Open Source Political Community Development: A Five-Stage Adoption Process

Abstract

This article considers the emergence of large-scale “commons-based peer production” projects such as Wikipedia.org from an institutional development perspective. The argument it makes is threefold. First, that that the lowered transaction costs and information abundance found online transform a subset of public goods problems, essentially replacing free-ridership with mass coordination as the central challenge. Second, that the boundaries of this subset are defined by a “power-law topology” that leads to the emergence of online hub spaces and serves to resolve search problems endemic to the anti-geographic online landscape. These boundary conditions limit the overall impact of commons-based peer production for the political space. Third, that all such hubs move through a common five-stage institutional development process, directly related to standard models of the diffusion of innovation. Identification of the institutional development process behind Wikipedia leads in turn to the stipulation of seven hypotheses: the “Field of Dreams” fallacy, the “Interest Horizons” thesis, “Political Strategy Is Not Like Computer Code,” the “Location-based Wave” thesis, “Power Law Fragility Under Moore's Law,” the “Punctuated Equilibrium” thesis, and “Code-Forking the Public Sphere.” Each thesis holds direct implications for the potential and limitations of “open source” applications in the political arena.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 18 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.