Читать книгу The Handbook of Peer Production - Группа авторов - Страница 64

That being said, peer production projects do have systems of quality control. These “maintainers” (in free and open source software) or “editors” (in Wikipedia) protect the integrity of the system as a whole and can refuse contributions that endanger the integrity of the system. However, they do not coerce work. Peer production is based on freely engaged and passionate labor. Moreover, it eliminates some costs to capital. Hence, as we discuss next, it can also be embraced by for‐profit‐maximization forces, which explains the massive growth of peer production as a means to produce software for industry.

Peer production is neither hierarchy‐less, nor structure‐less (Freeman, 1970; Bauwens in Kostakis, 2010), but usually characterized by flexible and dynamic hierarchies and structures based on merit that are used to enable participation. Heterarchies combine elements of networks and hierarchies. Carole Crumley has offered one of the most common definitions (1979, p. 144), which suggests that heterarchy is “the relation of elements to one another when they are unranked, or when they possess the potential for being ranked in a number of different ways, depending on systemic requirements.” Thus, multiple levels exist where the communication among them is crucial in transcending the dysfunctions of traditional, rigid hierarchies.

Peer production introduces a cooperative framework that “includes both ranked and nested structures along with those that are flatter and networked” (Crumley, 2015, p. 9). In peer production, the emergence of dynamic hierarchies empowers a measure of cooperation and autonomy. The sole role of hierarchy is, therefore, the initiation and continuous flowering of autonomous cooperation.

Leadership is also “distributed.” Peer production projects are often led by a core of founders, who embody the original aims of the project, and who coordinate the vast number of individuals and micro‐teams working on specific patches. Their authority and leadership derive from their input into the constitution of the project (meritocracy), and on their continued engagement. Peer production projects may sometimes involve “benevolent dictatorships” (Kostakis, 2010); however, one must not forget that since the cooperation is entirely voluntary, the continued existence of such projects is based on the consent of the community of producers. One is always free to “fork,” i.e., to copy and modify and thus take the project to a different, independent direction; though in reality it could be quite difficult to attract a sufficient number of volunteers to a brand‐new project.