1A. User Boundaries: Clear and locally understood boundaries between legitimate users
and nonusers are present.
1B. Resource Boundaries: Clear boundaries that separate a specific common-pool resource
from a larger social-ecological system are present.
2A. Congruence with Local Conditions: Appropriation and provision rules are congruent
with local social and environmental conditions.
2B. Appropriation and Provision: Appropriation rules are congruent with provision rules:
the distribution of costs is proportional to the distribution of benefits.
3. Collective-Choice Arrangements: Most individuals affected by a resource regime are
authorized to participate in making and modifying its rules.
4A. Monitoring Users: Individuals who are accountable to or are the users monitor the
appropriation and provision levels of the users.
4B. Monitoring the Resource: Individuals who are accountable to or are the users monitor
the conditions of the resource.
5. Graduated Sanctions: Sanctions for rule violations start very low but become stronger if a
user repeatedly violates a rule.
6. Conflict-Resolution Mechanisms: Rapid, low-cost, local arenas exist for resolving
conflicts among users or with officials.
7. Minimal Recognition of Rights: The rights of local users to make their own rules are
recognized by the government.
8. Nested Enterprises: When a common-pool resource is closely connected to a larger
social-ecological system, governance activities are organized in multiple nested layers (ibid.
422).
While these are the empirical results of researchers observing and coding variables, there is now a movement that translates these design principles into a principled approach to governance that could be applied beyond the typical common
pool goods. Commoning thus captures a mind-set that favors collective ownership
and development. Regarding freely available natural resources, it holds the view
that they are the common heritage of mankind, so that everyone has an equal
entitlement to use them but also equal responsibility to protect them. Each generation should only take to the extent that leaves future generations with similar
wealth. Also, jointly produced output is viewed as a common good rather than an
asset to be divided up into individual returns on the production factors invested.
Thus, in addition to being co-stewards of that which Earth and our ancestors have
provided, everyone is seen as a co-proprietor of wealth created. Commoning
solutions therefore seek to define new systems for reproduction that go beyond the
typical market and state patterns in political economy. They break with their private
or public ownership logics by creating governance and entitlement structures tailored to the type of good and local circumstances. Often this will lead to envisioning and enacting non-commodified production and consumption solutions
among peers that are marked by joint responsibility for the maintenance of the
system created.
The book The Wealth of the Commons: A World Beyond Market and State
comprises 73 essays from thinkers and practitioners in the commoning field (Bollier
and Helfrich 2012). The commonalities within this community are described as “an
overarching worldview.” They comprise a set of social attitudes, commitments and
political philosophy, and even a spiritual disposition, all shaping an experimental
means of strategic change (Bollier and Helfrich 2012: xii–xiii).
4.4 Pioneering Governance Systems: Commoning as a New Stark Utopia
141
and nonusers are present.
1B. Resource Boundaries: Clear boundaries that separate a specific common-pool resource
from a larger social-ecological system are present.
2A. Congruence with Local Conditions: Appropriation and provision rules are congruent
with local social and environmental conditions.
2B. Appropriation and Provision: Appropriation rules are congruent with provision rules:
the distribution of costs is proportional to the distribution of benefits.
3. Collective-Choice Arrangements: Most individuals affected by a resource regime are
authorized to participate in making and modifying its rules.
4A. Monitoring Users: Individuals who are accountable to or are the users monitor the
appropriation and provision levels of the users.
4B. Monitoring the Resource: Individuals who are accountable to or are the users monitor
the conditions of the resource.
5. Graduated Sanctions: Sanctions for rule violations start very low but become stronger if a
user repeatedly violates a rule.
6. Conflict-Resolution Mechanisms: Rapid, low-cost, local arenas exist for resolving
conflicts among users or with officials.
7. Minimal Recognition of Rights: The rights of local users to make their own rules are
recognized by the government.
8. Nested Enterprises: When a common-pool resource is closely connected to a larger
social-ecological system, governance activities are organized in multiple nested layers (ibid.
422).
While these are the empirical results of researchers observing and coding variables, there is now a movement that translates these design principles into a principled approach to governance that could be applied beyond the typical common
pool goods. Commoning thus captures a mind-set that favors collective ownership
and development. Regarding freely available natural resources, it holds the view
that they are the common heritage of mankind, so that everyone has an equal
entitlement to use them but also equal responsibility to protect them. Each generation should only take to the extent that leaves future generations with similar
wealth. Also, jointly produced output is viewed as a common good rather than an
asset to be divided up into individual returns on the production factors invested.
Thus, in addition to being co-stewards of that which Earth and our ancestors have
provided, everyone is seen as a co-proprietor of wealth created. Commoning
solutions therefore seek to define new systems for reproduction that go beyond the
typical market and state patterns in political economy. They break with their private
or public ownership logics by creating governance and entitlement structures tailored to the type of good and local circumstances. Often this will lead to envisioning and enacting non-commodified production and consumption solutions
among peers that are marked by joint responsibility for the maintenance of the
system created.
The book The Wealth of the Commons: A World Beyond Market and State
comprises 73 essays from thinkers and practitioners in the commoning field (Bollier
and Helfrich 2012). The commonalities within this community are described as “an
overarching worldview.” They comprise a set of social attitudes, commitments and
political philosophy, and even a spiritual disposition, all shaping an experimental
means of strategic change (Bollier and Helfrich 2012: xii–xiii).
4.4 Pioneering Governance Systems: Commoning as a New Stark Utopia
141