Looking Forward. By Michael Albert and Robin Hahnel

 Go to Table of Contents

 

  6. Participatory Allocation

 

 

 

 

 

 

"No central agency composes the final plan. No market competition generates the final plan. A decentralized, social, iterative, communication process allows all actors to democratically formulate the final plan."

 

 

 

 

Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.

 

-Charles Dickens

 

 

The basic actors in participatory planning are workers' and consumers' councils that allow ordinary citizens to make decisions about production in their workplaces and about their personal and neighborhood consumption. But besides neighborhood consumers' councils, we also have ward, city, county, state, and regional councils responsible for summing the proposals of lower levels and adding collective requests. And beside workplace councils, we have regional and industry council federations.

 

In addition, Consumption Facilitation Boards (CFBs) operate at different consumption levels to assess issues such as collective consumption proposals, and Production Facilitation Boards (PFBs) operate at different levels to consider issues such as production externalities and economies of scale. Employment Facilitation Boards (EFBs) assist workers in changing their places of employment and Household Facilitation Boards (HFBs) help citizens find membership in communities and neighborhoods.

 

Additionally, at every level we find Updating Facilitation Boards (UFBs) responsible for facilitating the least disruptive methods of updating planning requests to take account of unforeseen circumstances. And finally, to facilitate convergence of the planning process we also have Iteration Facilitation Boards lFBs

 

To participate, each consumption actor proposes a plan for the upcoming period. Individuals request private goods for the year. Neighborhood or other collective consumption units sum personal requests and develop collective consumption requests as well.

 

Similarly, each production actor proposes a plan for the upcoming period. Whether the actor is an individual, work group, workplace, or industry the proposal lists the inputs needed to complete the proposed activities and the outputs that will result.

 

Of course, the collection of first proposals for consumption and production will not be equal, or in economist's jargon, first proposals will not comprise a feasible plan. The initial demand for most goods will exceed proposed supply.

 

In any event, after receiving information regarding the proposals of all other actors and other actors' reactions to one's own initial proposal, each actor makes a new proposal. In time, as actors "bargain" with one another through successive "iterations" (or rounds of bargaining), the process converges to an implementable plan. No central agency composes the final plan. No market competition generates the final plan. A decentralized, social, iterative, communication process allows all actors to democratically formulate the final plan.

 

But how does anybody know what to propose? Why won't bargaining continue forever. Moreover, even if the planning process converges to a feasible conclusion, what will guarantee that it will be efficient and equitable, and what will ensure that people can save or borrow as they choose? And what if desires or circumstances alter during the year? Will we be bound to do whatever we said on January 1 even when July rolls around and we are unexpectedly ill? Or what if workers encounter unexpected problems? How can anyone offer a responsible accounting of what he or she will consume or produce for a whole year?

 

For the moment, let's assume the system has been in operation for many years and ask what a planning process for a new year would be like under such conditions. This will let us answer the above questions, and though it sidesteps important difficulties of transition from current procedures and habits, we can worry about transition after we're convinced there is something worth "transitioning" to.