Sunday, May 3, 2009

More on Crowdsourcing of Infrastructure

With many chances for effective debt control dwindling and with rising deficits into the foreseeable future, energy infrastructure investments to be more affordable is not going to go away in a hurry. So I have kept thinking about ways of crowd-sourcing the costly part physical infrastructure. A good solution has been devised by David Palella, who takes kindly to our endeavors. But he planned for developing countries and the large costs saved saved are for licensing a preexisting network.

True, crowd-sourcing of large infrastructure would be very desirable on the count of effective public debt control. If only a handful of well-defined sponsors could "own" the project and only through group mediation.

But important issues need to be tackled, issued that are generally successfully solved on a more micro level. Pretty important among them are:

  • co-leadership of management
  • group accountability
Some say this is typically only works when one person (corporate or natural) is at the helm. (And I agree with it with important qualifications, commented on that article.)
But this typically ALSO works well in a well-bonded smaller group, such as balanced familial duties, minority business, sports team, rapid-growth partnerships. On closer examination, what is characteristic in these are:
  • "clicking"and/or forging together, and
  • long period of low risk slow bonding
In fact, some close business partners were also able to become pretty big successes that of course germinated over a long bonding period --- in the case of Walt and Roy, Gates and Allen, and Brin and Page. (Still, the two of them acted like one executive unit, which would be somewhat difficult in a crowd-sourced setting.)

It is also important to note that some leadership information will always remain confidential and vested in a smaller group, especially that of vested in a more macro-scale infrastructure.

Also, group accountability has generally been applied in the form of retribution, not reward. One might think of the ruthlessness of collective punishment, which is usually associated with the practice of victim-blaming. This is either a militant, hostile or "re-educational" concept, and also have been successfully applied by colonists mostly against convicts or the natives. But that is not exactly what most of us would normally have in mind as a good example to follow.

Not to mention the housing privacy issues, and who guarantees it planned and maintained. That always wrought with dangers to corrupt to process, and if not, still throws a major spanner in the works.

That said, I still find projects that have goals focused on inevitability and a bit away from the immediate here-and-now still merit such thinking.

See for more: The Masarang Foundation

No comments: