Penny U

Penny U

Saturday, July 4, 2015

Notes April 8: Exploring the Commons


Penny U poses questions as springboards for conversation. Its principal content comes from all who attend. Context was set for this evening’s conversation by a statement circulated and posted here. We began by going around the room with quick responses to the question:  

What first comes to mind when you hear the phrase, "the commons"?

“Open-ended possibilities – freedom within limits imposed by users”

     A frame of reference, communitarian spirit, interdependency.

     Political spaces that can't be regulated. The internet. Wilderness. A place where the rules are formed by the people who occupy it. 

     Shared social space, where ideas are exchanged and resources are shared.

     A place, either concrete or abstract, with open-ended possibilities. Freedom is important, within limits imposed by users. 

     The Commons at the UW came to mind first. A central space that breathed. The term is very alive. The commons instituted some things, and people who came through also instituted things. Food was central. 

     New England, a green lawn in the center where animals were grazed together. Volunteer Park.

     A shared or created resource that can exist at lots of scales (large and small). Examples might be: living in an intentional community, a library, a city at its full potential.

     Many ideas provoked: questions of commons vs. public vs. private.  Enclosures of the commons in 17th century England.  Communities of mind.  A project of his in the 1980s, "Invisible City," with multiple personas and the exchange of ideas; trying to reconstitute it today on Facebook. A project with Charles Mudede, "Reading Money." What are authentic commons today? 

     A place where people gravitate, like the water cooler. 

     The Boston Commons. Traffic circles with gardens on them. Everyone benefits, though someone could snip the flowers. 

     Every time I think about the idea, it gets bigger. It's what we all share and benefit from – shared experience, human rights.

     College. Where you went to intersect, see, and share. 

     Town Hall, its physical space and its intellectual work, like its science programs, making ideas available to more people. 

     The ideas of Lawrence Lessig.  A community sharing a resource. The scope of a commons varies depending on where it is on a political spectrum.  My communitarian neighbor and my libertarian friends would approach the question in different ways. 

     I want to help corporate developers understand the commons. Seattle is about to allow the privatization of every outdoor surface, with big digital billboards. Let's Keep Seattle Beautiful.

     Shared community. Concern for the greater good.  Pennsylvania is a “Commonwealth.” Does that make it different from other states?

     I'm reminded of the Seattle Commons (a 1995 proposal for a huge development including public park lands in South Lake Union). Was it a missed opportunity?

Background:  The commons is our collective wealth

Short introductions to the conversation from Penny U’s organizers followed.

Edward: 

“The commons is a broad idea of political, social, and economic organization. A ‘commons’ can be a physical place or s set of resources (imagine national parks, watersheds, fisheries, grazing land). A commons can also be abstract, referring to information or ideas (as in “creative commons” and open source software). But the commons can also be a principle, a set of values that inspires any work that seeks to collectively enrich a community (think about public artists, nonprofits and civil society, organizations, informal community gatherings, or Town Hall).

“The thread that runs through these meanings has ancient historical roots in legal and social practice, but the commons has emerged again in response to profoundly urgent contemporary concerns. Penny U has looked at many dimensions of our economic life in its conversations this year – exploring our changing relationship to work through the lenses of income inequality, technological change, the environment, and climate change. All of these concerns point to an urgent need for new models of collective responsibility.”

Anne:

Borrowing especially from David Bollier, a writer and thinker about the commons, I offer a few definitions: The commons is collective wealth – it’s what we own together. It is also a social system to manage resources while maintaining values and building community. It is a resource, plus a defined community, plus the protocols, values, and norms devised by the community to manage its resources.

Each commons is different. One example is the acequias in New Mexico – an ancient system for managing and sharing water that survives today. Wikipedia is another, more contemporary, example.

Questions for conversation

Where are commons in your own life and community today? How do they work? Can they be expanded or strengthened?

