My personal belief is, like for the current version of the economy and production, millions of little experiments must happen in various ways that aren’t under one umbrella and don’t follow one pre-defined path.
Yet, collaboration, and the creation of “ecosystems” as loose entities that share a common, if loosely defined, direction, is useful. The Silicon Valley, the Bangalore startup ecosystem, and many other examples come to mind. While this happens, we must be careful to not codify and make it a rigid, brittle thing, but support and cheer on a multitude of ideas and methods which might be short term wins, or even missteps. The great move forward will emerge, not appear as a function or outcome of precise design.
Social/common goods ALSO require a “top-down” “socialist” approach. Having worked in the education sector, countries/communities that have done schooling (a proxy of education) well are the ones where the State/local-body is the primary promoter and manager of the service. Market-based solutions tend to favor private/individual benefits at the cost of social/common benefits.
The same applies to climate change solutions/services. Unless there is a strong societal mandate (provided and regulated by…?), market-based solutions will corrupt very quickly.
So, we need both… and I agree the move forward will emerge, but it needs a mandated societal canvas.
@sameershisodia is there a page where detailed case studies of all experiments have been documented by you or your team? What I mean for example is this - years back there were close to 81 representatives from alternative education at a conference i attended: their hypothesis and learnings were in their head and there was tons of overlap and yet after 3 to 4 days of discussion there was no common ground for future discussions and the knowledge in their heads remained there. Thank you