Process for gathering proposals from the network

Hi Alex. Thanks for your input. Did you see the pad? There's a link in the description of this thread. From there there are links to examples.

I agree totally with Alek. Clear concise policy content undersatanble by policy-makers must be a priority over a strict consensual co-creation process. I mean the EU policy context and language is fundamental, content must not be pushed out by process. As well, at this point of preparation for the Assembly event in the European Parliament in one months time we need to look for some consensual, "big recommendations" to frame commons principles. Our objective is to favour an EU facilitatiing the commons as opposed to being a barrier.

I'm glad we are having some discussion in loomio on this. I also agree that concise proposals are important in the Parliament. However, I think that by doing this "back-end" co-creation work we are creating something much more sustainable in the long run because we are talking to each other and working together, so the proposals have something strong to stand on.

The coordination team has identified Sunday October 23 as the cut off for issue proposals. So then the task is to translate the "back-end" stuff on the pads into the "front-end" concise proposals for the EU. Does this make sense? Thoughts? It will be up to people in the Content Team like @davidhammerstein @gaelle11 and @sophie40 to follow this process! We already have a good start.

hi @nicoleleonard I did have a look at the pad and I started reading the Knowledge & copyright pad, since that's the issue I most familiar with. I like the content and I agree with the gist of it, but I noticed that the recommendations are not very precise (yet). From my experience good recommendations are much, much harder than good analysis, overview of the issue, etc. - that's why I thought that having more clear guidelines in very practical terms, of the "product" you want to have, could be good guidance. I'm writing this from a perspective of someone wanting to help with some of the issue framing (I'm also interested in "education" and "internet". but from what you're saying we should this week focus on providing you with issue content, even if it's still rough. ok.

It's not 100% clear and I'm not the one making calls, the previous comment was just a personal opinion from someone who has been following the discussion on this. I'd say if you are in a position to cut out some of the "translation from back to front end work" for a specific issue and go right into framing and recommendations then go ahead. Also, if you come up with any nice ways to frame the other issues, please share them here asap. We can use help from people with experience on this.

Hi all!

Agreed on the overall container that is now lacking or the present list of commons seeming to become a sectoral approach of (material) commons. Also I'd like to state that I am discovering new insights here in Rotterdam in the Noomap & Synergy Space Network where many commons gather this month and before. I.e. The art of collaboration, Village 3.0, Sphere Foundation etc. I thinks these belong in a policy proposal to the EU officials too. And can be clarified in valuation and estimation strategies of support of the commons by the EU.

Trends I see are:
1. A scaling of commons globally on intent (moving away from the margins). Creating nodes that connect.
2. A combination of bottom up and top down strategies to do this. With still a strong p2p component. Or renewed strategies for financing and starting. Combining i.e. gentrification principles that might be not so commons per se with a commons approach for the content and use of empty buildings on a longer term.
3. An overall movement from 'common resources' or material commons towards 'time & space' commons: connecting hubs, connecting intentions, connecting co creative ways of working in a global way. With this the 'in between space' or heterotopia between material and immaterial commons is being covered. It's more than before about dynamics and communication or conceptual commons that are more abstract and connecting, than about material commons or 'resources' only. This contributes to the global approach. With this 'resource centralized thinking' is being left.
4. Insights in 'natural time & space management', i.e.
a. emergent co creation processes which are not linear
b. the measurement of time as a resource and determining factor in the valuation of work or creation
as a component that has been missing in the analysis on the commons in general.

There is a reason for the commons to be staying in the margins. We have often talked about powers that be and the political system or capitalism, not about the generic principles that lead to the construction of only material commons, such as the valuation of what's being created and the perceivement of time as a value by people. It think this is a topic we can learn from. And I am in the right collaboration now to put it on the agenda. With this we leave the commons as a purely 'resources focussed' subject and we look in the more abstract principles determining our behavior and organizing principles of society. As well we can find keys to enhance the commons.

