br><h3>Presentation</h3></br><p><a href="http://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php?title=Definir_le_bien_commun&action"><em>Define The Commons</em></a> is a multilingual project sharing definitions of commons. It is a process of collecting spontaneous and very brief definitions of the commons, made over several years and in different places around the world. </p></br><p>The project started in the first by interviewing people during the first <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Berlin_Commons_Conference">International Commons Conference</a>, co-organized by the Heinrich Böll Foundation and the<a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Commons_Strategies_Group"> Commons Strategies Group</a>, in Berlin November 1 and 2, 2010. The conference organizers and participants were invited to define the commons with just one sentence in their own langage. Since 2010, many other definitions have been collected during other meetings. </p></br><h3>Future developpement</h3></br><p>Collection of the definitions of the commons continues. It is open to individuals and organizations contributions to define the paradigm of the commons. Publications and uses of the collection of definitions are in preparation, such as a mapping of the definitions of the commons. This project will also contribute to the creation of a glossary of commons through the identification of the terms used in the definitions.</p></br><p>If you want to participate, please sent an email to Alain Ambrosi (ambrosia/at/web.ca) or Frédéric Sultan (fredericsultan/at/gmail.com). </p></br><h3>Collaborators</h3></br><p>This initiative is an idea of Alain Ambrosi. Join contributors in the <a href="http://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php?title=Definir_le_bien_commun"> wiki-page</a>.</p></br><h3>Funding</h3></br><p>The project have been launched within the framework of the prototyping phase of <em>Remix The Commons</em> supported by the International Organization of Francophonie and the Foundation for the Progress of Human (FPH).</p></br><h3>Contribution of Remix The Commons</h3></br><p>Remix The Commons is the methodological and technical support of this approach.</p>hase of <em>Remix The Commons</em> supported by the International Organization of Francophonie and the Foundation for the Progress of Human (FPH).</p> <h3>Contribution of Remix The Commons</h3> <p>Remix The Commons is the methodological and technical support of this approach.</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<blockquote><p><em>Defin … <blockquote><p><em>Define the commons #1</em>, is the first serie of 20 videos and remixes of definitions of the commons, (presented below), produced by Communautique and VECAM for <a href="http://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php?title=Definir_le_bien_commun"><em>Define The commons</em></a>. This serie has been gathered at the <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Berlin_Commons_Conference">International Commons Conference</a>, co-organized by the Heinrich Böll Foundation and the<a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Commons_Strategies_Group"> Commons Strategies Group</a>, in Berlin, November 1 and 2, 2010,</p></blockquote></br><h3>Presentation</h3></br><p><a href="http://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php?title=Definir_le_bien_commun&action"><em>Define The Commons</em></a> is a multilingual project sharing definitions of commons. It is a process of collecting spontaneous and very brief definitions of the commons, made over several years and in different places around the world.</p></br><p>The project started in the first by interviewing people during the first <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Berlin_Commons_Conference">International Commons Conference</a>, co-organized by the Heinrich Böll Foundation and the<a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Commons_Strategies_Group"> Commons Strategies Group</a>, in Berlin November 1 and 2, 2010. The conference organizers and participants were invited to define the commons with just one sentence in their own langage. Since 2010, many other definitions have been collected during other meetings.</p></br><h3>Future developpement</h3></br><p>Collection of the definitions of the commons continues. It is open to individuals and organizations contributions to define the paradigm of the commons. Publications and uses of the collection of definitions are in preparation, such as a mapping of the definitions of the commons. This project will also contribute to the creation of a glossary of commons through the identification of the terms used in the definitions.</p></br><p>If you want to participate, please sent an email to Alain Ambrosi (ambrosia/at/web.ca) or Frédéric Sultan (fredericsultan/at/gmail.com).</p></br><h3>Collaborators</h3></br><p>This initiative is an idea of Alain Ambrosi. Join contributors in the <a href="http://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php?title=Definir_le_bien_commun"> wiki-page</a>.</p></br><h3>Funding</h3></br><p>The project have been launched within the framework of the prototyping phase of <em>Remix The Commons</em> supported by the International Organization of Francophonie and the Foundation for the Progress of Human (FPH).</p></br><h3>Contribution of Remix The Commons</h3></br><p>Remix The Commons is the methodological and technical support of this approach.</p>ork of the prototyping phase of <em>Remix The Commons</em> supported by the International Organization of Francophonie and the Foundation for the Progress of Human (FPH).</p> <h3>Contribution of Remix The Commons</h3> <p>Remix The Commons is the methodological and technical support of this approach.</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<blockquote><p><em>Defin … <blockquote><p><em>Define the commons #5</em>, is the fifth serie of short videos of definitions of the commons, produced by Communautique and Gazibo for <a href="http://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php?title=Definir_le_bien_commun&action"><em>Define The Commons</em></a>. It contains 12 capsules presented below. This serie has been gathered at the Internationale conference <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Berlin_Commons_Conference">ECONOMICS AND THE COMMON(S): FROM SEED FORM TO CORE PARADIGM</a> , co-organized by <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Commons_Strategies_Group"> Commons Strategies Group</a>, the <a href="http://www.boell.de">Heinrich Böll</a> and <a href="http://www.fph.ch">Charles Leopold Mayer Pour le Progrès de l’Homme</a> Foundations and <a href="http://remixthecommons.org">Remix The Commons</a>, in Berlin, May 24 and 25, 2013.</p></blockquote></br><h3>Presentation</h3></br><p><a href="http://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php?title=Definir_le_bien_commun"><em>Define The Commons</em></a> is a multilingual project sharing definitions of commons. It is a process of collecting spontaneous and very brief definitions of the commons, made over several years and in different places around the world. </p></br><p>The project started in the first by interviewing people during the first <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Berlin_Commons_Conference">International Commons Conference</a>, co-organized by the Heinrich Böll Foundation and the<a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Commons_Strategies_Group"> Commons Strategies Group</a>, in Berlin November 1 and 2, 2010. The conference organizers and participants were invited to define the commons with just one sentence in their own langage. Since 2010, many other definitions have been collected during other meetings. </p></br><h3>Future developpement</h3></br><p>Collection of the definitions of the commons continues. It is open to individuals and organizations contributions to define the paradigm of the commons. Publications and uses of the collection of definitions are in preparation, such as a mapping of the definitions of the commons. This project will also contribute to the creation of a glossary of commons through the identification of the terms used in the definitions.</p></br><p>If you want to participate, please sent an email to Alain Ambrosi (ambrosia/at/web.ca) or Frédéric Sultan (fredericsultan/at/gmail.com). </p></br><h3>Collaborators</h3></br><p>This initiative is an idea of Alain Ambrosi. Join contributors in the <a href="http://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php?title=Definir_le_bien_commun&action"> wiki-page</a>.</p></br><h3>Funding</h3></br><p>The project have been launched within the framework of the prototyping phase of <em>Remix The Commons</em> supported by the International Organization of Francophonie and the Foundation for the Progress of Human (FPH).</p></br><h3>Contribution of Remix The Commons</h3></br><p>Remix The Commons is the methodological and technical support of this approach.</p>ve been launched within the framework of the prototyping phase of <em>Remix The Commons</em> supported by the International Organization of Francophonie and the Foundation for the Progress of Human (FPH).</p> <h3>Contribution of Remix The Commons</h3> <p>Remix The Commons is the methodological and technical support of this approach.</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<blockquote><p>An experience o … <blockquote><p>An experience of self-management of computational infrastructure, that allows organizations to embed digital sovereignty into their thinking on transition and take action!</p></blockquote></br><p>Together with other individuals and organizations, and in collaboration with <a href="https://www.koumbit.org/">Koumbit</a>, Remix the commons is developing a collective response to the need for digital tools and infrastructures. The idea is to ensure full digital sovereignty over our work, exchanges and data in coherence with the vision set out in the Charter for Building a Data Commons for a Free, Fair and Sustainable Future.</p></br><p>After having tested with Koumbit, an independent and solidary hosting company in Montreal, our ability to set up and manage some tools based on open source and the commons on a shared server, we designed a cooperation system based on a model similar to that of AMAPs, which we call the « Konbit numerique », in reference to the konbit of Haitian farmers. <a href="https://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php?title=Konbit">Konbit</a> numerique is a prototype of « computational commons » for commoners’ projects. It proposes a working infrastructure that makes it possible to gradually achieve the objectives of independence and sovereignty on information and communication technology.</p></br><p>Our Konbit numerique consists of a group of identified users and a server administrator, Koumbit cooperator. It is based on a 6 TB server hosted by Koumbit in Montreal (<a href="https://nuage.en-commun.net">https://nuage.en-commun.net)</a>, in which are installed the applications we need, tools based on open source and commons: file sharing, calendars, task management, online editing of text documents, table, email,… and most importantly for us a wiki farm. This is coverering a large part of the current digital uses of our organizations.</p></br><p>Users are involved in the governance, and as much as possible in maintenance. The work of the server administrator is handled by the collective through a monthly intervention time credit system. This includes, in addition to the time dedicated to server maintenance, time reserved for future technical developments that will be allocated according to the Konbit’s needs. The idea is therefore to jointly pre-finance a digital infrastructure dedicated to the collective. This infrastructure is not based on capitalist logic. It does not seek to make more profit in the perspective of extraction, but to satisfy the needs of the collective. It allows us to start a process to degoogling our digital practices.</p></br><p>Each person involved in the projects of the partners, stakeholders of this initiative, has access to this space and uses it within the framework of their activities in relation to the commons. Each partner can contribute to the life and development of the konbit by subscribing one or more shares of solidarity support (suggested amount: 15 € – 20 $CAD per month, or according to the budgets and needs of the projects), and according to the principle which aims to decouple use and trade (principle 3 of the Charter mentioned above). We have set ourselves the objective of gradually expanding the first collective to a balance between technical need/capacity and finance/governance. It is estimated that about 20 members would be an interesting size of the collective. Then other Konbits could be created and allow a federated type of operation.</p></br><p>The konbit numerique is not an open structure like a Chaton (online service open to all), or an alternative hoster, but an experience of self-management of computational infrastructure by its users. It is still a little early to draw lessons from this approach, but it is likely that this initiative allows organizations to embed digital sovereignty into their thinking on transition and take action. We hope that accompanying such processes could be a challenge of interest to free software activists.</p>hinking on transition and take action. We hope that accompanying such processes could be a challenge of interest to free software activists.</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<blockquote><p>As Alain Ambros … <blockquote><p>As Alain Ambrosi wrote in 2012, « <a href="http://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php?title=Le_bien_commun_est_sur_toutes_les_l%C3%A8vres" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Commons is on everyone’s lips</a>« 1. In order to make this notion known and to avoid its dilution in sometimes too vague speeches, the collective Remix the Commons endeavors to decipher the practices and to sketch out the semantic and conceptual field of the movement of the commons from the collection and analysis of the documents it produces. The development of this vocabulary, which uses the tools of the semantic web, makes it possible to link the initiatives of documentation and promotion of the commons without erasing what makes their identities unique. By doing that, the movement of the commons has a space for strategic collaboration.</p></blockquote></br><figure id="attachment_4643" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-4643" style="width: 1024px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img decoding="async" loading="lazy" class="size-large wp-image-4643" src="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/alaina-buzas-Samburu-vocabulary--1024x681.jpg" alt="By Alaina Buzas " width="1024" height="681" /><figcaption id="caption-attachment-4643" class="wp-caption-text">By Alaina Buzas</figcaption></figure></br><p>It is in 2010 that Remix the Commons initiates a process of documentation of the commons. Initially, the collective has a simple web site to identify and report content, mostly video, accessible online. At the same time, an initial series of video interviews was conducted at an international meeting in Berlin (2010). Others will follow the rhythm of World Social Forums or local initiatives in France, Senegal, Quebec first, and then in many countries on different continents. It quickly becomes necessary to allow each person to search by using key words in this documentation.</p></br><h1>From key words to the commons vocabulary</h1></br><p>When cataloging media objects on the Remix the Commons wiki (more than 500 media objects now), we describe the content of each production according to four axes which helps to position it in the field of the commons: object or resource to be commonified, stakes, associated actions and expected results. To date, more than 400 « key concepts » have been identified from the corpus gathered on the site. After that, ech concept is a card that uses the information on the Remix the Commons wiki, but also data from other sources accessible by using linking techniques by wikis and the semantic web. From each record, the user accesses information from the main documentary collections associated with the commons (P2P Foundation, Transformap, Digital Library of the Commons) and the large reference databases DBpedia, Wikidata, VIAF And WorldCat. Each concept is accompanied by definitions in several languages, resources published around the world that illustrate the point or refer to practices.</p></br><p>This set of key concepts provides a vivid and moving description of the world from the point of view of the commons. This collection is freely accessible, usable by all and open to contribution. Although this work is still at an experimental stage, it opens up interesting perspectives in terms of research, the production and the dissemination of knowledge about the commons. Holes, gaps and nuances between sources of information, between languages and cultures can be identified, documented and discussed among the actors involved in the field of the commons.</p></br><p>The vocabulary of the commons highlighted can support the emerging practices and contribute to the enrichment of the contents in Wikipedia and Wikidata, for example. The associations and collectives that contribute to the documentation of the commons, have there a resource that allows them to collaborate on the production of informational commons on the commons.</p>te to the documentation of the commons, have there a resource that allows them to collaborate on the production of informational commons on the commons.</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<blockquote><p>From the 15th-1 … <blockquote><p>From the 15th-17th of November 2016 a European Commons Assembly will take place in Brussels. The commoners will convene, discuss, showcase, and reclaim Europe. On the afternoon of the 16th, around 150 will partcipate in a meeting in the European Parliament, organized in cooperation with the EP intergroup on Common Goods and Public Services (Led by Marisa Matias, Dario Tamburrano, Ernesto Urtasun, Sergio Cofferati). A variety of other events (and local assemblies) will take place outside Parliament, both in Brussels and across Europe.</br></p></blockquote></br><p><H1>Networking, unity and policy around the commons paradigm </H1></p></br><p>On September 26, a group of nonprofits, foundations, and other civil society organizations jointly publish a “Call for a European Commons Assembly” (https://europeancommonsassembly.eu/#section1). The collectively drafted document, which continues to garner signatures from groups and individuals around Europe, serves as a declaration of purpose for a distributed network of “commoners.”