We then divided into small groups of four or five to discuss this bundle of questions. Following are notes from each of the five tables, taken by participants.

Table 1: The Commons we use

     A buddhist meditation group ~ religion
      -   Incorporates the concept of volunteerism
     
     Courtesy, no obvious center of authority
      -   Rules are enforced by users

     The Gateway Project in Columbia City, a space for human interaction

     A desire for intentional community. A collective ethos of contemplation, not necessarily grounded physically, although that’s possible

     Consensus: What is the role of consensus in the context of a common space?
      -   “Courtesy”
      -   Agreement vs. acquiescence
      -   Power – the violent potential of majority-based decisions.
      -   We should strive toward consensus as much as possible.


     Motivational interviewing
      -   is a means to identify “informal norms” and to maintain cohesion
      -   relies on a spirit of volunteerism

     Other ideas that surfaced in the conversation:
      -   A recognition of the need for mutual aid.
      -   A private school is implicitly a vehicle of segregation.
      -   What is a safe place?
      -   Loving those we were raised to despise.
      -   Workers’ cooperatives – $15/hour and profit-sharing at Ivar’s restaurant
      -   Energy
      -   Safety
      -   Appreciative Inquiry

 Table 2: What commons do we participate in now?

     The internet is pervasive, like air or water.


     Commons have value. How is that value measured?  What’s the relationship between value and things that are free?  Scarcity creates value. How are contributions to the common good valued?


     Can economies also be commons?  above ground? underground?
      -   How about time banking, with hours as the basic currency?
      -   Or, a barter economy.
      -   It’s hard to see the value of a barter economy in the U.S. where increasingly 
          everything has a dollar value and where people are so litigious.

     In California right now, the state is trying to set up a new commons around water.

     The “village” concept – an organizing system that aims to allow older people to age in their homes – is growing around the country. Members participate in a shared system to get services they need from volunteer or fee-based services, building a sense of community as they go. There are 3 in the Seattle area so far.

     Generosity vs. immediate gratification. “Paying it forward.”  Earned value.

     Where are examples of evolving villages that balance the economic side and the spiritual side? Maybe Buddhist practice provides one and shows the imagined and real consequences of living a more ethical life, a more intentional life of inquiry.

     How can other people be incorporated into an existing community? How do people find their way into a commons? Access is a big issue. On one hand, you can spend a lot of time looking for something and, on another, something can just land in your lap.

     Do people come together and form a commons in response to crisis?  or in response to success?

     Thinking of small associations, like a small condo or co-op …

-     Small size is ideal.
-     What happens when you join into an ongoing group or commons?  Do commons need a combination of stability and institutional memory, along with a influx of new people?
-     It’s different from individual ownership. Accountability and shared responsibility is part of being in the group.

     Do you build on one experience of the commons and have a successful force in your life?  Or do you go out and seek other commons and forms?

     Large scale challenges create difficulties in joining together, challenges such as climate change and social equity.

     What’s the political efficacy of the commons?  How does the commons relate to: political action, advocacy, and personal choices?

     Is there a tipping point where we understand that a critical resource (like shared necessities) requires action by a group or individually, requires that we care for the commons that emerges to care for it, to support it and make changes as needed and necessary. It’s important to connect with what resonates and draws people in, to establish motivation and intention.

     Education plays a role in supporting action and in a commons. It is a powerful source in shaping public opinion and shared myth. Sharing stories and art making can also be valuable.

     “Patra Passage,” an art work by Lynda Lowe, involved 108 vessels – beautiful objects that were not individually owned but were given away as part of a giving economy. Each owner infused a story in the vessel, which could go any where, but returned finally to the Museum of Glass. A total of 480 people received and gave away the objects, which were sold, along with the stories, and the proceeds donated to charities.

