Global Information Commons in A Multi-Level Perspective

Jan Goossenaerts
Pragmeta Knowledge Clout

www.pragmetaknowledgeclout.be
Session 5 Management & Social Aspects, 9 Nov. 2007 Global Information Commons Workshop Copyright 2010 J. Goossenaerts
Abstract
In the long term perspective, the creation of economic and social values concurs with the
rise from niche (micro) to regime (meso) or landscape (macro) of new solutions to
frequently occurring problems. Multiple socio-technical regimes such as transportation,
agriculture, manufacturing, health and energy, depend on the society's science base and
the socio-industrial fabric utilizing it to achieve more sustainable innovations. Broadly
speaking, in the chain from scientific data and facts to improved artifact, multiple trade-
offs and combinations are required. The chains involve multiple stakeholders and
decision frames. Even if all required knowledge and information would be open, they
would be complex and time-demanding. Yet, as the rationality of men is bounded, much
knowledge and scientific data are enclosed, and engineering designs are protected by
property rights, the outcome of the trade-off and the sub-sequent engineering effort are
more likely to be conservative rather than innovative.
In the multi-level perspective the importance of meso-level arrangements is emphasized,
yet the institutional and infrastructural elaboration of these arrangements needs more
attention. It is a hypothesis that in the global to local context, much value is left un-
constructed as the unfolding research & technology development proceeds under
prevailing institutional practices. Within specific sectors (regimes as meso-level actors),
past studies have used counterfactual models to quantify the social savings of
infrastructure systems such as railroads (Fogel). Macro-level institutional innovations
have been key in achieving landscape-wide surges in economic performance and
innovation (North, Shiller).
For a science-based socio-industrial landscape and at the meso-level, we propose
architecture commons (a limiting principle for IPR) and architecture-commons
compliant provisioning of scientific and technical data. (We tentatively estimate the
potential impacts of enhanced meso-level institutions and infrastructure in overcoming
current micro-level barriers to innovation.)
Overview
 Introduction
 Socio-technical Transitions in a multi-level perspective
 Multi-level Regulative Cycle? Is it a wheelwork?
 Do information products induce a problematic
expansion?
 Architecture Commons
 for sectoral consolidation of dominant designs
 in science (software) applications
 the scorecards of enterprise architecture
 Conclusion
Introduction
 Systems Architect's Perspective:
 strive for balance and compromise among the tensions of multiple
stakeholder needs and resources, interests and technology
 consider the full scope of the system of concern: from strategy to
operations, from its environment to its interface and component families
 Contributions (Target)
 A Multi-level Perspective to scrutinize the boundary of (intellectual)
property and commons
 Leverage knowledge on:
 institutional analysis and design
 socio-technical transition pathways
 product, software and enterprise architecture
 Shared vision on problem mess & solution options
Socio-Technical Transition Pathways
- society & its
governance
Landscape macro
- discipline &
sector
Socio-technical Regime C commons
Socio-technical Regime B (laws, models,
Socio-technical Regime A standards,..)
meso
- labs & firms
Networks of actors micro

-
Ref: Geels, F. W., Schot, J., (2007) “Typology of sociotechnical
- persons pico
transition pathways”, Research Policy 36, pp. 399-417.
The Regulative Cycle
= a methodology of practice, geared towards the "interested" regulation of
the behaviour of groups or organizations in the desired direction
 in a multi-level perspective - consider it for:
 pico: the person's livelihood
 micro: the firm and its assets
 meso: industrial sector or science discipline (in a country, or globally)
 macro: the economy
 concerted use (for various stakeholders)
 a method pattern; it helps to articulate needs and

temper technology push or method preferences
 Reference: van Strien, P.J. (1997) Towards a Methodology of Psychological

