279 lines
16 KiB
Markdown
279 lines
16 KiB
Markdown
|
||
# Hacklabs to technological cooperatives
|
||
|
||
*Carolina*
|
||
|
||
Techno-political collectives mix technical and political concerns. A perfect
|
||
example is Riseup which defines its mission as a provider of “online
|
||
communication tools for people and groups working on liberatory social change.
|
||
We are a project to create democratic alternatives and practice
|
||
self-determination by controlling our own secure means of communications”.
|
||
Nowadays the field is composed by very different types of organizations
|
||
ranging from loose and informal networks of hacktivists, free software
|
||
communities, formal organisations such as foundations, start-ups invested in
|
||
the so-called civic tech and even public institutions and council towns.
|
||
|
||
Some years ago, technological sovereignty meant the development of free
|
||
technologies [^0] by and for the civil society. Empowering society by
|
||
developing tools, hardware, services and infrastructure that meet social needs
|
||
based on the ethics of free software and self-management. Nowadays, with the
|
||
transition to open source things have become messy as big corporations
|
||
promoting open source software basically for their own benefit have broken the
|
||
relation between technological development and social responsibility.
|
||
|
||
In this text I will rethink what role cooperatives have, or could have, as
|
||
economic and social actors in reclaiming this relationship. To do so, I will
|
||
depart from the broad galaxy of techno-political collectives [^1], and then
|
||
focus on the format of technological cooperatives as they have been deployed
|
||
in Spain.
|
||
|
||
## A galaxy of initiatives
|
||
|
||
We find foundations which can be committed to create open source and free
|
||
software solutions and services (FSF, Mozilla, Blender, etc.) and/or to
|
||
protect and defend digital rights (Electronic Frontier Foundation, La
|
||
Quadrature du Net, X-net) mobilizing and pulling economic resources to make
|
||
those project run in the mid and long term. People can support foundations as
|
||
a donor, volunteer, intern. They normally look for experienced and qualified
|
||
professionals and count with formal and legal structures when many
|
||
techno-political collectives are based on informal groups and communities.
|
||
|
||
Another weird aspect of the current scene consists in local government
|
||
initiatives which are working towards openness and transparency based on
|
||
citizen participation. Many “rebellious” council towns located in Spain are
|
||
supporting the development of free software tools focused on citizen driven
|
||
political participation [^2], and behind those developments, freelancers, small
|
||
companies and cooperatives are working on setting up viable, robust and
|
||
trustful systems to promote open democracy.
|
||
|
||
Technological cooperatives can be found at the intersection of both previous
|
||
options as they have an economical goal aiming towards sustainability and also
|
||
a political and social approach to technology. Besides, as most of their
|
||
clients come from the third sector (non‐profit oriented, such as NGOs,
|
||
associations, collectives ) they can help build products based on their
|
||
specific needs and desires. Examples include [^3] Candela (Amnesty’s activist
|
||
management app), GONG (project/budget manager for NGOs), Oigame (online
|
||
petition platform), Nolotiro (platform to exchange things), Mecambio
|
||
(repository of energetic, financing and connectivity alternatives).
|
||
|
||
## Creating a coop...
|
||
|
||
From now on, I will focus on the particular story of how we founded a free
|
||
software cooperative, Dabne, in Spain – but simultaneously others were doing
|
||
the same [^4]. In the 90’s, when Internet started to be accessible, several
|
||
projects [^5] wonder what it meant to escape from established identities,
|
||
self-organize online transgressing borders, create a collective brain.
|
||
Hacklabs, in squats or association offices, were places to experiment, learn
|
||
about things that were not easily available as not everyone had an Internet
|
||
access yet, nor a computer. Until then hackers were barely visible and
|
||
hacklabs became that meeting point where “isolated” hackers came in contact
|
||
with social movements. A passionate hybrid came out of that, it knock a
|
||
strong free/libre software community which had a high impact on society’s
|
||
approach to free technology.
