Digital technology facilitates collaboration by inviting organizations from all sectors to come together under this common language. Thus, the digital transformation of organizations leads them to enter into a process of openness and collaboration, facilitated by the development of collaborative work tools. All organizations are naturally led to open up to the outside world in order to develop external projects internally, and conversely to promote projects initiated internally. For all these reasons, players in a wide range of sectors are now taking a close interest in open models. Aware that they can no longer maintain their competitiveness by innovating alone, they want to approach the market from a new angle.

Digital technology is the source of a new impetus for the commons movement, so it is not a surprise that more and more public and private actors are joining forces to make such commons emerge as viable alternatives to the logic of the dominant digital actors.

However, this phenomenon depends on important cultural changes, so that all actors can fully benefit from and contribute to these common resources.

This article is based on the constantly evolving version of the tutorial that you will find on the toolbox.

Why a Digital Commons Tutorial?

It is therefore a matter of providing concrete answers to their questions, and gradually removing the cultural, technical, organizational and economic barriers often associated with opening up and pooling approaches.

The design of the Digital Commons Tutorial

This Digital Commons Tutorial is the result of two days of workshops coordinated by Inno³ during the first edition of Numérique en commun(s ), which brought together some twenty stakeholders from different backgrounds, both private and public, all of whom were eager to share their difficulties in setting up a digital commons project, and to collectively come up with possible solutions.

It was then augmented by contributions collected online or produced during post-NEC workshops. A version is presented here but it is a collaborative process in progress, do not hesitate to react and increase by sharing in comments or by contributing from your personal space your feedback, your tools, your thoughts.

How to use the Tutorial

This Tutorial in the Commons is organized around two parts:

• I. A first part adopts the point of view of a public or private actor wishing to engage in a digital commons approach, whether to use, contribute to or initiate a digital commons.
• II. The second part adopts the point of view of the community of actors gathered around a Common project from its initiation, to its valorization, through its perpetuation.

Each time the collaborative process has produced tools that contribute to the operationalization of the projects, these are indicated in an insert on the left and available on the site. These elements can be enriched as and when contributions and feedback are received from all those who will use them.

The structure of the Commons Tutorial can be summarized by the diagram below:

I. Public or private actor: why and how to join or launch a Digital Commons process?

I. 1. I have a digital need

The choice of a digital commons rather than a proprietary solution can be based on a number of factors: first of all, the desire to share design and maintenance costs, but not only. Indeed, the digital commons allows to create bridges between different sectors through the cooperation necessary for its sustainability, and also allows a better distribution of the value produced by the community.

The first step, for those who wish to initiate a digital commons project, is to find out if there is an existing resource that can meet their needs, either completely or partially. Indeed, it will be easier to contribute to an existing digital commons in order to adapt it to one's needs by participating in the collective effort, rather than creating a new resource that could divide the efforts of a community.

Moreover, if this research does not allow us to identify a common project that meets the needs formulated, it will have the benefit of identifying complementary or inspiring projects that could be of interest to refer to later.

There are currently no directories listing all digital commons projects, so it is generally necessary to approach sectoral initiatives (such as the Mobility Factory, Federation-Open Space Maker, Logistics Factory, Transiscope, etc.) or even transversal initiatives (such asCommon Platforms). In the absence of such an initiative for the sector in which your need lies, it may then be interesting to turn to more generalist actors, such as theAssembly of the Commons or the Commons Coop, which link numerous projects.

Close

Article that might interest you

Les Communs Numériques : un modèle innovant de développement des ressources numériques

