16 Matching Annotations
  1. May 2022
    1. An Introduction to PLAN E Grand Strategy for the Twenty-First-Century Era of Entangled Security and Hyperthreats

      Planetary Boundary / Doughnut Economic Main Category: SOCIO-ECONOMIC: Culture, Education

      Although culture and education are chosen as the main categories, Plan E applies to all planetary boundaries and all socio-economic categories as it is dealing with whole system change.

      Visit Stop Reset Go on Indyweb for detailed context graph and to begin or engage in discussion on this topic. (Coming soon)

    2. “low-hanging fruit”

      IPCC AR6 WGIII Chapter 5: demand, services and social aspects of mitigation identifies that up to 45% of mitigation can result from a demand-side socialization strategy and collective action mobilization. This gives us tremendous power of impact to mobilize people. The low hanging fruit can be identified by comprehensive, ongoing, deep, global conversations with the greatest diversity of actors with a common vision collectively searching for the social tipping points, leverage points and idling resources and scaling massively thru the Indyweb as a cosmolocal network (what's light we share, what's heavy we produce locally).

      Climate scientist and realist Professor Kevin Anderson has argued for many years that demand side changes are the only solutions that can be implemented rapidly enough to peak emissions and drop emissions rapidly in the short term (next few years), buying time for reneewable energy solutions to scale globally.

    3. The hyper-response takes the viewpoint that, in the context of the enormous amount of work that needs to be done in a short period of time, Earth’s large human population is an asset if it can be effectively leveraged as part of the hyper-response

      The billions of ordinary people whose potential as appropriate level change actors has remained untapped. It is a significant reservoir of collective agency, an enormous repository of idling resource. It just needs a compelling enough narrative to lower the threshold to participatory collective action.

  2. Apr 2022
  3. Mar 2022
  4. Nov 2021
    1. Social convention, which has for so long worked against us, can if flipped become our greatest source of power, normalising what now seems radical and weird. If we can simultaneously trigger a cascading regime shift in both technology and politics, we might stand a chance. It sounds like a wild hope. But we have no choice. Our survival depends on raising the scale of civil disobedience until we build the greatest mass movement in history, mobilising the 25% who can flip the system.

      This is the core philosophy behind Stop Reset Go, but NOT NECESSARILY just in the direction of civil disobedience. To invest only in that is to put all our eggs in one basket that top down actors will be pressured beyond a certain threshold. It may happen, it may not, or it may just take too long. We must diversify and also invest in systematized bottom-up efforts.

  5. Oct 2021
    1. In the future envisioned here, decentralized networks play the role of governments, municipalities and intentional commons, fostering common goods. It is possible to produce common goods when a big-enough community cooperates to bear the cost of production and its implementation; but this, correspondingly, requires large-scale coordination, and large-scale coordination is generally a very hard problem. In this article we introduce Common Good, a blockchain-based application that solves this problem by enabling the coordination and motivation of different relevant actors for achieving a desired common good, by providing it with a “business model” just as in the profit-seeking sector. Our solution takes inspiration from the Social Impact Bonds (SIB) model.

      A proposal to use decentralized blockchain to make large scale coordination possible.

  6. Aug 2021
    1. Currently, there is no formal or mandated monetary threshold applied to determine what is, or is not, considered material in the sustainability context. Many companies, especially large publicly traded ones, identify their own unique set of sustainability priorities on a regular basis, and include them in their sustainability reports and related disclosures.

      This is an opportunity for collective action to complement corporate action. Such collective action will be more effective if closely coordinated with individual actors as well as broader umbrella sectors, as in this particular case.

  7. Jul 2020
  8. Jun 2020
  9. May 2020
  10. Jan 2019
    1. It should be no surprise recognizing the problematic-theoretical simi­larities between disaster research and its "half-sibling" (e.g., see Wenger 1987), collective behavior. Both disaster research and collective behavior are at a theoretical standstill (e.g., see Aguirre and Quarantelli 1983), and both still rely upon every-day language rather than a broader scheme for describing events (e.g., see Weller and Quarantelli 1973, McPhail 1992). Works by Kreps and Bosworth (1994) and Dombrowsky (1981; 1987), (and perhaps Barton's 1970 classic work) reflect the theoretical attention disaster research needs to build.

      Connects crisis informatics research with collective behavior.

      I wonder though does Neal define collective behavior and collection action differently?

      Look at these citations:

      Quarantelli, E.L. 1985. Emergent Citizen Groups in Disaster Preparedness and Recovery Activities. Final Report 33. Newark, Delaware: Disaster Research Center, University of Delaware

      Turner, Ralph and Lewis Killian. 1987. Collective Behavior. Third Edition. Engle­wood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

      Weller, Jack M. and E. L. Quarantelli. 1973. "Neglected Characteristics of Collec­tive Behavior," American Journal of Sociology 79:665-85.

      Wenger, Dennis. 1987. "Collective Behavior and Disaster Research." Pp. 213-237 in Sociology of Disasters, edited by R. Dynes, B. De Marchi and C. Pelanda. Milan, Italy: Franco Angeli.

    2. Also, with disaster research having strong theoretical ties with the study of collective behavior(Wenger 1987), and with the field of collective behavior often looking at issues related to social change {e.g., riots, social move­ments), another link between disasters and social change has implicitly

      Neal connects concerns about disaster-driven social change and the natural desire for people to respond via some collective action impulse.

      Nice segue into SBTF as collection action motivated by social change

    1. By examiningwork practices, and tracing how those practices are reified in the social-technical organization of a group that is forming and stabilizing as they do the work, we learn not just what this particular group did, but also how the mechanisms by which collective action in digital environments are organizedbottom-up. We also learn how those lessonsaregraduated into prescriptivetop-down direction to sustain and direct future action

      Interesting frame of reference for this study that also helps to unpack the contribution of the SBTF research.

      Perhaps Elinor Ostrom's work could be helpful here too.