Skip to main content

Home/ Commons.fi/ Group items tagged commons.fi

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Jukka Peltokoski

From the theory of peer production to the production of peer production theor... - 0 views

peerproduction.net/...tion-of-peer-production-theory

commons.fi p2p commons commons-teoria kleiner benkler oekonux caffentzis commons-politiikka

shared by Jukka Peltokoski on 15 Nov 12 - No Cached
  • The object of this article is to give an interpretation of the ideological positioning of various movements and intellectual groupings and individuals within the ‘left field’ of peer to peer theory production.
  • What we understand under the concept of “the Production of Peer Production Theory” are the various attempts to make sense of peer production, both in terms of its place in the current dominant economic system of capitalism, and in terms of its future potential.
  • 1. Yochai Benkler: peer production as an adjunct to the market
  • ...27 more annotations...
  • we aim for a fair synthesis
  • Our main counter-argument is this: under capitalist conditions, peer production is not capable of self-reproduction and therefore not a full mode of production or value creation. We make an important distinction between the self-reproduction capability of a peer production project as a whole, and the social reproduction at the individual level. The reason is that there is no real universal possiblity for the reproduction of the human life of peer producers under capitalist conditions.
  • We would characterize Yochai Benkler’s vision as a reformist or meliorist approach, seeking to improve and balance some of the negative aspects of capitalism through increased peer production dynamics.
  • 2. Oekonux: free software as a germ form that is prefigurative of a peer production society
  • free software production is a full mode of production that is born within capitalism but destined to supersede it, based on a understanding of germ form theory.
  • The description of Meretz considers free software as a full mode of production, prefigurative of a wider transformation of the current capitalist mode of production.
  • We would characterize the main argument as stating that the deep lowering of transaction/coordination/communication costs, creates the possibility for a new mode of production next to the market and the firm, which produces value through ‘social allocation’.However, for Benkler, the new modality exists ‘in addition’ and in complementary with market dynamics.
  • On the collective level, we can see that peer production occurs when a pool of voluntary contributors can create commons-oriented value, under conditions of participatory governance, i.e. through the social, and not market or hierarchical, allocation of productive resources. This can occur on a collective level, but only if we abstract from the need for the social reproduction of the individuals who contribute.
  • there is no autonomous social reproduction within the commons itself
  • 3. Dmytri Kleiner’s Venture Communism
  • For Kleiner, peer production can only occur if commoners also own the common stock of production.
  • Kleiner proposes that peer producers would create common stock cooperatives, and use a specific licence, the Peer Production or Copyfarleft license, to protect their shared innovation commons from private appropriation by capitalist forces.
  • Like with the P2P Foundation’s approach, Kleiner also recognizes the continuation of the politics of class, as long as we live in a class-based society.
  • Our contrasting peer production IS a proto-mode of production, which means that indeed value is created in a radically different way in peer production, but that it’s lack of self-reproduction capabilities makes it dependent on capitalism.
  • Kleiner’s strategy is exactly what can make it independent and capable of self-reproduction since its combination with common-stock physical production entities, would guarantee the self-reproduction capability of individuals and collectives contributing to the commons.
  • creating a real counter-economy
  • 4. George Caffentzis and the Anti-capitalist commons
  • two kinds of commons, i.e. anti-capitalist commons which exist to produce value in a different way, and which function against capitalism, and commons which are used by capital for its own self-reproduction and act in favour of capitalism
  • Politically, pro-capitalist commons are represented by the neo-Hardinian school of Elinor Ostrom
  • while the basic premise of the existence of capitalism-compatible commons is correct, the making of a radical dichotomy, based on the necessity to struggle against capitalist commons, is absolutely counter-productive.
  • Our approach stresses that it is more productive to focus on the post-capitalist potentialities of peer production, and make them real and concrete, than to fight against commons that are compatible with capitalism.
  • it makes only sense to undertake efforts to make the commons more autonomous from profit-maximizing entities and the system as a whole. This can be done through strategies such as those proposed by Kleiner and the P2P Foundation.
  • In the interpretation of the P2P Foundation, social change occurs because proto-modes of production, which are initially embedded in a dominant economic system, and benefit that system, become gradually more efficient, and capable of self-reproduction, and therefore create the conditions for a phase transition to occur, in which the new emergent mode of production, achieves its independence over the formerly dominant model.
  • For the P2P Foundation, an integration needs to occur between the new prototype model, i.e. the field of peer production proper, as it emerges in multiple social fields and attempts to become more autonomous; the social mobilization of progressive social forces (i.e. politics and even ‘revolution’ are crucial remaining aspects of social evolution), and political/policy oriented movements that are capable of creating new institutions.
  • Politically, § we differ from the Benklerite approach because we believe peer production has the potential to succeed capitalism as the core value and organisational model of a post-capitalist society § we differ from Oekonux by stressing the lack of autonomy of peer production under current conditions § we differ from the Telekommunisten approach by stressing it a proto-mode of production § we differ from the Caffentzis approach by stressing a post-capitalist approach centered on the autonomy and self-reproduction needs of peer producers, rather than guided by a core hostility to capitalism
  • P2P Foundation also has an integrative and integral approach, this means that despite differences, we seek commonality around aspects of our friends and allies that we may differ from in other aspects.
  • § we agree with Benkler and similar approaches that peer production improves on the current conditions of capitalism, i.e. we generally support the spread of commons and p2p-oriented practices § we agree with Oekonux that peer production carries within itself the seeds of a post-capitalist value system § we agree with Kleiner’s proposal for a peer-based counter-economy § we agree with Caffentzis that we need a preferential treatment towards autonomous commons approaches that create a counter-logic within the present system
Jukka Peltokoski