<br /></br><img decoding="async" loading="lazy" src="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/ECA-300x212.jpg" alt="eca" width="900" height="636" class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-4561" /><br /></br>Author: TILL GENTZSCH</p></br><p>The Assembly seeks to unite citizens in trans-local and trans-european solidarity to overcome Europe’s current challenges and reinvigorate the political process for the 21st century. The commons can be understood as a bridging paradigm that stresses cooperation in management of resources, knowledge, tools, and spaces as diverse as water, Wikipedia, a crowdfund, or a community garden. Their Call describes commoning as:</p></br><ul></br>…the network-based cooperation and localized bottom-up initiatives already sustained by millions of people around Europe and the world. These initiatives create self-managed systems that satisfy important needs, and often work outside of dominant markets and traditional state programmes while pioneering new hybrid structures.</ul></br><p> The Assembly emerged in May from a diverse, gender balanced pilot community of 28 activists from 15 European countries, working in different domains of the commons. New people are joining the Assembly every week, and ECA is inclusive and open for others to join, so that a broad and resilient European movement can coalesce. It seeks to visibilize acts of commoning by citizens for citizens, while promoting interaction with policy and institutions at both the national and European levels. </p></br><p><H1>Part of a broader movement</H1><br /></br>The rapid embrace of commons as an alternative holistic, sustainable and social worldview is in part an expression of unease with the unjust current economic system and democratic deficiencies. The commons movement has exploded in recent years, following the award of the Nobel Prize in Economics to Elinor Ostrom in 2009 for her work on managing common resources. It has also seen overlap with other movements, such as the Social and Solidarity and Sharing Economy movements, peer to peer production, and Degrowth.</p></br><p>Michel Bauwens, part of the ECA who is also a prominent figure in the peer-to-peer movement, explains: <em>All over the world, a new social movement is emerging, which is challenging the ‘extractive’ premises of the mainstream political economy and which is co-constructing the seed forms of a sustainable and solidary society. Commoners are also getting a voice, for example through the Assemblies of the Commons that are emerging in French cities and elsewhere. The time is ripe for a shoutout to the political world, through a European Assembly of the Commons.</em></p></br><p>The Call includes an open invitation to Brussels from November 15 to 17, 2016 for three days of activities and shared reflection on how to protect and promote the commons. It will include an official session in the European Parliament, hosted by the Intergroup on Common Goods and Public Services, on November 16 (limited capacity). </p></br><p>You can read and sign the full text of the Call, also available in French, Spanish, and soon other European languages, on the <a href="http://europeancommonsassembly.eu">ECA website</a>. There is an <a href="http://europeancommonsassembly.eu/sign-call/">option to sign</a> as an individual or an organization.</p></br><p>For more information, visit <a href="http://europeancommonsassembly.eu/">http://europeancommonsassembly.eu/ </a> or follow @CommonsAssembly on Twitter for regular updates.</p></br><p><strong>Media Contact: Nicole Leonard contact@europeancommonsassembly.eu<br /></br></strong><br /></br>Keywords: Commons, European, Citizens, Parliament, Participatory Democracy, Civil Society</p>/ </a> or follow @CommonsAssembly on Twitter for regular updates.</p> <p><strong>Media Contact: Nicole Leonard contact@europeancommonsassembly.eu<br /> </strong><br /> Keywords: Commons, European, Citizens, Parliament, Participatory Democracy, Civil Society</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<blockquote><p>Last 6, 7 and 8 … <blockquote><p>Last 6, 7 and 8 of November, the Art of commoning, an event the community Art of Hosting Montreal, saw 70 people come together to explore the commons and commoning, and develop a culture from the posture of commoner. The first two days were held in the beautiful local gardens Space for Life (Espace pour la vie) partner of the event. The third day, the participants were divided in different places (Tiers lieux) with commons projects throughout the city of Montreal.</p></br><p>David Bollier who participated with Silke Hefrich, Alain Ambrosi and myself, made a <a href="http://bollier.org/blog/art-commoning"> review of the meeting on his blog </a>. For more information you can look at the <a href="https://www.remixthecommons.org/fr/2014/11/lart-de-len-commun/">full article</a> (in French only)</p></blockquote></br><p><a href="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/20141107_162027.jpg"><img decoding="async" loading="lazy" class="aligncenter size-large wp-image-4035" src="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/20141107_162027-1024x576.jpg" alt="20141107_162027" width="1024" height="576" /></a></p>g/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/20141107_162027-1024x576.jpg" alt="20141107_162027" width="1024" height="576" /></a></p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<div class="link-more"><a href="h … <div class="link-more"><a href="https://www.remixthecommons.org/es/calendario-actividades-de-remix/" class="more-link"><span>Continuer la lecture<span class="screen-reader-text"> “Calendario : Actividades de Remix”</span>…</span></a></div> Actividades de Remix”</span>…</span></a></div>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<div class="link-more"><a href="https://www.remixthecommons.org/fr/test-code-court/" class="more-link"><span>Continuer la lecture<span class="screen-reader-text"> “Test code court”</span>…</span></a></div>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<figure id="attachment_6619" aria-descr … <figure id="attachment_6619" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-6619" style="width: 512px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img decoding="async" loading="lazy" class="size-full wp-image-6619" src="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Conseil_dEtat_Paris.jpg" alt="<a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conseil_d%27%C3%89tat_(Paris).jpg">Gzen92</a>, <a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0">CC BY-SA 4.0</a>, via Wikimedia Commons" width="512" height="384" srcset="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Conseil_dEtat_Paris.jpg 512w, https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Conseil_dEtat_Paris-342x257.jpg 342w" sizes="(max-width: 512px) 100vw, 512px" /><figcaption id="caption-attachment-6619" class="wp-caption-text"><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Conseil_d%27%C3%89tat_(Paris).jpg">Gzen92</a>, <a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0">CC BY-SA 4.0</a>, via Wikimedia Commons</figcaption></figure></br><p>Adopté par l’Assemblée nationale, le projet de loi confortant le respect des principes de la République a fait l’objet de deux saisines du Conseil Constitutionnel. L’une sur l’article 49 de la loi, relatif à l’enseignement en famille par les députés des groupes LR, UDI et Libertés et Territoires (<a href="https://www.deputes-les-republicains.fr/images/documents/Saisine-CC-PJL-respect-principes-de-la-Republique-et-lutte-contre-le-separatisme.pdf">lien</a>) et l’autre sur les articles 4, 6, 7, 8, 14 bis AA et 18 par 71 députés des groupes Gauche démocrate et républicaine, La France insoumise et Socialistes et apparentés (<a href="https://lafranceinsoumise.fr/2021/07/23/loi-separatisme-la-france-insoumise-participe-au-recours-collectif-devant-le-conseil-constitutionnel/">lien</a>). Le Conseil Constitutionnel prévoit de rendre sa décision le 13 août (<a href="https://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/actualites/calendrier-de-travail-sur-les-decisions-a-venir">https://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/actualites/calendrier-de-travail-sur-les-decisions-a-venir</a>).</p></br><p><strong>Remix est co-signataire de la contribution extérieure associative demandant la censure de plusieurs articles du projet de loi envoyée le lundi 26 juillet au Conseil Constitutionnel. </strong><strong>Vous retrouverez l’intégralité de la contribution extérieure sur le site de L.A. Coalition pour les libertés associatives en cliquant ici</strong> : <a href="https://www.lacoalition.fr/CP-LA-Coalition-pour-les-libertes-associatives-demande-au-Conseil">https://www.lacoalition.fr/CP-LA-Coalition-pour-les-libertes-associatives-demande-au-Conseil</a></p>.fr/CP-LA-Coalition-pour-les-libertes-associatives-demande-au-Conseil">https://www.lacoalition.fr/CP-LA-Coalition-pour-les-libertes-associatives-demande-au-Conseil</a></p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<h2>Interview with Joan Subirats – B … <h2>Interview with Joan Subirats – Barcelona, April 20, 2017</h2></br><p><strong>Alain Ambrosi and Nancy Thede </strong></p></br><blockquote><p><i>The pro-independence government of Catalonia recently sparked a political crisis in Spain by proposing to call a referendum on independence by the end of 2017 with or without the approval of the central government. In contrast, « Catalonia in common » defines itself as an innovative political space of the Catalan left. Initiated by Barcelona in Comú a little less than a year after its election to city hall, the initiave was launched in October 2016. A short manifesto explained its raison-d’être and presented an « ideario politico » (a political project) of some 100 pages for broad discussion over 5 months which culminated in a constituent assembly last April 8.</i></p></br><p><i>This new political subject defines itself as « a left-wing Catalan organisation that aims to govern and to transform the economic, political and social structures of the present neo-liberal system. » Its originality in the political panorama of Catalonia and of Spain is its engagement with « a new way of doing politics, a politics of the commons where grassroots people and communities are the protagonists. » In response to those who see its emergence only in the context of the impending referendum, it affirms: « We propose a profound systemic, revolutionary change in our economic, social, environmental and political model. » </i></p></br><p><i>We interviewed Joan Subirats a few days after the Constituent Assembly of Catalunya en Comú took place. Joan is an academic renowned for his publications and his political engagement. A specialist in public policy and urban issues, he has published widely on the Commons and on the new municipalism. He is one of the artisans of Barcelona in Comú and has just been elected to the coordinating body of the new space named recently « Catalunya en comú ».</i></p></blockquote></br><h3>The Genesis of a New Political Subject</h3></br><p><b>NT —</b> Tell us about the trajectory of the development of this new initiative: a lot of people link it to the 15-M, but I imagine that it was more complex than that and started long before.</p></br><p><img decoding="async" loading="lazy" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-4740" src="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Joan_Subirats_2013_cropped.jpg" alt="Joan_Subirats_2013_(cropped)" width="423" height="526" /><br /></br><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3AJoan_Subirats_2013_(cropped).jpg">By Directa (youtube) [CC BY 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons</a></p></br><p><b>JS —</b> At the outset there was Guanyem, which was in fact the beginning of Barcelona en Comú: the first meetings were in February-March 2014. Who was involved? this is quite simultaneous with the decision by Podemos to compete in the European Parliament elections in May 2014. Podemos organises in February 2014; Guanyem begins organising in February- March 2014 to compete in the municipal elections of May 2015.</p></br><p>Going farther back, there is a phase of intense social mobilisation against austerity policies between 2011 and 2013. If we look at the statistics of the Ministry of the Interior on the number of demonstrations, it is impressive, there were never as many demonstrations as during that period, but after mid-2013 they start to taper off. There is a feeling that there are limits and that demonstrations can’t obtain the desired changes in a situation where the right-wing Popular Party (PP) holds an absolute majority. So the debate emerges within the social movements as to whether it’s a good idea to attempt to move into the institutions.</p></br><p>Podemos chooses the most accessible scenario, that of the European elections, because these elections have a single circonscription, so all of Spain is a single riding, with a very high level of proportionality, so with few votes you get high representation because there are 60-some seats, so with one million votes they obtained 5 seats. And people vote more freely in these elections because apparently the stakes are not very high, so they are elections that are good for testing strategies. In contrast, here in Barcelona, we chose the municipal elections as the central target because here there is a long history of municipalism.</p></br><p>So this sets the stage for the period that began in 2014 with Guanyem and Podemos and the European elections and in May 2015 with the municipal elections where in 4 of the 5 major cities – Barcelona, Madrid, Valencia and Zaragoza – alternative coalitions win that are not linked to either of the two major political parties (PP and the Socialist Party – PSOE) that have dominated the national political scene since the return to democracy in 1977. And in the autonomous elections<sup id="cite_ref-1" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-1">[1]</a></sup>, a new political cycle also begins, in which we still are. If we go farther back, to 2011 – there are a couple of maps that show the correlation between the occupation of plazas in the 15-M with the number of alternative citizen canadidacies at the municipal level.</p></br><p>So Podemos and all the alternative citizen coalitions all refer to the 15M as their founding moment. But the 15M is not a movement, it was a moment, an event. You must have heard the joke about the stranger who arrives and wants to talk to the 15M – but there is no 15M, it has no spokespersons and no address. But everyone considers it very important because it transformed the political scene in its wake . But what was there before the 15M?</p></br><p>There were basically 4 major trends that converged in the 15-M :<br /></br>First the anti-globalisation movement, the oldest one, very interesting because a large number of the new political leaders have come out of it, with forms of political mobilisation different from the traditional ones.</p></br><p>Then there was the « Free Culture Forum » linked to issues regarding internet which was very important here in Barcelona – with Simona Levy and Gala Pin, who is now a municipal councillor – that is important because here digital culture, network culture, was present from the very beginning, something that didn’t occur in other places.</p></br><p>The third movement was the PAH (Platform for People Affected by Mortgages) which emerges in 2009 and had precedents with Ada Colau and others who organised « V for vivienda » (like the film « V for vendetta », but in this case vivienda – housing), an attempt to demonstrate that young people were excluded from social emancipation because they didn’t have access to housing. Their slogan was « you’ll never have a house in your whole f’king life ». And the forms of mobilisation were also very new, for example, they occupied IKEA because at that time IKEA’s advertising slogan was « the independent republic of your home », so they occupied it and slept in the beds there. So this was more youthful, alternative, more of a rupture, but then in 2009 with the creation of the PAH they started to try to connect with the immigrant sector and people who were losing their houses because of the mortgage hype, it was very important because it’s the movement that tries to connect with sectors outside of youth: the poor, immigrants, working class… with the slogan ‘this is not a crisis, it’s a sting’. So the PAH is very important because it’s the movement that connects with sectors of the population outside of youth: workers, immigrants, the elderly… For example, here in Plaza Catalunya in 2011 the only major poster rallying people who weren’t youth was that of the PAH.</p></br><p>And the fourth movement – the most ‘authentic’ 15M one – was that of the « Youth without future ». People who organised mainly in Madrid, typical middle-class university sector with post-grad studies, who suddenly realised that they wouldn’t find jobs, that it wasn’t true that their diplomas would open doors for them, they were in a precarious situation.</p></br><p>So those were the four major currents that converged in the basis of the 15M. But what made it ‘click’ was not just those 4 trends, but the fact that huge numbers of other people recognised the moment and converged on the plazas and overwhelmed the movements that started it. The most surprising thing about the moment was that those 4 movements – that were not all that important – were rapidly overwhelmed by success of the movement they started and new people who spontaneously joined. That was what really created the phenomenon, because if it had been just those 4 movements, if it had been like ‘Nuit debout’ in Paris where people occupied the plaza but without the sensation that people had steamrollered the leaders. So, when the plazas are evacuated, the idea becomes ‘Let’s go to the neighbourhoods’. So all of a sudden, in the neighbourhoods of Barcelona and Madrid, assemblies were organised where there was a mixture of the old neighbourhood associations that were no longer very active and whose members were older (my generation) and new people who brought new issues like ecology, energy, bicycle transport, cooperatives, water and a thousand different things and who created new spaces of articulation where people who had never thought that they would meet in the neighbourhoods began to converge.