Practice, the Regulative Cycle. Theory and Psychology, 7(5) pp. 683-700
The Regulative Cycle
Problem
/Gap
Peer Intelligence Register
(Market, Science, PRM
Roadmap,
Benchmarking,..) Problem
Identification
reference model
Evaluation
/ Monitoring
Translation
site real site Analysis and

specific work system diagnosis
s
PRM
site specific Intervention
reference model Implementation
Plan of action
Design
PRM: performance reference model
Examples at multiple levels
Level Macro Meso Micro Pico
Aspect (Landscape) (Regime/sector) (Niche/firm)
Typical Intern., regional, nat. & local Standards orgs; corporations person in multiple roles
Principals authorities engineering & science disc.
Real site work Market & non-market sectoral interactions in a farm, factory, office the livelihood, the learning
system interactions in a territory territory, or in community of environment that sustain and/or work context of the
practice value creating processes person
Sample Design regulatory reform (Jacobs, research & eng. design business & org. dev. Kolb; learning paths
Methods 2007) methods; standards dev.; methods
Constitutive Institutional sectoral IAD (Hess & Ostrom,
Analysis & Design (IAD) 2007)
Cases Parliament in the England Photo Voltaic cells (Nagamatsu many many
(North, 1990) et al, 2006); (business lit.) (psychology & pedagogy
Limited liability by Law (Shiller, GSM (Bekkers et al, 2002); lit.)
2003); TRIPS ICPS (Nagashima)
Problem comparative economics, comparison among benchmarking social comparison

articulation Incl. historical (North, 1990) sectors (Festinger)
Values growth, inclusivity, Innovation; diffusion; competition, productivity, care of the self and the
sustainability, security substitutability (market) market share, profit family, wealth
The carrying capacity & development of livelihoods
H
Opportunity
Context
Vulnerability
N Technology
Context S Development
livelihood Learning
Changes in
influence Processes
flows&stocks
P F
Asset Stocks & Flow
H: Human capital
S: Social capital
P: Physical capital
livelihood F: Financial capital
Outcomes N: Natural capital
Reference SLF: Sustainable Livelihoods Framework
...is it a (regulative) wheelwork?
 in a "good" socio-technical design, it is preferrable that
levels can behave & evolve "autonomously" (decoupling)
 mono-level incremental/modular innovation
 mono-level architectural/radical innovation
"business as usual under institutions that are fit for the
interactions"
 accumulating innovation in one (or more) levels or loci

may cause pressures elsewhere
"contradictions necessitate analysis (of fitness) and
redesign"
Do information products induce a
problematic socio-technical expansion?
information based
demand-supply interactions demand-supply interactions under
without fit institutions & right-conditioned institutions
utilities for data & knowledge facilitated by utilities designed for
demand for efficient material/energy/financial
content & services flow & people mobility
by business & consumers
improvement
misses due to
silo-architecture
& high switching costs
institutions
non-interoperabilities
as cross-cutting
infrastructure
innovation decelerator;
asset eroder; strategy to lock
incentive destroyer in customers by institution gap
vertical solutions utility gap
supply of content &

service solutions
Embedding eInfrastructure into livelihoods
Vulnerability
Context S N
livelihood Evidence-based
Changes in
influence Development
flows&stocks + e-device Processes
P F
stock of knowledge
livelihood
& its remembering Asset Stocks & Flow
Outcomes
H: Human capital
S: Social capital
+ e-Infrastructure P: Physical capital
F: Financial capital
N: Natural capital
development of ICT-reliant
livelihoods
Life Cycle Stage
Lfe Cycle Focus
Model Maintenance &
Model
Work System Repository Increment Project
real site work
Operation
Increment Execution
system
(cumulative models) Project Charter Using a methodology
Using a methodology
- Problem Statement
Value and Risk Model D3-O5-I8
- Vision Statement Installation Life Cycle Stage
- Function Model
- Assumptions D1-O1-I1 & Delivery
- Context Statement Scope direct Monitoring & l
- Scoping Statement Definition D2
- Indicator Register Evaluation
Balanced
- Goal Model direct Decision
- Value & Risk Register Analysis Scorecard
- Project Risks direct Using a methodology
O4-I7
Operations Model Operations Delta Construction
- Principal Model O2-I2 & Testing
- Principal D Problem operations Life Cycle Stage
- Asset Model - Asset D Analysis D2<O3 Primary Process &
- Resource Model operations Decision
- Resource D Analysis
Asset
Maintenance
- Interaction Refinements
- Interaction D operations
Using the assets & IT
I3 I6
ICT Models ICT Models Delta Requirements Physical
Analysis Design & info
- Requirements Model - Requirements D ICTA Integration system
- Component Model - Component D I4 ICTA
Logical
- Platform Specific Model - Platform Specific D Design
ICTA D2<O3<I5
Decision
Analysis
ICTA
Global Information Commons
 thought experiment: a material economy without commons?
 commons and private property as two sides of a coin (in a market)
 incentives in productive & market interactions depend on a clear and

