Invitation to Coordination Sessions
Free Association Coalition
Dear Colleague,
We are introducing the Free Association Coalition framework at COP30 and inviting those interested to schedule briefings to explore Free-Association, a Digital Public Good (DPG) for priority-aligned resource and capacity allocation.
What We're Building
The Coalition consists of entities piloting DPGs to support voluntary coordination, and capacity-building. An international working group is developing protocols that enable real-time coordination while preserving full sovereignty over data, decisions, and priorities.
Why We're Reaching Out
This DPG is designed to address common coordination challenges in climate action:
Climate finance – transparent tracking of commitments, flows, and gaps
Technology transfer – matchmaking capacity providers with recipients
Capacity-building – coordination across development partners and beneficiaries
Multi-stakeholder initiatives – infrastructure for coalition-building
Data interoperability – designed to work alongside existing systems and frameworks
The framework aims to allow entities to coordinate resources and commitments while maintaining full autonomy over their participation, data, and decision-making.
What Participation Involves
Participation is entirely voluntary and exploratory. You may:
Observe technical demonstrations of the operational system
Engage in discussions about applications to your priorities
Design optional pilot projects suited to existing programs
Provide input on technical design and the draft participation framework
What We're Asking
No commitment is required. We invite you to:
Review this packet to understand the proposed framework
Consider whether this might address coordination challenges you face
Join a session if you're interested in seeing demonstrations or discussing applications
At COP30 Sessions (Belém, 10–21 November 2025)
In-Person:
Blue Zone: Daily 10:00–18:00
Green & Free Zone: Daily 18:00–24:00
Virtual: Available via video conference
Format: Drop-in discussions, scheduled briefings, or bilateral consultations
Next Steps
If you're interested in exploring further:
Quick briefing: Schedule 30 minutes at calendly.com/free-association/30min
Questions/Contact: Email [email protected]
Drop-in: Visit us at COP30 sessions (locations above)
More information: openassociation.org and docs.openassociation.org
We're happy to arrange a preliminary call to answer questions or to discuss specific applications to your priorities.
The framework is being developed collaboratively — your input will shape its design.
Note: This coalition is being established through informal coordination sessions at COP30. It does not represent any government, UN body, or existing institution. Participation is open to all interested parties on a voluntary basis. This Digital Public Goods is being offered for free, open-source and optionally white-label. Implementation support can be provided by coalition-members at their own discretion.
Free Association Coalition
Draft Participation Framework for Review b1 v0.43 [Nov 18, 15:41]
Drafted by: Initial working group convened at COP30 2025 coordination sessions
This coalition consists of entities experimenting with piloting new Digital Public Goods (DPGs) for voluntary coordination. The coalition proposes a re-engineering of how collective action and resource allocation can be coordinated.
The key insight is separating:
Publishing (what is, what I have/need)
Derivation (what we can infer collectively)
Recognition (who/what contributes to my goals)
Allocation (how we divide our capacities)
Implications & Significance:
Sovereignty and Interoperability: Participants retain full control over their own data, recognitions, and priorities. They choose whose data to subscribe to. The system enables collaboration without requiring surrender of autonomy.
Automation of Cooperation: The vision is to have a significant portion of capacity/resource allocation (funding, technical support) be automatically derived based on the state of network data, drastically reducing transaction costs and delays.
Participants may publish data: recognitions, capacities, needs, environmental data, qualities, or any other data. Examples include contribution percentages, resources/capacities, needs, organizational membership, environmental variables, sources for deriving, filters and their applications.
Participants may derive data from local and network-data: For example, distributions, goals, estimates, needs, capacities, organizational membership, sources for deriving, filters and their applications, or any other data. Key distribution derivations include Recognition (always a portion of 100%), Mutual Recognition (reciprocal minimum), and Organizational Recognition (derived from mutual-recognition among members).
Participants can publish/propose/offer/allocate with the help of protocols of their choosing.
Why this works: Core Derivations
Recognition: Acknowledgement of contributions to the realization of one's priorities/values.