</p></br><p>I think this explains the re-emergence of municipalism that followed: people begin to see the city as a place where diverse social changes can be articulated on a territorial basis: many mobilisations are taking place in isolation, in a parallel manner and don’t have a common meeting-point. Water as a common good, energy transition, sustainable transport, public health, public space, infant education… All of a sudden there was something that brought people together which was to discuss the city, the city we want – David Harvey mentions in an article that the modern-day factory is the city. That is, we no longer have factories, the city is now the space where conflicts appear and where daily life becomes politicised: issues like care, food, schooling, transport, energy costs – and this creates a new space for articulating these issues that hadn’t been previously envisaged.</p></br><p>So I think this is the connection : 15-M as a moment of overwhelming, the end of a cycle of mobilisation – remember that there had been a petition of a million and a half signatures to change the mortgage legislation, that Ada Colau presented in the national Congress, where she accused the PP deputies of being assassins because of what they were doing – but that mobilisation had no effect in the law. A PP deputy declared ‘If these people want to change things, then they should get elected’. So people started thinking ‘OK, if that’s the way it is, then let’s get ourselves elected’. This is the initial change of cycle in 2014. So the 4 movements were present in the meetings of Guanyem and BComun, as well as some progressive intellectuals and people from other issue areas like water, transport, energy etc. That was the initial nucleus here in Barcelona – in Madrid it was different. There the Podemos generation had a different logic. Here, from the beginning, we wanted to create a movement from the bottom up and to avoid a logic of coalition of political parties, this was very clear from the outset. We didn’t want to reconstruct the left on the basis of an agreement amongst parties. We wanted to build a citizen movement that could impose its own conditions on the parties. In the case of Podemos it was different: it was a logic of a strike from above – they wanted to create a strong close-knit group with a lot of ideas in a very short period and as a result an electoral war machine that can assault the heavens and take power. Here, on the other hand, we foresaw a longer process of construction of a movement where we would start with the municipalities and after that, we’ll see.</p></br><p>So Guanyem was created in June 2014, 11 months prior to the municipal elections, with a minimal program in 4 points:</p></br><ol></br><li>we said, we want to take back the city, it’s is being taken away from the citizens, people come here to talk about a ‘business-friendly global city’ and they are taking it away from the citizens, we have lost the capacity to control it, as the first point;</li></br><li>there is a social emergency where many problems don’t get a response;</li></br><li>we want people to be able to have decision-making capacity in what happens in the city, so co-production of policy, more intense citizen participation in municipal decisions;</li></br><li>moralisation of politics. Here the main points are non-repetition of mandates, limits on salaries of elected officials, anti-corruption and transparency measures, etc.</li></br></ol></br><p>So we presented this in June 2014 and we decided that we would give ourselves until September to collect 30,000 signatures in support of the manifesto and if we succeeded, we would present candidates in the municipal elections. In one month we managed to get the 30,000 signatures! Besides getting the signatures on internet and in person, we held a lot of meetings in the neighbourhoods to present the manifesto – we held about 30 or 40 meetings like that, some of them small, some more massive, where we went to the neighbourhoods and we said « We thought of this, what do you think? We thought of these priorities, etc’. » So, in September of 2014 we decided to go ahead; once we decided that we would present a slate, we began to discuss with the parties – but with the strength of all that support of 30,000 people backing us at the grassroots, so our negotiating strength with respect to the parties was very different. In Dec 2014 we agreed with the parties to create Barcelona en Comun – we wanted to call it Guanyem but someone else had already registered the name, so there was a lot of discussion about a new name, there were various proposals: Revolucion democratica, primaria democratica, the term Comu – it seemed interesting because it connected with the Commons movement, the idea of the public which is not restricted to the institutional and that was key. It was also important that in the previous municipal elections in 2011 only 52% of people had voted, in the poorer neighbourhoods a higher number of people abstained and that it was in the wealthier neighbourhoods where a larger proportion of people had voted. So we wanted to raise participation by 10% in the poor neighbourhoods more affected by the crisis and we thought that would allow us to win. And that was what happened. In 2015, 63% voted, but in the poor areas 40% more people voted. In the rich areas, the same people voted as before.</p></br><p>So it was not impossible to think we could win. And from the beginning the idea was to win. We did not build this machine in order to participate, we built it in order to win. We didn’t want to be the opposition, we wanted to govern. And as a result, it was close, because we won 11 of 41 seats, but got the most votes so we head the municipal council, the space existed. From the moment Guanyem was created in June 2014, other similar movements began to be created all over Spain – in Galicia, in Andalucia, in Valencia, Zaragoza, Madrid… One of the advantages we have in Barcelona is that we have Ada Colau, which is a huge advantage, because a key thing is to have an uncontested leader who can articulate all the segments of the movement – ecologists, health workers, education professionals…. If you don’t have that it’s very difficult, and also the sole presence of Ada Colau explains many things. In Madrid they found Manuela Carmena, who is great as an anti-franquista symbol, with her judicial expertise, very popular but who didn’t have that tradition of articulating movements, and as a result now they are having a lot more problems of political coordination than here.</p></br><h3>A New Political Subject for a New Political Era</h3></br><p><b>AA —</b> So now Catalunya en comu defines itself as a new political space on the left for the whole of Catalonia. But in recent Catalan history that’s nothing really new: there have been numerous political coalitions on the left, such as the PSUC<sup id="cite_ref-2" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-2">[2]</a></sup> in 1936 followed by many others. So what is different about this initiative?</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> If we open up our perspective and look at things more globally, I think that what justifies the idea that this is a new political space is the fact that the moment is new, we’re in a new phase so it’s very important to understand that if this new political moment reproduces the models and the conceptual paradigms of the old left and of the Fordism of the end of the 20th century, we won’t have moved ahead at all. The crisis of social democracy is also a crisis of a way of understanding social transformation with codes that no longer exist. As a result the measure of success of this new political space is not so much in to what extent it can bring together diverse political forces, but rather its capacity to understand this new scenario we find ourselves in – a scenario where digital transformation is changing everything, where we no longer know what ‘labour’ is, where heterogeneity and social diversity appear as factors not of complexity but of values, where the structure of age no longer functions as it used to – where everything is in transformation, so we can no longer continue to apply ideas – to use a phrase coined by Ulrich Beck – ‘zombie concepts’, living dead, no?, we forge ahead with our backpacks full of 20th-century concepts, applying them to realities that no longer have anything to do with them. It’s easy to see the defects of the old, traditional concepts, but it’s very difficult to construct new ones because we don’t really know what is happening nor where we are headed. The example of the debate in France between Valls and Hamon – at least, I read the summary in Le Monde, where Valls maintained that it would be possible to come back to a situation of full employment and Hamon said that is impossible, that it’s necessary to work towards the universal basic income; in the end, Hamon is closer to the truth than Valls, but Hamon isn’t capable of explaining it in a credible way – and it is very difficult to explain it in a credible way.</p></br><p>Here, we are working at one and the same time on the Commons and the non-institutional public sphere, we are demanding greater presence of the public administration when probably it wouldn’t really be necessary, but since we don’t have a clear idea of how to construct this new thing, we are still acting sort of like slaves of the old. So that’s where I think the concept of the Commons, of the cooperative, the collaborative, new ideas regarding the digital economy, are more difficult to structure, because we’re also conscious that capitalism is no longer only industrial or financial but now it’s digital capitalism, and it controls all the networks of data transmission and at the same time the data themselves, probably the wealth of the future. So, sure we can do really interesting things in Barcelona, out of Barcelona en Comun, but we have GAFAM (Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft), and GAFAM has its own logics and that complicates things. So we have to create a new political subject – and it’s obvious that we need something new – but what isn’t so obvious is what are the concepts we need to create this new subject. So if you look at the documents published by Un Pais en Comu<sup id="cite_ref-3" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-3">[3]</a></sup> that’s what you’ll see: a bit of different language, a different way of using concepts, but at the same time a trace of the heritage of the traditional left. The journal ‘Nous Horitzons’ has just published a new issue on ‘Politics in Common’<sup id="cite_ref-4" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-4">[4]</a></sup> which brings together a lot of these elements. The impression that some of us had in the assembly the other day in Vall d’Hebron (the inaugural assembly of the movement) was that the old ways were still weighing us down, that there was a difficulty to generate an innovative dynamic.</p></br><p><b>NT —</b> That was clear in the composition of the audience.</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> Yes, well, the Podemos people weren’t there, of course… they didn’t come for various reasons, because probably not everybody was in agreement with Albano-Dante<sup id="cite_ref-5" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-5">[5]</a></sup> but they saw there was a lot of disagreement and so they preferred not to come, and that’s a type of public that, as well as filling the hall, also changes the type of dynamic – so it was more the traditional-style organisations that were there (Iniciativa or EUIA<sup id="cite_ref-6" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-6">[6]</a></sup>), there was more of the old than the new probably. Perhaps that’s inevitable, but what we have to do now is to see if we can change that dynamic.</p></br><p><b>AA —</b> When one reads the ‘Ideario politico’ (the political project of Un Pais en Comu) it’s a sort of lesson in political economy, political philosophy as well, but also a vast programme, and the left has never put forward this type of Commons-inspired programme before, be it in Catalunya or in Spain or probably internationally. How do you see its contribution in the context of the Commons ecosystem? There have been experiences of the Commons without the Commons label, as in Latin America …</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> Yes, in Catalunya the anarcho-sindicalist movement…</p></br><p><b>AA —</b> Of course, but more recently, the idea of ‘Buen Vivir’ …</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> Yes, but when you go to Latin America and you talk about that, it all revolves around the State. But here, we try not to be state-centric. We are trying to avoid the idea that the only possible transformation needs to depend on the State.</p></br><p><b>AA —</b> But in the ‘Ideario’ a lot of discussion is devoted to public services as well, this implies that the State has to exist. And in the Commons vocabulary there is the concept of the ‘partner-state’, but it doesn’t appear in the Ideario…</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> Yes, there’s a margin there: the resilience of the new politics depends more on the capacity to create ‘muscled’ collective spaces – public, collective, common – than on the occupation of the institutions. But without the occupation of the institutions, it’s very difficult to construct those spaces. The example that comes to mind for me is from Copenhagen: there it was the cooperatives of the workers’ unions that built the big housing coops that exist now; also, the municipal government when the left was in power built a lot of public housing; then when a right-wing government came to power, it privatised all the public housing but it couldn’t privatise the cooperatives. So in the end, things that are strictly state-based are more vulnerable than when you build collective strength. So if we are able to benefit from these spaces in order to build ‘collective muscle’, using our presence in the institutions, this will end up being more resilient, more stable over time than if we put all our eggs in the State basket. So the Barcelona city government has civic social centres that are municipal property, but what is important is to succeed in ensuring that these centres are controlled by the community, that each community make them its own despite the fact that the property is officially that of the municipality, but they must be managed through a process of community management. So you need to build in the community a process of appropriation of institutions that ends up being stronger than if it were all in the hands of the State.</p></br><p>Now we are discussing citizen heritage, how the city government can use its property – houses, buildings – and it can cede them for a certain period in order to construct collective spaces. For example, 8 building sites that belong to the municipality have been put up for auction on 100-year leases for community organisations to build housing cooperatives. This doesn’t take property away from the public sphere and at the same time it generates collective strength. But a certain sector of the political left here, the CUP, criticises this as privatisation of public space. They think Barcelona en Comun should build public housing instead, state-owned housing. That’s a big difference. And people are aware of that, but at the same time there are doubts about whether this makes sense, whether there is sufficient strength within the community so that this can work. Or, for example, the most common criticism is that “you have an idea of the public, the collective, the Commons, that implies capacities in the community that are only present in the middle classes that have the knowledge, the organisational capacity… so it’s a very elitist vision of the collective because the popular sectors, without the backing of the State, won’t be able to do this. » Well, we’re going to try to combine things so it can work, but we don’t want to keep converting the public into the ‘state’.</p></br><p>Nancy Fraser wrote an article on the triple movement – looking at Polanyi’s work on the ‘double movement’ in the Great Transformation, that is the movement towards mercantilisation, and the opposite movement it stimulated towards protection. Polanyi talks about the confrontation of these 2 movements in the early 20th century, and the State – in its soviet form or in its fascist form – as a protectionist response of society which demands protection when faced with the uncertainty, the fragility the double movement engenders. Nancy Fraser says that all that is true, but we’re no longer in the 20th century, we’re in the 21st century where factors like individual emancipation, diversity, feminism are all very important – so we shouldn’t be in favour of a protectionist movement that continues to be patriarchal and hierarchical. We need a movement for protection that generates autonomy – and there resides what I think is one of the keys of the Commons movement. The idea of being able to get protection – so, a capacity of reaction against the dynamics of the market attacks – without losing the strength of diversity, of personal emancipation, of feminism, the non-hierarchical, the non-patriarchal, the idea that somebody decide for me what I need to do and how I will be protected. Let me self-protect myself too, let me be a protagonist too of this protection. And this is contradictory with the state-centric tradition.</p></br><h3>A Commons Economy, Participation and Co-production of Policy</h3></br><p><b>AA —</b> The first theme of the ‘Ideario’ is the economy – you are an economist, amongst other things – how do you see this proposal in terms of the Commons? For example, there is a lot of discussion now about ‘open cooperativism’, etc. What you were saying about the cooperative movement here, that it is very strong but not sufficient…</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> In some aspects no. For example, the city wanted to open a new contract for communications (telephone, internet) – now there are the big companies Telefonica, Movistar, Vodafone, Orange, etc: there’s a cooperative called ‘Som Connexion’ (We are connection)- or ‘Som Energia’ (We are energy) that’s a lot bigger – it has 40,000 members – but these cooperatives, it would be fantastic if the city were to give them the contract for energy or for communication, but they aren’t capable of managing that at the moment. So if they take it, we’d all have big problems: faulty connections, lack of electrical power – because they’re growing for sure but they don’t yet have the ‘muscle’, the capacity they need to take this on.</p></br><p>So we have to continue investing in this, it’s not going to take care of itself. On the other hand, in other areas, like home services for the elderly, we do have very strong cooperatives, Abacus for example is a cooperative for book distribution that has 800 000 members, so that is a coop that’s very powerful, and there are others. But in general, the more powerful the coop, the less politicised it is – they tend to transform themselves into big service companies. But now they are understanding that perhaps it would be in their interest to have a different vision; there has been a very politicised movement in the grassroots level coops that is contradictory with the entrepreneurial trend in the big coops. So we’re in this process right now: yes, there are very big, very strong coops and there are also smaller, more political ones but they don’t have sufficient muscle yet.