1,721,016 research outputs found
Action research: mapping the nexus of research and political action
No full textThis paper aims to capture the richness and diversity of action research on the global justice movement. It starts by proposing a typology of five tendencies (participative-collective method; producing alternative content; strategic thinking for political processes; building relationships and networking connections; and opening knowledge). It goes on to present clusters of different experiences, illustrated by examples. Having provided an orientation map of action research on the global justice movement, the author concludes by presenting what in her view should characterize action research. The paper is based on participant observation, a review of the literature and personal experience
Polítiques públiques i sostenibilitat dels mitjans lliures a Amèrica Llatina i la Unió Europea : de les ràdios lliures als comuns digitals
Full text linkEn aquesta tesi hem comprovat que la naturalesa dels mitjans lliures, basada en l'autogestió i la crítica social, els perjudica en l'establiment i els continguts de la seva regulació com a part del sector audiovisual (ràdio i televisió). Reconstruint els processos polítics a sis països d'Europa i Amèrica Llatina, regions on presenten més arrelament aquests mitjans, hem tret a la llum les diferents estratègies amb què l'estat, sovint pressionat pels interessos lucratius, els obstaculitza l'activitat i l'assoliment d'un status jurídic. Els governs nacionals, i les empreses, acaparen les freqüències de l'espectre radioelèctric mentre retarden el reconeixement legal dels nous actors, els imposen limitacions tecnològiques i econòmiques arbitràries i compleixen la llei parcialment. Una altra estratègia és la implantació de mitjans locals participatius, també anomenats d'accés obert (ex. les ràdios indigenistes mexicanes i algunes municipals espanyoles). Els mitjans lliures es diferencien dels d'implantació per ser oberts també en la governança, pel que són considerats els autèntics comunitaris, per això poden ser concebuts com a nous comuns. La coexistència d'ambdós tipus d'iniciatives crea confusió en les definicions legals. Aquestes empren el terme mitjans comunitaris, per bé que la noció acaba sent més propera a la de tercer sector: les llicències són concedides a esglésies, sindicats, patronals, petites empreses, etc., i les iniciatives lliures normalment queden excloses. A banda, part de les freqüències destinades als comunitaris es concedeixen a empresaris. La raó d'aquests obstacles amb què es troben els mitjans lliures és política. Els seus continguts i aspiracions democràtiques els fan incòmodes per a l'statu quo. En exposar temes i punts de vista crítics i alternatius als dels mitjans hegemònics, posen en qüestió els principis de neutralitat i diversitat que els legitimen; i reclamant participar en les polítiques públiques qüestionen també el caràcter democràtic de les institucions polítiques. El rol transformador d'aquestes iniciatives rau també en la seva organització (autogestió, assemblearisme), en la producció (cooperació, horitzontalitat, desprofessionalització) i en l'economia. La cerca de la màxima autonomia és el que uneix experiències aparentment diferents com les ràdios lliures de París i les comunitàries indígenes de Oaxaca. I aquesta s'aconsegueix amb la independència financera respecte l'estat i les grans corporacions. La fluctuació dels membres i els recursos econòmics així com la reconciliació del treball i l'oci són altres característiques dels mitjans lliures. També destaca la varietat d'ideologies polítiques dels participants d'aquests mitjans (llibertaris, comunistes, ecologistes, feministes, punks, defensors de l'economia solidària, dels comuns i de la cultura lliure, etc.). Això provoca discrepàncies entre els partidaris de reclamar a l'estat els drets que els pertoquen (millors normatives, subvencions públiques) i els partidaris de mantenir-se al marge per preservar l'autonomia. Alguns col·lectius no reconeixen l'estat com a actor legítim i en general hi ha desconfiança en les institucions polítiques. A banda, la pròpia regulació dels mitjans lliures resulta contradictòria en el marc de l'estat capitalista, basat en l'autoritarisme, l'heteronomia i la suplantació de les relacions espontànies de solidaritat pròpies de la societat civil. Per això, l'establiment d'una llei que s'ajusti a la naturalesa dels mitjans lliures, per exemple, assegurant l'accés a l'espectre en igualtat de condicions, requereix un canvi radical en la configuració de l'estat. Els paradigmes dels comuns i l'economia solidària ofereixen nous angles per reflexionar des d'una perspectiva més amplia sobre el lloc de l'autogovernança a les societats actuals. Combinem mètodes quantitatius (un qüestionari respost per 60 mitjans) i qualitatius. Els països seleccionats presenten elements comuns i de contrast (cultures llatines vs anglòfones, democràcies velles vs joves, economies centrals vs perifèriques, presència de pobles originaris). Això ens ha permès comprovar que l'exclusió dels mitjans lliures no s'explica per les diferències regionals sinó pels marcs ideològics dels governs.This PhD thesis argues that the nature of free media, based on self-government and social critic, affects them negatively in their legal recognition and obligations as a part of the audiovisual sector (radio and TV). Through a process-tracing in six countries of Latin America and Europe, regions where these media are more developed, we shed light on the state's strategies to hinder their activity and the achievement of their legal status, usually under pressure of lucrative interests. National governments and corporations hoard the radio spectrum while the legal recognition of the new actors comes late and imposing arbitrary barriers (technical and economical); the law is partially implemented in several cases. Another strategy is the implantation of local participatory media, also known as open access model (ex. indigenistas in Mexico and municipal radios in