enforceable property regime: Market economies are institutionally
underpinned by a clearly delineated system of property rights – enabling
people and firms to keep the returns on their investments, make
contracts and resolve disputes ...(Rodrik, 1999)
 How would a clearly delineated system of property rights for

information products look like?
 Are there any problems with information products?
The information products
problem mess pico
Much learning needs;
rapid erosion of knowledge;
information overload
micro
Many non-interoperability costs;
many missed improvements;
slow innovation; rapid erosion;
high switching costs
meso
Many sectoral regimes;
Much fragmentation (standards);
dominant content & software
providers seek rents from path
dependence & lock-in ;
intellectual infrastructure is
macro low on agenda
institutional gaps;
patchwork IPR regimes;
aged content practices;
immature generic models;
coping with globalization
Different viewpoints
 Economics: Increasing returns in information products are cemented
by business models which leverage small portfolios of intellectual
property into the control of markets. Information products are, however,
equally well suited to other business models in which increasing returns
are slight and competitors are many." (Guy,Rev. of International
Political Economy, 2007)
 Law: property regimes for infrastructure resources (Frischmann,
Minnesota Law Review, 2005); Essential Facilities Doctrine (Sherman
Act, US 19th century); Competition Law (EU)
 Technology/Suppliers: proprietary architecture & data standards are

essential to deliver innovation to the market
 Demand side: good decisions build upon much information (which is

hard to get)
Architecture Commons (1)
 Architecture = the fundamental organization of a system embodied in
its components, their relationships to each other, and to the
environment, and the principles guiding its design and evolution (IEEE
1471-2000)
 Characteristics:
 via dominant design, it is fairly stable in an industrial sector
 basis for division of production & service processes
 those who own architecture via patent(s) have power that can block others
from innovating (Ford vs. Ransom, Blackberry,...) (architecture patenting)
 (in software, moreover):
 often privately controlled ( e.g. Microsoft, SAP)
 (stack wars)
 silo-structured applications lock-in customers (use
 prevailing claim: proprietary control of architecture is key to delivery of
innovation
Architecture Commons
in Industry Sectors (General)
 Design choices:
 treat it as an infrastructure resource that cannot be part of intellectual
property (i.e. prohibit architecture patenting)
 make meso-level entities owner of it (as part of standards)
 use it as a means to segment the modules on the basis of which end-
user functionality is configured (adaptivity)
 patents within a pool are either:
 complementary (different modules);
 substitutable (for a same module, or new module for set of others)
 use it to structure patent pools & decide on division of license income
among the owners of (component-related) intellectual property
 Current practices (incl. past patent pools):
 product platforms, often maintained within companies
 GSM standard and the essential IPR underlying it (ETSI)
 Aerospace, automotive,...
Architecture Commons in
Information Systems
 Issue:
 data and its use are all encapsulated in a single application
 applications have heterogeneous user interfaces, data
encoding techniques,...)
 it is very difficult to repurpose the data
 Solution Option:
 use a reference model for technical integration
 adopt/enforce a componentization discipline in the
development of applications
 (all in addition to commons needs addressed during
workshop)
applying a 4+2 tier reference architecture
Tool
Application
Legacy
silo User Presentation Tier
User Service
Interface
Domain
Tier User Dialog Tier
Component Infrastructure
science User Service language
appl. Tier
User Resource
data
with Service Tier
LA LS
Key
internal Component
Business Service
Business science
data & Service
appl logic
LA Local Adapter
Tier
Domain
user LS Local Storage
interface RA Resource Adapter
data
Resource RA RA
Service Database
Tier Inter-component
communication
Ref: COMET
AS-IS TO-BE Handbook
Enterprise Architecture:
Scorecard commons in Value & Risk Analysis
instantiate
for each globe / MDG
level &
work system sector scorecard
(Global Reporting
Initiative,
incl.sector supplements
firm scorecard
person scorecard
Balanced Scorecard Generalized Scorecard
Financial Value flows
Customer External stakeholders; SC &