Cet article est issu de la démarche collaborative de conception du « Tutoriel  des Communs Numériques ».Ce Tutoriel des Communs Numériques est issu de deux jours d'ateliers coordonnés par Inno³ au cours de la première édition de Numérique en commun(s) réunissant une vingtaine d'acteurs des communs issus de différents milieux, privés comme publics, tous désireux de partager leurs difficultés dans la mise en place d'un projet de commun numérique, et d'y apporter collectivement des pistes de solutions.Il a ensuite été augmenté de contributions collectées en ligne ou produites au cours d'ateliers postérieurs à NEC. Une version est présentée ici mais il s’agit d’une démarche collaborative en cours, n’hésitez pas à réagir et augmenter en partageant en commentaires ou en contribuant depuis votre espace personnel  vos retours d’expériences, vos outils, vos réflexions. IntroductionLe numérique facilite la collaboration en invitant les organisations provenant de tout secteur confondu, à se rapprocher sous ce langage commun. Ainsi, la transformation numérique des organisations les amènent à entrer dans une démarche d’ouverture et de collaboration, facilitée par le perfectionnement d’outils de travail collaboratif. Toutes les organisations sont naturellement amenées à s’ouvrir vers l’extérieur afin de développer en interne des projets externes, et réciproquement de valoriser à l’extérieur des projets initiés en interne. Pour toutes ces raisons, des acteurs de secteurs très divers s'intéressent aujourd'hui de près aux modèles ouverts. Conscients qu’ils ne peuvent plus maintenir leur compétitivité en innovant seuls, ils souhaitent aborder le marché sous un angle nouveau.Le numérique est la source d’un nouvel élan pour les mouvements des communs, ce n’est donc pas une surprise si de plus en plus d’acteurs publics et privés se regroupent afin de faire émerger de tels communs comme alternatives viables aux logiques des acteurs dominants du numérique. Ce phénomène repose néanmoins sur d’importants changements culturels, afin que tous les acteurs puissent pleinement bénéficier et contribuer à ces ressources communes. Les communs numériques ont des caractéristiques nouvelles : Ainsi, les communs numériques gagnent à être partagés, car ce partage augmente directement la valeur d'usage de la ressource et permet par ailleurs d’étendre la communauté qui la préservera. Le numérique est donc à l’origine du développement de communs d’un nouveau genre par différenciation avec les communs naturels ou matériels, ouverts et partagés, accroissant d’autant plus leur potentiel.l’usage de la ressource par les uns ne limite pas les possibilités d’usage par les autres (la ressource est non rivale)sa préservation ne passe pas par la réservation du droit d'usage à une communauté restreinte (la ressource est non-exclusive).Les exemples de communs numériques les plus évidents, car utilisés au quotidien, sont probablement le système d’exploitation Linux, le navigateur web Firefox et l’encyclopédie en ligne Wikipédia.De plus en plus de bases de données collaboratives émergent aussi comme communs numériques, tels OpenStreetMap en matière de données géographiques, Open Food Facts pour les produits alimentaires ou encore TelaBotanica, véritable encyclopédie botanique collaborative.La numérisation croissante des différents secteurs industriels favorise les logiques de mutualisation et collaboration qui se formalisent par une multiplication de communs numériques « sectoriels » (énergie, banque, mobilité, santé, etc.). 2.1. Pourquoi choisir le modèle des communs numériques pour une ressource ?La mutualisation est généralement le bénéfice premier induit par la mise en commun d’une ressource : mutualisation en termes de temps de conception, de maintenance, de ressources, etc. Plus encore, produire un commun numérique permet d’ériger une ressource comme référence dans un domaine. La valeur étant liée à l’usage qui en est fait – l’utilisation par les uns renforçant la valeur pour les autres – son adoption généralisée est une motivation suffisante en tant que telle. À la fois facteurs d’innovation, de libre concurrence et de coopération ouverte, les communs numériques s’accompagnent d’une collaboration facilitée dans tous les champs de notre société, créant des ponts entre le secteur privé et le secteur public, le champ lucratif et le non lucratif. À l’échelle d’une organisation, l’adoption d’une démarche de communs numériques est généralement liée à la prise de conscience d’une nécessité de transformation numérique, permettant de conforter ses atouts stratégiques, de gagner en attractivité et d’attirer de nouveaux talents. À l'échelle de la ressource, c'est aussi un gage de pérennité, d'émancipation et de résilience vis-à-vis des contributeurs. Plus spécifiquement, pour un acteur public, le recours au modèle des communs présente l’avantage d’offrir une plus grande richesse ainsi qu'une meilleure répartition de la valeur produite par la collectivité, mais également d’engager les usagers d’un service dans une démarche de maintenance et de développement de ce dernier. Cela permet aussi de renforcer l’accessibilité à ce service. En ce sens, il peut être intéressant, du point de vue d’une administration, d’envisager a priori toute ressource numérique produite par elle comme un commun, sauf à ce que cela soit contraire à ses objectifs ou intérêts. Cette posture rejoint le régime de l’« Open Data par défaut » introduit par la Loi pour une République Numérique, posant ainsi un cadre et une pérennité nécessaire pour donner sens à ces obligations. 2.2. À quoi engage le développement d'un commun numérique ?Les bénéfices qui précèdent restent néanmoins les fruits des efforts qui accompagnent nécessairement une telle démarche. Plus que la simple production ou ouverture d’une ressource, le développement d’un projet de commun numérique impose le maintien d’une vigilance forte à l’égard de la ressource, mais aussi au bénéfice de la communauté et de ses règles de gouvernance. Toute la structuration du commun doit intégrer des dispositifs d'accompagnement, une animation et des pratiques qui assurent le caractère ouvert et inclusif du projet. Cela exige des efforts dédiés pour accompagner la venue et la fidélisation des membres d’une communauté, ainsi qu’un certain nombre de bonnes pratiques intéressantes au-delà de cette seule communauté (documentation du code, outils de commentaires, etc.). De la même façon, il est nécessaire de définir et de faire respecter un cadre assurant le caractère collaboratif, ouvert et inclusif du commun, afin que la communauté de contributeurs et d’utilisateurs puisse s’épanouir. Engager le développement d’un commun nécessite donc un engagement sur la durée, qui ne se résorbera que lorsqu’une communauté suffisante aura rejoint le projet. Si vous souhaitez aller plus loin et comprendre les enjeux et modalités opérationnelles à concevoir pour s’engager dans une démarche de commun numérique, consultez le Tutoriel aux Communs Numériques et les outils associés issus de la démarche collaborative menée à Numérique(s) en Commun 2018.

