Klimaschutz+ offers a platform and tools for addressing climate change mitigation and adaption, poverty-alleviation and the need to develop a culture of non-violence at the same time.
logo
source
This panel describes how it is peer governed.
xxxxx
# Peer-Governance in the Commons
We've centralized the administration but decentralized the power especially over the use of money.
The statutes is, where Klimaschutz+ participants Declare Shared Purpose & Values. It has been developed by the founders.
Logo source
When asked about how they Keep Commons & Commerce Distinct, Peter Kolbe used an interesting example: The project climatefair2go. html 
. Its idea is simple, Respect Human Dimensions, take your time and enjoy your coffee".
Climatefair2Go is a nudge not to use one-way-cups for coffee for ecological reasons. It cooperates with many coffee-shops who provide background information to costumers as well as simple alternatives. If people decide for a one way cup, they pay 0,10 Euro extra.
The project's goal is not to sell, but to go bankrupt:
The Climate Fair2Go 10cents are added to the bill.
source
We want to go bankrupt with this, then we would have reached our goal. Actually, the sales figures are our control mecanism. We check each month if the sum becomes smaller. If it doesn't, we need to adjust the project. The ideal is, not to sell ANY one way cup anymore.
POST http://image-transporter.apps.allmende.io/image
The conversation about how they Set Semi-Permeable Boundaries has been as interesting as listening to their climatefair2go philosophy.
Take monastry walls. They clearly separate inside and oudside. But the portals are part of these walls. Always. They basically invite everybody to enter this 'other inside world with its different set of rules'. So, this 'boundary with portals' invites and protects. A boundary only becomes a problem, when portals aren't integral part of it. (Peter Kolbe)
Many decisions are being taken collectively. Many of them offline, as the best way to Assure Commoners' Consent in Decisionmaking when people cam't meet f2f. All those who contributed something to the foundation are entitled to take part in the decision-making process.
In practice, these decision-making processes are very diverse. Some very quick and easy going, because people Trust Situated Knowledge of the project's advocate. Others groups grapple with the situation.
Within the different project groups and teams (a core group has 5, a bigger group around 15 members) decisions should be taken based on the principle of consensus, preceeded by an open deliberation. Ift here is pressure, people use majority vote or the Systemic Consensus Principle, html .
Finance Commons Provisioning at Klimaschutz+.
source
Since its foundation, during 5 years, there has only been one decision that has not been taken in consensus. Somebody was insisting, that a project can only begin when enough money has been raised to fund a job for the project's management.
To Share Knowledge Often & Widely is what makes the platform alive. Klimaschutz+ provides a website, a regular newsletter html and any information partners need.
The project strives for open accounting, as they are advocates of radical transparency in economic terms, but they can hardly do so, when working with market-players and public funding. However, they Honor Transparency in a Sphere of Trust, html , that is - within the organization. Three steps have been taken:
- To be part of the self-obligating "Initiative Transparent Civil Society" - To care for transparent accounting - To respect the Social Reporting Standard
Given the fact, that Klimaschutz+ was not allowed to make "each accounting line" transparent, the mid term solution is to allow all project partners a 100% access and examination rights of the accounts.
The best way to describe the Klimaschutz+ way to Relationalize Property, Finance Commons Provisioning and Protect & Extend Value Sovereignty is to follow the flow of money within the institution. Each individual contribution or "investment into a sustainable future" - as they call it - goes to the Klimaschutz+, which has the legally binding task to "foster the common good" (thereof derives its legal status; Gemeinnützigkeit -> Förderung des Gemeinwohls.)
The insight is: all legal forms - also communal/ collective property - provide abundand loopholes. Who seeks for individual gain will manage to do so. The solution Klimaschutz+ came up with is to:
Hack the cooperative law in Germany. We make sure that no profit is being reaped individually or privatized at any moment.
This is how it works: Klimaschutz+ (entity nr 1) is not allowed to invest, but in a "small cooperative" (= kleine Genossenschaft, entity nr 2. Small means: there is a maximum of 20 members. At least 50% of them need to be part of the foundations' council (Stiftungsbeirat), which is composed of qualified people of different areas.
All "small cooperative" members declared (cf. Declare Shared Purpose & Values, that their...
economic goal is a high 'return' in socio-economic terms and that they do without/abstain from getting paid a dividend in the long run. (Peter Kolbe)
This is the way Klimaschutz+ makes sure that the funds collected will be secured for collective purposes as laid town in the statutes. Ausschüttung in the long run) Damit ist dauerhaft sichergestellt, dass die Mittel in der kollektiven Nutzung bleiben.
As for the five renewable power stations: they are legally owned by the "registered cooperative", (eingetragene Genossenschaft), but financed with interest free credits or donations from Grameen Social Businees Investment.
# See also: Klimaschutz+, Solidarstrom Bremen