In the face of this grotesque and, as it turns out, entirely unnecessary mismatch, inertia and short term considerations were in, while imaginative thinking and concern for longer term consequences were curiously out. Something was clearly out of whack, and we were all paying for it -- in terms of the environment, quality of life, social equity... and of the economy itself. (This last, it turns out, provides the first clue to what may be the answer, i.e., our challenge in good part was and is that of turning the economy around. The hitch was, however, that none of the usual economic indicators were providing accurate information as to what was really going on.)

Today, a full generation later, despite the ever-burgeoning collection of studies, reports, fact finding missions, meetings, consultations, statistical reforms, presidential commissions, laws, proclamations, institutional overhauls, and many others signs of apparent concern and desire to tackle the issues ... all of the same basic problems are still firmly in place, but only now greatly magnified for their negative potential. But, and this is where the hope lies, also in terms of their positive potential.

In the face of this unacceptable situation, The Commons is being organized as a citizen-led “knowledge and consensus building” activity that is setting out to harness the latest available technologies in an attempt to permit those of us around the world, who care about these matters, somehow to ‘put our heads together’ to see what we might eventually be able to do, collectively, about these great and growing challenges.

• The first is the uniting central theme which is the common concern of this forum: the need for better understanding and management of technology as it impacts on people in their daily lives.

• Second is the realization that for the most part until now, “we” -- that is, governments, political parties, public administrations, employers, labor unions, institutions, educators, parents, and individual citizens in virtually all parts of the world -- have not shown ourselves as being able to cope with the challenges of better anticipating the likely impacts of all these innovations -- much less of finding ways of controlling or reducing their negative impacts.

• The next is that this thing that we so glibly call “government” is going to be only as smart, generous and efficient as we, the individual responsible citizens of the world, make it. We have seen that our governments and administrations, as presently constituted, are unable to cope with many of these challenges. They need help, guidance and support (when they are wise). The goal of The Commons is, therefore, to help provide the broad backdrop of citizen-led knowledge, reflection and support that is so badly needed.

• Fourth is an understanding that, until something better comes along, the main mediating device between technology and society is this thing that we call "the economy". A major theme of The Commons will thus be the creative, even aggressive rethinking of this troublesome but powerful interface. In this respect our goal will not be just to protest or whine about what is going on, but to take on, debate and redefine mainstream economics, and thereby bring it into the mainstream of the concerns and the possibilities of our post-industrial society.

• Fifth is an awareness that, as the game is currently being played, there is little real willingness on the part of government and public administrations in most places to share with the general public, the informed and responsible citizenry, the full blown consideration of these issues, the trade-offs that need to be spotted and negotiated, the decisions themselves, or, for that matter, the implications of past failures and successes. The contribution of The Commons will thus be to work both to broaden the debate on those important social-technical issues and decisions which need greater insight, citizen input and understanding, as well as to subject to independent open analysis a certain number of benchmark decisions and actions of the past, so that we can learn from our mistakes.

• Next is the realization that while the basic underlying problems are not for the most part new -- the means at our disposal for doing something about them have evolved in a most extraordinary way in the last few years. The truth is, however, that we have not thus far taken much advantage of these considerable means from a policy perspective. Thus, we continue for the most part to deal with these society-threatening issues with more or less the same tired old tools that were being used fifty or more years ago.

• For better or worse, the thing that we so ungraciously call here the electronic environment, is perhaps the most important single mediator in the communications and transformation process that now needs to be engaged. It will be the challenge of putting these new means to work in the interest of society and future generations that will be the main business of The Commons in the years ahead.

• The eighth guiding point involves a statement of modesty -- an acceptance of the cruel fact that it takes time to make history. Thus, given the magnitude and sheer velocity of the problems, in combination with the heavily inertial nature of both we human beings and our institutions, it is altogether sure that we are not, within the next few years or decades, going to be able to solve most of these problems as they need to be solved. Does this mean that we simply give up? Not at all, it just means that we have to accept that the time horizon under which we must now engage to cooperate is going to be a somewhat unfamiliar one to most of us -- a matter of generations. This means, that in combination with the activism that is now required, we must give more attention than ever before to preparing future generations for the challenges that they are going to have to face. Which of course tells us a great deal about where we should be investing the bulk of our resources and efforts!

• The ninth and last point is another step of modesty. Here we are today, almost half way through the last decade of this century, setting out to develop the first rough outlines of a plan for "knowledge sharing and knowledge building", together with an operational procedure which, warts and all, is at least sufficient to achieve the basic communications objectives which are central to this undertaking. But we must acknowledge that this is obviously only the beginning, and that in very short order we can anticipate a number of major changes. This is, after all, both a collective enterprise and a heavily feedback-oriented process, and the structure that we are putting in place is intended to take advantage of the best and most useful of this feedback.