• Commons

The interest of a digital commons compared to a proprietary solution lies in the freedom it gives to users to adapt it to their particular needs, and to let the community benefit from these improvements. Thus, by moving away from the role of simple user to become a contributor, one improves the resource both for oneself and for others, thus increasing its possibilities of use and starting a virtuous circle of permanent enrichment of the resource.

Whether you want to enhance the development of a digital commons and/or adapt it to your particular needs, the question of contribution - which can take many forms and dimensions - will necessarily arise. Since the point of such a resource is to accept and frame such contributions, it is very useful to have a document that outlines the rules associated with each type of potential contribution. Note that anyone can contribute without necessarily having advanced technical skills!

For a potential contributor, the evaluation of the opportunity to contribute to a digital commons must thus be adapted to the yardstick:

• - The resource to which such a contribution could be made: not all projects are necessarily equipped to receive such contributions and, sometimes, the first useful contribution may be to foster such a collaborative framework.
• - Constraints related to one's own organization: even if the digital commons are, by nature, favorable to free competition, cooperation and innovation, it is necessary to have the principle of such a contribution validated internally within the organization (except for teachers who are authors of their own content) (especially when it generates intellectual property rights). Once these precautions have been taken - both for the contributor and the community concerned - it will be relatively simple to evaluate the opportunity and feasibility of such an approach (see the "Evaluation grid" tool).

Close

Article that might interest you

I. 2. I have a digital resource

Several reasons can be put forward (political, ethical, societal, etc.), the most pragmatic being to make the production AND maintenance of a digital resource collective and likely to interest other actors as well. Indeed, even if our culture is one of ownership, sharing a resource generally generates much less disadvantages than advantages.

In the case where there is no digital commons adapted to needs that are collectively shared (this is unfortunately still often the case), it is always possible to share an existing resource and/or to initiate a process to design a commons.

Such approaches require an upstream evaluation at several levels:

• The first level concerns the existence of a real or presumed community, which is assessed in particular by the interest that the resource is likely to generate for other actors in the sector (see 2/A/).
• The second level concerns the resource, in order to determine the extent to which it lends itself to collaborative development.
• The third level concerns the organization, in order to determine to what extent the quality (particularly legal) and the necessary skills (internal or external) are present. The answer is not binary, these reflections are only there to allow us to take a step back on these approaches in order to anticipate the levers and obstacles. Thus, if there is no community, it is always possible to start alone and then open up to others.