Spain). Free media differ from them they are open also to governance. For this reason they are considered the authentic community media, and they can be conceived too as a new commons. Coexistence of both kinds of initiatives creates confusion in legal definitions. National frameworks select the term community media but it is used in a wider sense, close to third sector concept: licenses are granted to religious institutions, Unions, employers' foundations, small businesses, etc., free initiatives are often excluded. Also, some, some frequencies reserved for community media are granted to businessmen. The reason for these obstacles is political. Free media's contents and democratic aspirations make them unwelcome by the statu quo. By broadcasting alternative visions to hegemonic media, they question the principles of neutrality and diversity that legitimate them; and claiming to participate in the policymaking they question the democratic nature of public institutions. The transformative role of free media also concerns to their organisation (self-government, assembly), production (cooperation, horizontality, des-professionalization) and economy. Seeking maximum autonomy is what unites apparently different projects such as Parisian free radios and Oaxaca's indigenous community stations. Autonomy can be achieved through finance independency from state and big corporations. Other characteristics of free media are the reunification of work and leisure and the fluctuation of participants and economic sources. Free media members present a variety of ideologies (some of them are anarchists, communists, ecologists, feminists, punks, commoners, advocate for free culture and solidarity economy, etc.). This diversity ends in discrepancies between the supporters to claim for their rights to the state (better regulations, public founding) and the supporters to stay out in order to preserve their autonomy. Some collectives do not recognize the state as a legitimate actor. Mistrust of political institutions is commonplace. On the other hand, regulation of free media appears to be a contradiction in the context of the capitalist state, based on authoritarianism, heteronomy and the substitution of spontaneous solidarity proper to civil society. For this reason, a law which adjusts to free media's nature -ex., ensuring access to the spectrum under equal conditions- requires a radical change of the state. The paradigms of commons and solidarity economy offer new approaches to reflect from a broader perspective on the place self-government has in current society. We combine qualitative and quantitative (a survey answered by 60 media collectives) methods. Selected countries have common and contrast elements (Latin vs. Anglo-Saxon cultures; old vs. young democracies; central vs. peripheral economies; presence of indigenous peoples). This allowed us to show that free media exclusion is not related to regional differences but to government's ideologies
How much are digital platforms based on open collaboration? An analysis of technological and knowledge practices and their implications for the platform governance of a sample of 100 cases of collaborative platforms in Barcelona
No full textFrom the early cases of FLOSS and Wikipedia, the digital collaborative model of production and consumption has rapidly expanded to other spheres. This article explores to what extent this expansion has maintained the open character of the initial model, specifically the extent to which platform projects follow an open collaborative approach in their technological and knowledge policies and practices, and if this is also reflected in an open approach to governance. The empirical analysis is based on a sample of 100 cases in Barcelona. On the basis of this analysis, we conclude that open modalities of collaborative digital platforms are not prevalent. Around a third of the sample present open modalities of the dimensions analyzed. Different areas (technological, knowledge, or governance) showed different levels of diffusion of open practices. The cases which tended to be open in one dimension also tended to be open in the other dimensions. That is, the analysis points to a correlation between technological, data, and knowledge policies and open and democratic collaborative economy models. These results suggest the importance of open technology and knowledge in adopting an open and democratic collaborative model
A Framework for Assessing Democratic Qualities in Collaborative Economy Platforms: Analysis of 10 Cases in Barcelona
No full textThe term 'collaborative economy' or 'collaborative economy platforms' refers to exchange, sharing, and collaboration in the consumption and production of capital and labor among distributed groups, supported by a digital platform. Collaborative economies' use is growing rapidly and exponentially, creating high expectations of sustainability and their potential to contribute to the democratization of the economy. However, collaborative economy platforms lack a holistic framework to assess their sustainability and pro-democratization qualities. In addition, there is confusion about platforms which present themselves as collaborative when they actually are not, and similar uncertainties and ambiguities are associated with diverse models. To address this confusion, this article provides a framework for assessing the pro-democratic qualities of collaborative economy initiatives. It was applied to 10 cases in the context of the city of Barcelona. The methods used in this study include mapping and typifying 10 collaborative economy cases in the city, structured and in-depth interviews, and a co-creation session. The results indicate the presence of several modalities for favoring democratic values in a collaborative economy
A Framework for Assessing Democratic Qualities in Collaborative Economy Platforms: Analysis of 10 Cases in Barcelona