Up to half of all food is wasted: agri-industry and supermarkets are culpable... - 0 views

peopleandnature.wordpress.com/...-and-supermarkets-are-culpable

food waste agriculture commons.fi

shared by Jukka Peltokoski on 19 Jan 13 - No Cached
  • Between 30% and 50% of all food produced – 1.2-2 billion tonnes/year – is wasted or lost, a report by the Institution of Mechanical Engineers (IME) says. It argues that the waste is caused mainly by marketing techniques in rich countries, along with poor practice and/or insufficient investment in harvesting, storage and transportation.
  • The report, published last week, highlights the vast amounts of farmland, energy, fertilisers and water swallowed up by the production of food that is thrown away or left to rot.
  • in poor countries, “wastage tends to occur primarily at the farmer-producer end of the supply chain”. Inefficient farming, and poor transportation and infrastructure mean that food is “frequently handled inappropriately and stored under unsuitable farm site conditions”. Almost all of what reaches households is eaten, though.
  • ...7 more annotations...
  • it is the way food is produced and sold for profit, in a process controlled by agri-industrial giants and supermarkets – rather than food consumption or human population growth as such – that pushes at the earth’s natural limits.
  • food losses at one-third of what is produced, or 1.3 billion tonnes/year
  • In rich countries, farming practices are more efficient, transport and storage facilities are better, and much less food is lost between farm and shop. But then “modern consumer culture” takes over: supermarkets often “reject entire crops of perfectly edible fruit and vegetables at the farm” – e.g. 30% of the vegetable crop in the UK – because of its size or appearance.
  • 30% of what is harvested from the field never actually reaches the marketplace (primarily the supermarket) due to trimming, quality selection and failure to conform to purely cosmetic criteria”
  • the estimated average cost to households in the UK is £480/year per household.
  • The report suggests that it is not food production per se that is unsustainable, but production of food for the distorted market, i.e. the commodification of food. It is “market mechanisms” that deprive poor country farmers of the means to invest in basic infrastructure and “market mechanisms” according to which supermarkets trash millions of tonnes of good food.
  • ■ Average crop yields increased by 20% between 1985 and 2005, “substantially less than the often-cited 47% production increase for selected crop groups”; ■ Globally, only 62% of crop production by mass is for human food; 35% is for animal feed and 3% for biofuels. ■ The land devoted to raising animals – including pasture, grazing and animal feed production – is an “astonishing” three-quarters of the total, and “the amount of land (and other resources) devoted to animal-based agriculture merits critical evaluation”. ■ Most agricultural expansion is in the tropics, where “about 80% of new croplands are replacing forests”. “Slowing (and ultimately, ceasing) the expansion”, particularly in the tropics, is “an important first step” to sustainability. ■ Irrigation accounts for 70% of global freshwater withdrawals, which is “of particular concern”. ■ Fertiliser use, manure application and leguminous crops (which fix nitrogen in the soil) have “dramatically disrupted” the global nitrogen and phosphorus cycles.
Jukka Peltokoski

