Sustainability, governance and partnerships of Decidim
Participatory process to define Decidim's management model and sustainability strategy
Currently, the Decidim Association is highly dependent on public funding. Specifically, it receives two subsidies from Barcelona City Council (100k) and the Generalitat de Catalunya (50k). This income allows it to support the Technical Office and pay for other minor expenses. In addition, there is a contract from Barcelona City Council through which Decidim's maintainers are hired.
However, depending so much on public funding and so few institutions is a risk. As we have already seen, we can lose that money for bureaucratic reasons - as happened to us with the 50k from Barcelona City Council last year - or because of changes in governments, which could lead to the withdrawal of institutional support. This is why it is imperative to work to diversify the Association's sources of funding, both qualitatively and quantitatively.
This debate seeks to discuss what strategies to follow in order to ensure the long-term sustainability of the project.
Questions for the debate
- How can the Association obtain resources from all the economic activity generated around Decidim?
- How can we expand the number and type of actors that can support the project, beyond Catalan institutions? In particular, would it be possible for public institutions, NGOs, etc. that are users of the Decidim SW to support the project?
- What kind of services can the Association offer?
- What other sustainability strategies should we explore?
*It is necessary to take into account those aspects that are already defined in the Statutes of the Association:
Article 4.3. Defines services as an activity of the Association.
Article 20. The management of public and private subsidies corresponds to the coordination committee.
How can I participate?
- By leaving your comments below. You can answer the questions or write your thoughts on the topic addressed in this debate.
- Upvote for the comments you agree with. Your votes will be taken into account when drafting the document.
Remember to express your opinion respectfully.
.jpg)
Report inappropriate content
Is this content inappropriate?
Close debate
What is the summary or conclusion of this debate?
Comment details
You are seeing a single comment
View all comments
Thank you very much for this insightful and engaging discussion. There isn't much to add after considering all of your contributions.
In order not to repeat what has already been said, I would like to highlight the hours of work and dedication that have gone into making this project a success to date. My thoughts go especially to those of us who were fortunate enough to be part of the previous Coordination Committee or to those who are part of the current team. Often, these hours go unpaid and unnoticed. Without all this hard work, I doubt we would be having this debate. However, I believe we face a challenge, an opportunity, and an obligation to reverse this trend and prioritize real sustainability. It is impossible to assume the responsibilities of a strong Technical Office (https://meta.decidim.org/processes/sustainability-governance/f/1795/debates/248) without adequate funding. I think we all agree on this point.
I also support the idea that the Association should engage in strategic projects with significant impact and potential return, as mentioned by @xabier and @carol . When the Association participates in specific projects, it should guarantee unbeatable quality in terms of technology, democracy, and communication, which can be duly recognized and accredited. In other words, the Association's involvement should serve as a guarantee of the highest quality for the projects it participates in.
Lastly, as @paarals pointed out, the value of the Association lies not only in the technological realm but also in its accumulated and localized knowledge regarding participatory and democratic innovation. This is where, in my opinion, the strength of this project truly lies.
Loading comments ...