|
||
|
||
Spain has quite a long tradition of agricultural and industrial cooperatives
|
||
and at some point, some of us started thinking that our hobby could turn
|
||
through cooperativism into a way of living. As each cooperative have their
|
||
own agreements regarding work and labour, I will share the terms under which we
|
||
founded our own:
|
||
|
||
* We wanted to make a living but not at all costs.
|
||
* We wanted a shared decision making process.
|
||
* We wanted transparency.
|
||
* We wanted to define our goals, and change them when needed.
|
||
* We wanted everybody to be treated equal and in a fair way.
|
||
* We wanted to continue learning, have fun and promote free software.
|
||
* We didn’t want to be slaves of our work but work with others in a
|
||
collaborative and cooperative way.
|
||
|
||
With that in mind, we analysed how the “enterprise world” worked and wonder if
|
||
we could become “business people” doing something that until then we did for
|
||
free. A key element lied in the belief that we were going to found companies
|
||
and step into “the market”, that thing governed by capitalist rules which we
|
||
were deeply against. Vertigo. There were no previous references of free
|
||
technology cooperatives neither money to invest (we needed 250€ each). There
|
||
was a strong determination and will to not work for big capitalist companies
|
||
that make you uniform, dull and slave to their rules. The libre/free software
|
||
community was there so we were not alone, we had our computers and skills, our
|
||
beliefs that free technologies empower society, that free software brings
|
||
sovereignty and that the digital era should make knowledge accessible, open
|
||
doors to people and bring democratic alternatives to societies. We were
|
||
choosing a way of living not just a job.
|
||
|
||
Dabne was founded in 2005 and it took us one year to understand what it meant
|
||
to create a company, to manage a business and to decide a legal form that
|
||
would favour our values of collaboration, transparency and responsibility. We
|
||
went to workshops, talks, trainings, wrote business plans, attend appointments
|
||
at the Chamber of Commerce. It seemed endless but little by little things
|
||
began to take shape.
|
||
|
||
Becoming a coop happens in a specific environment of cooperatives advisers
|
||
which is by far more friendly and easy to ask than in the start up world for
|
||
instance. Mantras like “success”, “fame”, “competitiveness”,“big profit” are
|
||
not part of their vocabulary. They gave us a social approach, an
|
||
understanding of how to address our impact and empower social organisations in
|
||
the technical aspect.
|
||
|
||
Our friends xsto.info had founded one year before a free software cooperative
|
||
in Madrid, they were a small group of sysadmins, web developers, wireless
|
||
experts also committed to the free software community. Their experience
|
||
helped us, we could share our doubts, difficulties, and see how others had
|
||
gone through similar situations.
|
||
|
||
All in all, we managed to set up the company, and one good thing about
|
||
software is that to start up, you basically need nothing but knowledge, a
|
||
laptop and Internet access which means that costs are minimum – but the first
|
||
challenge is to get the first clients. Through friends and contacts, we
|
||
started our way, then the word spread mouth to mouth and slowly we had our
|
||
group of clients.
|
||
|
||
Our mainly technical profile made us look for alliances like with noez.org
|
||
focused on design and innovation centred on people. With them we could share
|
||
different perspectives of technologies and made our work more understandable.
|
||
Then Dabne became in an unplanned way a women's free software cooperative. So
|
||
far we do not know of any other women’s software development cooperative in
|
||
Spain. This led Dabne to IT counselling: as active listeners we could make
|
||
technologies comprehensible to non-technical people, adjust projects rhythms,
|
||
be honest and able to say no when we cannot do it.
|
||
|
||
## Building a multi-verse of communities and networks
|
||
|
||
Cooperatives are most of the times fragile. But by working together, building
|
||
and taking part in existing communities, creating and nurturing networks, they
|
||
can strengthen their resilience and sustainability over time.
|
||
|
||
Through a cooperatives’ platform (UMCTA) we got in contact with environmental,
|
||
agroecology, social work and social adviser cooperatives willing to share
|
||
their longer experience and knowledge. To become a coop also meant to enter
|
||
the social and solidarity economy community [^6]. At that time Coop57-Madrid,
|
||
an ethical financial service cooperative was founded and its goal has been to
|
||
finance social and solidarity economy projects thanks to investments from
|
||
civil society. Red de economía alternativa y solidaria (REAS) and the social
|
||
market are networks for the production and distribution of goods and services
|
||
based on the principles of social and solidarity economy. Among those we
|
||
found ones concerned with social transformation, environmental sustainability,
|
||
commons, gender equality, transparency, participation, self-organization,
|
||
internal democracy.