The Boom of Commons-Based Peer Production - keimform.de - 0 views

keimform.de/...-commons-based-peer-production

commons siefkes linux gpl stallman wealth of commons.fi

shared by Jukka Peltokoski on 12 Oct 12 - No Cached
  • In 1991, an undergraduate Finnish computer science student, Linus Torvalds, had a surprising idea: he began to write a new operating system on his PC.
  • He announced his work on the Internet and asked for feedback about features that people would like to see. Some weeks later, he put the software online.
  • Only two years later, more than 100 people were helping develop the software now called Linux (a wordplay on “Linus” and “Unix”). Richard Stallman’s GNU Project was another initiative that had already developed a number of useful system components. The combination of the GNU tools with the Linux kernel resulted in an operating system that was both useful and free.
  • ...22 more annotations...
  • The software was met with enormous interest
  • Another crucial factor is the community that coordinates the development of the operating system. The open, decentralized, and seemingly chaotic way of working together pioneered by Torvalds and his collaborators became known as the “bazaar” model of software development (Raymond 2001)
  • With free software, there is no strict boundary between users and developers. Many participants simply use the software, but some help to improve it, either occasionally or even regularly and intensely. The participants themselves decide whether and how to contribute. Participation is not obligatory, but quite easy if you want to get involved.
  • Linux and Wikipedia are important examples of two communities – the free software movement (also called open source movement) and the free culture movement
  • The GNU/Linux story reveals the essential characteristics of peer production. Peer production is based on commons: resources and goods that are jointly developed and maintained by a community and shared according to community-defined rules.
  • If I modify and distribute a GPL’ed software, I must publish my own version under the GPL. This principle is called “copyleft” since it turns copyright on its head. Instead of granting exclusive rights of control and exploitation to the authors, it ensures that all versions of the software will remain in the commons forever.
  • While production for the market aims to produce something that can be sold, the usual goal of peer production is to produce something useful.
  • In contrast to companies and entities in planned economies, peer projects don’t have command structures. That does not mean that they are unstructured; on the contrary, most projects have “maintainers” or “admins” who keep the project on course and decide which contributions to integrate and which to reject.
  • The success of GNU/Linux is based on the fact that – like all free software – it is a commons that everybody can use, improve and share. The freedoms that make free software a commons were first defined by Richard Stallman in the 1980s. He designed the GNU General Public License (GPL) as an exemplary license to legally protect these freedoms.
  • Open hardware projects design physical products by freely sharing blueprints, design documents, and bills of materials.
  • No production is possible without means of production. The RepRap 3D printer has received a lot of attention because it can “print” many of its own parts. Other free 3D printers are the Fab@Home and the MakerBot, around which a large community has formed. Thingiverse is a platform for sharing 3D designs for such printers. Projects such as FurnLab and CubeSpawn design CNC (computer-controlled) machines for processing wood and metals; their aim is to facilitate “personal fabrication.
  • You cannot create things from designs and blueprints alone – physical resources and means of production are needed as well. Technological advancements have made various production processes less expensive and more accessible.
  • It makes more sense for productive infrastructures to be community-based, i.e., jointly organized by the inhabitants of a village or neighborhood. There are already examples of this.
  • Community-organized production places are emerging as well.
  • Fab Labs are modern open workshops whose goal is to produce “almost anything.” That’s not yet realistic, but they can already produce furniture, clothing, computer equipment (including circuit boards), and other useful things.
  • Their goal is the creation of an entirely commons-based production infrastructure, a network of free and open facilities that utilize only free software and open hardware.
  • But can peer production really get that far in the physical world? Won’t it be stopped by the fact that natural resources and the Earth’s carrying capacity are limited?
  • Digital, Internet-based peer production has produced astonishing amounts of software and contents – a digital plenty that benefits us all. In the physical world, a similar plenty for everyone must seem impossible if one equates plenty with lavishness and wastefulness. But plenty also has another meaning: “getting what I need, when I need it.
  • Commons-based peer production brings such a needs-driven conception of plenty for everyone into reach.
  • Physical production is impossible without natural resources. Therefore, peer production won’t be able to realize its full potential unless access to resources is managed according to its principles. Digital peer production treats knowledge and software as a commons. Likewise, physical peer production needs to manage resources and means of production as commons, utilizing them in a fair and sustainable way and preserving or improving their current state.
  • The challenge is huge
  • For the future of commons-based peer production it will be very important to bring together the perspectives and experiences of commoners from all areas – whether “digital,” “ecological,” or “traditional.”
Jukka Peltokoski