Table 3:  Many examples

     A land bank on Lopez Island
     A land trust in Monterrey



     Co-housing in Lynnwood with common gardens
     Esalen in Big Sur has commons buildings for dancing, art, and workshops. Started in 1962, its fee structure allows you to work to reduce the fees.
     European co-housing, building with shared spaces, private space with a shared kitchen and open space.
     Parks that are open equally to all during certain hours.
     Homeless camps are commons. No one claims the poor as constituents.
     The Boston Commons have existed since the beginning of the city. A microphone is set up in a building nearby that hosts presentations.
     The hospital on the Blackfeet Reservation has a cafe because many people used the hospital as a community space. The hospital added space in order to allow for both uses.
     The High Line in New York City.
     Beaches in California are open access.
     Public libraries now, but what will they look like in 20 or in 50 years?

About the commons

     Commons are political.
     The commons and commoner are related.
     Who’s responsible for the commons?
     Common space shouldn’t have a prohibitively high entrance fee.
     It is a mark of privilege to be able to choose not to have to see poverty around you.

Table 4:  Present commons

     Volunteering, at an organization. Doing jobs that are not paid. A “trickle down” approach to participating in a commons.

     The commons are a place between private and public.



     Commons experiences from college days: a veggie food co-of of 20 students; buying food together for all for dinner; lots of sharing of information, grew exponentially. Gained practice being in a co-op.

     A shared household of 5-8 people. I didn’t feel like I participated, but I still did the obligated tasks.

     “The innovation of tradition” might apply to the commons.

     People are yearning for connection. They’re isolated.  We have to start thinking of the “extended family” vs. the “nuclear family.”

     How do the sharing economy and the gift economy participate in the commons? Does the sharing economy co-opt the commons? The gift economy is a non-monetized economy.

     The construction of the “we” is political.

     Society is based on one-to-one communication.

Table 5: How do we decide what is common and what is privatized?

     Where we find the commons:  Westlake, Ferguson, where free speech is possible

     The commons has protocols. It can’t be turned it off because it’s Christmas, or whatever.

     Mancur Olson, an economist and social scientist who wrote The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups, dealt with scale in organizations and in communities and trade unions.  At a certain scale people are heard. As the scale gets larger, communication breaks down and interests are controlled.

     The Pike Place Market began when onion sellers got together to avoid the middle man and set the price themselves. People bought directly from them because the price was cheaper.

     How do we decide what is common and what is privatized? Society has a track record of working some things out through the law to benefit both individuals and society. People have a right, for instance, to own property privately, but that isn’t an unlimited right. Zoning, for instance, qualifies the ownership of private property. The assumption has been that “society” decides.

     Each individual and each generation decides where along a set of axes between “reverence for the individual” and “beneficial for community” they want to be. It’s never absolutely determined.


     Matthew Crawford (Town Hall’s speaker following this Penny U) talks about how our “third places” – the commons where we congregate outside of work or home, like coffee shops and sidewalks – are being invaded. Our once-shared visual and audio space is being taken over by private companies that pump them full of sound and video, and very often advertising). Advertisers who project digital billboards on large outdoor walls , didn’t pay for that right to our “captured eyeballs.” It’s ironic that even the National Parks Foundation advertises this way in Times Square.

     Can and how do communities come together as society gets more dense? Where do we feel safe? Where do we retain opportunities to speak with each other?

     And 52% of the population that could vote doesn’t even register, perhaps because they don’t think they can make a difference.

     Perhaps eligible but disgruntled voters could form a voting bloc and agree to vote identically, making their votes count in a bigger way.

A few summary comments & questions

     One negative response to ideas around the commons is the thought that they are being asked to pick up the ball that the public (that is, government) dropped.  A big push for increased volunteering is one piece of this.

     Volunteering is giving without expecting a return.

     In “constructing a we, there will always be people outside.

     What does “courtesy” mean? Is there a place for it in a discussion of the commons?

     What’s the relationship between power and consensus?  I’d push for as much consensus as possible.

•     How can the commons be maintained at a larger scale than 5-6,000 people?