Close

Article that might interest you

II. Collective of actors of a Digital Commons: how to initiate, sustain and enhance the Digital Commons?

II. 1 Initiating the common

In order to foster the emergence and sustainability of a community around the digital resource, the following two elements must be identified and addressed upstream

1. A clear objective: it is essential to formalize the objective(s) collectively pursued within the framework of the project and to make them public. This allows for, among other things:

• Internally, to federate contributors around the same objective and to ensure that they do not stray from it as the resource develops;
• Externally, to be transparent about the direction adopted by the project, to give confidence to funders, to attract new contributors, etc.

Whether the sustainability of the commons is based on the definition of an economic model (see I.2.B. above) or not, there will always be a certain amount of financing to be provided: directly by the organization designed to support the commons, or indirectly, thanks to the contributors to the digital commons. In this respect, the possibilities of external financing of the project, while they must be carefully thought out in order to participate in reinforcing this digital commons and not to make it live artificially, are worth knowing and controlling. However, such financing must be strictly limited to real financing needs, and must not place too great a burden on the project, otherwise what was a means may become an end. The choice of an external financing method will depend on the way in which the digital commons is structured (and more specifically on the existence of a legal personality), the type of need to be financed and the legal personality of the person who wishes to finance the development of the commons. From the point of view of the digital commons, it is advisable to anticipate the different methods of organized financing as well as the different needs that may be met in this way. Given the stakes in terms of transparency and governance, and the values associated with the digital commons, such sources of funding will have to be clearly defined, as well as the ways in which the sums are allocated. By their very nature, the standardized documents used by the various commons are all possible sources of mutualization, making it possible to operate a true technical, legal and economic transversality between the various commons. There is thus a kind of mutualization by design. On the other hand, there are no autonomous "generalist" initiatives specifically designed to pool the various resources being developed (beyond the sectoral examples mentioned, such as the Fabrique des mobilités, the Coop des communs, etc.), or even to allow for the pooling of funding. However, the growing emergence of endowment funds could eventually allow for the co-financing of multiple "general interest" digital commons projects - like the Open Law endowment fund, which is intended to finance many more projects than those specifically supported by the organization. The article on the right offers you, for example, a tool for listing funding needs and the possible existing mechanisms for financing them.

Close

Article that might interest you

II. 2. Perpetuating the common

The sustainability of a digital commons depends on the definition of a set of key elements, which must be identified and addressed as early as possible with the various contributors to the project. These elements, which constitute the project's collaborative framework, are intended to give confidence to all stakeholders by providing them with a secure environment that is conducive to creation and allows them to innovate freely. These elements may vary in content or form, but overall they cover these three pillars: contribution dynamics, value sharing and economic model, and formalized governance rules.

These different elements can be formalized through several key documents, made available to the community in a transparent manner, as well as to third parties when relevant. These documents often take the form of a charter or a contribution policy.

The digital commons are based on a dynamic of contribution (see the article illuminations + 1/C)

In order for the common good to be sustainable, it is necessary to create the conditions to encourage and organize contributions of various kinds from a wide range of actors.

The first step is to identify the different needs in terms of contribution and the actors or types of actors/communities likely to meet them.

Indeed, in terms of digital commons, multiple frequent needs are added to more specific needs for certain projects. They can be differentiated as follows:

• - The classic needs of any digital project: developing the resource, producing the documentation, translating the productions, etc.
• - The specific needs of the collaborative and inclusive dimension of the digital commons: ensuring mediation between the various contributors, encouraging contribution through various mechanisms, etc.

The article opposite proposes for example a co-constructed repository of needs and potential communities of contributors.

Close

Article that might interest you

Once the needs have been defined and the communities identified (see questions 3.1 Who can meet the development needs of the community and how? ), a framework must be formalized to encourage, welcome and facilitate the contributions of these communities. It is only on this condition that the will to contribute will be "transformed" into real contributions, since each remaining obstacle makes the contribution less certain and its integration into the digital commons more difficult.

