Clearly defined boundaries
This recognizes the need to immediately define the boundaries of the commons as well as those authorized to use the commons.
In stark contrast to the ethos of decentralization, this principle the important of closing the first boundaries of the system from “outsiders”, who seek to benefit from the commons without being even slightly aligned with the systems goal/ideals or just exploit the commons resource.
Congruence between appropriation and provision rules and local conditions
There is a need to adopt rules associated with the management of the commons.
For decentralized system and digital communities “local” reference can be adapted from “shared geographic” to “shared purpose”.
In TEC it is implemented via various voting methods and smart contract parameters.
Collective choice arrangements
This principle says the individuals who are affected by the operation of the rules of the system should be able to modify the rules.
Systems using this principle are better suited to their local settings and circumstances.
Monitoring
This recognises the need for monitoring to audit community behaviour and conditions.
The incentives or dis-incentive of reputation and shared norms are not sufficient to keep the community aligned with the systems rules and have cooperative behaviour over long periods of time.
Just the knowledge of the community behaviour being monitored turn out to be critical to the sustainability of the system. (Corollary to the quantum phenomena where the act of observation changes the behaviour of the entity observed.)
The monitoring actives should be low-cost and performed in a transparent manner.
Graduated Sanctions
Members and officials can decide to sanction other members that violate the rules. The principle recognizes that members may not be inclined to sanction other members. A system of “quasi-voluntary” compliance has proven to be successful.
Conflict resolution mechanisms
There should be a low cost arenas for dispute resolution among members and officials.
Recognizes that rules are never unambiguous. It’s not the “interpretation” of the rules its the “intent” of the rules that matter.
Minimal recognition of rights to organize
It recognises the need for members to create their own sub-groups without formal structures. Without being influenced by external authorities or orgs.
Nested enterprises
Multiple layers with their own variation of rules and organisation.