Public Services & Democracy | Unleashing the creativity of labour - 1 views

www.tni.org/...unleashing-creativity-labour

stuttgart commons kaupunki kunnallispolitiikka coops cooperative social commons commons.fi

shared by Jukka Peltokoski on 04 Oct 12 - No Cached
  • Something interesting is going on in the city of Stuttgart, one of the regional success stories of the German system of Mitbestimmung, or ‘co-determination’, where workers have a role in the management of companies. The dominant trend in Germany is of co‐determination becoming ‘crisis corporatism’, in which the unions concede low wages and increases in hours, ostensibly to save jobs. But in Germany’s southern manufacturing centre, in contrast, trade unionists are holding out for workers having real control over the conditions and hours of work – and over the purpose of their labour too.
  • In Stuttgart’s public services, the union Verdi has combined a strong fight over wages and conditions with an effective and popular campaign to improve and defend public services. In response, the city government – a coalition of the SPD, Green, Die Linke and local party Stuttgart Ökologisch Sozial – is re‐municipalising several services that the previous CDU city government sold off.
  • Meanwhile, among the 20,000 workers at the Daimler Mercedes factories, a radical grouping in the IG Metall union is also looking beyond bargaining over the price of labour, instead holding out for shorter working hours and an alternative view of the future of the car industry. ‘We have a huge amount of intelligence in this factory,’ says works council member Tom Adler, also an active member of Stuttgart Ökologisch Sozial. ‘It’s not beyond the capacity of our designers and engineers to think beyond the motor car.’
  • ...22 more annotations...
  • The reaction of Stuttgart workers to the destruction of public services and the perversion of co-determination indicates that austerity measures are coming slap-bang up against the legacy of two periods of democratic and egalitarian reform. The first is post-war reconstruction, including the welfare state. The second is the system of co-determination, which was strengthened in response to rebellions in the 60s and 70s. However, the resistance now, in Stuttgart as elsewhere in Europe, is not simply over the erosion of the institutions created in these periods of reform – after all, that erosion has been taking place for at least a decade. It is a profound and uncertain clash of cultures, expectations and increasingly activities, shaped by these periods of reform and rebellion, across generations. People’s expectations, or at least sense of legitimate claims, are for cultural equality as well as moves toward economic equality, and for meaningful and dignified work to match the decades of expansion of higher education.
  • There are also the spreading networks of autonomous hackers and geeks creating open, non-proprietorial, software and therefore effectively creating a key part of the infrastructure of today’s society as a digital commons
  • They all involve forms of labour which cannot be understood in the same terms as the conventional wage contract
  • nd the list also includes trade unionists who are taking on the role of organising for the common good in defence, or for the improvement of public services, or to push their company towards climate jobs.
  • All kinds of co-ops, cultural and social centres have emerged or been strengthened by these combinations of refusal and creation.
  • What this variety of activity has in common is that it is based on collaborative forms of creativity
  • and more recently ‘The coming of the commons’
  • can the public sector be transformed in a democratic, open and egalitarian direction against the forces of marketisation? If so, it can be a major economic player, especially in urban centres, with considerable bargaining power as contractor, as employer, and as trend-setter and creator of new communicative infrastructure.
  • The spread of information, knowledge and communication technologies not only enables theoretical expertise and practical knowledge to be shared on a previously unimaginable scale, but also creates tools for co-operation and self-managed co‐ordination of the most complex, multi-actor, transnational processes.
  • All these developments also illustrate the significance of democracy – transparency, participatory decision- making, the recognition of and means of sharing plural sources of knowledge – as a source of productivity, a base for a new economics.