No full textThe term 'collaborative economy' or 'collaborative economy platforms' refers to exchange, sharing, and collaboration in the consumption and production of capital and labor among distributed groups, supported by a digital platform. Collaborative economies' use is growing rapidly and exponentially, creating high expectations of sustainability and their potential to contribute to the democratization of the economy. However, collaborative economy platforms lack a holistic framework to assess their sustainability and pro-democratization qualities. In addition, there is confusion about platforms which present themselves as collaborative when they actually are not, and similar uncertainties and ambiguities are associated with diverse models. To address this confusion, this article provides a framework for assessing the pro-democratic qualities of collaborative economy initiatives. It was applied to 10 cases in the context of the city of Barcelona. The methods used in this study include mapping and typifying 10 collaborative economy cases in the city, structured and in-depth interviews, and a co-creation session. The results indicate the presence of several modalities for favoring democratic values in a collaborative economy
Cultura lliure a Catalunya
Full text linkAquest capítol és una aproximació a la cultura lliure: se'n repassa el context històric, s'analitza amb detall el concepte de cultura lliure i, finalment, es descriu aquest moviment a Catalunya a partir d'indicadors sobre la seva dimensió i d'un mapa dels sectors en què s'ha anant desenvolupant. L'estudi s'ha basat en la triangulació de mètodes, incloent-hi l'anàlisi documental, indicadors web, un eqüestionari a 145 iniciatives i 24 entrevistes
Acción colectiva a través de redes online:: Comunidades de Creación Online para la construcción de bienes públicos digitales
No full textOnline Creation Communities (OCCs) can be defined as networks of
individuals that communicate, interact and collaborate; in several forms and degrees of
participation which are eco-systemically integrated; mainly via a platform of participation
on the Internet, on which they depend; and aiming at knowledge-making and sharing. This
article analyses the conception of participation and the organizational logic of participation
in OCCs. Participation in OCCs does not follow a dichotomize approach, but function more
as an eco-system. The more significant characteristic of participation in OCCs are: 1) What
is important is that the system is open to participation, but it is not expected that everybody
participate and contribute equally; 2) Participation has multiple forms and degrees which are
integrated. A critical mass of active developers is essential to initiate the project and maintain
the content; weak cooperation enriches the system and facilitates reaching larger fields of
information resources; and lurker or non-participants provide value as audience or though
unintended participation that improve the system; 3) Participation is decentralized and
asynchronous; 4) Participation is in public; 5) Participation is autonomous in the sense that
each person decides which level of commitment they want to adopt and on what aspects they
want to contribute. 6) Participation is not only deliberation but implementation. To conclude,
an analysis of the governance conditions under which the resulting outcome could be defined
as a digital commons is included. Furthermore, a reflection on the political implications of
CCOs is also provided. The analysis is developed over the case studies of a platform provided
by the European Social Forum, Flickr, Wikihow and Wikipedia. The main empirical methods
are interviews, virtual ethnography and content analysis
Governance of online creation communities for the building of digital commons : viewed through the framework of the institutional analysis and development
Full text linkThis chapter addresses the governance of a specific type of constructed commonpool resource, online creation communities (OCCs). OCCs are communities of individuals that mainly interact via a platform of online participation, with the goal of building and sharing a common-pool resource resulting from collaboratively systematizing and integrating dispersed information and knowledge resources. Previous research of the governance of OCCs has been based on analyzing specific aspects of the governance. However, there has been a gap in the literature, one of lacking a comprehensive and holistic view of what governance means in collective action online. This chapter provides a set of dimensions that define the governance of OCCs. Particularly, most previous work did not consider infrastructure provision in their analysis. This chapter challenges previous literature by questioning the neutrality of infrastructure for collective action. The governance of OCCs is here analyzed through the institutional analysis and development (IAD) framework, building on Madison, Frischmann, and Strandburg's (2010) adaptation of this framework to constructing commons in the cultural environment. References to Schweik and English's adaptation of IAD to free and open source communities will also be made. The empirical data are drawn from a statistical analysis of 50 cases and four case studies on OCCs (Wikipedia, Flickr, Wikihow, and Openesf). The empirical analysis results in a set of models of OCCs governance. The conclusions provide an assessment of the utility of IAD in the analysis of OCCs, and Madison, Frischmann, and Strandburg's adaptation. Additionally, it ends by addressing the defining characteristics of digital commons
2022: Un somni obert per les noves teconlogies
No full textAbstract: As part of a collective review addressing the question of “Which will be the social movements at Catalonia in 15 years time – in 2022?”, Fuster present some lines on the angle of how the new technologies of information could affect the further development of the social movements. In specific she reviews how the Internet could support the freedom and the lack of freedom in the political action. And how the new technologies plus other factors, are contributing to a more flexible, open and multiple political organization form
- …
