Author of machiavelli.net, proud father of three, interested in shaping network society. Welcome to my blog.World 2.0: Twitter Governance [Conditions of Possibility]
What makes technologically mediated social interactions different? What are the conditions of possibility of networked governance?
The Technology Principle: Network Society is mediated through technology. Corollaries:
- The Path Dependency Principle: Path dependency makes it costly for us to exercise choice and leave any given network.
- The Scale and Network Effects Principle: Network effects are the glue of network society.
- The Critical Mass Principle: Some things only work when a critical mass is present.
- The Modularity Principle: Modularity allows complexity by combining simple parts.
- The Granularity Principle: The smaller the useful contribution, the easier the scalability.
The Social Principle: Any network participant chooses to participate or to leave at any point in time. Corollaries:
- The Consensus Principle: Decisions in choice-communities are made by consensus (not unanimity…and forking is allowed)â€.
- The Outcome Legitimacy Principle: The legitimacy of a policy that aims to create public value is derived from the public value created (as defined by its stakeholders choice to stay-or-leave).
- â€The Peer Collaboration Principle: Commons are produced by peers, for peers.
- The Transparency Principle: Transparency takes the role of democracy as the standard which any governance situation is evaluated against, this necessitates documentation (transparency through time).
- The Reflexivity Principle: any decision-making situation can be reflected at all times (this is what Beth Noveck calls visual deliberation).
Anything I am missing? What types of governance does such a world allow? What are the limits and possibilities of networked governance?