Total Recognition (100%): Each participant has a fixed "budget" of total-recognition to divide and attribute. This forces prioritization and trade-offs. Recognition is non-transferable and dynamically adjustable. Each participant can allocate recognition to entities who contribute to achieving their goals.
Mutual Recognition (MR): Calculated as the lower of the recognition percentages that two entities assign to each other. This creates perfect reciprocity in proportion. A one-sided relationship (where A recognizes B highly (ex: 50%), but B recognizes A little (ex: 1%) is valued at the lower amount (ex: 1%), discouraging free-riding and encouraging mutual engagement and support.
When we recognize each other, we have mutual-recognition of mutual-value and can choose to allocate our capacities to each-other in precise proportion to how (collectively-)mutually-fulfilling we are to each other.
The system naturally promotes accurate recognition through mathematical necessity:
Entities define their goals/priorities subjectively, but achieving them depends on objective access to capacities and partnerships.
∝
is proportional to
↑
increase in
↓
decreases in
∴
therefore
FOR ANY PARTICIPANT:
GIVEN:
Total Recognition = 100%
Capacities distributed ∝ (Mutual-)Recognition
Goals require access to specific capacities/partnerships
THEN:
↑ Recognition allocated to non-beneficial partners
∴ ∝ ↓ Recognition available for beneficial partners [total-recognition budget constraint]
∴ ↓ Mutual-Recognition with beneficial partners
∴ ↓ Access to needed capacities [proportional allocation]
∴ ↓ Goal Achievement
∴ RESULT: Natural incentive to correct recognition allocation
Key Implication: The system creates natural incentives for accurate recognition. Inflating or misattributing recognition only decreases connection to beneficial partners and capacities. Entities that maintain accurate recognition patterns receive better-aligned capacities and achieve better outcomes.
Example Scenario: Emergency Response Coordination
Cyclone hits Mozambique. Multiple actors need to coordinate rapid response.
What They Publish
Mozambique:
Needs:
Emergency shelter: 10,000 units
Medical supplies: 500,000 vaccine doses
Water purification: 50 systems
Logistics coordination: Immediate
Recognition (splits 100%):
WHO → 20%
Doctors Without Borders → 30%
Red Cross → 15%
others → 35%
WHO:
Capacities:
Medical supplies
Vaccination teams
Recognition (splits 100%):
Mozambique → 12%
Doctors Without Borders → 15%
others → 73%
Doctors Without Borders:
Capacities:
Mobile medical units
emergency response teams
Recognition (splits 100%):
Mozambique → 30%
WHO → 15%
others → 55%
Red Cross:
Capacities:
Emergency shelter logistics
Recognition (splits 100%):
Mozambique → 8%
others → 92%
What Protocols Derive
Mutual Recognition (MR = minimum of paired recognitions):
Mozambique attributes WHO 20% WHO attributes Mozambique 12% → MR = 12%
Mozambique attributes Doctors Without Borders 30% Doctors Without Borders attributes Mozambique 30% → MR = 30%
Mozambique attributes Red Cross 15% Red Cross attributes Mozambique 8% → MR = 8%
WHO attributes Doctors Without Borders 15% Doctors Without Borders attributes WHO 15% → MR = 15%
Total-MR (including with others not listed):
WHO 45%, Mozambique 35%, Doctors Without Borders 65%, Red Cross 55%
Example Derived Allocations (% of each entity's total capacity: (x's-mutual-with-entity / x's-total-mr)):
WHO allocates (12 / 45) ≈ 26% of medical supplies toward Mozambique
Doctors Without Borders (30 / 55) ≈ 54% allocates of mobile units toward Mozambique
Red Cross allocates (8 / 55) ≈ 14% of shelter toward Mozambique
What Happens Next
WHO and Doctors Without Borders see their 12% MR → natural coordination partners for joint operations
All actors see real-time gap updates as resources arrive
Logistics coordinated based on who's deploying what when
Response is coordinated without meetings
Gaps are visible in real-time as they're filled
Duplication is avoided through transparency
Recognition adjusts based on actual delivery
For more information:
Last updated