Download - P2Pvalue @ Barcelona CAPS Infoday
www.p2pvalue.eu
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 610961
European project P2Pvalue project
P2PvalueDecentralized platform for value generation in
commons-based peer production Mayo Fuster Morell IGOPnet.cc
www.p2pvalue.eu
An implementation of Google Drive Real Time API over a distributed federated infrastructure
Lean principles inspiration Empirical research for technological development
www.p2pvalue.eu
Delimitation Criteria
Collaborative production+
Peer to peer relationshipsNon traditional command
Limited mercantile exchange+
Common resourcesOpen access, reproducibility
& derivativeness
Mapping expansion & hybridificationof common based peer production
www.p2pvalue.eu
Traditional theories of value do not apply to CBPP
Alternative strategies to assess value
How to measure value?
What is valuable?
How does value creation function in CBPP?
www.p2pvalue.eu
Community buildingMission accomplishment
Monetary value
Social use value Reputation
Dimensions of value
www.p2pvalue.eu
Community buildingScale of the communities is extremely variable.
Diverse degrees of participation (Power law 1/9/90)
Dimensions of value
www.p2pvalue.eu
Mission accomplishment Projects are quite satisfied!
Half the cases assign themselves a score between 7 and 10 in a scale of 10
Dimensions of value
www.p2pvalue.eu
Monetary value: Budget39% of cases have budgets of less than 1000 euros
Dimensions of value
www.p2pvalue.eu
Dimensions of value
Indicators of reputation and use
Google Pagerank, Alexa, Kred, Twitter followers, & Facebook likes
Strong correlation between them
Indicators available for all cases, but corporate based and non transparent
Urge an open CBPP oriented indicator of value
www.p2pvalue.eu
CBPP are highly openBut cases very diverse in the way to be open
Index of openness to contributors: 50% > 6 up to 10 ranking scale
CBPP are highly free, tooIndex of freedom of contributors: 77% > 2 of 3 indicators
(registration policy, participation policy, and user profile policy)
Self-governance of community interaction and roles 63% members can intervene in their interaction governance
Governance features
www.p2pvalue.eu
Diverse permissions levels (hierarchies) are very common
¨Hierarchies¨ are very frequent 88%
Gender balance in rolesNot always too ¨bad¨
25% of cases 50% of female administrators
Lack of rotation of roles !!!!!Less than 5% of have a system for frequent rotation of administrators
Governance features
www.p2pvalue.eu
Only a few cases (3%) use a proprietary license
14 different kinds of licenses (Software, Hardware, Data, Content and more).
Most used licenseGeneral Public License (for software)
Creative Commons BY-SA (for content)
Almost 50% of cases includes a copyleft (or “share alike”) clause
Governance features: Licenses
www.p2pvalue.eu
From more centralized to more decentralized
Data storage From 88% to 95% store the users’ data in centralized servers
Type of infrastructure architecture: 32% Centralized not reproducible (central proprietary server) Example: Facebook46% Centralized but reproducible (FLOSS platforms in a central server) Example: Wikipedia 3% Federated Example: N-1/Lorea/Kune5% Peer to Peer architecture Example: GNUnet
P2Pvalue platform
Infrastructure architecture
www.p2pvalue.eu
There is not “a” single formula of “success” Data: Not strong correlations with the whole sample.
There are different features and models that favour success.
More self-governance favours reputational value creation
in specific areas of activity : FLOSS, Collaborative writing, Collaborative research, Citizens media, Collaborative archives, Community networks, and Open technology.
Different “models” of “success”: Size and reputation versus collaborativeness
Conditions of “success”