Why Social Architecture?

In their recent book, North, Wallis and Weingast (2009)¹ explain the difference between natural states and modern societies. Modern societies create open access to economic and political organizations, and by doing so they foster political and economic competition, and development.

In the modern society, the balance between open access resources and private property is a subtle one. For knowledge resources, this balance seems to be least understood. Vagueness regarding the allocation of knowledge resources induces individual risk considerations that hinder development.
By using a multi-level classification of the actors in the socio-technical fabric we can articulate and vary the rules of interaction and the claims on (knowledge) resources. This is an indispensable instrument in re-architecting the socio-technical fabric of the techno globe.

Macro, Meso, Micro and Pico

The table below generically characterizes actors at different levels in a modern society. All these actors may benefit from systematized knowledge commons. Test cases, such as on Johannesburg Plan of Implementation, UN Climate Talks and VAT compliance in ERP systems, typically involve actors at multiple levels. The level (macro, meso, micro, or pico) of a Principal², will determine attributes of its interests (e.g., the resources for survival and growth that it must consume, produce or protect). Also behavioural constraints are determined by the level. For instance, within their jurisdictions, macro and meso-level actors should refrain from giving preferential treatment to any of their micro or pico-level "subjects". On the other hand companies compete at the micro-level and persons compete in sports contests or for job promotion. The institutional instruments that governments can use to promote their industries are constrained by global trade agreements.