MNL5630 Case Studies in Alternative Technologies and Organizations for Sustainability (2026 spring)
Section outline
-
General Information:
This course will delve into the challenges and possibilities of the commons, with a primary focus on sustainability. The course is organized into 8+1 semi-autonomous sessions, each offering a unique perspective on alternative methods of organizing production and society. Students will explore and reflect on various case studies related to commoning, covering a range of topics, from free and open-source software and open hardware cases to AI, energy cooperatives, and technology/science parks. A critical approach is expected from students as they formulate their perspectives on the subject.
Final grade:Pass/Fail, based on attendance, the self-evaluation report (one-pager), a short video, and participation in the discussions during the classes. On 20/05, students should submit their near-future landscape videos (3-6 minutes) by sending the link to the teacher (more info on the video exam in Class 9 below). The report submission deadline is 27/05 @ 11.59 p.m (Estonian time). The report should be sent by email to vkostakis AT pm.me. Students who fail to adhere to any of the deadlines will fail the course.
Prerequisites for grading:Lecture-seminar participation. Participation in online seminars is mandatory; absence from a maximum of two seminars is allowed. Missing more than two seminars results in failure in the course. For health or serious personal reasons, an additional absence may be justified.Schedule of classes:13/02, 27/02, 13/03, 20/03, 27/03, 10/04, 17/04, 24/04 @ 17:15 - 20:00 (all classes will take place on this zoom link). On 20/05, students should submit their near-future landscape videos (3-6 minutes) by sending the link to the teacher (more info on the video exam in Class 9 below).Teacher:Prof. Dr. Vasilis Kostakis (vkostakis AT pm.me) -
Question: How to resolve “the tragedy of the commons”?Recommended material: Garrett Hardin’s 1968 article and the following video:.Highlights:
- There are three ways of governing open-access resources: 1) creating and selling property rights to resources (privatization); 2) top-down regulations (government regulations); and 3) bottom-up institutions (cooperative collective action).
- The commons is a social system (bottom-up institutions) by which communities co-manage resources. The commons involves: a resource; the user and/or productive community; and the rules defined by the community.
- Successful cases of the commons include eight principles as defined by Elinor Ostrom.
- Polycentricity: build governance diversity to manage the biodiversity as well as the diversity of human creativity.
-
Question: How to compensate for coders’ work on publicly available projects?
Recommended material: A Ford Foundation report by Eghbal and this paper by Pazaitis and Kostakis.
Highlights:
- Free and open-source software makes software production: faster; more inclusive and passionate; cheaper; and more innovative.
- Free and open-source software projects are underfunded because of free riding; lack of awareness; and anti-money culture.
- Key distinction: Consumer software vs. infrastructure software.
- How to support or fund free and open-source software (FOSS) production (no solution is perfect):
- Public procurement
- Release publicly funded code as open-source ("public money, public code")
- Hire key developers
- Tax-exempt for open-source organizations
- Create a tax/fee for for-profit companies that use FOSS
- Promote FOSS through education (teachers, students, see Google’s Summer of Code)
- Create public awareness and institutionalise appreciation
- Experiment with new commons-oriented licenses to ensure that for-profit companies reciprocate (dual licensing)
- Tokenization
- Public procurement
-
Question: In October 2025, Elon Musk launched Grokipedia — an AI-generated encyclopedia built by xAI — positioning it as a corrective to what he called Wikipedia's liberal bias. Within hours, critics pointed out that Grokipedia relied heavily on Wikipedia's own content, while selectively reframing politically sensitive topics to align with Musk's worldview. You're Jimmy Wales. Musk has 200 million followers on X, effectively unlimited capital, and a stated mission to replace your platform. But your model — volunteer-driven, donation-funded, open-source, commons-based — has survived for over two decades. Should you be worried? And more fundamentally: can a community-governed knowledge commons survive when a single individual with extraordinary resources decides to build a proprietary alternative?
Recommended material: Read this article and this article. Watch this video:
.Highlights:
- In 25 years, Wikipedia has managed to outperform Microsoft's Encarta, Google's Knol and Britannica.
- Wikipedia vs Grokipedia <=> commons-based vs proprietary platform <=> transparent bias vs hidden bias <=> community vs one-man show <=> billions of users vs some millions <=> scarce monetary resources vs backed up by a multibillionaire.
- Wikipedia is about representations of knowledge, about unfinished artifacts in a constant process of creation and evaluation. Always imperfect like a democracy.
- Wikipedia maintains human oversight over automated translation to protect the quality and reliability of the knowledge commons, ensuring that machine-generated content does not undermine community standards.
