Eerik Wissenz — The Travesty of the Anti-Commons I and II

This week's guest post is by Eerik Wissenz of Solarfire. It is part one of a four-part series leading up to a wider exploration ofCommunities that Abide, based on the example of certain small nations which, much to the chagrin of neoliberal economists, have preserved a large and productive commons.

Club Orlov
The Travesty of the Anti-Commons
Eerik Wissenz | Solarfire

The Travesty of the Anti-Commons—Part II

Tim Harford — Do You Believe in Sharing?

Tim Harford deftly explains Garrett Hardin's The Tragedy of the Commons and Elinor Ostrum's Beyond the Tragedy of the Commons. Good summary of the issues and proposals. Ostum offers a way to escape the dilemma of relying on hierarchical government and privatization to solve environmental issues by relying instead on communalism in dealing with the commons.

The Undercover Economist
Do You Believe in Sharing?
Tim Harford | The Financial Times

(John Zelnicker in the comments)

Margaret Flowers and Kevin Zeese — Building the Commons as an Antidote to the Predatory Market Economy

Communalism versus neoliberalism. "The tragedy of the commons" is the idea that anything not privatized is not being utilized as efficiently and efectively as it could be if privatized, so that left to itself the commons deteriorates due to overuse and poor management. Libertarian anarcho-capitalists even recommend ocean privatization.

In recent years, the case for "The Tragedy" has been rebutted by Nobel Prize-winning economist Elinor Ostrum, who wrote "Beyond the Tragedy of the Commons." Ostrum examined how commons were actually used. She found that the so-called tragedy of the commons was not prevalent, nor was it difficult to solve. Indeed, people from local communities routinely develop controls over the commons to protect it from "the tragedy." In 1990, she wrote, "Governing the Commons," which examined the governance of natural resources. She found that neither state control nor privatization of resources was the appropriate answer and that commons are sometimes governed by voluntary organizations. She developed eight "design principles" of stable local management of commons. These are:

1. Clearly defined boundaries.
2. Rules regarding the appropriation and provision of common resources that are adapted to local conditions.
3. Collective-choice arrangements that allow most resource appropriators to participate in the decision-making process.
4. Effective monitoring by those who are part of or accountable to the appropriators.
5. A scale of graduated sanctions for those who violate community rules.
6. Mechanisms of conflict resolution that are cheap and of easy access.
7. Self-determination of the community recognized by higher-level authorities.
8. In the case of larger commons resources, organization in the form of multiple layers situated inside one another, like Russian nesting dolls.

These have been refined to include additional principles, e.g. effective communication, internal trust and reciprocity, and making connections between the various parts of the resource system as a whole.

The real tragedy of the commons is enclosure, which is what privatization used to be called. Marx called it "primitive accumulation" and observed that it is the origin of feudalism (landlordism with emphasis on "lord")) and capitalism (ownership of the means of production by a privileged class). Marx disputed Adam Smith's imagined narrative of the original enclosure arising spontaneously as hard workers utilize available resources, while slackers goofed off. Marx pointed to history, which is the record of powerful interests appropriating the commons by force, creating a privileged class of have's and a class of have-not's that whose existence was to serve the privileged class with their labor in order to use what had previously been held in common. This with their fellow countrymen. And with the rise of colonialism the process was even more brutal to the point of genocide in some places, for example, in America, when the native population resisted.

Truthout | Opinion
Building the Commons as an Antidote to the Predatory Market Economy
Margaret Flowers and Kevin Zeese

David Bollier — Viewing Education as a Commons

Enclosures bring with them a pathology that most markets entail, however. Their success often stems from "externalizing" as many costs as they can onto the community, students or future generations, so that the business enterprise can become more "efficient" and "productive." This is how markets routinely function -- by generating externalities. It is why industry does not take adequate account of the long-term health of nature.

Enclosures of public schools are doing the same thing. They exclude those students who are more difficult or costly to teach -- the low achievers, those with learning disabilities, and those who may not fit in. They regard students (or their parents) as "consumers," not as co-producers and collaborators in the educational process. Learning that cannot be measured in clear metrics (and therefore which cannot be a basis for market competition) are regard as secondary or inconsequential. The shared commitments of a community to each other, or the need for inclusiveness and social equity, are not seen as important because, as in any market, we are all "individuals." These are just a few reasons why the market paradigm is inappropriate as a regime for understanding the challenges of education and managing public schools.

David Bollier
Viewing Education as a Commons

The "tragedy of the commons" now being applied to public education with the claim that private enterprise can do it more efficiently and effectively, but this is only the case due to generating externalities that are not computed in determining true cost and true price.

David Bollier — The Logic of Collective Action: The Fall of an Iconic Theory?

Mancur Olson's neoliberal theory of public choice and Garrett Hardin's “tragedy of the commons" parable wrong? Harvard Business Professor Gunnar Trumbull says yes in his new book, Strength in Numbers: The Political Power of Weak Interests, especially in the digital age.

David Bollier' — news and perspectives on the commons
The Logic of Collective Action: The Fall of an Iconic Theory?
David Bollier

David Bollier — Cloud Computing as Enclosure

Lametti states his thesis simply: “I argue that the Cloud, unless monitored and possibly directed, has the potential to go beyond undermining copyright and the public domain – Enclosure 2.0 – and to go beyond weakening privacy. This round, which I call “Enclosure 3.0”, has the potential to disempower Internet users and conversely empower a very small group of gatekeepers. Put bluntly, it has the potential to relegate Internet users to the status of digital sheep.”

David Bollier
Cloud Computing as Enclosure

Is "free enterprise" and privatization of the commons a road to serfdom as we move forward on a neoliberal vision for globalization under corporate control?

Steve Roth — Creating the Commons: A Tragedy in No Acts

I've been posting on the commons lately. Here are some of Steve Roth's thoughts on "the tragedy of the commons." It's a travesty. The cattlemen knew what they were up against with they resisted the sheep herders' push for enclosure.

Asymptosis
Creating the Commons: A Tragedy in No Acts
Steve Roth