</p></br><p><b>AA —</b> When we look at issues of participation, co-production of policy and such, it is also a question of culture, a culture of co-production that doesn’t exist. In the neighbourhoods, yes there is a trend to revamping participation, but when we talk to people in the local-level committees they say ‘Sure, people come to the meetings, but because they want a tree planted here…’ and they don’t have that vision of co-creation. So first there has to be a sort of cultural revolution ?</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> There are places where there has been a stronger community tradition that could well converge with this. Some neighbourhoods like Roquetes for example, Barceloneta or Sants, have very strong associational traditions. If you go to Roquetes to the meeting of the community plan, everybody is there: the people from the primary medical services centre, the doctors, the schools are there, the local police, the social workers – and they hold meetings every 2 weeks and they know everything that goes on in the area, and they transfer cases amongst themselves: “we detected this case, how do we deal with it?” etc. The community fabric in those neighbourhoods functions really well. So what can you add to that fabric so that it can go a bit further? On the other hand, in other neighbourhoods like Ciutat Meridiana, in 5 years 50% of the population has changed, so it’s very difficult to create community where the level of expulsion or change is so high. In Sants, in Ca Batlló, there was a very interesting experience where people want to create a cooperative neighbourhood – it’s a bit polemical – they want to create a public school without using public funds, instead using money from the participants themselves, because the coop tradition in Sants is very anarchist, libertarian – so they promote the idea of a public school, open to all, but not using public funds. And it would have its own educational philosophy, that wouldn’t have to submit to standard educational discipline. And groups have appeared in different neighbourhoods dedicated to shared child-raising where there are no pre-schools for children between 0 and 3 years, or people prefer not to take the kids to public pre-schools because they find them too rigid, so they prefer generating relationships amongst parents. So what should the role of the city government be with respect to such initiatives? Should it facilitate or not? There’s a debate about how to position the municipality with respect to these initiatives that are interesting but then when, inside Barcelona en Comú or Catalunya en Comú, the person who is in charge of these issues comes with a more traditional union perspective and says “This is crazy, what we need to do is to create public schools with teachers who are professional civil servants. These experiments are fine for gentrified zones, but in reality…’” And they are partly right. So we’re in that sort of situation, which is a bit ambivalent. We’re conscious that we need to go beyond a state-centric approach, but at the same time we need to be very conscious that if we don’t reinforce the institutional role, the social fragilities are very acute.</p></br><h3>The Commons and Issues of Sovereignty, Interdependence and the « Right to Decide »</h3></br><p><b>AA —</b> Another high-profile issue is that of sovereignty. The way it’s presented in the Ideario is criticised both by those who want a unified Spain and by those who want Catalan independence. Sovereignty is simply another word for independence in the view of many people. But the way it’s presented in the Ideario is more complex and comprehensive, linked to autonomy at every level …</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> Exactly: it’s plural, in lower case and plural: sovereignties. The idea is a bit like what I said earlier about the city, that we want to take back the city. We want to recover the collective capacity to decide over what affects us. So it’s fine to talk about the sovereignty of Catalonia, but we also need to talk about digital sovereignty, water sovereignty, energy sovereignty, housing sovereignty – sovereignty in the sense of the capacity to decide over that which affects us. So we don’t have to wait until we have sovereignty over Catalonia in order to grapple with all this. And this has obvious effects: for example, something we are trying to develop here: a transit card that would be valid on all forms of public transit – like the “Oyster” in London, and many other cities have them – an electronic card that you can use for the train, the metro, the bus: the first thing the Barcelona city government did on this was to ask the question “Who will own the data? “. That’s sovereignty. The entity that controls the data on who moves and how in metropolitan Barcelona has an incredible stock of information with a clear commercial value. So will it belong to the company that incorporates the technology? or will the data belong to the municipality and the municipality will do with it what it needs? At the moment, they are installing digital electricity metres and digital water metres: but to whom do the data belong? because these are public concessions, concessions to enterprises in order that they provide a public service – so who owns the data?</p></br><p>This is a central issue. And it is raised in many other aspects, like food sovereignty. So, we want to ensure that in the future Barcelona be less dependent on the exterior for its food needs, as far as possible. So you need to work to obtain local foodstuffs, control over the products that enter – and that implies food sovereignty, it implies discussing all this. So, without saying that the sovereignty of Catalonia isn’t important, we need to discuss the other sovereignties. Because, suppose we attain the sovereignty of Catalonia as an independent state, but we are still highly dependent in all the other areas. We need to confront this. I don’t think it’s a way of avoiding the issue, it’s a way of making it more complex, of understanding that today the Westphalian concept of State sovereignty no longer makes much sense. I think we all agree on that. We are very interdependent, so how do we choose our interdependencies? That would be real sovereignty, not to be independent because that’s impossible, but rather how to better choose your interdependencies so that they have a more public content.</p></br><p><b>AA —</b> Talking of interdependence, there is the issue as well of internationalism. Barcelona en Comú puts a lot of emphasis on that, saying ‘There is no municipalism without internationalism’ etc. From the very outset of her mandate, Ada Colau in 2015 in her inaugural speech as mayor said that ‘we will work to build a movement of cities of the Mediterranean’, and as time goes on the approach is becoming clearer, for example with the participation of Colau and the vice-mayor Gerardo Pisarello in the major international city conferences. What do you see as the importance of this internationalism within the Commons ecosystem?</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> There are 2 key aspects for me. First, cities are clearly the most global political space and zone of social convergence that exists. Apparently when we talk about cities we’re talking about something local, but cities are actually very globalised. Benjamin Barber wrote a book about ‘Why Mayors should govern the world’. And he set out an example I think is very good: if the mayor of Montreal meets with Ada and the mayor of Nairobi and the mayor of Santiago de Chile and the mayor of say Hong-Kong, after 5 minutes together they’ll all be talking about the same things. Because the problems of cities are very similar from one place to another despite their different sizes. Questions of energy, transport, water, services, food… If we try to imagine that same meeting between Heads of State, the complexity of the political systems, cultural traditions, constitutional models and all will mean that the challenge of coming to a common understanding will be much more complex. That doesn’t mean that cities are the actors that will resolve climate change, but certainly the fact that Oslo, Copenhagen, Amsterdam, Barcelona and Paris agree that in 2025 there will no longer be cars circulating that use diesel will have more impact than a meeting of Heads of State. With AirBnB Barcelona is in constant confrontation, the city has fined them 600 000 euros, but Barcelona on its own can’t combat AirBnB. But New York, Paris, London, Amsterdam and Barcelona have come to an agreement to negotiate jointly with AirBnb: those 5 cities together can negotiate with them. But it isn’t the problem for States, it’s much more a problem for cities than for States. And AirBnB uses digital change to enter spaces where there is a lack of precision – it’s what happens too with Uber, Deliveroo and other platforms of so-called ‘collaborative economy’, which is really extractive economy, but which use the reglamentary voids. The people who work for Uber or Deliveroo aren’t employees, they are independent entrepreneurs but they work in 19th century conditions. Tackling this problem from the level of the city can produce new solutions.</p></br><p>I think when we decided in 2014-2015 to attempt to work at the municipal level in Barcelona, we were aware that Barcelona isn’t just any city: Barcelona has an international presence and we wanted to use Barcelona’s international character to exert an influence on urban issues worldwide. Ada Colau participated in the Habitat conference in Quito in October 2016, before that in the meeting of local authorities in Bogota, she is now co-president of the World Union of Municipalities. So there’s an investment that didn’t start just with us but that started in the period when Maragall<sup id="cite_ref-7" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-7">[7]</a></sup> was mayor, a very high investment by Barcelona in participating in this international sphere of cities. This reinforces Barcelona in its confrontations with the State and with private enterprise as well. It plays an important role. There is an international commission within Barcelona en Comú, they are constantly working with other world cities – they have been in France, they have a strong link with Grenoble and will be going to a meeting of French cities in September to talk about potential collaboration, they often go to Italy, they’ve gone to Belgrade, to Poland. In June they’re organising a meeting of Fearless Cities, with the participation of many mayors from major cities in Europe and around the world.<br /></br>So there is a very clear vision of the global aspect. So the global dimension is very present, and at the level of Spain as well. The problem there is that there is political interference, for example in Madrid, which is very important as a city, but within the municipal group “Ahora Madrid” they’re very internally divided, so sometimes you speak to one and the others don’t like it. We have really good relations with Galicia: A Coruña and Santiago de Compostela, also with Valencia, but Valencia also has its own dynamic. Zaragoza. Each city has its own dynamic, so sometimes it’s complicated to establish on-going relations.</p></br><p><b>AA —</b> What about Cadiz?</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> Of course, Cadiz is also part of this trend, but the group there is part of the Podemos anti-capitalist faction, so there are nuances.</p></br><p><b>NT —</b> You mentioned 2 points regarding internationalism…</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> Yes, first there was the general global perspective on cities and the second is Barcelona’s own concrete interest. So the first is more global, that is, any city in the world today has many more possibilities if it looks at its strategic global role and if it wants to strengthen its position, it has to work on the global level. In the case of Barcelona specifically, there is also a will that’s partly traditional, because it was begun by Maragall, you have to remember that here in Barcelona there are 10 districts, and during the war of the Balkans, Maragall created District 11, which was Sarajevo: city technicians went to Sarajevo to work with them, and still today there are municipal technicians who travel regularly to Gaza to work there, or with La Havana – in other words there’s a clearly established internationalist stance in the municipality. Also, the headquarters of the World Union of Local Governments is in Barcelona. The international headquarters of Educating Cities is in Barcelona, so there has constantly been a will to be present on the international scene since Maragall, and now this is continuing but with a new orientation as well. Perhaps there used to be the idea of exporting the Barcelona model, branding Barcelona, but that is no longer the case.<br /></br>There’s very intense organisation globally, probably if Ada accepted all the invitations she receives, she’d be travelling all the time.</p></br><p><b>AA —</b> Coming back to the issue of sovereignty vs independence and “the right to decide”, how does this play out?</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> The issue of independence is internally very complex with different positions. I think there is a general agreement on 3 things, ie:</p></br><ol></br><li>Catalonia has its own demos and therefore is a political subject which must be recognised,</li></br><li>it has to be able to decide how to articulate itself with the other political subjects in Spain and in Europe, it has to have the right, the capacity to decide;</li></br><li>this requires the construction of a State of its own.</li></br></ol></br><p>It is on the fourth point that we are not in agreement: whether that State should be independent or whether it should be in some way linked, allied, confederated with the rest of the Iberian Peninsula or with Europe. These 3 initial points are sufficiently important and they are the basis for the fact that Catalunya en Comú or Barcelona en Comú is part of the broad sovereigntist space in Catalonia. What it isn’t part of is the independentist space in Catalonia. Despite the fact that I would say some 30-40% of the members are pro-independence, but the rest not. And that is an issue which divides us. But what we are trying to do is to work out this debate on the basis of our own criteria, not on those of other movements. The criteria of the others are ‘you are independentist or you are not independentist’. Our own criteria are: yes, we are sovereigntists, we discuss sovereignties and we’ll see. Since we agree on what is the most important (that is – an autonomous political subject, the right to decide, an autonomous State), let’s discuss how we can articulate. We have fraternal relations with 4 million people in the rest of Spain who agree with us on the first 3 criteria. So the key question probably would be: Does Catalonia want to separate from the rest of Spain or from this Spain? The standard response would be “We have never known any other. We’ve always seen the same Spain, so there is no other Spain”. So the debate we can have is over “Yes, another Spain is possible”. Sort of like the debate right now over whether to leave Europe: do we want to leave Europe of leave this Europe? But is another Europe possible or not?</p></br><h3>The Challenges of Scale</h3></br><p><b>NT —</b> I am struck by the fact that every time we refer to the initiative of Catalunya en Comú, you respond by giving the example of what’s happening in Barcelona: do you see Barcelona as the model for Un Pais en Comú?</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> No, it’s not that it’s the model, there is even some reticence within Barcelona en Comú that this new political initiative may have negative consequences for Barcelona en Comú. The Barcelona in Comú experiment has worked really well: within BeC political parties continue to exist (Podemos, Iniciativa, EUIA, Guanyem) and all agree that it’s necessary to create this subject, because it’s clear – there’s a phrase by a former mayor of Vitoria in the Basque country who said “Where my capacities end, my responsibilities begin” – that is, clearly, cities are developing roles that are more and more important, but their capacities continue to be very limited and especially their resources are very limited – so there’s an imbalance between capacities and responsibilities. Between what cities could potentially do and what they really can do. Refuge-cities – a thousand things. So within Barcelona en Comú there is an understanding of the interest of creating Catalunya en Comú in order to have influence in other levels of government. And to present candidates in elections in Spain with En Comú Podem because to be represented in Madrid is also important. But of course, sometimes this expansion can make us lose the most original aspect, that is the emphasis on municipalism, in the capacity to create these spaces – so there’s a certain tension. And obviously, when you go outside Barcelona in Catalonia, the local and territorial realities are very different, you find… you no longer control what kind of people are joining and so you can end up with surprises – good and bad ones – so there are some doubts, some growing pains. You have to grow, but how will that affect what we have so far? our ways of working and all that… I always refer to Barcelona en Comú because we have existed for longer, we have a sort of ‘tradition’ in the way we work, and on the contrary, the other day we held the founding assembly of Catalunya en Comú and – where are we headed? how long will we be able to maintain the freshness, avoid falling into the traditional vices of political parties? Xavi (Domenech) is a very good candidate, he has what I call a Guanyem DNA, but it’s not evident that we can pull this through. That’s the doubt.</p></br><p><b>NT —</b> How do you assess the results of the founding assembly of Catalunya en Comú? Are you happy with what came out of it?