Celebrating the 30th Anniversary of Ostrom’s Governing the Commons: Traditions and Trends in the Study of the Commons, Revisited

Laerhoven, Frank van; Schoon, Michael; Villamayor-Tomás, Sergio

doi:10.5334/ijc.1030

Cited by 34 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 16 publications

(16 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To achieve these objectives, we apply a transdisciplinary research process that integrates diverse types of knowledge, both from practical actors (German and Philippine seed initiatives, companies and NGOs), and the scientific community. Determining Seed Commons criteria in a transdisciplinary approach helps to bridge the gap between practitioners and scholarly communities, which has been identified as an ongoing challenge in commons research (van Laerhoven, Schoon, and Villamayor-Tomas 2020), and specifically helps to incorporate the meanings, experiential knowledge, and normative perspectives of Commoners (see Vivero-Pol et al 2018). This methodology is essential when aiming to link resource and practice-oriented approaches of Commons (ibid.).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diverse Seeds – Shared Practices: Conceptualizing Seed Commons

Sievers-Glotzbach

Tschersich

Gmeiner

et al. 2020

International Journal of the Commons

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Commons approaches in the seed sector are multi-faceted: They span from traditional seed systems, i.e. seed sharing networks, to recent anti-enclosure movements that resist intellectual property rights on varieties, like organic breeding initiatives. This paper derives a conceptualization of 'Seed Commons' at the local and regional level, based on a comprehensive transdisciplinary research process that integrates diverse types of knowledge, both from practitioners (German and Philippine seed initiatives, companies and NGOs), and the scientific community. As a result, we identify four core criteria that characterize diverse Seed Commons arrangements at local and regional scales: (1) collective responsibility, (2) protection from private enclosure, (3) collective, polycentric management, and (4) sharing of formal and practical knowledge. Discussing these Seed Commons criteria in the context of different Commons approaches, we find that Seed Commons transcend the distinction between traditional (natural resource) Commons and New Commons approaches, by integrating biophysical, informational and cultural elements in their collective governance. Reaching beyond resource characteristics, the Seed Commons criteria reflect practices of Commoning, which aim to fulfill social functions such as farmer empowerment and food sovereignty.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diverse Seeds – Shared Practices: Conceptualizing Seed Commons

Sievers-Glotzbach

Tschersich

Gmeiner

et al. 2020

International Journal of the Commons

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A lecture took place, and at a later moment, participants were invited to attend the workshop together with local schools 2017: The idea of holding workshops with the community arose, before the implementation of a temporary project, with the purpose of informing the population about said intervention and collecting suggestions. However, the project went ahead without clear communication with the local population (Guido et al, 2017;URB-I, 2019) Regarding the initiatives approval rate (percentage) by general users, largely, the inhabitants agreed with the proposal for withdrawing a circulation range of cars, with a view to broadening sidewalks, with interventions to create more bike lanes, and reduce local speed limits. This gives us an indication of a significant demand for more comfortable, more pleasing, and safer spaces for walking and cycling, in accordance to the preferences related to reduce commons dilemmas and externalities.…”

Section: Modes Of Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Urban Commons in Active Mobility Experiences

Cruz

Paulino

2020

International Journal of the Commons

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our study focuses on the challenges facing sustainable urban mobility in the megacity of Sao Paulo. We aim to explore the panorama of active mobility initiatives, proposing to analyze the relationship between urban commons and innovation in public services. We selected the Reduced Speed Zone and Complete Street initiatives, which aim to improve road safety conditions (public services focused on common infrastructure), active mobility and access to public transport, and may also potentially help to reduce noise levels, improve air quality (social dilemmas/ common issues/negative externalities) and reduce greenhouse gas emissions (global commons). Based on an analytical model for interpreting innovation in services, considering competences and techniques originating from the provider (municipal government) and users (through civil society organizations), our findings identified innovations at a local level within infrastructure treatment for pedestrians. These public services were introduced in a participatory process and a collective re-appropriation of urban space. The projects contribute to the development of service provider competences, related to various interactions with civil society, resulting in a systemic view with regard to the uses, local dynamics and behavioral aspects of the users themselves. Service provider techniques may be both temporary and permanent intervention methodologies, besides methodologies for project impact evaluations. These techniques are associated with tactical urbanism as a technique for temporary urban interventions. User techniques were identified for application of the propensity score-matching method, which aims to evaluate the impacts of an instance of intervention through the comparison of groups, as well as through technical inspections and local interviews. The relationship management generated relational and organizational competences for civil society organizations. However, despite the advances indicated by the analyzed experiences of active mobility-highlighting the role of civil society organizations-and by some progress made in the regulatory framework, innovative practices have been restricted to the treatment of infrastructure for pedestrians, a change of speed limit for vehicles, and horizontal signaling to mark the perimeter of these areas. Therefore, there is a large-scale potential for the continued introduction of innovations regarding the improvement and scale gains of public services for pedestrian mobility, promoting participatory restructuring as a form of (re)appropriation of urban public spaces by its own users, improving the current negative externalities and social costs of urban mobility.