I saw the open container as an invite to share new insights and to put them on the agenda.

Then again I'd like to stipulate that thoughts such as 'Preventing that commons-oriented projects, hubs and networks end up becoming "clusters" which reinforce processes of socio-economic exclusion instead of undermining them. Including intersectionality: Race/ethnicity/nationality, class, gender.' often relate to acting as if commons were to come out of the margins of power instead of reinventing the commons for a common future from a non-dual perspective going beyond power structures.

In general I am positive on the trends I see and might add here: yes we can move beyond power structures by not reinforcing them constantly in our thoughts and policy proposals again.

Let's create that shared future and move beyond power structures as a topic, towards nodes of commons connecting.

I respectfully disagree that at this stage we need to have concrete policy proposals. Simply because there is no time if we want to keep a bottom - up approach and keep calling this an assembly. We have to be VERY VERY careful with the process otherwise you risk alienating many people and especially because the location of the event itself being hosted in the EU parliament is not helping with that either. I would propose to focus on the process and gathering input from many people for many things, present some to the event and then have time through the tools that we are already establishing to work on these.

Here's a suggestion for conceptualizing the policy areas in the master list to make them fit better. I fear it may be too late in the game to implement this, given that this is due on the 24th but give it your consideration.

As part of our policy work in Commons Transition, we identified the competencies of the various EU commissions and related them to the existing categories on the Commons Transition wiki (which can be found here. This "targeting" is very specific to EU commissions, but I don't know how they will be reflected by the MEPs attending or if those clusters make sense for the brief presentations (for example, clustering Communities, Law, Housing, Land for Home and Justice Affairs, etc).

I'm attaching our initial comparison. There are descriptions for each of the councils in the notes in column A.

Do you think this framing is useful? I'm not sure myself so I'd really appreciate your opinions.

HI everyone,
I think the comments by Jose Luis - which I just copy in here below - are very helpful.
Just to build on and respond this his comments:

1. what type of policy recommendations: I think this depends on the topic. For example, on copyright there is a reform taking place now, and we can be quite specific and point towards legal proposals. On urban commons there is less competence at EU and less obvious current avenues for legal proposals, so we could a more general or aspirational approach. They need to be relevant for EU policy in some way or another, and it would be great if the European Parliamentarians could add, respond and relate it to their work. The Parliamentarians involved are very keen on making this more of a ongoing platform for exchange, we should see how that works out, but they'd like to take up our ideas basically and push them in policy. For that they need to relate to ongoing processes.

2. Agreed!

3. Agreed!

4. 25 ! :)

5. Agreed! it would be great if we can do some of the mapping of the project people are involved in the run up to the assembly meeting in November and show case it in some way.
   Sophie

Jose Luis :
Dear commoners,

I would like to address issues mentioned by Elisabetta and Amanda, and both are related to the topic that I have just uploaded in the hackpad on Food Commons (pls, feel free to enrich it).

1.- Regarding the policy recommendations, it could be nice if we agree what type of policy suggestions should we craft (general policies, specific ones?, legal proposals? more aspirational declarations ?) and to whom they should be targetted? Do we just think about policy proposals that can be debated/agreed upon by European Parliamentarians? or is much broader?

2.- I understand the 3 minutes limitation does not give much space for an ellaborated rationale and nuanced proposals, so we could have two results of the co-creation of policy proposals: a longer version with more words, substance and better rationale and policy proposals and a short version with prioritised policies specifically addressed to EP members and to be delivered in 3 minutes. The latter would be meant for the Assembly and the former as a foundational document for further actions

3.- Regarding the overall framework and the approach by topics, we need both but they have different goals. Policy-wise, it is better to work with specific policy proposals for specific sectors (be that water, energy, transport, IP rights or food), but we also need a broader framework that provides the over-arching narrative and shows how this narrative, goals and values differ from the neoliberal/capitalistic hegemonic narrative. Using a Gramscian approach, this a a debate of ideas or a clash of narratives to gain hegemonic power to then justify specific policies that conform that narrative. Therefore, we need both: the overall narrative of the commons transition and the topic-framed policy proposals.

4.- It took the neoliberal capitalism half a century to become so dominant and its narrative so pervasive, so we cannot expect to overthrow profit-maximising capitalism so easily. It will take at least other 50 years.

5.- I support the idea to nurture "nodes of innovation" at two levels: a) co-creation of ideas and alternative commons narratives, and b) exchanging and networking of practical experiences. In that sense, a common endeavour could be "Mapping the European Commons" (material and inmaterial resources) in order to highlight their survival from past enclosures and the thriving growth is now experiencing. This mapping exercise can be better done by topics.

I am looking forward to meeting you all in BXL.

best regards

Jose Luis

and at some point, with some time before the assembly, we will have to have a little ad hoc working group, bring together the 10 proposals we are going to present, and edit them into presentable proposals in the European Parliament. The Parliamentarians have also requested to receive them in advance.

Hello,

1.- I agree with Dimitris and Alek that we should rather focus on opening a process of dialogue on the commons with the EP and Europarliamentarians instead of having concrete policy proposals that may come out of the blue for them (thus killing the process since the very begining). So, I would propose to call for regular meetings and Open-Ended Working Groups between MPs and EP Groups and the European Assembly of the Commons. Let's start a process of dialogue with legislators and then we will have more time and better places to discuss specific legal and political measures.

So, the creation of an Open-Ended Working Group on the Commons could be a major request (holding thus regular hearings and specific workshops on different commons, namely water, food, energy, transport, land, knowledge, co-housing, peer-2-peer licenses, etc).

2.- We need to establish a regular process with the EP and (with their help) with EC and EU authorities to discuss about the Europan Commons. We need regular channels to communicate, advocate and lobby.

3.- Thirdly, I shall insist that Mapping the European Commons by specific topic is a very powerful tool at this point to show the policy makers how important is this movement in Europe. We need to show them that the commons narrative, movement and praxis is alive and kicking (and growing).

Jose Luis

Our meeting on the 16th is just one stop in a long process. The idea of making some very short and generic policy proposals is an exercise of creating cohesion and identity of the group and allowing others outsde the commons movement to start to get a general but not a very precise or technical idea of what a "partner state" or "facilitating policy" could look like in some policy areas where a general consensus exists among us. After the 16th we can,only if we wish, establish more viable channels of communication with political institutions such as the European Parliament. We should do this at our own pace and according to our processes, but also conscious of the need to respond of the social and environmental urgencies that surround us.

@alektarkowski , @joseluisviveropol , @dimitriskoukou , @staccotroncoso , @sophie40 , @gaelle11 and others who have been active on this: I am proposing that we hold a call dedicated to how we will frame the Policy proposals. I will circulate a Framadate now and by email to this group for next week. Do you agree? And What platform do people prefer for calls? Skype can be tricky sometimes.

Great initiative. We need to discuss that! skype or call, as you want..

Ok. I sent an email but will also post the link here: https://framadate.org/cUGf94AOEIFyEreChJ8HFCZb/admin

Once we have a time slot I will communicate on where the call is and the agenda.

Nice initiative!
I have already confirmed my availability Tuesday or Wednesday. Could it be Skype or normal phone because I will be at the university and we are not authorised to download other type of software. Perhaps, open platforms for group calls where we do not need to download anything?
best

Please let's discuss together our commons strategy
I think it's really necessary to have at least some clear propositions to give to EP even starting from this first step meeting
even just some points of work to emprove in the process
I'm available to discuss on that...
Let me know
D

Dear all,
Sorry for hopping in so late, but I added my contributions to the proposals.