</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> Yes, I’m satisfied, although I don’t think the results were optimal, but we are squeezed by a political calendar that we don’t control. It’s very probable that there will be elections this year in Catalonia, so if that happens… what would have been preferable? To reproduce the Barcelona en Comú model, take more time and work more from the bottom up, hold meetings throughout the territory – we did hold about 70 or 80, but a lot more would have been better – do things more slowly and look around, build links with local movements, the same ones as in Barcelona but on the level of Catalonia – energy, water, etc: reconstruct the same process. But sure, they’re going to call elections or a referendum in 2 days. What is clear is that we can’t do the same thing as with ‘Catalunya si que es pot’<sup id="cite_ref-8" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-8">[8]</a></sup>, which was a coalition but it didn’t work. So all this has meant that the process – despite the fact that I think it has been carried out well, is not optimal: within the realm of the possible, I think it was done with great dignity.</p></br><p><b>NT —</b> And with respect to the deliberative process that was used to arrive at the final document?</p></br><p><b>JS —</b> Basically the same thing: it could have been done better, with deeper debates in each area, it was done very quickly, a lot of issues in a short period of time. The task was very complex, and I think the result is worthy. We tried to avoid standardised jargon and parameters, to make it a bit different. So now we’ll see – yesterday the Executive met for the first time, and on May 13 will be the first meeting of the coordinating group of 120 people<sup id="cite_ref-9" class="reference"><a href="#cite_note-9">[9]</a></sup>. So we’ll have to see how this all is gotten underway. I am not convinced that it will all be functional in time for the Catalan elections, for me the key date is May 2019 which are the next municipal elections. Then we’ll see if this has really jelled and if we can have a significant presence throughout the territory. This territorial vision is very important in order to avoid a top-down construction. The key thing in Catalonia is to do it with dignity and not to become entrapped in this dual logic of independence or not, to be capable of bringing together a social force that is in that position.</p></br><div class="" style="font-size: .8em;"></br><p>NOTES</p></br><ol class="references"></br><li id="cite_note-1"><span class="mw-cite-backlink"><a href="#cite_ref-1">↑</a></span> <span class="reference-text">Autonomous elections are those held in the 17 Autonomous Communities of Spain created by the 1978 Constitution. Catalunya is one of them.</span></li></br><li id="cite_note-2"><span class="mw-cite-backlink"><a href="#cite_ref-2">↑</a></span> <span class="reference-text">The Unified Socialist Party of Catalonia or PSUC: Founded in 1936, it allied the main parties of the Catalan left around the Communist Party. It was dissolved in 1987.</span></li></br><li id="cite_note-3"><span class="mw-cite-backlink"><a href="#cite_ref-3">↑</a></span> <span class="reference-text">« A country in common ». The process, carried out in a transparent and well-documented manner, began with a negotiation with certain left-wing parties and movements, and encouraged discussion and new proposals at popular assemblies throughout the region and in online discussion open to the public. More than 3,000 people participated in 70 assemblies and more than 1,700 proposals and amendments were made online with the webpage registering nearly 130,000 hits. The Assembly discussed and voted on the various amendments and agreed on a transitional structure composed of a coordinating body of 120 members and an executive committee of 33 members, each with a one-year mandate to propose an ethical code, statutes, an organizational structure and political options in the unfolding conjuncture. </span></li></br><li id="cite_note-4"><span class="mw-cite-backlink"><a href="#cite_ref-4">↑</a></span> <span class="reference-text">« La Politica de Comù » in Nous horitzons (New Horizons) No. 215, 2017. Originally titled Horitzons, the magazine was founded in 1960 in clandestinity and published in Catalan abroad by intellectuals linked to the PSUC. It has been published in Catalonia since 1972. It recently opened its pages to other progressive political tendencies. </span></li></br><li id="cite_note-5"><span class="mw-cite-backlink"><a href="#cite_ref-5">↑</a></span> <span class="reference-text">Albano Dante Fachin, member of the Catalan parliament, is the head of Podem (the Catalan wing of the Podemos party). He opposed the participation of his party in the constituent assembly of Un Pais en Comù thus creating a crisis in the ranks of Podemos at both the Catalan and national levels. Party leader Pablo Iglesias did not disown him, but delegated his national second-in-command Pablo Echenique to represent him in the assembly. </span></li></br><li id="cite_note-6"><span class="mw-cite-backlink"><a href="#cite_ref-6">↑</a></span> <span class="reference-text">Coalitions of the Catalan left since the transition period of the 1970s have been numerous and complex for the uninitiated. « Iniciativa for Catalonia Verts » dates from 1995 and was composed of the Green party with Iniciativa for Catalonia, itself a 1987 coalition of the left parties around the PSUC and the former Catalan Communist Party. EUIA (United and Alternative Left) is another coalition in 1998 which includes the first two and all the small parties of the radical left. EUIA is the Catalan branch of Izquierda Unida (United Left) the new name of the Spanish Communist Party. </span></li></br><li id="cite_note-7"><span class="mw-cite-backlink"><a href="#cite_ref-7">↑</a></span> <span class="reference-text">Pasqual Maragall, member and later president of the Catalan Socialist Party, became mayor of Barcelona in 1982 with the support of the elected members of the Unified Socialist Party of Catalonia (PSUC). He remained in this position for almost 15 years without ever having a majority in the municipal council. He then became President of the Catalan government in 2003.</span></li></br><li id="cite_note-8"><span class="mw-cite-backlink"><a href="#cite_ref-8">↑</a></span> <span class="reference-text">Catalunya Sí que es Pot (CSQP, « Yes Catalonia Is Possible ») is a left-wing coalition created in view of the Catalan elections in the autumn of 2015. Barcelona en Comù, itself a municipal coalition, was elected in May 2015 but decided not to run in the autonomous elections. </span></li></br><li id="cite_note-9"><span class="mw-cite-backlink"><a href="#cite_ref-9">↑</a></span> <span class="reference-text">The election result was no surprise: ‘A country in common’ founder Xavier Domenech will preside the Executive Committee and Ada Colau, the current mayor of Barcelona, is president of the coordinating body. The membership, via an internet vote, chose on May 20 a new name preferring « Catalunya en Comù » to « En Comú podem », thus distinguishing itself from the 2015 Catalan coalition with Podemos, also called « En comu podem » and signalling a reinforcement of the « Barcelona en Comù » wing with respect to the supporters of Podemos in the new entity. The rejection of the earlier name ‘Un Pais en Comu’ may also denote a desire to distance itself from a pro-independence stance.</span></li></br></ol></br></div>i> </ol> </div>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p><a href="https://www.remixthec … <p><a href="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Move-North-South-Water.jpg"><img decoding="async" loading="lazy" class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-4194" src="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Move-North-South-Water-198x300.jpg" alt="Move North South Water" width="198" height="300" /></a></p></br><p>Le « Nan Shui Bei Diao » – littéralement Sud Eau Nord Déplacer – est le plus gros projet de transfert d’eau au monde, entre le sud et le nord de la Chine. Sur les traces de ce chantier colossal, le film d’Antoine Boutet dresse la cartographie mouvementée d’un territoire d’ingénieur où le ciment bat les plaines, les fleuves quittent leur lit, les déserts deviennent forêts, où peu à peu des voix s’élèvent, réclamant justice et droit à la parole. Tandis que la matière se décompose et que les individus s’alarment, un paysage de science-fiction, contre nature, se recompose.</p></br><p>Sud Eau Nord Déplacer sortira mercredi 28 janvier 2915 dans les salles de cinéma. Si vous souhaitez vous associer à une de ces projections, contactez la salle de cinéma concernée ou la distribution du film : mdecout@zeugmafilms.fr. Si vous souhaitez accompagner une projection dans une ville où le film n’est pas encore programmé, contactez-nous : hague.philippe@gmail.com</p>film n’est pas encore programmé, contactez-nous : hague.philippe@gmail.com</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p><iframe loading="lazy" src="// … <p><iframe loading="lazy" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/a0J2gj80EVI?rel=0" width="400" height="225" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p></br><p>« Sans Lendemain », est un film d’animation sur l’exploitation des énergies fossiles et des ressources naturelles et leurs conséquences sur la vie humaine sur la planète. Il est réalisé par Dermot O’ Connor et produit par Incubate Pictures. en 35 minutes, il aborde de façon très intelligible toute une série de problématiques liées à la croissance de notre système économique et à notre façon de consommer.</p></br><p>Réalisation : Dermot O’ Connor (35 minutes, 2012).<a href="http://www.idleworm.com">http://www.idleworm.com</a><br /></br><a href="http://www.incubatepictures.com">http://www.incubatepictures.com</a> – <a href="http://www.angryanimator.com">http://www.angryanimator.com</a></p></br><p>Information et documentation sur le site <a href="http://sansLendemain.mpOC.be">http://sansLendemain.mpOC.be</a>.</p></br><p>Titre original étasunien : There’s no tomorrow.<br /></br><a href="https://www.youtube.com/redirect?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DVOMWzjrRiBg&redir_token=PRF4kw9bwKfWe7SJ5S33XwpWSiZ8MTQwMTM2NzY0MEAxNDAxMjgxMjQw">https://www.youtube.com</a></p></br><p>Version française 2013 due à l’initiative du groupe de Liège du mpOC, Mouvement politique des objecteurs de croissance (le mpOC n’est pas un parti politique).</p></br><p>Avec le soutien de :<br /></br>Amis de la Terre Belgique, ASPO.be (section belge de l’Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas), GRAPPE (Groupe de Réflexion et d’Action Pour une Politique Ecologique), IEW (Inter-Environnement Wallonie), Imagine demain le monde, mpOC.</p></br><p>Traduction : Francis Leboutte.<br /></br>Voix : Caroline Lamarche.<br /></br>Mixage voix : Margarida Guia.<br /></br>Sous-titres en néerlandais, allemand, anglais, français, espagnol et italien.</p>aduction : Francis Leboutte.<br /> Voix : Caroline Lamarche.<br /> Mixage voix : Margarida Guia.<br /> Sous-titres en néerlandais, allemand, anglais, français, espagnol et italien.</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p><iframe loading="lazy" src="// … <p><iframe loading="lazy" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/6t0csmTRkck?rel=0" width="400" height="225" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p></br><p>Les questions sur la «propriété» ou sur le droit de bénéficier de l’héritage indigène sont au cœur des débats politiques, économiques et éthiques en cours aux niveaux local, national et international. Quand il s’agit de la recherche dans ce domaine, la vision des peuples autochtones sur la façon dont les études relatives à leur patrimoine sont gérés, est généralement peu prise en compte. De plus en plus cependant, des efforts sont faits pour décoloniser les pratiques de recherche en favorisant des relations plus équitables entre les chercheurs et les peuples autochtones, fondées sur la confiance mutuelle et la collaboration.</p></br><p>Dans cette présentation, George Nicholas critique les débats sur la «propriété» du patrimoine autochtone et fournit des exemples de nouvelles pratiques de recherche qui sont à la fois plus éthiques et plus efficaces. Ces modèles de recherche en collaboration, dans lesquels la communauté mène la recherche, mettent en évidence de nouvelles orientations importantes dans la protection du patrimoine des peuples autochtones.</p></br><p>IPinCH (Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage) est un projet international de recherche participative autour de la réappropriation de l’héritage culturel par les communautés ancestrales. A qui appartient le passé ? A qui bénéficie-t-il ? quelles sont les conceptions culturelles de l’héritage culturel (de la mémoire) ? Comment distinguer accaparement et emprunts culturels (cultural borrowings) ? Ce projet croise des questions sur le domaine public, la nature de la recherche conduite par les communautés (et non pour elles) et sur les connaissances ancestrales (et culturelles en général). Il montre un éventail de processus de gestion collective des connaissances des communautés et tire des principes applicables à la recherche et pour comprendre les questions étudiées. Enfin, il propose l’usage de la <a href="http://www.localcontexts.org/">Traditional Knowledge licence</a> et un <a href="http://www.sfu.ca/ipinch/outputs/blog/appropriation-month-midterm-exam">questionnaire </a>pour évaluer accaparement ou emprunt culturel.</p></br><p>Speaker: George Nicholas<br /></br>Event: SFU Public Square<br /></br>Date: April 2, 2014</p>;/p> <p>Speaker: George Nicholas<br /> Event: SFU Public Square<br /> Date: April 2, 2014</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p><img decoding="async" loading= … <p><img decoding="async" loading="lazy" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-4963" src="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/pla_barcelona_digital_city_in-2.jpg" alt="" width="600" height="300" /><br /></br>In the last elections in May, Barcelona en Comù has formed an alliance with the Catalan Socialist Party to form a new municipal government with a common agenda and Ada Colau was re-elected for another 4-year term. The first term of office 2015-2019 was held with a minority government and in a regional and national context that was politically and ideologically unfavourable to the development of a « new municipalism of the commons » and an « alternative way of doing politics » that Barcelona claimed to be « en Comù ».</p></br><p>The time has come to take stock and, of course, many will have something to say about the achievements made by comparing them to the initial programme. But when we see on the one hand the concrete achievements that often go beyond or question the competences of a municipality (housing, mobility, civic income, health, immigration, tourism, feminisation of politics, energy and technological sovereignty, etc) and on the other hand, what has been done to put transparency in the relationship between the institution, the social movements and the neighbourhood assemblies and the research, for a co-production of policies, we can affirm that the results are generally positive.</p></br><p>The commons movement members and the supporters of a new municipalism, can be pleased that, thanks to a coalition of social movements, that has had the courage (and it is necessary) to invest an institution impregnated with neo-liberal practices and a logic of political parties fights, that is often far from the needs and realities of residents, Barcelona remains one of the most dynamic laboratories of urban commons and a model to which to refer.</p></br><p>The <a href="https://ajuntament.barcelona.cat/digital/sites/default/files/pla_barcelona_digital_city_in.pdf_barcelona_digital_city_in.pdf">review of the digital plan</a> implemented during the first mandate proposed here is characteristic of the achievements, critical path and creativity of this laboratory.</p></br><p>Here is how the city summarizes the principles of its action:</p></br><blockquote><p>Establish itself as a global reference point as a city of commons and collaborative production<br /></br>End privatisation and transfer of public assets in private hands, while promoting remunicipalisation of critical urban infrastructures<br /></br>Massively reduce the cost of basic services like housing, transport, education and health, in order to assist those in the most precarious strata of the population<br /></br>Institute a citizens basic income focused on targeting proverty and social exclusion Barcelona Digital City Plan (2015-2019)<br /></br>Build data-driven models of the economy, with real inputs (using real time data analytics) so that participatory democracy could model complex decisions<br /></br>Prefer and promote collaborative organisations over both the centralised state and the market solutions (start investing higher percentages of public budget in innovative SMEs and the cooperative sector)<br /></br>Build city data commons: decree that the networked data of the population generated in the context of using public services cannot be owned by services operators</p></blockquote></br><p>These principles are embodied in an action programme, the effects of which are detailed in this document. In addition to the emblematic 13,000 policy proposals from the inhabitants, of which 9.245 (72%) have been accepted, there have been 126 cases of corruption reported through the Transparency mailbox since 2017 or the inclusion of gender differences in the STEAM education and technological training programme.</p></br><p>Finally, Barcelona, here as in other areas, is building on and strengthening city networks. It initiated – with New York and Amsterdam – the Coalition of Cities for Digital Rights and launched the campaign « 100 Cities in 100 Days » to defend 5 principles of digital policy:</p></br><blockquote></br><ul></br><li>Equal and universal access to Internet and computer literacy Barcelona Digital City Plan (2015-2019)</li></br><li>Privacy, data protection and security</li></br><li>Transparency, accountability and non-discrimination in data, content and algorithms</li></br><li>Participatory democracy, diversity, and inclusion</li></br><li>Open and ethical digital service standards</li></br></ul></br></blockquote></br><p>The cities of the Coalition are developing common roadmaps, laws, tools, actions and resources to protect the digital rights of residents and visitors.</p></br><p><strong>Alain Ambrosi and Frédéric Sultan</strong></p></br><p><em>For a more exhaustive assessment see the sector-by-sector assessment on the <a href="https://barcelonaencomu.cat/es">Barcelona Joint Site (in Spanish)</a> </em></p> protect the digital rights of residents and visitors.