Network Processes;Social Capital
generalize for
ubiquitous Internal Business Processes Internal Assets & business processes;
Human capital
value & risk
dimensions Learning & Growth Competitiveness & Sustainability
performance & developmental connectivities across levels
Instituties Markt
Markt
Systeem- IS-reliant Systeemoperaties &
ontwikkeling Worksystem Onderhoud
Levenscyclus fase Levenscyclus fase
Levenscyclus focus Levenscyclus focus
Performance Alert:
Project Portfolio Evaluatie &
Management Project
Behoefte aan belastingverhoging Beoordeling l
Project
Charter
m.b.v. project portfolio Project
Charter m.b.v. Balanced
instrumenten Charter
Bedrijfsomgeving
E&B instrumenten
Scorecard
Bedrijven
Bedrijven Bedrijfsomgeving
Bedrijf Systeem-
System Bedrijf
IS-reliant Systeem-
Systeem- operaties &
Development
ontwikkeling
IS-reliant
Worksystem operaties &
Onderhoud
Levenscyclus focus Onderhoud Levenscyclus focus
Worksystem Levenscyclus
Levenscyclus
Levenscyclus Levenscyclus
fase
fase
fase fase Primary Process &
s
Project uitvoering
rt
Asset Management
Ale
Levenscyclus Levenscyclus
nc e
m.b.v. project instrumenten focus focus m.b.v. assets &
& repositories Performance Alert: operationele ICT
rma
systemem
Project Portfolio BTW-tarief verandert Evaluation &
rfo
Project Management Monitoring
Risico op boetes
Pe
Project
Charter
Project
Charter
l
m.b.v. project portfolio
an
m.b.v. E&B instrumenten
Charter instrumenten
ts ta
Levenscyclus Levenscyclus Balanced BTW
On
focus focus Scorecard systeem
Project Primary Process
uitvoering & Asset
Management
m.b.v. project m.b.v. assets &
instrumenten & operationele ICT
repositories systemen
Marktrepository Bedrijfsrepository
ERP
systeem
BTW–ERP
Macro model Meso Case: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2009.05.013
Conclusion
 A multi-level perspective allows us to further clarify the boundary between
intellectual property and intellectual infrastructure
 architecture commons offer an additional factor choice in the redesign of

the socio-technical landscape:
 it builds upon legacy and successful practices of the "industrial" economy
 its implications for the knowledge economy should be further evaluated:
impacts (cost/benefits) on innovation efficiency
 interferences with GIC identified elsewhere
 it goes hand in hand with Regulative Cycle as a livelihood-driven method
pattern
 more detailed analysis, design & validation via scenarios needed prior to
the advocacy of an institutional redesign (knowledge economy reform)
 the "module" Intellectual property" frontside (with an "architecture GI"

commons backside) offers a clearly delineated, incentive-rich research &
technology development playing ground (which could mobilize creative
minds - inclusivity)

Global Information Commons in A Multi-Level Perspective

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Global Information Commons in A Multi-Level Perspective

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Jan Goossenaerts

Pragmeta Knowledge Clout

- labs & firms

Networks of actors micro

 concerted use (for various stakeholders)

 a method pattern; it helps to articulate needs and

 Reference: van Strien, P.J. (1997) Towards a Methodology of Psychological

site real site Analysis and

PRM: performance reference model

Problem comparative economics, comparison among benchmarking social comparison

Reference SLF: Sustainable Livelihoods Framework

 accumulating innovation in one (or more) levels or loci

supply of content &

 commons and private property as two sides of a coin (in a market)

 incentives in productive & market interactions depend on a clear and

 How would a clearly delineated system of property rights for

 Are there any problems with information products?

 Technology/Suppliers: proprietary architecture & data standards are

 Demand side: good decisions build upon much information (which is

Tier User Dialog Tier

user LS Local Storage

interface RA Resource Adapter

Customer External stakeholders; SC &

Levenscyclus fase Levenscyclus fase

Levenscyclus focus Levenscyclus focus

 architecture commons offer an additional factor choice in the redesign of

 the "module" Intellectual property" frontside (with an "architecture GI"

S-ar putea să vă placă și