1) Commons and feminism
I added one last minute a proposal linking the issues of feminism, care and welfare services. I have not checked for possible overlaps between democracy- and education-pads.
This proposal might be still too vague to work with but I wanted to raise it firstly as an important aspect and background of commons as social processes. Secondly I see that defending public services as commons is one way of preventing „commons-oriented projects becoming processes of socio-economic exclusion“ as @amandajansen well stated.

2) Commons and social & solidarity economies
I find @anamargaridaesteves proposal a very strong and interesting. With food and urban questions this proposal is already large, but I see that as such it still lacks a link to concrete policy process and responsible body of the EU. So I added a reference to european regional policies, please comment if you think the proposal spreads out too much. Alternatively the point could be handled with urban policy

I see regional policy as the most relevant for social and solidarity economies, because firstly regional policy is strongly linked with e.g. agricultural, urban and social economy policies. Secondly regional policy is among commission's priorities under e.g "jobs, growth and investments" but because the fundamental idea of economy in this policy line is competition- and growth-based, it strongly prevents the application of solidarity-based upscaling of local economies.

3) Big frames
I see the big lines especially therefore necessary, that one EU-policy area is often working against the others and their coherences do not receive enough attention in policy making. somehow this could be brought out although I agree with @sophie40 that it's more productive to target spesific, on-going processes.

4) @staccotroncoso , linking of commission competencies and commons
I find the „targeting“ very interesting and it could be very useful as well. I wonder, however, why do you refer to council configurations and not commission's policy work? Or how have the commissions competencies been identified?

When I was working at an EU regional office our first reference point in policy lobbying was the european commission, not council. Maybe it's conventional hierarchical thinking or the focus was chosen to affect on funding programms of the commission. I have to get back to that with more time.

Hi Everybody,
The Skype Talk about Policy Proposal Framing will be next Wed 10am. Nicole just proposed to connect on nicoleleonard92 at that time.
Regards,

Hi all,

For our discussion about to start an example I wanted to share that I was thinking about while trying to think about what we would like to be able to discuss on the 16th

Participatory discussion about how to finalize and implement these proposals in the context of EU policies and/or spread them in Europe

Example:

A proposal on refugees and how commoners develop action to welcome and harbor them

Several existing components to this action :
- housing in public buildings or communities,
- gathering and distribution of food,
- social clinics (medicines, etc.),
- Immigré Artists and Artists at Risk
- tools for access to legal and administrative information about human rights and services of protection (open access, access to computer, wifi, etc), etc.

Who is currently involved: X, Y, Z

How could this action be reinforced / scaled up / replicated : discussion

Resources needed :
-
-
-

Who coud do what :
- Commoners
- European Parliament
- European commission
- Local authorities in x, y, z city
- etc

Sorry if I have missed something... We had discussed on the skype call that it would be the best to include all proposals in a folder that will be given out to everyone. About the 3 that will be presented during the event in the EP we need to set the criteria of choosing them. Proposed criteria where 1. maturity of proposal 2. relation to what is being discussed now at the EP 3. Impact that the proposal can have 4. Innovative or revolutionary proposal. Please add any more criteria that you can think. I would propose the following two. 1. Impact on people 2. Innovative/ Revolutionary proposal. I would suggest also to finalize this and then decide on the proposals that will be presented, because they may need some extra work before the 16th so the people who know the subject might need some time before hand to prepare them.

Sorry maybe I missed something...
Do we present only thematic proposals?
I really think it's important to present a general and transversal proposal to the Parliament in order to start a dialogue but with clear challenges and indications.
It's important to have some clear points in the exchanging process with them
The EU Institutions are charged and confused now
More we'll be clear in our reclaims more they could react
Someone is working on that?
Please let's exchange on this idea
D

I am now sure how this can be done but if a good way can be found perhaps it will be good. One thing that I can think of that can apply across thematic proposals for all EU policy making is that anything that is publicly funded should produce open/free knowledge, designs, software, patents etc. So businesses, universities, municipalities, states etc can not take public money develop something and then ask us to pay license fees or have it closed or with limited access so only a few are benefiting from that. Would that be a general proposal that you are referering too?