</p> <p><strong>Alain Ambrosi and Frédéric Sultan</strong></p> <p><em>For a more exhaustive assessment see the sector-by-sector assessment on the <a href="https://barcelonaencomu.cat/es">Barcelona Joint Site (in Spanish)</a> </em></p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p>As we are preparing a public meet … <p>As we are preparing a public meeting on the 16th. of September in Paris, with Michel Bauwens and Bernard Stiegler, on issues of free knowledge as commons and ecological, social and economic transition, we present here the translation into French of the interview conducted by Richard Poynder, with Michel Bauwens about FLOK Society project. This interview was published when the summit FLOK society was started in Quito in May 2014. It was published under the original title: <a href="http://poynder.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/working-for-phase -transition-to-open.html "> Working for a phase of transition to an open commons-based knowledge society: Interview with Michel Bauwens. Michel Bauwens FLOK Society presents the project and the expected outcomes in Ecuador and more generally for the P2P movement, without concealing the difficulties he and his research team met.</a></p></br><p>Richard Poynder is a well knowed independent journalist and blogger, following the Open Access movement for a long time ago, specialised in scientific communication and open science, information technology and intellectual property. His <a href="http://poynder.blogspot.co.uk">Blog </a> is a mine of gold for every body who is interested in these issues.</p></br><p>The interview is under Licence : CC BY NC ND. The translation has been made by Frédéric Sultan.</p></br><p>Tuesday, May 27, 2014</p></br><figure style="width: 400px" class="wp-caption alignleft"><img decoding="async" loading="lazy" src="http://i.vimeocdn.com/video/177863970_640.jpg" alt="" width="400" height="225" /><figcaption class="wp-caption-text">Michel Bauwens – Berlin 2012 Remix The Commons</figcaption></figure></br><div><i>Today a </i><a href="http://cumbredelbuenconocer.ec/"><i>summit</i></a><i> starts in Quito, Ecuador that will discuss ways in which the country can transform itself into an open commons-based knowledge society. The team that put together the proposals is led by Michel Bauwens from the </i><a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/"><i>Foundation for Peer-to-Peer Alternatives</i></a><i>. What is the background to this plan, and how likely is it that it will bear fruit?  With the hope of finding out I spoke recently to Bauwens.</i></div></br><div>One interesting phenomenon to emerge from the Internet has been the growth of free and open movements, including free and open source software, open politics, open government, open data, citizen journalism, creative commons, open science, open educational resources (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_educational_resources">OER</a>), open access etc.</div></br><div>While these movements often set themselves fairly limited objectives (e.g. “<a href="http://cogprints.org/1702/">freeing the refereed literature</a>”) some network theorists maintain that the larger phenomenon they represent has the potential not just to replace traditional closed and proprietary practices with more open and transparent approaches, and not just to subordinate narrow commercial interests to the greater needs of communities and larger society but, since the network enables ordinary citizens to collaborate together on large meaningful projects in a distributed way (and absent traditional hierarchical organisations), it could have a significant impact on the way in which societies and economies organise themselves.</div></br><div>In his influential book <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wealth_of_Networks"><i>The Wealth of Networks</i></a>, for instance, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yochai_Benkler">Yochai Benkler</a> identifies and describes a new form of production that he sees emerging on the Internet — what he calls “<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commons-based_peer_production">commons-based peer production</a>”. This, he says, is creating a new <a href="http://www.slideshare.net/macloo/networked-information-economy-benkler">Networked Information Economy</a>.</div></br><div>Former librarian and Belgian network theorist <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Bauwens">Michel Bauwens</a> goes so far as to say that by enabling peer-to-peer (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_peer-to-peer_processes">P2P</a>) collaboration, the Internet has created a new model for the future development of human society. In addition to peer production, he <a href="http://poynder.blogspot.co.uk/2006/09/p2p-blueprint-for-future.html">explained to me in 2006</a>, the network also encourages the creation of peer property (i.e. commonly owned property), and peer governance (governance based on civil society rather than representative democracy).</div></br><div>Moreover, what is striking about peer production is that it emerges and operates outside traditional power structures and market systems. And when those operating in this domain seek funding they increasingly turn not to the established banking system, but to new P2P practices like crowdfunding and social lending.</div></br><div>When in 2006 I asked Bauwens what the new world he envisages would look like in practice he replied, “I see a P2P civilisation that would have to be post-capitalist, in the sense that human survival cannot co-exist with a system that destroys the biosphere; but it will nevertheless have a thriving marketplace. At the core of such a society — where immaterial production is the primary form — would be the production of value through non-reciprocal peer production, most likely supported through a basic income.”</div></br><h2>Unrealistic and utopian?</h2></br><div> So convinced was he of the potential of P2P that in 2005 Bauwens created the <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/">Foundation for Peer-to-Peer Alternatives</a>. The goal: to “research, document and promote peer-to-peer principles”</div></br><div>Critics dismiss Bauwens’ ideas as unrealistic and utopian, and indeed in the eight years since I first spoke with him much has happened that might seem to support the sceptics. Rather than being discredited by the 2008 financial crisis, for instance, traditional markets and neoliberalism have tightened their grip on societies, in all parts of the world.</div></br><div>At the same time, the democratic potential and openness Bauwens sees as characteristic of the network is being eroded in a number of ways. While social networking platforms like Facebook enable the kind of sharing and collaboration Bauwens sees lying at the heart of a P2P society, for instance, there is a growing sense that these services are in fact exploitative, not least because the significant value created by the users of these services is being monetised not for the benefit of the users themselves, but for the exclusive benefit of the large corporations that own them.</div></br><div>We have also seen a huge growth in proprietary mobile devices, along with the flood of apps needed to run on them — a development that caused <i>Wired’s</i> former editor-in-chief <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Anderson_%28writer%29">Chris Anderson</a> to <a href="http://www.wired.com/2010/08/ff_webrip">conclude</a> that we are witnessing a dramatic move “from the wide-open Web to semi closed platforms”. And this new paradigm, he added, simply “reflects the inevitable course of capitalism”.</div></br><div>In other words, rather than challenging or side-lining the traditional market and neoliberalism, the network seems destined to be appropriated by it — a likelihood that for many was underlined by the recent <a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-net-neutrality-20140114-story.html#page=1">striking down</a> of the US net neutrality regulations.</div></br><div>It would also appear that some of the open movements are gradually being appropriated and/or subverted by commercial interests (e.g. the <a href="http://poynder.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/the-state-of-open-access.html">open access</a> and open educational resources movements).</div></br><div>While conceding that a capitalist version of P2P has begun to emerge, Bauwens argues that this simply makes it all the more important to support and promote social forms of P2P. And here, he suggests, the signs are positive, with the number of free and open movements continuing to grow and the P2P model bleeding out of the world of “immaterial production” to encompass material production too — e.g. with the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_design">open design</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_hardware">open hardware</a> movements, a development encouraged by the growing use of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3d_printing">3D printers</a>.</div></br><div>Bauwens also points to a growth in mutualisation, and the emergence of new practices based around the sharing of physical resources and equipment.</div></br><div>Interestingly, these latter developments are often less visible than one might expect because much of what is happening in this area appears to be taking place outside the view of mainstream media in the global north.</div></br><div>Finally, says Bauwens, the P2P movement, or commoning (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bollier">as some prefer to call it</a>), is becoming increasingly politicised. Amongst other things, this has seen the rise of new political parties like the various <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate_Party">Pirate Parties</a>.</div></br><div>Above all, Bauwens believes that the long-term success of P2P is assured because its philosophy and practices are far more sustainable than the current market-based system. “Today, we consider nature infinite and we believe that infinite resources should be made scarce in order to protect monopolistic players,” he says below. “Tomorrow, we need to consider nature as a finite resource, and we should respect the abundance of nature and the human spirit.”</div></br><h2>Periphery to mainstream</h2></br><div>And as the need for sustainability becomes ever more apparent, more people will doubtless want to listen to what Bauwens has to say. Indeed, what better sign that P2P could be about to move from the periphery to the mainstream than an invitation Bauwens received last year from three Ecuadorian governmental institutions, who asked him to lead a team tasked with coming up with proposals for transitioning the country to a society based on free and open knowledge.</div></br><div>The organisation overseeing the project is the FLOK Society (free, libre, open knowledge). As “commoner” <a href="http://bollier.org/about">David Bollier</a> <a href="http://bollier.org/blog/bauwens-joins-ecuador-planning-commons-based-peer-production-economy">explained</a> when the project was announced, Bauwens’ team was asked to look at many interrelated themes, “including open education; open innovation and science; ‘arts and meaning-making activities’; open design commons; distributed manufacturing; and sustainable agriculture; and open machining.”</div></br><div>Bollier added, “The research will also explore enabling legal and institutional frameworks to support open productive capacities; new sorts of open technical infrastructures and systems for privacy, security, data ownership and digital rights; and ways to mutualise the physical infrastructures of collective life and promote collaborative consumption.”</div></br><div>In other words, said Bollier, Ecuador “does not simply assume — as the ‘developed world’ does — that more iPhones and microwave ovens will bring about prosperity, modernity and happiness.”</div></br><div>Rather it is looking for sustainable solutions that foster “social and territorial equality, cohesion, and integration with diversity.”</div></br><div>The upshot: In April Bauwens’ team published a series of <a href="http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Pl">proposals</a> intended to transition Ecuador to what he calls a sustainable civic P2P economy. And these proposals will be discussed at a summit to be held this week in the capital of Ecuador (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quito">Quito</a>).</div></br><div>“As you can see from our proposals, we aim for a simultaneous transformation of civil society, the market and public authorities,” says Bauwens. “And we do this without inventing or imposing utopias, but by extending the working prototypes from the commoners and peer producers themselves.”</div></br><div>But Bauwens knows that Rome wasn’t built in a day, and he realises that he has taken on a huge task, one fraught with difficulties. Even the process of putting the proposals together has presented him and his team with considerable challenges. Shortly after they arrived in Ecuador, for instance, they were told that the project had been defunded (funding that was fortunately later reinstated). And for the moment it remains unclear whether many (or any) of the FLOK proposals will ever see the light of day.</div></br><div>Bauwens is nevertheless upbeat. Whatever the outcome in Ecuador, he says, an important first stab has been made at creating a template for transitioning a nation state from today’s broken model to a post-capitalist social knowledge society.</div></br><div>“What we have now that we didn’t have before, regardless of implementation in Ecuador, is the first global commons-oriented transition plan, and several concrete legislative proposals,” he says. “They are far from perfect, but they will be a reference that other locales, cities, (bio)regions and states will be able to make their own adapted versions of it.”</div></br><div>In the Q&A below Bauwens discusses the project in more detail, including the background to it, and the challenges that he and the FLOK Society have faced.</div></br><h2>The interview begins</h2></br><div><b><i>RP:  We last spoke in 2006 when you discussed your ideas on a P2P (peer-to-peer) society (which I think </i></b><a href="http://www.bollier.org/"><b><i>David Bollier</i></b></a><b><i> refers to as “commoning”). Briefly, what has been learned since then about the opportunities and challenges of trying to create a P2P society, and how have your thoughts on P2P changed/developed as a result?</i></b></div></br><div><b>MB:</b> At the time, P2P dynamics were mostly visible in the process of “immaterial production”, i.e. productive communities that created commons of knowledge and code. The trend has since embraced material production itself, through <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_design">open design</a> that is linked to the production of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_hardware">open hardware</a> machinery.</div></br><div>Another trend is the mutualisation of physical resources. We’ve seen on the one hand an explosion in the mutualisation of open workspaces (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hackerspace">hackerspaces</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fab_lab">fab labs</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coworking">co-working</a>) and the explosion of the so-called sharing economy and collaborative consumption.</div></br><div>This is of course linked to the emergence of distributed practices and technologies for finance (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crowdfunding">crowd funding</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_lending">social lending</a>); and for machinery itself (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3d_printing">3D printing</a> and other forms of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_manufacturing">distributed manufacturing</a>). Hence the emergence and growth of P2P dynamics is now clearly linked to the “distribution of everything”.</div></br><div>There is today no place we go where social P2P initiatives are not developing and not exponentially growing. P2P is now a social fact.</div></br><div>Since the crisis of 2008, we are also seeing much more clearly the political and economic dimension of P2P. There is now both a clearly capitalist P2P sector (renting and working for free is now called sharing, which is putting downward pressure on income levels) and a clearly social one.  First of all, the generalised crisis of our economic system has pushed more people to search for such practical alternatives. Second, most P2P dynamics are clearly controlled by economic forces, i.e. the new “netarchical” (hierarchy of the network) platforms.</div></br><div>Finally, we see the increasing politicisation of P2P, with the emergence of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate_Party">Pirate Parties</a>, network parties (Partido X in Spain) etc.</div></br><div>We have now to decide more clearly than before whether we want more autonomous peer production, i.e. making sure that the domination of the free social logic of permissionless aggregation is directly linked to the capacity to generate self-managed livelihoods, or, if we are happy with a system in which this value creation is controlled and exploited by platform owners and other intermediaries.</div></br><div>The result of all of this is that my own thoughts are now more directly political. We have developed concrete proposals and strategies to create P2P-based counter-economies that are de-linked from the accumulation of capital, but focused on cooperative accumulation and the autonomy of commons production.</div></br><div><b><i>RP: Indeed and last year you were </i></b><a href="http://bollier.org/blog/bauwens-joins-ecuador-planning-commons-based-peer-production-economy"><b><i>asked to lead a team</i></b></a><b><i> to come up with proposals to “remake the roots of Ecuador’s economy, setting off a transition into a society of free and open knowledge”. As I understand it, this would be based on the principles of open networks, peer production and commoning. Can you say something about the project and what you hope it will lead to? Has the Ecuadoran government itself commissioned you, or a government or non-government agency in Ecuador? </i></b></div></br><div><b>MB:</b> The project, called <a href="http://floksociety.org/">FLOKSociety.org</a>, was commissioned by three Ecuadorian governmental institutions, i.e. the <a href="http://www.conocimiento.gob.ec/">Coordinating Ministry of Knowledge and Human Talent</a>, the <a href="http://www.senescyt.gob.ec/web/guest">SENESCYT</a> (Secretaría Nacional de Educación Superior, Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación) and the <a href="http://iaen.edu.ec/">IAEN</a> (Instituto de Altos Estudios del Estado).