|
||
|
||
Interestingly, most social and solidarity economy networks share a lack of
|
||
interest towards techno-political issues, making difficult to include the
|
||
concerns of free software cooperatives in their agenda. Because of this, in
|
||
2007 technical cooperatives set up the initiative “Software libre y ONGs”,
|
||
dedicated to promoting the use of free software and free technologies. A call
|
||
for breakfasts while having short talks complemented with a conference focused
|
||
on Free/Libre software and Third sector organizations. At a bigger scale, in
|
||
2008, the Federal Association of Free software companies (Asolif) and other
|
||
platforms [^7] were created for promoting free software, create new business
|
||
models and achieve responsible wealth.
|
||
|
||
On the other hand, communities were built around each specific technology,
|
||
programming language, content management system, operating system distribution
|
||
or hardware, in order to advance knowledge, share good practices, come up with
|
||
improvements, and welcome newbies. A small cooperative uses several
|
||
technologies, so the best option would be to participate in the different
|
||
technical communities and attend their events (conferences, meet-ups, etc).
|
||
But being able to take part of IT community events requires people, time and
|
||
money, which is very difficult to handle in a small cooperative with limited
|
||
resources...
|
||
|
||
Yet, time has shown that new people are founding cooperatives and collectives
|
||
[^8] around free technology, so the wheel keeps rolling.
|
||
|
||
## SWOT for coop
|
||
|
||
I will recap dimensions introduced previously using a Strength Weakness
|
||
Opportunities Threats (SWOT) analysis where:
|
||
|
||
Strengths refers to characteristics and internal factors of the cooperative or
|
||
project that give it an advantage over others:
|
||
|
||
* Small team can change and adapt quickly
|
||
* Flexible working environment (home, office, client’s office)
|
||
* Ability to make decisions and define company goals
|
||
* No initial capital needed
|
||
* Define own timing
|
||
* Good corporate image
|
||
* Creativity
|
||
* Curiosity
|
||
* Have fun
|
||
|
||
Weaknesses refers to characteristics of the cooperative or project that puts
|
||
it at a disadvantage relative to others:
|
||
|
||
* Strain of working
|
||
* 24/7 involvement
|
||
* No business management experience
|
||
* No specialized profiles
|
||
* Difficulty to grow
|
||
* Communication
|
||
* No financial cushion
|
||
* No legal counselling
|
||
|
||
Opportunities refers to external factors of the environment that the
|
||
cooperative or project could exploit to its advantage:
|
||
|
||
* Able to develop own ideas & projects
|
||
* Ability to chose partners & projects
|
||
* Be part of different networks & communities
|
||
* Capacity to respond to concrete and uncommon needs and desires
|
||
|
||
Threats are external elements in the environment that could cause trouble for
|
||
the cooperative or project:
|
||
|
||
* Exhaustion and burn out
|
||
* Uncertainty about future
|
||
* No update on technical issues
|
||
* Price reduction
|
||
|
||
## Now some open questions remain
|
||
|
||
Cooperatives can make possible the building of new autonomous zones while
|
||
responding to many challenges:
|
||
|
||
* **Economy**: how to shape an economy of the commons, social and supportive?
|
||
|
||
* **Self-organization**: how to be sustainable in a long term run, while
|
||
questioning unquestionable truths like, consensus, horizontality,
|
||
participation, leadership?
|
||
|
||
* **Technological freedom**: how to fight for free software, digital rights,
|
||
open knowledge and copyleft?
|
||
|
||
As years pass by, technological cooperatives still looks like a small field
|
||
based on strong personal relationships, which are key to building trust and
|
||
assuming new challenges, but that can be also a limitation when there is a
|
||
need to scale up. Besides, the precarious and uncertain economic situation
|
||
makes it difficult to integrate new people. However, there is always a moment
|
||
when the project grows and with it, should the team grow, how … or not?