Another common thing that all policy proposals should have is the democratic processes. Something in order to be a commons does not only mean that has to be open or free but that the civil society can controls it, manage it and that they, the users and workers, set the rules. So perhaps before or after presenting the thematic proposals we should mention that all policy proposals should have a path towards openess, inclusion, democratisation and accessibility...

We sent out a message on the main commonswatch list asking for reformulation of policy proposals on Friday afternoon. I am reposting it here:

Hello participants in European Commons Assembly,

Thank you all for submitting your topics for policy proposals for the European Commons Assembly. There were almost 25 subjects on the hackpad(1), covering many different issues but also overlapping on others. It's great we've been able to openly show the different issues we care about and are working on, and make them visible so we can identify potential collaborations and keep working together. This is important work that will continue to feed the European Commons Assembly and commons-based policy making processes into the future, well beyond November 15, 16, and 17 at Brussels.

The proposals as they exist now on the pad are in different formats and stages of development. There is still clearly more defining work to be done between now and our First Meeting in Brussels, and from then on.

The purpose of this message is therefore to clarify this process between now and November 15-17th, and to describe the purpose we see these serving as proposals of commoners.

General context:

All the proposals will be collected and published in the wiki Commons Transition (http://commons.transition.org) by the P2P Foundation as a shared resource of the Assembly.

For the 16th in Parliament, all the policy proposals will be exposed and 3 will be chosen (3) for discussion by the coordination committee.  The framing of the discussion is: How do we develop commoners action in Europe on the given topic, with the EU institution? How can we make this proposal real? After a presentation of the topic we open to everyone for elaboration and discussion. We will have 55 minutes for the 3 topics. This is just one section of the full 3.5-hour program for the 16th which will be available online very shortly.

Obviously, this is not enough time to treat every subject deeply. Nor is it the place to highlight a selective sample of narrow legal or financial proposals on behalf of the whole network. We may have these opportunities to lobby and advocate for specific reforms later down the line, but this 55 minute-slot in parliament is not the place.

Then, on the 17th, when we discuss how to stand in solidarity around our diverse struggles for the commons, the commons-based policy proposals will be a pillar resource for structuring groups on these issues and themes. This meeting and process for the 17th are under construction, but we know it will be an important opportunity to discuss the future direction of the ECA. 

(1): https://europeancommonsassembly.hackpad.com/Policy-Proposal-Co-creation-WnSX18B6o07

Next steps:

So, please:

Review the existing proposals and look for complementarities. There are opportunities to reasonably merge a few of the existing topics, while still staying targeted. There are multiple entries on the collaborative economy, for example. Another example: Work and social protection has a lot of similarities with the proposal on “Feminism, Commons and Welfare” policies.

Write up a minimum 1-2 pager (can be bullet points!) which responds to the guidelines and recommendations (2) below, and send it to contact@europeancommonsassembly before Friday November 4. Please name who is involved. This will serve as input to the Assembly, the MEPs, and the facilitator who guides the discussion. It will also inform the “presentation” of the subject that will be displayed on the screen during the conversation.

These will be shared with the rest of the network and with MEPs in a meeting with their assistants and the Coordination Committee on November 7. This allows everyone to come into the conversations prepared. The proposals that are not selected as part of the three can still be discussed as part of the session the following morning, on November 17, and form a basis for more work into the future.