</div></br><div>The legitimacy and logic of the project comes from the <a href="http://www.unosd.org/content/documents/96National%20Plan%20for%20Good%20Living%20Ecuador.pdf">National Plan of Ecuador</a>, which is centred around the concept of Good Living (<a href="http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/blog/buen-vivir-philosophy-south-america-eduardo-gudynas">Buen Vivir</a>), which is a non-reductionist, non-exclusive material way to look at the economy and social life, inspired by the traditional values of the indigenous people of the Andes. The aim of FLOK is to add “Good Knowledge” as an enabler and facilitator of the good life.</div></br><div>The important point to make is that it is impossible for countries and people that are still in neo-colonial dependencies to evolve to more fair societies without access to shareable knowledge. And this knowledge, expressed in diverse commons that correspond to the different domains of social life (education, science, agriculture, industry), cannot itself thrive without also looking at both the material and immaterial conditions that will enable their creation and expansion.</div></br><h2>FLOK summit</h2></br><div><b><i>RP: To this end you have put together a transition plan. This includes </i></b><a href="http://bollier.org/blog/ecuador%E2%80%99s-pathbreaking-plan-commons-based-peer-production-update"><b><i>a series of proposals</i></b></a><b><i> (available </i></b><a href="https://floksociety.co-ment.com/text/"><b><i>here</i></b></a><b><i>), and a main report (</i></b><a href="http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan"><b><i>here</i></b></a><b><i>). I assume your plan might or might not be taken up by Ecuador. What is the procedure for taking it forward, and how optimistic are you that Ecuador will embark on the transition you envisage?</i></b></div></br><div><b>MB:</b> The transition plan provides a framework for moving from an economy founded on what we call “cognitive” and “netarchical” capitalism (based respectively on the exploitation through IP rents or social media platforms) to a “mature P2P-based civic economy”.</div></br><div>The logic here is that the dominant economic forms today are characterised by a value crisis, one in which value is extracted but it doesn’t flow back to the creators of the value. The idea is to transition to an economy in which this value feedback loop is restored.</div></br><div>So about fifteen of our policy proposals apply this general idea to specific domains, and suggest how open knowledge commons can be created and expanded in these particular areas.</div></br><div>We published these proposals on April 1^st in <a href="http://www.co-ment.com/">co-ment</a>, an open source software that allows people to comment on specific concepts, phrases or paragraphs.</div></br><div>This week (May 27^th to 30^th) the crucial <a href="http://cumbredelbuenconocer.ec/">FLOK summit</a> is taking place to discuss the proposals. This will bring together government institutions, social movement advocates, and experts, from both Ecuador and abroad.</div></br><div>The idea is to devote three days to reaching a consensus amongst these different groups, and then try and get agreement with the governmental institutions able to carry out the proposals.</div></br><div>So there will be two filters: the summit itself, and then the subsequent follow-up, which will clearly face opposition from different interests.</div></br><div>This is not an easy project, since it is not possible to achieve all this by decree.</div></br><div><b><i>RP: Earlier this year you made a series of </i></b><a href="http://bollier.org/blog/flok-society-vision-post-capitalist-economy"><b><i>videos</i></b></a><b><i> discussing the issues arising from what you are trying to do —  which is essentially to create “a post-capitalist social knowledge society”, or “open commons-based knowledge society”. In one video you discuss three different value regimes, and I note you referred to these in your last answer — i.e. cognitive capitalism, netarchical capitalism and a civic P2P economy. Can you say a little more about how these three different regimes differ and why in your view P2P is a better approach than the other two?</i></b></div></br><div><b>MB:</b> I define cognitive capitalism as a regime in which value is generated through a combination of rent extraction from the control of intellectual property and the control of global production networks, and expressed in terms of monetisation.</div></br><div>What we have learned is that the democratisation of networks, which also provides a new means of production and value distribution, means that this type of value extraction is harder and harder to achieve, and it can only be maintained either by increased legal suppression (which erodes legitimacy) and outright technological sabotage (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights_management">DRM</a>). Both of these strategies are not sustainable in the long term.</div></br><div>What we have also learned is that the network has caused a new model to emerge, one adapted to the P2P age, and which I call netarchical capitalism, i.e. “the hierarchy of the network”. In this model, we see the direct exploitation of human cooperation by means of proprietary platforms that both enable and exploit human cooperation. Crucially, while their value is derived from our communication, sharing and cooperation (an empty platform has no value), and on the use value that we are exponentially creating (Google, Facebook don’t produce the content, we do), the exchange value is exclusively extracted by the platform owners. This is unsustainable because it is easy to see that a regime in which the creators of the value get no income at all from their creation is not workable in the long; and so it poses problems for capitalism. After all, who is going to buy goods if they have no income?</div></br><div>So the key issue is: how do we recreate the value loop between creation, distribution, and income? The answer for me is the creation of a mature P2P civic economy that combines open contributory communities, ethical entrepreneurial coalitions able to create livelihoods for the commoners, and for-benefit institutions that can “enable and empower the infrastructure of cooperation”.</div></br><div>Think of the core model of our economy as the Linux economy writ large, but one in which the enterprises are actually in the hands of the value creators themselves. Imagine this micro-economic model on the macro scale of a whole society. Civil society becomes a series of commonses with citizens as contributors; the shareholding market becomes an ethical stakeholder marketplace; and the state becomes a partner state, which “enables and empowers social production” through the commonication of public services and public-commons partnerships.</div></br><h2>Challenges and distrust</h2></br><div><b><i>RP: As you indicated earlier, it is not an easy project that you have embarked on in Ecuador, particularly as it is an attempt to intervene at the level of a nation state. Gordon Cook has </i></b><a href="http://www.cookreport.com/newsletter-sp-542240406/current-issues/287-cook-report-for-may-june-2014"><b><i>said</i></b></a><b><i> of the project: “it barely got off the ground before it began to crash into some of the anticipated obstacles.” Can you say something about these obstacles and how you have been overcoming them?</i></b></div></br><div><b>MB:</b> It is true that the project started with quite negative auspices. It became the victim of internal factional struggles within the government, for instance, and was even defunded for a time after we arrived; the institutions failed to pay our wages for nearly three months, which was a serious issue for the kind of precarious scholar-activists that make up the research team.</div></br><div>However, in March (when one of the sides in the dispute lost, i.e. the initial sponsor <a href="http://www.elciudadano.gob.ec/new-left-review-se-presento-en-ecuador/">Carlos Prieto</a>, rector of the IAEN), we got renewed commitment from the other two institutions. Since then political support has increased, and the summit is about to get underway.</div></br><div>As for Gordon, he became a victim of what we will politely call a series of misinterpreted engagements for the funding of his participation, and it is entirely understandable that he has become critical of the process.</div></br><div>The truth is that the project was hugely contradictory in many different ways, but this is the reality of the political world everywhere, not just in Ecuador.</div></br><div>Indeed, the Ecuadorian government is itself engaged in sometimes contradictory policies and is perceived by civil society to have abandoned many of the early ideas of the civic movement that brought it to power. So, in our attempts at broader participation we have been stifled by the distrust many civic activists have for the government, and the sincerity of our project has been doubted.</div></br><div>Additionally, social P2P dynamics, which of course exist as in many other countries, are not particularly developed in their modern, digitally empowered forms in Ecuador. It has also not helped that the management of the project has been such that the research team has not been able to directly connect with the political leaders in order to test their real engagement. This has been hugely frustrating.</div></br><div>On the positive side, we have been entirely free to conduct our research and formulate our proposals, and it is hard not to believe that the level of funding the project has received reflects a certain degree of commitment.</div></br><div>So the summit is back on track, and we have received renewed commitments. Clearly, however, the proof of the pudding will be in the summit and its aftermath.</div></br><div></div></br><div>Whatever the eventual outcome, it has always been my conviction that the formulation of the first ever integrated Commons Transition Plan (which your readers will find <a href="http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan">here</a>) legitimised by a nation-state, takes the P2P and commons movement to a higher geopolitical plane. As such, it can be seen as part of the global maturation of the P2P/commons approach, even if it turns out not to work entirely in Ecuador itself.<b><i></i></b></div></br><div><b><i>RP: I believe that one of the issues that has arisen in putting together the FLOK proposals is that Ecuadorians who live in rural areas are concerned that a system based on sharing could see their traditional knowledge appropriated by private interests. Can you say something about this fear and how you believe your plan can address such concerns?</i></b></div></br><div><b>MB:</b> As you are aware, traditional communities have suffered from systematic <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/biopiracy">biopiracy</a> over the last few decades, with western scientists studying their botanical knowledge, extracting patentable scientific results from it, and then commercialising it in the West.</div></br><div>So fully shareable licenses like the GPL would keep the knowledge in a commons, but would still allow full commercialisation without material benefits flowing back to Ecuador. So what we are proposing is a discussion about a new type of licensing, which we call <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Peer_Production_License">Commons-Based Reciprocity Licensing</a>. This idea was first pioneered with the Peer Production License as conceived by <a href="http://www.dmytri.info/">Dmytri Kleiner</a>.</div></br><div>Such licences would be designed for a particular usage, say biodiversity research in a series of traditional communities. It allows for free sharing non-commercially, commercial use by not-for-profit entities, and even caters for for-profit entities who contribute back. Importantly, it creates a frontier for for-profits who do not contribute back, and asks them to pay.</div></br><div>What is key here is not just the potential financial flow, but to introduce the principle of reciprocity in the marketplace, thereby creating an ethical economy. The idea is that traditional communities can create their own ethical vehicles, and create an economy from which they can also benefit, and under their control.</div></br><div>This concept is beginning to get attention from open machining communities. However, the debate in Ecuador is only starting. Paradoxically, traditional communities are today either looking for traditional IP protection, which doesn’t really work for them, or for no-sharing options.</div></br><div>So we really need to develop intermediary ethical solutions for them that can benefit them while also putting them in the driving seat.</div></br><h2>Fundamental reversal of our civilisation</h2></br><h2></h2></br><div><b><i>RP: In today’s global economy, where practically everyone and everything seems to be interconnected and subject to the rules of neoliberalism and the market, is it really possible for a country like Ecuador to go off in such a different direction on its own? </i></b></div></br><div><b>MB:</b> A full transition is indeed probably a global affair, but the micro-transitions need to happen at the grassroots, and a progressive government would be able to create exemplary policies and projects that show the way.</div></br><div>Ecuador is in a precarious neo-colonial predicament and subject to the pressures of the global market and the internal social groups that are aligned with it. There are clear signs that since 2010 the Ecuadorian government has moved away from the original radical ideas expressed in the Constitution and the National Plan, as we hear from nearly every single civic movement that we’ve spoken with.</div></br><div>The move for a social knowledge economy is of strategic importance to de-colonialise Ecuador but this doesn’t mean it will actually happen. However, the progressive forces have not disappeared entirely from the government institutions.</div></br><div>As such, it is really difficult to predict how successful this project will be. But as I say, given the investment the government has made in the process we believe there will be some progress. My personal view is that the combination of our political and theoretical achievements, and the existence of the policy papers, means that even with moderate progress in the laws and on the ground, we can be happy that we will have made a difference.</div></br><div>So most likely the local situation will turn out to be a hybrid mix of acceptance and refusal of our proposals, and most certainly the situation is not mature enough to accept the underlying logic of our Commons Transition Plan <i>in toto</i>.</div></br><div>In other words, the publication and the dialogue about the plan itself, and some concrete actions, legislative frameworks, and pilot projects, are the best we can hope for. What this will do is give real legitimacy to our approach and move the commons transition to the geo-political stage. Can we hope for more?</div></br><div>Personally, I believe that even if only 20% of our proposals are retained for action, I think we can consider it a relative success. This is the very first time such an even partial transition will have happened at the scale of the nation and, as I see it, it gives legitimacy to a whole new set of ideas about societal transition. So I believe it is worthy of our engagement.</div></br><div>We have to accept that the realities of power politics are incompatible with the expectations of a clean process for such a fundamental policy change. But we hope that some essential proposals of the project will make a difference, both for the people of Ecuador and all those that are watching the project.</div></br><div>For the future though, I have to say I seriously question the idea of trying to “hack a society” which was the initial philosophy of the project and of the people who hired us. You can’t hack a society, since a society is not an executable program. Political change needs a social and political basis, and it was very weak from the start in this case.</div></br><div>This is why I believe that future projects should first focus on the lower levels of political organisation, such as cities and regions, where politics is closer to the needs of the population. History though, is always full of surprises, and bold gambles can yield results. So FLOK may yet surprise the sceptics.</div></br><div><b><i>RP: If Ecuador did adopt your plan (or a significant part of it), what in your view would be the implications, for Ecuador, for other countries, and for the various free and open movements? What would be the implications if none of it were adopted?</i></b></div></br><div><b>MB:</b> As I say, at this stage I see only the possibility of a few legal advances and some pilot projects as the best case scenario. These, however, would be important seeds for Ecuador, and would give extra credibility to our effort.</div></br><div>I realise it may surprise you to hear me say it, but I don’t see this as crucial. I say this because, we already have thousands of projects in the world that are engaged in peer production and commons transitions, and this deep trend is not going to change. The efforts to change the social and economic logic will go on with or without Ecuador.</div></br><div>As I noted, what we have now that we didn’t have before, regardless of implementation in Ecuador, is the first global commons-oriented transition plan, and several concrete legislative proposals. They are far from perfect, but they will be a reference that other locales, cities, (bio)regions and states will be able to make their own adapted versions of it.</div></br><div>In the meantime, we have to continue the grassroots transformation and rebuild commons-oriented coalitions at every level, local, regional, national, global. This will take time, but since infinite growth is not possible in a finite economy, some type of transition is inevitable. Let’s just hope it will be for the benefit of the commoners and the majority of the world population.</div></br><div>Essentially, we need to build the seed forms of the new counter-economy, and the social movement that can defend, facilitate and expand it. Every political and policy expression of this is a bonus.</div></br><div>As for the endgame, you guessed correctly. What distinguishes the effort of the P2P Foundation, and many of the FLOK researchers, is that we’re not just in the business of adding some commons and P2P dynamics to the existing capitalist framework, but aiming at a profound “phase transition”.</div></br><div>To work for a sustainable society and economy is absolutely crucial for the future of humanity, and while we respect the freedoms of people to engage in market dynamics for the allocation of rival goods, we cannot afford a system of infinite growth and scarcity engineering, which is what capitalism is.