  • What would it mean to think about industrial policies not so much in terms of the goal of nudging the private sector to invest, but more in terms of how to release, develop and extend the creativity of labour in its broadest sense?
  • How to expand and strengthen ‘productive democracy’? How to enhance the capacities of those whose ‘only’ means of production is their creative potential – and the social co-operation through which they can develop and realise this potential?
  • First, it’s come from the kinds of challenges that the trade union movement is facing in defending jobs in manufacturing as well as public services.
  • The second sphere for the rethinking of labour has been through the renewal of the co-operative movement. And a third development is the powerful and ambiguous trend opened up by the new technology towards new kinds of collaboration is the peer to peer, distributed productions and the digital commons, as referred to earlier. This ‘sphere’ is not separate: it could expand both the transformative power of workers already rethinking labour in conventional employment, and the scale and reach of co-operatives.
  • One increasingly significant context of convergence is over ‘climate jobs’. We’ve noted already the growth of co‐operatives creating and distributing renewable energy. The ravages of climate change are leading some trade unionists to demand that workers, whether currently unemployed or employed in high-carbon industries, be allowed to deploy their know-how to manufacture wind turbines, solar water heaters and other parts of the infrastructure of a low-carbon economy.
  • Another potential focal point for the mutual reinforcement of different forms of productive democracy is cities.
  • They illustrate ways in which labour could be self-organised, on the basis of social values underlying its purpose, use or context.
  • The implication of my argument here is that policymakers now need to work on how to support the economic creativity of millions of people, whether in existing workplaces or working precariously outside the formal labour market. At present these capacities are being wasted.
  • They need specific forms of support, some of it from the state, and some of it from organisations that share or could be persuaded to share their goals. These could include the trade unions, the co-operative movement, some parts of the church, foundations, and the growing experiments in crowdfunding, democratically controlled loan funds and so on.
  • As far as existing workplaces are concerned, we need states to not only restore and extend rights that protect trade unions in their struggles over wages and conditions, but also to give workers rights to control the purpose of their labour: for example, a legal prohibition on closures or redundancies without alternatives being publicly explored, and in the case of large companies, public inquiries at which alternatives would be presented. Labour is a commons – it should not be wasted. We need a new kind of ‘industrial strategy’ – one designed to support the creation of value that is not only monetary and requires autonomy from the pressures of the labour market. These should include a basic ‘citizen’s income’ (see page 34). Shorter working hours would be another measure that would serve a similar end.
  • We also need a regional policy that gives real support to cities as hubs of economic development, through direct public employment, and through support for co-ops involving regional banks. These could learn from the operations of the Mondragon bank and become a source of support and co‐ordination to networks of co-ops and other collaborative means of nurturing and realising the creativity of labour, rather than operating as banks of the traditional kind.
  • These are mere illustrations of industrial policies which recognise the capacities of generations shaped by expectations of cultural as well as political and economic equality. To realise these capacities as a resource for a new model of economic development requires rebuilding the distributional gains of the welfare state – but it also requires going further than that. We need to create not simply full employment, but the conditions by which people can creatively collaborate to meet the needs of a changing society and a precarious planet.
Jukka Peltokoski