In this regard, the project will have to install the conditions to establish :

• -The project methodology: the pursuit of your objective while respecting commonly established values will result in the collaborative development of the methodology to be applied to the project. The methodology concretely sets the main rules of governance (for example: defining the different poles or work groups, the processes for validating a task, the flow of meetings, etc.) as well as the processes (technical and organizational) that frame the concrete development of the resource.
• - The adoption of standards in the development of your project aims to make it interoperable and thus increase its potential for improvement. This gives you the opportunity to benefit from the advances of other communities and from an extended collective intelligence, while making the exchange of information within your project more efficient.
• - Valuing the contributions of the participants. It is essential to the development and sustainability of the project that its contributors feel valued, at least symbolically.

• - Specific tools are needed to encourage collaborative contributions (such as a wiki for documentation, a software forge for development, etc.):
• - Specific processes to facilitate contributions (e.g. a translation policy to integrate contributions in the context of the internationalization of the project);
• - Specific terms of contributions (e.g., to manage the intellectual property rights of employed third-party developers - see 2/C). All these rules must be published in a transparent manner. They may change as the project evolves, but it is best to anticipate them in order to make the processes more fluid as soon as new contributors arrive.

Beyond the contributory dimension (and the source of it), the conditions for the sustainability of a commons also depend on the existence of a model for sharing value. Indeed, the development of a digital commons generates value and it is therefore necessary to collectively define a model for evaluating and sharing this value.

Contrary to a business project, the design of a digital commons does not aim to create an economy of rent. Nevertheless, financial autonomy can be sought in order to ensure the conditions for the project's sustainability. As a complement or alternative to the traditional financing based on voluntary contributions and donations, this model has certain advantages, notably that of relying on the strength of the economy, and more precisely on the economic interest that the members of the commons have in maintaining this commons. Such an objective must, however, reconcile the conditions necessary for the self-financing of the common without isolating it from the concerns of the members of the community, i.e. from the collective interest to which it must continue to respond. Under this condition, it is entirely possible to envisage the construction of a digital commons around an economic model focused on the development of the resource. This economic model can be translated in several ways:

• - External economic activity: through the creation of an environment favorable to economic actors. This funding model is currently the most widespread: it involves setting up an economic model that is peripheral to the digital commons as such (for example, through the sale of services or products - software or hardware - based on the commons). In this way, the digital commons can benefit from various contributions from those economic actors directly interested in the development and perpetuation of the commons on which their activity depends.
• - Internal economic activity: by organizing certain activities of the community in order to self-finance certain costs inherent in the development or perpetuation of the community. This generally involves offering complementary services (premium services, conferences, etc.). Such a model benefits from the centrality of the commons, but runs the risk of either diverting the commons from its purpose (what was a means becomes an end), or of competing with certain members of the community (or, worse, of favoring some at the expense of others).
• - Mixed economic activity: by articulating the two previous models. It is thus possible to provide for mechanisms by which contributors are encouraged to contribute to the digital commons because of their own economic model, while at the same time providing for the organization that manages the commons to be granted a monopoly on the exercise of certain services necessary to perpetuate the commons (e.g., the sale of certification, the issuance of labels or authorizations through the use of the brand, etc.). Here again, the models are diverse and varied and many remain to be constructed.

The strength of the commons lies in the durability of the model on which it is based. Thus, as long as it is useful to its users, it must be able to continue to evolve and adapt to their expectations. This status is not automatic, however, and requires the formalization of a certain number of rules and the establishment of shared governance. It is also important to anticipate the various risks in order to ensure a model that is technically, legally and economically sustainable.

The relationships of contributors to a digital commons project are numerous and diverse, ranging from simple coordination of contributions to decision-making on the future of the resource. To this end, it is important to set up a governance to structure these relationships and, thus, to give internal legitimacy to the decisions made by the community. The effects will be felt in terms of increased confidence in the project both internally and externally. In this respect, the choice or not of a legal structure, partially or totally dedicated, to formalize this governance can condition or implement certain aspects. If the need to have a legal personality persists in order to take legal action, to benefit from certain grants or to enter into contracts, digital tools today extend the scope of actions that can be carried out outside such a framework (such as the OpenCollective platform). The need to create a legal structure, or even the intermediate solution of being hosted within an existing structure, is generally recommended when a strong collective interest unites the different actors or when there is a risk of keeping the responsibility for actions on the members alone. The associative or cooperative models (SCOP or SCIC) are particularly flexible and adapted to support the development of a common cause, but other forms (GIE, SAS, GIP, etc.) can achieve similar results as long as their purpose is geared towards the realization of this objective. Moreover, while the establishment of a governance system is essential, there is no ideal governance system - except for the one that best meets the specific challenges and problems of the project to which it applies. The majority of governance systems for digital commons projects share certain elements, such as the desire to be readable and understandable by all project stakeholders, mechanisms that ensure the transparency of decisions made, and mechanisms that allow governance to be opened up to contributors, and even to external partners.