show abstract

“…Partly building on this traditional work, commons scholarship has over the last decades developed into a large and diversified research field (Quintana and Campbell 2019;Van Laerhoven et al 2020). The trichotomy statemarket-common (or community) is now seen by many as artificial, and various authors have discussed contemporary hybrid forms of natural resource management (Lemos and Agrawal 2006;Driessen et al 2012;Villamayor-Tomas et al 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This paper addresses two specific lacunae in understanding commercialisation of common-pool resources. First, the currently emerging nuanced picture is lacking historical resonance since most commons scholars study present-day cases using a socio-economic lens (Van Laerhoven et al 2020). This paper will delve into the specific history of practices of commercialisation, examining how different actors and institutions responded to it in the past and what can be learned from this for present-day situations of common-pool resource commercialisation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dire Necessity or Mere Opportunity? Recurrent Peat Commercialisation from Raised Bog Commons in the Early Modern Low Countries

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Commercialisation of resources taken from commons is considered problematic in several ways in traditional commons scholarship. In particular common-pool resource (CPR) theory argues that institutions for collective action such as commons are largely autonomous, experiencing little influence from either the market or the state, and focusing only on the needs of entitled (local) communities. Consequently, commercialisation and sustainable collective use of common-pool resources are largely considered incompatible. Moreover, the dominant focus of CPR theory is on renewable resources rather than non-renewable resources such as peat. Although commons scholarship has broadened over the last decades and come to more nuanced views on the state-market-common trichotomy, our study adds historical depth and does pay attention to peat as a valuable non-renewable resource. We analyse historical sources on two cases of peat commercialisation from raised bog commons in the early modern Low Countries: the Bakelse gemeint in the Dutch Peel region, and the commune de Xhoffraix in the Belgian Hautes-Fagnes. In terms of volume, the share of commercialised peat in the total peat exploitation was limited; the significance of peat commercialisation lay in its permanence, recurrence, and/or regional outreach. Taxes and high debts placed communities in dire financial straits, which was one of the motives for peat commercialisation. In addition, state institutions could intervene in commons management if there was an (internal) conflict. Sources indicate that these institutions had a pragmatic attitude towards peat commercialisation, probably to foster social harmony and local prosperity in times of resource contestation and economic hardship. This study adds a novel intermediate category of peat exploitation to the traditional binary subdivision in domestic peat extraction from commons versus large-scale commercial exploitation of privatised bogs. We demonstrate that long-term use of common-pool resources could go together with a moderate degree of commercialisation. Rather than being fully autonomous, commons in the early modern Low Countries were -permanently or at times of internal conflict -clearly impacted by markets, notions of private user rights, and state institutions.

show abstract

Celebrating the 30th Anniversary of Ostrom’s Governing the Commons: Traditions and Trends in the Study of the Commons, Revisited

Abstract: In this editorial we assess 50 years' worth of peer-reviewed publications to establish traditions and trends in the study of the commons. Based on this assessment, we provide a sketch of how IJC and its editors can continue to contribute to the development of the field.

Cited by 34 publications

References 16 publications

Diverse Seeds – Shared Practices: Conceptualizing Seed Commons

Diverse Seeds – Shared Practices: Conceptualizing Seed Commons

Urban Commons in Active Mobility Experiences

Dire Necessity or Mere Opportunity? Recurrent Peat Commercialisation from Raised Bog Commons in the Early Modern Low Countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About