(2) Guidelines and recommendations

The policy proposals already published in the pad now present elements like background/intro/context, the problem, and demands for for new political measures to be adopted by the EU. The proposals should be complemented and enriched for the minimum 1-2 pager by responding to some of the following questions:

What are the existing experiences of the commons movement in this field, and initiatives of commoning related to this issue ?
Why is this proposal pertinent to be discussed at the European scale, with the EU institution, in the EU Agenda. It could also be because it is an urgent matter to introduce at this scale of policy.
What are the existing components to this commons?
What are the main ideas the commoners are reclaiming or struggling for in this field ?
What are the already experimented measures in this field and where (in a particular country? part of Europe? Elsewhere?
Who are the actors involved in these struggles ?
How could these commons or commoning action be reinforced, scaled up, or replicated?
What are the changes (mobilisation, new law, declaration, education, …) required to move forward?
What are the resources needed?
Who could do what to move forward?
What is needed from the EU institutions?

(3) Criteria for choosing the 3 policy proposals for the 16th

The 3 proposals we treat in the discussions in Parliament will be selected by the Coordination Committee according to selection criteria, including:

maturity of the proposal

Is or can it be relevant in the context of the EU (since we will be at the EP)

Imaginative and innovative in the policy landscape (something the MEPs don’t already know and that shows that the ECA can contribute with original proposals )

Possible to replicate/scale up in Europe or at EU level

Is articulated to concrete actions that commoners are already undertaking (groups, initiatives, etc. can be named)

Touches upon several fields (digital and urban, cultural and rurban, etc.)

Thank you all for your work so far and we are looking forward to the event.

dear dimitris
dear all

I think that we could work for a transversal proposition starting from this question that we've to answer within some thematic propositions:

What is needed from the EU institutions?

I think that it could be strong to have some recurrent proposals as a leit motif in all propositions

and I propose some simples proposals
i. e.

_an European juridical framework of recognition for the commons
in order to protect, legitimate and encourage them

_directs funds to empower and enable local experiences and practices and their European networking process
in order to make them growing in equal european standard-conditions and do not suffer for the unequal national conditions both economical and political

These are really interesting.. could you and Dimitris develop a bit more for Friday?

I totally agree Daniela, very good idea. I would also add the two previous. Public funding should be producing open/commons knowledge, so everyone who is funded by the EU should be obliged to release their work, or part, with open/free licences. And that policies should be designed with an inclusion and decentralisation of power always in order to promote participation (I am not good at writing down what I have in mind for this one...). Would you like to create a pad and perhaps arrange a skype call to write these things down?

I agree !
"Equal European Standard conditions" is a key transversal issue to address
Even if it's very tricky and technical regarding European legal landscape, it's worth working on this with MEP's, from now on, and on the long run...

Thanks Daniela and Dimitris.
I agree, this is an important point. It should be enlarged including some principles concerning open data, format, environemental concerns, ... that could like indicators of the "bonne conduite" respecting commons paradigme
I have open the pad : https://europeancommonsassembly.hackpad.com/Transversal-Proposal-Principle-for-politics-LAreuWTz9QO

Thanks Frederic, I am looking at it, made a few changes. I would appreciate it if someone with better writen word than me could have a look at it because I believe it can be improved.

Thanks Frederic, Thanks Dimitris
I'll read everythings and react asap
by
d

Dear all,
I have to admit that I am now a bit lost with regard to recent movements to move forward with the proposals.
What are the next steps? Now that we have the guidelines to prepare the briefs, we have already closed the deadline to submit briefs and we have guidelines to select the three to be presented at EP, are we going to have further discussions?
Who is going to select the three?
I have read two other proposals that are related to the Food Commons (the ICCAs + the Social and Solidarity Economy) and perhaps they could be combined, but we need to be careful with the embracing title.
I mean, it is not clear to everybody whether "Social and Solidarity Economy" is the same than "Sharing Economy", or "Peer-to-Peer Economy" or "the commons economy" so I would rather suggest to use "commons" as en encompassing political banner and then linking everything to that. Otherwise, our initiative may risk not to be understood.

When are we going to merge and finalise the proposals? Between now and 15? or during the 15 meeting in BXL?

best regards and thanks in advance for any clarification
Jose Luis