Close

Article that might interest you

The relationships of contributors to a digital commons project are numerous and diverse, ranging from simple coordination of contributions to decision-making on the future of the resource. To this end, it is important to set up a governance to structure these relationships and, thus, to give internal legitimacy to the decisions made by the community. The effects will be felt in terms of increased confidence in the project both internally and externally. In this respect, the choice or not of a legal structure, partially or totally dedicated, to formalize this governance can condition or implement certain aspects. If the need to have a legal personality persists in order to take legal action, to benefit from certain grants or to enter into contracts, digital tools today extend the scope of actions that can be carried out outside such a framework (such as the OpenCollective platform). The need to create a legal structure, or even the intermediate solution of being hosted within an existing structure, is generally recommended when a strong collective interest unites the different actors or when there is a risk of keeping the responsibility for actions on the members alone. The associative or cooperative models (SCOP or SCIC) are particularly flexible and adapted to support the development of a common cause, but other forms (GIE, SAS, GIP, etc.) can achieve similar results as long as their purpose is geared towards the realization of this objective. Moreover, while the establishment of a governance system is essential, there is no ideal governance system - except for the one that best meets the specific challenges and problems of the project to which it applies. The majority of governance systems for digital commons projects share certain elements, such as the desire to be readable and understandable by all project stakeholders, mechanisms that ensure the transparency of decisions made, and mechanisms that allow governance to be opened up to contributors, and even to external partners.

As the law manifests itself in every collaboration, any digital commons project must be organized to understand and use the legal instruments that will enable it to strengthen the development of the project, foster trust with respect to the project's external stakeholders and accelerate the innovation carried by the project. The legal issues can thus be multiple:

• - Concerning the development of the resource: the license of the project (see question 4.4 Why choose a free license to disseminate the digital commons?), the contracts with the contributors, the trademark, even the patents related to the project and all the other legal aspects specific to a regulation (in particular the rules concerning export, health, encryption, etc.). Some guidelines exist
• - Concerning the organization of relations with third parties: services, partnership agreements, follow-up of grants or donations, cross-membership or legal actions. These legal issues are important to deal with, at the risk of putting the burden on a few contributors personally. Relatively common to digital commons projects, they are sometimes shared within "umbrella foundations".
• - Concerning the choice of license: The free license associated with the project expresses a posture and sends a signal to contributors and users. It is therefore important to choose a license that is in line with the project's objectives and values, that is legally robust and that federates a community. The choice of this license will notably depend on the connection with other digital commons projects, as well as the participation of certain contributors. This reflection must be carried out from the beginning of the project and cannot be dissociated from the development of the resource.

Références : 1 2

II. 3 Valuing the common: disseminating and composting

The sustainability of the commons relies in particular on the community that makes it up. In the digital domain, such an objective is achieved primarily by increasing the number of users. Indeed, the multiplication of users does not reduce the value or even the use of the digital commons, but on the contrary favors an increase in the number of final contributors. In order to reach the widest possible audience, dissemination will rely on communication adapted to different profiles. It should be both :

• - passive (making information accessible to those who seek it)
• - and active (reaching new people through specific approaches).

Finally, it is necessary to think upstream about the "compostability" of the project: this consists in thinking of the project and each of its components as "perishable" and therefore in designing them in such a way that the resources that will be drawn from them can be reused later on, within the framework of the project or other initiatives.

Références : 3 4

Close

Article that might interest you

This Digital Commons Tutorial is part of a collaborative and iterative process: it aims to be expanded and refined with contributions from all. To contribute, react, open new perspectives, questions and tools, you can comment in the comments section below, propose a contribution from your personal space or by writing to societe.numerique@finances.gouv.fr.