|
||
|
||
Then who should be part of the cooperative? Should they have specific
|
||
technical skills? Should they have a versatile profile? Are technical skills
|
||
always needed? Is it affordable and ethical to have apprenticeships?
|
||
|
||
And what about decision making processes? Cooperativism is about sharing the
|
||
decision making process but experience shows that not everyone wants to take
|
||
part of it – should they be excluded from the cooperative? Is the ability to
|
||
make decisions key to be part of a cooperative? Should all decisions be taken
|
||
in common?
|
||
|
||
These challenges give a comprehensible vision of the times to come, and the
|
||
creation of these autonomous zones opens possibilities to different ways of
|
||
understanding work, the commons, sustainability and economy.
|
||
|
||
[^0]: As a reminder, free technologies, in a nutshell, are the technologies and services based on the freedom given by free/libre software and it’s philosophy. **Freedom 0**: The freedom to run the program for any purpose. **Freedom 1**: The freedom to study how the program works, and change it to make it do what you wish. **Freedom 2**: The freedom to redistribute and make copies so you can help your neighbour. **Freedom 3**: The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements (and modified versions in general) to the public, so that the whole community benefits.
|
||
|
||
[^1]: Rise Up: https://riseup.net/ (USA) • Autistici: https://autistici.org/ (ITA) • Free: https://www.free.de/ (GER) • So36: https://so36.net/ (GER) • BOUM: https://www.boum.org/ (FR) • Nodo50: http://nodo50.org/ (ESP) • Pangea: https://pangea.org/ (ESP) • Immerda: https://www.immerda.ch/ (CH) • Mayfirst/People Link: https://mayfirst.org/ (USA)
|
||
|
||
[^2]: Consul: https://github.com/AyuntamientoMadrid/consul • Decidim: https://github.com/AjuntamentdeBarcelona/decidim
|
||
|
||
[^3]: Candela: https://github.com/amnesty/candela • Gong: https://gong.org.es/projects/gor • Oigame: https://github.com/alabs/oigame • Nolotiro: https://github.com/alabs/nolotiro.org • Mecambio: https://www.mecambio.net/
|
||
|
||
[^4]: Dabne: https://dabne.net/ • Xsto.info: https://xsto.info/ • aLabs: https://alabs.org/ • Semilla del software libre: https://semillasl.net/ • Enreda: https://enreda.coop/ • Gnoxys: https://gnoxys.net/ • Cooperativa Jamgo: https://jamgo.coop/
|
||
|
||
[^5]: **Quelques projets**: Sindominio: https://sindominio.net/ (ES) • Autistici: https://autistici.org/ (IT) • Samizdat: https://samizdat.net/ (FR) • Espora: https://espora.org/ (MX) • Thing: https://thing.net/ (USA)
|
||
|
||
[^6]: Redes Cooperativa: https://redescooperativa.com/intervencion-social/ • REAS: https://www.economiasolidaria.org/red_redes • Coop 57: https://coop57.coop/ • Economia Solidaria: https://www.economiasolidaria.org • Madrid Mercado Social: https://madrid.mercadosocial.net/ • Tangente coop: https://tangente.coop/
|
||
|
||
[^7]: Asolif: https://www.asolif.es/ • Esle: https://esle.eus/ • Olatukoop: https://olatukoop.net
|
||
|
||
[^8]: **Some other cooperatives, groups or initiatives working around free/libre technologies:** • Deconstruyendo: https://deconstruyendo.net/ • Interzonas: https://interzonas.info • Talaios: https://talaios.net/ • Shareweb: https://shareweb.es • Reciclanet: https://www.reciclanet.org • Buenaventura; https://www.buenaventura.cc/ • Itaca: https://www.itacaswl.com • Saregune: https://www.saregune.net • Cooptecniques: https://cooptecniques.net/ • **Latin America**: Kefir: https://kefir.red/ • Vedetas: vedetas.org • Tierra comun: https://tierracomun.org/ • Técnicas rudas: https://www.tecnicasrudas.org/
|