Governance of online creation communities: Provision of infrastructure for the building of digital commons

From WikiLit
Jump to: navigation, search
Publication (help)
Governance of online creation communities: Provision of infrastructure for the building of digital commons
Authors: Mayo Fuster Morell [edit item]
Citation: European University Institute  : . 2010.
Publication type: Thesis
Peer-reviewed:
Database(s):
DOI: Define doi.
Google Scholar cites: Citations
Link(s): Paper link
Added by Wikilit team: Yes
Search
Article: Google Scholar BASE PubMed
Other scholarly wikis: AcaWiki Brede Wiki WikiPapers
Web search: Bing Google Yahoo!Google PDF
Other:
Services
Format: BibTeX
Governance of online creation communities: Provision of infrastructure for the building of digital commons is a publication by Mayo Fuster Morell.


[edit] Abstract

This doctoral research is framed by the notion of a transition in which distinct commons organizational forms are gaining in importance at a time when the institutional principles of the nation state are in a state of profound crisis, and those of the private market are undergoing dramatic change. Additionally, the transformation of industrial society into a knowledge-based one is raising the importance of knowledge management, regulation and creation. This doctoral research addresses collective action for knowledge-making in the digital era from a double perspective of organizational and political conflict through the case of global online creation communities. From the organizational perspective, it provides an empirically grounded description of the organizational characteristics of emerging collective action. The research challenges previous literature by questioning the neutrality of infrastructure for collective action and demonstrating that infrastructure governance shapes collective action. Importantly, the research provides an empirical explanation of the organizational strategies most likely to succeed in creating large-scale collective action in terms of the size of participation and complexity of collaboration. From the political conflict perspective, this research maps the diverse models of governance of knowledge-making processes, addresses how these are embedded in each model of governance, and suggests a set of dimensions of democratic quality adapted to these forms. Importantly, it provides an empirically grounded characterization of two conflicting logics present in the conditions for collective action in the digital era: a commons versus a corporate logic of collective action. Additionally, the research sheds lights on the emerging free culture and access to knowledge movement as a sign of this conflict. In hypothesizing that the emerging forms of collective action are able to increase in terms of both participation and complexity while maintaining democratic principles, this research challenges Olson’s assertion that formal organizations tend to overcome collective action dilemmas more easily, and challenges the classical statements of Weber and Michels that as organizations grow in size and complexity, they tend to create bureaucratic forms and oligarchies. This research concludes that online creation communities are able to increase in complexity while maintaining democratic principles. Additionally, in the light of this research, the emerging collective action forms are better characterized as hybrid ecosystems which succeed by networking and combining several components, each with different degrees of formalization and organizational and democratic logics. In hypothesizing that the emerging forms of collective action are able to increase in terms of both participation and complexity while maintaining democratic principles, this research challenges Olson’s assertion that formal organizations tend to overcome collective action dilemmas more easily, and challenges the classical statements of Weber and Michels that as organizations grow in size and complexity, they tend to create bureaucratic forms and oligarchies. This research concludes that online creation communities are able to increase in complexity while maintaining democratic principles. Additionally, in the light of this research, the emerging collective action forms are better characterized as hybrid ecosystems which succeed by networking and combining several components, each with different degrees of formalization and organizational and democratic logics.

[edit] Research questions

"how the governance of online creation communities affect participation and growth"

Research details

Topics: Wikipedia as a system, Policies and governance [edit item]
Domains: Information systems, Knowledge management [edit item]
Theory type: Explanation [edit item]
Wikipedia coverage: Case [edit item]
Theories: [edit item]
Research design: Case study [edit item]
Data source: Interview responses, Websites [edit item]
Collected data time dimension: Cross-sectional [edit item]
Unit of analysis: Website [edit item]
Wikipedia data extraction: Live Wikipedia [edit item]
Wikipedia page type: Collaboration and coordination, Other [edit item]
Wikipedia language: Multiple [edit item]

[edit] Conclusion

[edit] Comments


Further notes[edit]

Facts about "Governance of online creation communities: Provision of infrastructure for the building of digital commons"RDF feed
AbstractThis doctoral research is framed by the noThis doctoral research is framed by the notion of a transition in which distinct commons organizational forms are gaining in importance at a time when the institutional principles of the nation state are in a state of profound crisis, and those of the private market are undergoing dramatic change. Additionally, the transformation of industrial society into a knowledge-based one is raising the importance of knowledge management, regulation and creation.

This doctoral research addresses collective action for knowledge-making in the digital era from a double perspective of organizational and political conflict through the case of global online creation communities. From the organizational perspective, it provides an empirically grounded description of the organizational characteristics of emerging collective action. The research challenges previous literature by questioning the neutrality of infrastructure for collective action and demonstrating that infrastructure governance shapes collective action. Importantly, the research provides an empirical explanation of the organizational strategies most likely to succeed in creating large-scale collective action in terms of the size of participation and complexity of collaboration. From the political conflict perspective, this research maps the diverse models of governance of knowledge-making processes, addresses how these are embedded in each model of governance, and suggests a set of dimensions of democratic quality adapted to these forms. Importantly, it provides an empirically grounded characterization of two conflicting logics present in the conditions for collective action in the digital era: a commons versus a corporate logic of collective action. Additionally, the research sheds lights on the emerging free culture and access to knowledge movement as a sign of this conflict. In hypothesizing that the emerging forms of collective action are able to increase in terms of both participation and complexity while maintaining democratic principles, this research challenges Olson’s assertion that formal organizations tend to overcome collective action dilemmas more easily, and challenges the classical statements of Weber and Michels that as organizations grow in size and complexity, they tend to create bureaucratic forms and oligarchies. This research concludes that online creation communities are able to increase in complexity while maintaining democratic principles. Additionally, in the light of this research, the emerging collective action forms are better characterized as hybrid ecosystems which succeed by networking and combining several components, each with different degrees of formalization and organizational and democratic logics.

In hypothesizing that the emerging forms of collective action are able to increase in terms of both participation and complexity while maintaining democratic principles, this research challenges Olson’s assertion that formal organizations tend to overcome collective action dilemmas more easily, and challenges the classical statements of Weber and Michels that as organizations grow in size and complexity, they tend to create bureaucratic forms and oligarchies. This research concludes that online creation communities are able to increase in complexity while maintaining democratic principles. Additionally, in the light of this research, the emerging collective action forms are better characterized as hybrid ecosystems which succeed by networking and combining several components, each with different degrees of formalization and organizational and democratic logics.
and organizational and democratic logics.
Added by wikilit teamYes +
Collected data time dimensionCross-sectional +
Data sourceInterview responses + and Websites +
Google scholar urlhttp://scholar.google.com/scholar?ie=UTF-8&q=%22Governance%2Bof%2Bonline%2Bcreation%2Bcommunities%3A%2BProvision%2Bof%2Binfrastructure%2Bfor%2Bthe%2Bbuilding%2Bof%2Bdigital%2Bcommons%22 +
Has authorMayo Fuster Morell +
Has domainInformation systems + and Knowledge management +
Has topicWikipedia as a system + and Policies and governance +
Publication typeThesis +
Published inEuropean University Institute +
Research designCase study +
Research questionshow the governance of online creation communities affect participation and growth
Revid10,795 +
Theory typeExplanation +
TitleGovernance of online creation communities: Provision of infrastructure for the building of digital commons
Unit of analysisWebsite +
Urlhttp://www.onlinecreation.info/?page_id=5 +
Wikipedia coverageCase +
Wikipedia data extractionLive Wikipedia +
Wikipedia languageMultiple +
Wikipedia page typeCollaboration and coordination + and Other +
Year2010 +