Adopt Version one of the governance charter: "Working Principles of the ECA"
Nicole Leonard
Public
Seen by 118
WORKING PRINCIPLES OF THE EUROPEAN COMMONS ASSEMBLY (Version 1)
We conceive of the ECA itself as a commons. We are a community (of activists, researchers, students, teachers, citizens etc.) who steward our shared space for trans-local collaboration on commons which is the European Commons Assembly. Here, we outline our governance.
The ECA is a non-hierarchical, peer-to-peer space for collaboration, rather than a body of representation.
Individual participants cannot legitimately speak “on behalf of” the Assembly as a whole.
They can however claim that ideas or work “emerged from” the ECA, or identify as members or “part of” of the Assembly.We work through self-organized Assembly Groups that hold responsibility for carrying out initiatives, or "actions".
All groups should inform, communicate and share their actions with the broader ECA.
At the beginning of an agreed-upon action they should clarify and document a mandate that describes and contextualizes the action and provides relevant information for the rest of the ECA.We strive for consensus when making decisions and taking actions at all levels - individually, within Assembly Groups, and for the ECA at large.
All initiatives and decisions should cohere with the following principled criteria:
Be recorded "publicly" before executed (i.e. on loomio or on the list - not in private email conversations)
Minimize harm
Enhance freedom – opens up more rather than closes possibilities for the Assembly
If adequately communicated and in line with the criteria, they can proceed unless someone explicitly objects.
In case of objection, discussions should take place to try to resolve the issue. The issue should be formulated to the whole ECA via the mailing list; if email exchanges are insufficient then a call should be set. The conclusion of the talks should be sent to the list for reaction. If there is no further objection, a decision can be adopted – if not another call can be arranged, or it should be considered that the issue should be dropped.
We expect that decisions that directly affect the ECA at large seek out broader and more in-depth input and discussion than those that affect a smaller swathe of the community.
Nicole Leonard Wed 22 Mar 2017 2:36PM
Thank you @silkehelfrich. I agree of course that it is important to have a Charter. To give some more background on why this came up, we had conversations in Brussels about how to govern and organize the assembly itself, and the main idea emerged that we want to manage the ECA as a commons as much as possible. The ECA is also a new experiment and we are learning a lot as we go. It became clear that we needed some sort of guiding rules to legitimate actions that we are all taking in association with the ECA, and to clarify questions of representation and membership in the Assembly. I agree that it's not all 100% clear yet but getting the ideas down and having people give input (which is what we are doing here) is a step in the right direction. Personally, as someone who is very active with the ECA, I find the principles helpful in allowing me to take decisions, showing me how they can be justified, and reminding me how to take them (e.g. the importance of documentation and openness). The charter brings people together and defines the community... without it we are all sort of individuals doing our own actions with no relation to the larger group.
I hope that helps clarify a bit. Also, I think the charter can be a useful point of reference in the future in case of disputes etc.
Silke Helfrich Wed 22 Mar 2017 3:26PM
@nicoleleonard , to me the process is pretty clear, and I very much agree - we need sth like a charter and principles of governance. We are certainly moving towards the right direction - thanks for all the effort you put into this to keep it on track! It'll just take time. And honestly: to me it seems almost impossible to do this kind of stuff merely through online collaboration); the last version of the Data Commons Charter I've just shared here has requiered quite a bit of f2f communication.
@asimong My answer to your questions is YES, this is pretty much how I would think about the function of the charter / the governance principles. It is an expression of the shared horizon and approach and it provides orientation (just as, say, the ten commandments do) while opening a path for responsible individual decisionmaking that takes into account the charter's spirit.
One more argument re: why I think the current version is not ready for adoption: it mixes the "who we are" with a "mission statement" with some governance principles.
Simon Grant Wed 22 Mar 2017 3:35PM
Yes, I agree with @silkehelfrich -- there is lots of great ideas in the draft, and when it is separated out into separate sections for the different purposes / functions we should have much more clarity.
Nicole Leonard Wed 22 Mar 2017 3:48PM
when you say separate out into the different sections- do you mean just separating the mission/vale statement from the procedural?
Simon Grant Wed 22 Mar 2017 4:13PM
Well, I'm not quite sure what the functions are that you wanted to fulfill with this. Certainly you could separate out something like the Data Commons Charter that Silke pointed to. Beyond that, I guess it depends on how formal or informal you all want it to be. The word "should" points to normative practice. Is there "membership" in any way? (Nicole Alix's question.) If so, are members required to conform to these norms? What if they don't? What force is there to the word "should"? Or is is, more like the Data Commons Charter, that if you behave in this way, you will be a valued member of the group, but if not, then not? You could rephrase it as "are expected to". Or do you want members, who sign up to a commitment that this is how they fully intend to behave?
I'm not trying in any way to say what functions this Charter "should" :) have, but just saying that careful consideration of the functions or purposes, and how they translate into practice, is likely to help clarify the material you have into different "sections" (or whatever you like to call them. Yes, you could have the mission / value statement (though how exactly do you expect this to govern behaviour?); then the procedural part -- is that the "should" statements? You frame the whole as a "governance charter" -- in what (various, separate) ways are the statements of the charter going to "govern" the behaviour of participants in the ECA? I hope that question helps...
Nicole Leonard Wed 22 Mar 2017 4:18PM
Hi yes thanks. We are definitely aware of these different concerns but the idea it putting them all together was to have one document, fairly simple with 4 short points. But then some procedural things started to creep in. I agree it needs to be standardized. I think because we are dealing primarily with an online space the procedural stuff is kind of important.
The goals with the charter are, as I see it: 1. Identify ourselves internally (in terms of how we ideally/normatively want to relate to each other). 2. Clarify questions of membership and representation to the ECA 3. Give an outline of the "structure" of the group 4. Outline principles and justification for decision-making.
Maybe that's too much for one document. Curious to hear what others think about splitting it up or not.
Simon Grant · Wed 22 Mar 2017 1:27PM
Very useful, thank you Silke! And I really resonate very positively with these 12 principles -- great work! So, I wonder if we are saying here, that a charter expresses the principles by which we (as commoners) recognise other commoners as collaborating, in the broadest sense? A "touchstone" perhaps. No one is going to enforce them, but if you don't follow them, expect other commoners to be less enthusiastic to collaborate. If you listen to feedback from others, they will guide you. And the charter should give you points of reference to bring up with other people who are not acting in what you think is a positive way for the commons. Open to discussion, of course!
Does that ring true with you and others?