- There is no such thing as neutrality; the world is reflexive (i.e., our observations, beliefs, and actions about the world feed back into and change the world itself)
- AI and information overflow will increase transaction and coordination costs, which is a problem for any online encyclopaedia.
- AI appropriation needs to be regulated and commons-based licensing needs to be respected and enforced.
- Wikipedia as a global digital commons could be supported by established institutions like academia or supranational organizations (e.g., UNESCO, the UN).
- Wikipedia has long faced criticism for its growing procedural complexity, which can deter new contributors; for informal power structures that, despite the project's egalitarian ethos, concentrate influence among experienced editors; and for systemic biases — particularly toward Western perspectives and male-dominated content — rooted in the demographic makeup of its editor community.
- Let a hundred flowers bloom; let a hundred approaches contend.
-
Question: What business/organisational model should Tzoumakers follow?
Recommended material: This paper; these photos and the following documentary (watch it on YouTube to enable the English subtitles)
.Highlights:- The first task for the Tzoumakers community is to formulate a code of conduct, outlining the norms, rules, responsibilities, and expected practices. See Ostrom's eight principles (Class 1).
- The community must also identify the domains of impact associated with the initiative. In the case of Tzoumakers, education — encompassing seminars, workshops, and research — emerges as a key domain.
- Bottom-up governance, autonomy, independence, and a community-driven approach are the pillars of Tzoumakers's organisational model. As such, the multi-stakeholder cooperative stands out as the most suitable business format to adopt.
- Potential sources of income include: grant funding (Erasmus+, Creative Europe, action research pilots, residencies); membership fees; consulting fees; public funding; repair and maintenance services; educational programmes and fees; customised production; agri-tourism; and hybrid approaches.
- Spaces like Tzoumakers should be regarded as public utilities, and as such, municipalities should provide support.
- Building a network among similar initiatives (across the EU to begin with) is essential.
- While effective locally, challenges remain in scaling without losing community character and avoiding industrialisation of the model itself.
- Challenges to be addressed include: documentation accessibility for non-English speakers; lack of standardisation; and gender imbalances.
-
Question: Should AI development be treated as a commons governed by communities, or does effective AI inevitably require the scale and resources that Big Tech is now using?
Recommended material: First watch the videos below in the following order and then read this article. First watch the We're Not Ready for Superintelligence video posted ~9 months ago:
then the Is this how AI might destroy humanity? video posted ~8 months ago:next watch the What Sam Altman Doesn't Want You To Know video posted ~3 months ago:then the Replacing Humans With AI Completely Backfired video posted ~4 weeks ago:and last the OpenAI is Suddenly in Trouble video posted ~3 weeks ago:Notice how the narrative around AI has slowly changed over the last year.Highlights:
- Text
-
Question: How could the externalities of the so-called "green energy" be reduced?
Recommended material: First watch the videos below and then read this paper. Watch "The Price of Green Energy" documentary:"Climate Change: We've Lost" video:"Has Earth Already Crossed MAJOR Tipping Points?" documentary:and "Could 'Degrowth' Save the World" video:Highlights: -
Question: Given how little we know about deep sea ecosystems, how should we weigh the demand for critical minerals for "green" energy technology against the potential ecological damage to largely unexplored deep sea ecosystems? Is the current international governance system equipped to protect deep sea environments while managing resource extraction, or do we need fundamental changes to our approach and political economy?
Extra question for all: Name one particular moment from each documentary that struck you.
Recommended material: Watch the two following documentaries in full:.Highlights: -
Question: What criteria would you use to evaluate whether a state-funded science and technology park is 'successful'? What policy recommendations would you suggest to achieve such success (e.g., what types of technologies and businesses should this park prioritize developing)?
Recommended material: This essay and the pp. 12-29 of this PhD thesis.
Highlights: -
Question: How would a near-future landscape* from your city/village look like if the state, market entities, and civil society prioritize the commons instead of profit maximization?
To answer this question, you need to create/edit a picture either by hand or using your PC, which should depict the near-term future, i.e., the next 15-25 years.
You need to produce a 3-6 minute long video featuring yourself elaborating on your picture. I highly recommend that you review all of the key points covered in our classes and try to incorporate them into your near-future landscape discussion. The more insights and arguments from the course you incorporate, the better.
The deadline for sending your video link to me (Vasilis) is on May 20th, 20:00 Estonian time. AI can be used for the visuals but not for the voice.
Do not worry about your artistic skills! We are all artists!
---
*A ‘near-future landscape’ (Slaughter, 1997) is a way of representing views of the near future in ways that non-specialists can understand by using visual images to highlight basic choices and to represent the results of exploring the near-term future. More info here.