Browsing by Author "Frischmann, Brett M."

Now showing 1 - 7 of 7

Constructing Commons in the Cultural Environment
(2008) Frischmann, Brett M.; Madison, M.; Strandburg, K.
"This paper considers the problem of understanding intellectual sharing/pooling arrangements and the construction of cultural commons arrangements. We argue that an adaptation of the approach pioneered by Elinor Ostrom and collaborators to commons arrangements in the natural environment may provide a template for the examination of constructed commons in the cultural environment. Such an approach promises to lead to a better understanding of how participants in commons and pooling arrangements structure their interactions in relation to the environment(s) within which they are embedded and with which they share interdependent relationships. We propose a framework for evaluating and comparing the contours of different pooling arrangements with an eye toward developing an understanding of the institutional and structural differences across arrangements and industries as well as the underlying contextual reasons for such differences. The proposed approach would draw upon case studies from a wide range of disciplines. Among other things, we argue that a theoretical approach to cultural constructed commons should consider rules pertaining to membership criteria, contribution and use of pooled resources, internal licensing conditions, management of external relationships, and institutional form along with the degree of collaboration among members, sharing of human capital, degrees of integration among participants, and whether there is a specified purpose to the arrangement."
An Economic Theory of Infrastructure and Commons Management
(2006) Frischmann, Brett M.
"The open access (commons) versus private control debate is raging. ... The theory, however, brings into focus the social value of sustaining Internet infrastructure in an openly accessible manner, and strongly suggests that the benefits of open access (costs of restricted access) are significantly greater than the current debate reflects. ... Content providers use the infrastructure to provide a private service to the consumer (delivery of content for consumption) under conditions that render the output rivalrous and excludable. ... As discussed above, a user's willingness to pay for access to the infrastructure resource is limited to benefits that can be obtained by the user, which depends upon the nature of the outputs produced, the extent to which such outputs generate positive externalities, and the manner in which those externalities are distributed. ... Like a road system, a lake, and basic research, the Internet is socially valuable primarily because of the productive activity it facilitates downstream. ... This is a very similar dynamic as seen with public infrastructure; the basic difference is that the benefits of public good outputs often are appropriable to a more significant degree than the benefits of nonmarket good outputs."
Governing Medical Knowledge Commons
(2019) Strandburg, Katherine J.; Frischmann, Brett M.; Madison, Michael J.
"This paper presents three excerpts from the edited volume, Governing Medical Knowledge Commons: Knowledge Commons and the Road to Medical Commons, The Knowledge Commons Framework and Governing Knowledge Commons: An Appraisal. These excerpts introduce the Governing Knowledge Commons framework, which is adapted from the IAD framework to account for the unique characteristics of knowledge as a resource. Most importantly, knowledge is often not only managed and shared, but also created, through cumulative social processes. Moreover, knowledge ordinarily has multiple non-rivalrous socially beneficial uses. Because of its unique characteristics, knowledge production and use may encounter a variety of social dilemmas and commons governance of knowledge often presents complex challenges. The nonrivalrous and cumulative nature of knowledge also means, however, that solutions to the challenges of knowledge commons governance are particularly valuable to society. In the medical arena, the benefits of commons governance -- and the waste imposed by private property -- are particularly apparent. The book from which these excerpts are taken presents case study analysis of various examples of medical knowledge commons governance. The concluding excerpt begins to draw lessons from those studies. The presentation will reflect upon those lessons in light of more recent studies of knowledge commons governance."
Knowledge Commons
(2019) Madison, Michael J.; Frischmann, Brett M.; Strandburg, Katherine J.
"This chapter describes methods for systematically studying knowledge commons as an institutional mode of governance of knowledge and information resources, including references to adjacent but distinct approaches to research that looks primarily to the role(s) of intellectual property systems in institutional contexts concerning innovation and creativity. Knowledge commons refers to an institutional approach (commons) to governing the production, use, management, and/or preservation of a particular type of resource (knowledge or information, including resources linked to innovative and creative practice). Commons refers to a form of community management or governance. It applies to a resource, and it involves a group or community of people who share access to and/or use of the resource. Commons does not denote the resource, the community, a place, or a thing. Commons is the institutional arrangement of these elements and their coordination via combinations of law and other formal rules; social norms, customs, and informal discipline; and technological and other material constraints. Community or collective self-governance of the resource, by individuals who collaborate or coordinate among themselves effectively, is a key feature of commons as an institution, but self-governance may be and often is linked to other formal and informal governance mechanisms. For purposes of this chapter, knowledge refers to a broad set of intellectual and cultural resources. There are important differences between various resources captured by such a broad definition. For example, knowledge, information, and data may be different from each other in meaningful ways. But an inclusive term is necessary in order to permit knowledge commons researchers to capture and study a broad and inclusive range of commons institutions and to highlight the importance of examining knowledge commons governance as part of dynamic, ecological contexts."
Privacy as Knowledge Commons Governance
(2019) Sanfilippo, Madelyn; Frischmann, Brett M.; Strandburg, Katherine J.
"The Governing Knowledge Commons (GKC) framework, inspired by and adapted from the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework, structures analysis of commons governance arrangements around knowledge resources and production. Within the first few dozen empirical applications, scholars routinely encountered privacy concerns and values, along with rules-in-use that govern appropriate personal information flow, in systematically studying commons governance of knowledge production, often even when personal information was not associated with knowledge resources. This paper highlights the interdependence between knowledge flows aimed at creative production and personal information flows and discusses how meta-analysis of past case studies, originally presented in 'Privacy as Commons,' and current empirical case research, forthcoming in the edited volume Governing Privacy in Knowledge Commons, has yielded additional questions to supplement the GKC framework, based on the specific governance challenges around personal information."
Two Enduring Lessons from Elinor Ostrom
(2013) Frischmann, Brett M.
"This article is a tribute to Elinor Ostrom. It explores two enduring lessons she taught: a substantive lesson that involves embracing complexity and context, and a methodological lesson that involves embracing a framework-driven approach to systematic, evolutionary learning through various interdisciplinary methodologies, theories, and empirical approaches. First, I discuss Ostroms work on environmental commons. I illustrate the two lessons through a discussion of the tragedy of the commons. Next, I explain how the two lessons play a significant role in recent efforts to extend Ostroms work on environmental commons to knowledge/cultural commons. I draw a parallel between the tragedy of the commons allegory and the free-rider allegory, and show how many of the problems Ostrom explored in the environmental context are manifest in the cultural environmental context. I discuss an ongoing research project that follows the path that Ostrom blazed and systematically studies commons in the cultural environment."
Where Micro meets Macro in Technology Space
(2008) Frischmann, Brett M.; Hogendorn, Christiaan
"We describe three key elements in economic growth models: general purpose technologies (GPTs), institutions, and infrastructure. In existing growth models, these are addressed from a very aggregate perspective, but we emphasize that their microeconomic structures are complex and often involve commons aspects. We discuss the similarities and differences between GPTs, institutions, and infrastructure from both the demand and supply side perspectives. We use that comparison to draw more specific lessons from growth models on the contributions of each of the growth drivers and the policy implications for how they can be managed."