Towards a Legal Framework for the Commons by Tommaso Fattori | via Michel Bauwens | Soc... - 0 views

snuproject.wordpress.com/...aso-fattori-via-michel-bauwens

commons p2p commons-talous commons.fi

shared by Jukka Peltokoski on 21 Aug 12 - No Cached
  • It is commonly acknowledged that there is a legislative gap concerning the protection and recognition of the sphere of Commons (1). The consequence of these inadequate legal guarantees is the extreme vulnerability of Commons, which remain without protection from processes of “enclosure”, due both to the market and to public policies in favour of privatization, in their various forms. (2)
  • A first preliminary step is the drafting of a catalogue of Commons (3), both at the national and European level, albeit in the knowledge that it must remain a potentially open and updatable catalogue
  • A catalogue which forms the basis for a Charter
  • ...10 more annotations...
  • the state and institutions must take an active role in supporting commoning and to support the creation of new Commons.
  • But the sphere of Commons is broader still, sometimes even tied to specific projects, as normally occurs in the case of digital or non-material Commons.
  • Commons must be defended by the legal system and safeguarded through particularly stringent protective norms which can ensure the collective enjoyment and use of them, also for the future. Commons also need a specific form of self-governing by the commoners themselves, which must also be strenuously defended
  • This active role must translate into forms of public-common partnership, where the institutions enable and empower the collective/social peer-creation of common value.
  • Governments could also provide seed funding
  • , incentives and grants for Commons and commoning, just as it currently provides research and development support and assistance to businesses and corporations (6).
  • The legal recognition of the sphere of Commons must lead to a delegation of authority and power by the state to commons-based institutions.
  • Current debates (and experiments) focus on Trusts, Foundations, for-benefit institutions etc.
  • Such trusts can be located either inside the boundaries of one state or be trans-border, according to the size and range of the resource and/or of its relative community of interest.
  • Just as it is true that commoning normally produces use value which cannot be accounted for in monetary terms (values which are part of the range of positive social or environmental externalities) one should construct a special legal form which could recognise and protect a similar type of enterprise or “project” (a common social enterprise) and protect a similar form of production of use value of collective use, which will help build another type of economy.
Jukka Peltokoski

Osuustoiminnalla voidaan luoda yhteistä vaurautta tulevaisuudessa | Taloussan... - 0 views

www.taloussanomat.fi/...12

osuuskunta-keissi osuuskuntaopas commons.fi

shared by Jukka Peltokoski on 02 Aug 12 - No Cached
  • Jukka Peltokoski on 02 Aug 12
     
    Tapani Köpän mukaan Suomessa osuustoiminnallinen ajattelu on painunut marginaaleihin. Pertti Linkola kirjoitti viime viikon sunnuntaina Helsingin Sanomien mielipidepalstalla. Pertti Linkolan mukaan Suomessa voitaisiin ottaa mallia Tanskasta, jossa tuulivoimaa on rakennettu osuustoimintaperiaatteella. Energiatuotannon lisäksi laajaa hyvinvointia tuottavaa osuuskuntatoimintaa voitaisiin nähdä hyvinvointisektorilla. Tampereen seudun osuustoimintakeskuksen toiminnanjohtaja Immonen näkee, että osuuskunnat toimisivat julkisia palveluita täydentävänä toimijoina. Hänen mielestään suomalaisen hyvinvointivaltion palvelutuotanto ei jatkossa taivu niin monimuotoiseen tarjontaan kuin olisi kysyntää. Kauhukuva on, että hoivapalvelun tuottaminen on globaalin pääomasijoittajan käsissä. Siellä ei tiedetä, minkälaisia palveluita paikallisesti tarvitaan. Palvelujen tuottaminen on bisnestä, jossa pyritään voiton maksimointiin. Silloin palvelun laatu ja taso eivät ole sitä, mitä ne voisivat olla, Niina Immonen sanoo. Osuuskunta on myös oiva muoto yhteiskunnalliseen yrittämiseen, joka tähtää yhteiskunnallisten ja ympäristöongelmien ratkaisemiseen liiketoiminnan keinoin.
Tero Toivanen