</div></br><div>In other words, today, we consider nature infinite and we believe that infinite resources should be made scarce in order to protect monopolistic players; tomorrow, we need to consider nature as a finite resource, and we should respect the abundance of nature and the human spirit.</div></br><div>So our endgame is to achieve that fundamental reversal of our civilisation, nothing less. As you can see from our proposals, we aim for a simultaneous transformation of civil society, the market and public authorities. And we do this without inventing or imposing utopias, but by extending the working prototypes from the commoners and peer producers themselves.</div></br><p><b><i>RP: Thanks for speaking with me. Good luck with the summit.</i></b></p>gt; <div>I realise it may surprise you to hear me say it, but I don’t see this as crucial. I say this because, we already have thousands of projects in the world that are engaged in peer production and commons transitions, and this deep trend is not going to change. The efforts to change the social and economic logic will go on with or without Ecuador.</div> <div>As I noted, what we have now that we didn’t have before, regardless of implementation in Ecuador, is the first global commons-oriented transition plan, and several concrete legislative proposals. They are far from perfect, but they will be a reference that other locales, cities, (bio)regions and states will be able to make their own adapted versions of it.</div> <div>In the meantime, we have to continue the grassroots transformation and rebuild commons-oriented coalitions at every level, local, regional, national, global. This will take time, but since infinite growth is not possible in a finite economy, some type of transition is inevitable. Let’s just hope it will be for the benefit of the commoners and the majority of the world population.</div> <div>Essentially, we need to build the seed forms of the new counter-economy, and the social movement that can defend, facilitate and expand it. Every political and policy expression of this is a bonus.</div> <div>As for the endgame, you guessed correctly. What distinguishes the effort of the P2P Foundation, and many of the FLOK researchers, is that we’re not just in the business of adding some commons and P2P dynamics to the existing capitalist framework, but aiming at a profound “phase transition”.</div> <div>To work for a sustainable society and economy is absolutely crucial for the future of humanity, and while we respect the freedoms of people to engage in market dynamics for the allocation of rival goods, we cannot afford a system of infinite growth and scarcity engineering, which is what capitalism is.</div> <div>In other words, today, we consider nature infinite and we believe that infinite resources should be made scarce in order to protect monopolistic players; tomorrow, we need to consider nature as a finite resource, and we should respect the abundance of nature and the human spirit.</div> <div>So our endgame is to achieve that fundamental reversal of our civilisation, nothing less. As you can see from our proposals, we aim for a simultaneous transformation of civil society, the market and public authorities. And we do this without inventing or imposing utopias, but by extending the working prototypes from the commoners and peer producers themselves.</div> <p><b><i>RP: Thanks for speaking with me. Good luck with the summit.</i></b></p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p>Every 3rd Tuesday of the month fr … <p>Every 3rd Tuesday of the month from 8pm to 9pm (CET – Paris time), Remix offers a public meeting on the model of the « community call » to address a question and share information on current projects or hot topics in the field of commons, while leaving a trace for those who are absent.</p></br><p>The appointment is structured according to the same protocol: duration 60 minutes, presentation 5 minutes, discussion of the topic of the call 45 minutes and finally, conclusion and appeal for the next call 10 minutes.Audio recording and collective note-taking on a pad (digital notepad) are done and shared after the meeting, for documenting it and keeping the memory of it.</p></br><p>The audio and text archives of the Commons Calls are accessible via the <a href="https://wiki.remixthecommons.org/index.php/Appel_en_commun">remix wiki </a>.</p></br><p>To be informed about future calls, send a message to the following e-mail address: <a href="mailto:info@remixthecommons.org">info@remixthecommons.org</a>.</p></br><div class="input-prepend">Remix the commons does not make any other use, nor share with anyone your personal data without your consent !</div>mix the commons does not make any other use, nor share with anyone your personal data without your consent !</div>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p>Facing economic, social and ecolo … <p>Facing economic, social and ecological crises, many of us think that we must create the conditions for a transition from a productivist industrial world to an economy based on sharing knowledge commons and collaborative and contributing productions. The first challenge is to forge new concepts to understand the effects of automation and rethink the general interest and solidarity as possible horizons. For this, the state, as local and national authorities, the University and organized civil society, must invent all together, alternatives to individualism ownership and to the governance based on the duopoly state / market. </p></br><p>In Ecuador, the government held a major study to try to clarify howto create the conditions for a transition based on the commons. Several researchers and international experts were mobilized, including Michel Bauwens and Bernard Stiegler.</p></br><p>What is the role of national and local governments in the transformation of the economy towards a production of goods and services based on the principles of the commons? What should be the legal and economic instruments invented? what are the alliances between the actors involved in alternative forms of economic and social innovation needed? How to go beyond the niches successfully developed in some sectors – such as the digital economy – and enable scaling to modes of production of goods and services based on the principles of the commons?</p></br><p><a href="http://ouishare.net/">Ouishare</a>, <a href="www.savoirscom1.info/">Savoirscom1</a> and <a href="www.vecam.org/">VECAM</a> invite you to discuss these issues with Michel Bauwens and Bernard Stiegler during a public meeting to be held September 16, 2014 from 6:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. in Salle Triangle, Centre Pompidou, Paris France. </ strong><br /></br><figure style="width: 400px" class="wp-caption alignleft"><img decoding="async" loading="lazy" alt="" src="http://i.vimeocdn.com/video/177863970_640.jpg" width="400" height="225" /><figcaption class="wp-caption-text">Michel Bauwens – Berlin 2012 Remix The Commons – Licence Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0</figcaption></figure></p></br><figure id="attachment_3924" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-3924" style="width: 398px" class="wp-caption alignright"><a href="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Stiegler-2_dans_les_années_2000.jpg"><img decoding="async" loading="lazy" src="https://www.remixthecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Stiegler-2_dans_les_années_2000.jpg" alt="By Joseph.paris — Wikimedia commons. Licence Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons " width="398" height="225" class="size-full wp-image-3924" /></a><figcaption id="caption-attachment-3924" class="wp-caption-text">Bernard Stiegler par Joseph.paris — Wikimedia commons. Licence Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons</figcaption></figure></br><p><H2><a href="https://www.eventbrite.fr/e/inscription-rencontre-publique-avec-bernard-stiegler-et-michel-bauwens-1885113425?ref=elink" target="_blank" style="color:#3BE8DC" rel="noopener noreferrer">Registration</a> is over. </H2></p></br><p>More information in the <a href="https://www.remixthecommons.org/fr/2014/07/vers-une-econo…-la-transition/ ">French version of the post</a>. </p></br><p>This conference is organized with the support of Fondation Pour le Progrès de l’Homme.</p>in the <a href="https://www.remixthecommons.org/fr/2014/07/vers-une-econo…-la-transition/ ">French version of the post</a>. </p> <p>This conference is organized with the support of Fondation Pour le Progrès de l’Homme.</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p>Les voies maritimes, une belle id … <p>Les voies maritimes, une belle idée de vidéo autour d’un projet d’aire maritime à protéger</p></br><p><iframe loading="lazy" frameborder="0" width="400" height="225" src="//www.dailymotion.com/embed/video/xu8azp" allowfullscreen></iframe><br /></br>Par <a href="http://www.aires-marines.fr/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Aires-marines-protegees</a></i></p></br><p>Trois photographes ont sillonné pendant plusieurs mois le golfe normand breton qui s’étend de l’île de Bréhat au Cap de La Hague et qui fait l’objet d’un projet de parc naturel marin. Rodolphe Marics, Denis Bourges et Xavier Desmier proposent une radiographie de cet espace marin selon trois points de vue différents et complémentaires : photos aériennes, pédestres et sous-marines. </p></br><p>Les voies maritimes est né d’un partenariat entre l’Agence des aires marines protégées et l’association Les champs photographiques. </p> des aires marines protégées et l’association Les champs photographiques. </p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p>Project « Justice transitionnelle … <p>Project « Justice transitionnelle: l’expérience Marocaine » plans to share those extremely important Moroccan experiences about transitional justice and community reparation. </p></br><p>In Morocco, from 1959 to 1999, Former King Hassan II often ruled his country with an iron fist. That period is called as the years of lead in Morocco, during which those who were considered a threat to the regime were subject to a wide range of human rights violations. Thousands were subjected to arbitrary arrest, torture, and enforced disappearance, leaving behind a bitter legacy.</p></br><p>However, starting in the early 1990s, a gradual process of dealing with the past began to take root, culminating most recently in the work of the Moroccan Equity and Reconciliation Commission (Instance Équité et Réconciliation (IER)), established by the successor to the throne, King Mohammed VI.</p></br><p>On January 7, 2004, the IER was created, which is the first truth commission in the Arab world. This also has been hailed internationally as a big step forward, and an example to the Arab world. Since that, the IER has been working on addressing the terrible legacy of this era by investigating some of the worst abuses in Morocco and arranging reparations for victims and their families.</p></br><p>Over the duration of its mandate, the IER has amassed an archive of more than 20,000 personal testimonies from victims and their families, which has been organized in a central database in Rabat. It has conducted a range of meetings, conferences, and seminars around a multitude of issues that are keys to understanding Morocco’s past and present.</p></br><p>It has also taken the monumental step of holding public hearings to give victims a platform from which to share their sufferings. Throughout its work, the Commission has aimed to document, preserve, and analyze the roots of the crisis in an attempt to help Morocco come to terms with its past. </p></br><p>Project Justice transitionnelle: l’expérience Marocaine aims to share videos about this process of transitional justice and community reparation. For Morocco, the Community Reparation Project is a huge project contributed to transitional justice. A total sum of 159 million Dirhams was mobilized and total number of completed projects was 149.</p></br><p>These videos talked about how to preserve memory of victim communities during “the years of lead” in Morocco and what kinds of public hearings took place, in fact those hearings gave the highlight of an extensive process of citizen deliberation, compassion and free expression in Morocco. They also talked about lots of stories about how community reparation project aimed to improve the living conditions of the people in victim communities and empower them. In fact, those materials mainly focused on women and children.</p></br><p>Project Justice transitionnelle: l’expérience Marocaine believes Moroccan experiences in transitional justice as commons are useful and valuable to other countries, especially to Arabic countries have the similar history of transitional justice, such as Iraq, Egypt, Tunisia, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Algeria and so on.</p></br><p>As open resources, these documentaries, videos and reports are free to use for the public goods. </p></br><h3>Futur development</h3></br><p>In the next step, Project Justice transitionnelle: l’expérience Marocaine will keep on sharing more historical videos and materials about experiences in transitional justice, such as the videos of public hearings, the videos of public seminars and conferences, historical pictures and final reports of the community reparation project.</p></br><h3>People involved</h3></br><p>Ning and Mohamed Leghtas, from Alternatives Forum in Morocco(FMAS) and Portail E-joussour take in charge of this project, which both based in Rabat, Morroco.</p></br><h3>Ressources</h3></br><p>The project Transitional Justice: the Moroccan experience is financed by the funds of the Equity and Reconciliation Commission (IER)</p></br><h3>Contribution to the projet « Justice transitionnelle</h3></br><p>Alternatives Forum in Morocco(FMAS) and Portail E-joussour take in charge of this project, which both based in Rabat, Morroco.</p>IER)</p> <h3>Contribution to the projet « Justice transitionnelle</h3> <p>Alternatives Forum in Morocco(FMAS) and Portail E-joussour take in charge of this project, which both based in Rabat, Morroco.</p>)
• Chargement/Site  + (<p>Santiago Hoerth Moura from <a … <p>Santiago Hoerth Moura from <a href="http://www.pillku.org/">Revista Pillku</a> met Alain Ambrosi in Mexico City last November 2012 during the preparatory meeting for the <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Overview_of_the_Economics_of_the_Commons_Conference">Economics, Commons Conference</a>. They have discussed about commons and about Remix the Commons project. Santiago Hoerth Moura has published the following interview in Spanish.</p></br><h4>Entrevista con Alain Ambrosi</h4></br><h2>Remix the Commons es una plataforma de intercambio multimedia</h2></br><p>Alain Ambrosi es de Québec, la ciudad de Montreal en Canadá y trabaja para una organización que se llama COMMUNOTIC como investigador asociado, y específicamente para un proyecto que se llama Remix the Commons o Remezcla los comunes que es un proyecto internacional de plataforma en la web.</p></br><p><strong>Por Redacción Pillku</strong></p></br><p><strong>¿Cuál es tu experiencia de trabajo con los comunes?</strong></p></br><p>Mi experiencia de trabajo en los comunes empieza en la documentación de todo lo que se hace y lo que se dice sobre los comunes desde hace ya tres años. Empezando en el Foro Social de Belém en 2009, donde tuvimos el primer Encuentro Internacional Ciencia y Democracia, donde se habló de los commons. En este tiempo se hablaba de los bienes comunes, y la declaración final de este foro social mundial de Belém integró una declaración de recuperación de los Bienes Comunes. Desde este tiempo yo hice como siguiendo un poco las manifestaciones, conferencias, que se hacían sobre los comunes, hubo después la conferencia de Berlín organizado también por el Commons Strategies Group pero con la Fundación Heinrich Böll, era el primer encuentro donde la gente de los comunes materiales y de los comunes inmateriales se encontraron por primera vez digamos. Y fue en esta ocasión que hemos pensando y lanzado la idea de un proyecto que se llama Remix the Commons.</p></br><p><strong>Entonces contamos un poco en qué consiste Remix the Commons.</strong></p></br><p>Remix the Commons es una plataforma de intercambio de difusión, de producción, de documentos multimedia sobre el tema de los comunes. Es una plataforma socio-técnica, donde preferimos hablar más de lo socio que de lo técnico, y decir que es una plataforma que es un espacio de co-creación sobre los comunes. Entonces hemos empezado con entrevistas en todas estas reuniones, foros sociales, pero estamos integrando varios documentos sobre los comunes. Pero la plataforma no es solamente una cosa que va hacer sobre internet; es realmente un espacio de trabajo de co-creación, quiere decir que ya tenemos un montón de problemas que resolver, problemas técnicos que para nosotros es algo menor, pero a nivel jurídico legal porque vamos a hacer circular imágenes, videos, lo cual es un problema grande, y a nivel económico también, porque hay que sustentar este tipo de proyectos y ya tenemos varias ideas de trabajar a nivel de los comunes, porque nosotros nos consideramos com un bien común, quiero decir el proyecto Remix the Commons, queremos funcionar como un bien común, una comunidad de “partenarios” que van a decir las reglas propias, para ir adelante con el proyecto.</p></br><p>Entonces tenemos otras dimensiones muy importantes, como la gobernanza, como cuáles reglas vamos a poner y, también, otra dimensión que me parece muy importante que es la dimensión intercultural porque es muy difícil, por ejemplo que hemos visto desde el principio en Berlín: hace dos años tenemos una serie de entrevistas, de series que hablan de los comunes en chino o en otros idiomas, y se ve que el concepto mismo de commons corresponde a algo bien profundo en todas las culturas, y a veces hay diferencias, etc., y entonces es un desafío que me parece muy grande eso, el de la interculturalidad, las traducciones, etc.</p></br><p>Remix The Commons es un proyecto colaborativo sobre obras multimedia. Su objetivo es documentar e ilustrar las ideas y prácticas en torno a la cuestión del bien común en el proceso creativo. Para conocer más su trabajo visita: <a href="https://www.remixthecommons.org">https://www.remixthecommons.org</a></p></br><p>via<a href="http://www.pillku.org/article/remix-the-commons-es-una-plataforma-de-intercambio/">Remix the commons es una plataforma de intercambio multimedia | Revista Pillku, amantes de la libertad | Cultura Libre.</a></p></a></p> <p>via<a href="http://www.pillku.org/article/remix-the-commons-es-una-plataforma-de-intercambio/">Remix the commons es una plataforma de intercambio multimedia | Revista Pillku, amantes de la libertad | Cultura Libre.</a></p>)