Olivier Jaspart on the Political Common in France
= in French: le 'commun politique"
Source
* Article: Olivier Jaspart, juriste spécialiste de la décentralisation : « Il s’agit d’envisager la politique publique partagée comme un bien commun ». Interview de Olivier Jaspart. M3, 2026.
Summary
Via DeepSeek, prompted by Michel Bauwens:
Olivier Jaspart, a French legal scholar specializing in decentralization, proposes a conceptual and operational shift in public action. He argues that the traditional model of decentralization—assigning exclusive blocks of competence to distinct territorial levels (communes, intercommunalities, departments, regions)—has reached its limits. To address complex, cross-cutting public policies (like climate, health, or food), he advocates for moving from a policy common (politique commune) to a political common (commun politique).
1. Distinction: Policy Common vs. Political Common
Policy Common (politique commune): This is the current administrative model. A single public structure (like an EPCI, an intercommunal authority) administers one or more exclusive competencies on behalf of member municipalities. It’s about pooling means and services within a fixed institutional framework.
Political Common (commun politique): This is a collaborative framework where different public authorities (communes, metropolis, state services, social security funds), each retaining their own distinct competencies, are obliged to cooperate to achieve a shared goal. It reframes a public policy not as a transferable competence but as a common good to be preserved collectively. The focus shifts from administrative structure to shared accountability towards citizens for the effective realization of their rights.
2. The "Contractual Molecule" as a Governance Tool
To operationalize the political common, Jaspart describes a governance mechanism he calls the "contractual molecule" (molécule contractuelle). Instead of a single overarching contract, it involves a dense, interconnected web of bilateral agreements between all relevant actors (state, local authorities, associations). This creates a stable network where withdrawing from one agreement would destabilize the entire set of relationships. This mutual interdependence fosters synergy and stability without formal hierarchy, making cooperation a resilient political resource rather than a merely imposed coordination.
3. Critique of Current Territorial Projects
Jaspart observes that promising instruments like Territorial Projects (for water, food, climate) are already being used but are failing to become true political commons. He criticizes their current "doctrine of use":
They are often reduced to mere administrative checkboxes required to obtain state funding.
Instead of empowering local stakeholders to collectively define rules for a common resource (like water), they become rigid, top-down planning tools focused on meeting ministerial indicators.
They thus reinforce a logic of centralized control rather than fostering genuine, shared governance.
4. A New Role for the State: From Pilot to Partner
Jaspart envisions a mature, non-hierarchical partnership between the state and local authorities. He argues that the state should abandon its fragmented, top-down approach (epitomized by constant legislative tinkering and competitive "call for projects").
His proposal is to create framework laws (lois-cadres) for decentralization. These sector-specific laws would:
- Define the state's mission as being at the service of local authorities.
- Provide multi-year, stable funding.
- Allow local authorities (grouped into "assemblies of competent administrations") the freedom to co-construct a 6-year "territorial mandate project" to implement the policy.
Evaluation would be conducted by the Senate and regional audit chambers, with parliamentary debate to inform future framework laws.
This would replace competition between territories with a logic of shared contribution, where no single authority holds the complete solution.
5. Key Obstacles to the Emergence of Political Commons
Jaspart identifies several deep-rooted obstacles:
- Political and Electoral Factors: The fragmented electoral system and the lack of genuine infra-communal democracy hinder local cooperation.
- Institutional Rigidity: France is stuck with a dysfunctional five-level decentralization model. The recent trend towards collectivités à statut particulier (special-status authorities) simplifies at one level but creates new imbalances and allows the state to micromanage local politics.
- A Culture of Control and Risk Aversion: Public managers are paralyzed by the threat of financial sanctions, a culture of performance indicators ("treating the index, not the patient"), and complex, competitive "call for projects" procedures. This leaves no time, imagination, or trust for building medium-term cooperative policies.
- Underutilized Legal Tools: Existing legal instruments are avoided due to perceived risk.
6. Practical Examples
Despite these obstacles, Jaspart points to emerging practices that embody the commun politique:
- Grenoble's Anti-Poverty Consortium: The local CCAS (social action center), the metropolis, communes, and anti-poverty associations formed a consortium to jointly respond to state calls for projects. They pool resources and share funding, simplifying procedures for both the applicants and the state.
- Territorial Food Projects (PAT): When implemented with genuine collaboration, they can become a leading-edge example of political commons.
- Territorial Data Charters: These establish common data-sharing standards for a territory, making it easier for businesses, associations, and citizens to engage with and hold public authorities accountable.
In essence, Jaspart's commun politique is a call to reinvent French public action through legally structured, place-based, and accountable cooperation, transforming administrative complexity into a resource for democratic innovation and effective public service.
Examples
Mentioned in the text:
"Jaspart pointe des pratiques émergentes qui incarnent le commun politique :
- Le consortium de lutte contre la précarité de Grenoble : Le CCAS local, la métropole, des communes et des associations de lutte contre la précarité ont formé un consortium pour répondre conjointement aux appels à projets préfectoraux. Ils mutualisent leurs moyens et se répartissent les financements, simplifiant les démarches tant pour les porteurs de projet que pour l’État.
- Les Projets Alimentaires Territoriaux (PAT) : Lorsqu’ils sont conçus et mis en œuvre avec une réelle collaboration entre acteurs (producteurs, transformateurs, distributeurs, collectivités, consommateurs), ils peuvent constituer une illustration concrète et avancée des communs politiques. Jaspart critique cependant leur dévoiement actuel en simples outils administratifs.
Le site du ministère de l’Agriculture présente le cadre général des PAT : https://agriculture.gouv.fr/projets-alimentaires-territoriaux-pat
- Les chartes territoriales des données publiques : Elles permettent d’établir des standards de diffusion et de partage des données à l’échelle d’un territoire. Cela facilite le travail des entreprises et des associations, et permet aux citoyens de mieux demander des comptes aux élus et à l’administration.
La « Charte territoriale des données publiques de Rennes Métropole » est un exemple concret consultable ici : https://metropole.rennes.fr/sites/default/files/inline-files/Charte%20territoriale%20des%20donnees%20publiques%20-%20Rennes%20Metropole.pdf