New Left Review - Michel Aglietta: The European Vortex - 0 views

www.newleftreview.org/...l-aglietta-the-european-vortex

commons.fi eurokriisi

shared by Tero Toivanen on 31 Jul 12 - No Cached
  • Tero Toivanen on 31 Jul 12
     
    michel aglietta Why has the Eurozone emerged as the new epicentre of the global financial crisis, when its origins-the famous subprime mortgages-were American? [1] And why, within Europe, has Greece proved to be the weak link?
Tero Toivanen

In this world, but not of this world - Gilles Dauvé | libcom.org - 0 views

libcom.org/...ld-not-world-gilles-dauv%C3%A9

commons.fi

shared by Tero Toivanen on 31 Jul 12 - No Cached
  • An ecologically-reformed capitalism is impossible. Let us have no illusion about de-growth, non-growth or un-growth. Capitalism is escalation: it does not des-escalade. Self-control is not a capitalist habit or virtue.
  • Unfortunately, history knows no such insurmountable limit. Civilizations in fact change for social reasons. Capitalism can only be stopped by the proletarians' will and ability to transform it into something utterly different.
Jukka Peltokoski

OM:n Jauhiainen: Uusi osuuskuntalaki tulee käsittelyyn syksyllä | Taloussanomat - 0 views

www.taloussanomat.fi/...12

osuuskunta osuuskuntakirja commons.fi yhteisötalous jauhiainen opm osakeyhtiö

shared by Jukka Peltokoski on 02 Aug 12 - No Cached
  • Laki tulee eduskunnan käsiteltäväksi syksyllä, ja sen tarkoituksena on helpottaa osuuskuntatoimintaa.
  • Lainsäädäntöneuvos Jyrki Jauhiainen oikeusministeriöstä kertoo, että lakiuudistuksen takana on yksinkertaistaa osuuskuntalakia ja helpottaa osuuskuntamuotista yritystoimintaa. Nykyinen osuuskuntalaki on vuodelta 2001, ja sen pohjana on käytetty vuoden 1954 osuuskuntalakia ja vuoden 1978 osakeyhtiölakia. Nyt osakeyhtiölaki on uudistunut, ja osuuskuntalaki halutaan muuttaa vastaamaan soveltuvin osin osakeyhtiölakia.
  • Kun lait yhtenäistetään, esimerkiksi osakeyhtiölainsäädännön tunteva kirjanpitäjä, tilintarkastaja tai asianajaja voi neuvoa osuuskuntaa aiempaa helpommin.
  • ...3 more annotations...
  • – Ylipäätään osuuskuntien yrityskohtaisille tarpeille ja perustajien, jäsenten ja rahoittajien omalle harkinnalle on tarkoitus antaa enemmän arvoa uudessa laissa, Jauhiainen sanoo. – Esimerkiksi hoivapuolella ja it-alalla hyvänä parannusehdotuksena on pidetty suurimman sallitun erisuuruisen äänivallan käytön laajentamista.
  • Jos lakiesitys menee läpi, tulevaisuudessa osuuskunnan voi perustaa myös yksittäinen henkilö.
  • Lakiesitykseen voi tutustua oikeusministeriön internet-sivuilla.
1 - 13 of 13
Showing 20▼ items per page