New Commons

Discussion

Charlotte Hess:

What is new in the 'new commons'?

"The map also tells us that the “new” in new commons does not necessarily mean newly evolved or created through new technologies. They may be resources that, particularly because of some kind of encroachment or threat of enclosure, have been newly conceptualized as a commons. This is the case with cultural and neighborhood commons.

New commons, in contrast to traditional common-pool resources or common property regimes such as forests, fisheries, irrigation systems, and grazing lands, are often uncharted territories. Successful traditional commons have customary (formal or informal) rules regulating the use and management of the resource. In some cases, local and national governments recognize a local commons rules and laws; in others, it is a constant struggle to be recognized.

Traditional commons have a history. The history is of human-resource interaction. The resource has an ecological history. The user community has a history of demographic change or stability. And the interaction has a history of natural and human events that include adaptation of rules pertaining to the use of that resource.

“New” has meaning in two distinct ways:

(1) It is in contrast to traditional (established) commons. Ostrom’s design principles (1990) and the characteristics of long-enduring traditional commons do not necessarily apply to new commons. Some are newly created through new technologies. Such is the case with digital commons.

(2)“New” is an important adjective, a signal of the recent emergence of the awareness of the commons. “New” evokes a sense of awakening, of reclaiming lost or threatened crucial resources. This is the “new” in many neighborhood commons. However, whether “commons” is just a current buzzword or a lasting social phenomenon will only be known with the passage of time.

The recent identification of all types of resources as commons belies the important need to see solutions beyond the government-private paradigm. It calls for new or renewed processes of participatory self-governance, particularly of local communities. Some of the new commons literature calls for “reclaiming” the commons. In Bollier’s important book (2002b) on American commons (public forests, minerals, knowledge, the Internet, broadcast airwaves, and public spaces) he exclaims “we as citizens own these commons (my emphasis)” (Bollier 2002: 2-3). Later on, he writes that “common sense tells us that wildlife, genes, and the atmosphere cannot really be owned...” (ibid: 60). This is the enigma with many types of commons: we “own” what we can’t own. One solution to the puzzle is that we own in the sense they are the common heritage of humankind. We are “owners’” in the sense of needing to participate in the protection of them. We don’t own them in the sense that no one should own them – i.e. they should not be privatized.

Surveying the wide variety of new commons, there are a number of observations that can be made:

• Collaboration and cooperation are particularly vibrant in the knowledge and

neighborhood commons

• Many new commons are on a much larger, often global scale; at the same time

there is a growing sense of commons on a local level

• There is often a larger vision of responsibility—“beyond our own back yard.”

• It is the upside of globalization that there is a greater consciousness of

geographically remote communities. Even neighborhood commons that may be focused solely on local issues, often have an eye on the impact of present decisions on future generations

• Sustainability is an ubiquitous issue. There is often a vision of effective management for the preservation and sustainability of a resource

• Equity is often an important consideration in new commons

• The concept of “gift economy” is becoming more familiar

• Commons resource users are often aware of their interdependence

• Unlike public goods, the commons is vulnerable to failure through

encroachment, privatization, commercialization, congestion, scarcity, degradation.

• Appropriate rules are necessary to govern the resource.

Why are so many people calling upon the commons? We are seeing a growing number of people discovering what individuals working together, developing self-governing skills, can accomplish independently of governments, corporations, or private owners. Understanding the commons leads to awareness of the need for participation and collective action in order to protect and sustain our valuable shared resources. People need to know that the “tragedy of the commons” is not inevitable; that there are comedies of the commons all around us." (http://ssrn.com/abstract=1356835)

Source

• Paper: Hess, Charlotte, Mapping the New Commons (July 1, 2008).

Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1356835