sign in sign up
<<
Home , Commons, Common good (economics)

Common-pool , a global issue Edouard Jourdain

To cite this version:

Edouard Jourdain. Common-pool resources, a global issue. Monde(s). Histoire, Espaces, Relations, Rennes : Presses universitaires de Rennes, 2011. ￿hal-02106716￿

HAL Id: hal-02106716 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02106716 Submitted on 13 May 2019

HAL is a multi-disciplinary L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. ,JVUVTPJ+PWSVTHJ`

Common-pool resources, a global issue 1

ÉDOUARD J OURDAIN

Copy editor for Conventions and PhD candidate in political science at the EHESS 2

fter having long been neglected in the able to appropriate or gain exclusive control economic, political, and legal spheres as over it. In other words, “ are Awell as by labour movements, the ques- over which no social unit (individual, family, tion of common-pool resources is becoming company) has exclusive rights of or of a central issue of the 21 st century. In an era use. The example of the commons in medieval marked by environmental crisis, the rise of Europe ( and pastures) has served as the the , and new modes of historic reference for this concept 3.” During the governance and production, the concept of the Middle Ages, was open for all to harvest; common-pool opens up new path- anyone could gather firewood and mushrooms, ways that have barely begun to be explored. peasants could graze their sheep on it, etc. Then, in 13 th century England, King John and the barons appropriated the commons for their own The theory of common-pool exclusive use. Their policy of sparked resources a popular uprising that culminated in 1215 in The defining feature of a common-pool resource the Magna Carta and the Charter of the , is that anyone within a group of people may use which introduced new regulations governing the and abandon it without any individual ever being right to use the commons. The notion of the commons re-emerged as a subject of public debate with an article 1. This article is taken from Conventions , a newsletter published jointly by the DGM of the French Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs and the Institute for High Judicial Studies 3. Daniel Compagnon, “La biodiversité, entre appropriation (IHEJ). It can be accessed by subscribers in pdf format. To subs- privée, revendications de souveraineté et coopération internatio- cribe, visit: www.convention-s.fr nal”, Développement durable et territoires , dossier No. 10 “Biens 2. École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales (School for communs et propriété”, http://developpementdurable.revues.org/ Advanced Study in the Social Sciences). index5253.html, placed on line on 7 March 2008.

  EDECONOMIC DIPLOMACY

entitled “The ”, therefore a social and political construct that published in 1968 by the sociobiologist, depends on the balance struck by the commu- . Using the example of nity between what it can or wants to support common pastures where herders graze any for the benefit of all and the production of animals they acquire but in doing so substan- open access goods. It is up to the community tially reduce the amount of available grass to determine how it wishes to manage these (through overgrazing), he concluded that resources; roads, for example, can be open open use of the commons leads to the ruin of access and free of charge and motorways open all. However, Hardin limited his view of the access but with toll payments. commons to open-access resources. Elinor Common-pool resources may be classified Ostrom subsequently demonstrated that into four categories according to two param- the commons concept is limited because it eters. The first relates to the question of is based on an abstract concept that can be whether the resource is open to all or only refuted with real- examples of goods that to a particular group. Air or road networks have been collectively managed for thousands are open to all, but this is not true of farm- of years (such as works and fishing land or irrigation networks, to which access grounds). Commons are linked to commu- is limited. The second parameter indicates nities and therefore to a sense of collective whether the common-pool resource system interest, where individuals communicate is regulated; the air that people breath is not and negotiate from a perspective that is not regulated, but the same is not true for the limited to their immediate self-interests. air discharged from a factory or for pollu- Indeed, the governance of common- tion. In other words, regulations governing pool resources, which is not imposed by the common-pool resources vary for a number market or the state, is aimed at reconciling of reasons (accessibility, policy choices, etc.). the right to use the resources with the need to But though rules may differ, they are similar conserve them. As the successful management in that no higher authority can dictate them. of complex common-pool resources (such Communities auto-regulate by creating as irrigation canals) demonstrates, these their own systems of control. two objectives can be achieved thanks to argues that it is better to encourage coopera- values that are shared by the members of the tion through institutional arrangements that community. Common values make it possible are tailored to local ecosystems than to try to overcome management difficulties, to manage everything from a distance. But transmit collective knowledge and “become this does not prevent states and international aware of the importance of the adaptability organisations from playing a decisive role in and flexibility of the institution 4”. The the recognition of common-pool resources. production of common-pool resources is Common-pool resources today The theory of common-pool resources has 4. Giangiacomo Bravo and Beatrice Marelli, “Ressources com- munes”, Revue de géographie alpine , 96-3, 2008, http://rga.revues. been regaining currency, especially since the org/index524.html, placed on line on 4 March 2009. end of the 1990s when the Internet began to

cTVUKLZc5V   Common-pool resources, a global issue

be seen as a type of common-pool resource. without infringing on existing interests. The difference between this digital common- Common-pool resources encourage strong pool resource (also considered “knowledge growth for non-commercial production, espe- commons”) and a natural common-pool cially in the information and sectors, resource is that digital resources are not through the Internet. Conflicts have emerged subtractable and that use by one person does around software, medication, genes and agri- not prevent or limit use by another. But even cultural seeds, pitting those who wish to if can seem unlimited, see them treated as universal common-pool they are nevertheless subject to new enclo- resources against those who wish to appro- sures, with the private sector appropriating priate them, especially through patents. This knowledge and methods (through patents raises a number of issues, including that of on software and knowledge, for example). the patentability of life. John Sulston, who Knowledge, an intangible resource, is one was awarded the Nobel prize in Physiology of the primary issues driving debate about or Medicine in 2002, made the following common-pool resources. Pierre-Joseph comment about the relationship between Proudhon and Victor Hugo, among others, common-pool resources and the genome: made the point in the 19th century that the “[…] The genome sequence is a discovery, not production of ideas was only possible because an invention. Like a mountain or a river, the authors could draw on and use it as genome is a natural phenomenon that existed, a resource. They believed that a text became if not before us, then at least before we common as soon as the author became aware of it. I believe that the Earth is disseminated it, forfeiting his or her copy- part of the ; it is better off not rights in favour public rights. This utopia owned by anyone, even though we may fence seems possible today, now that knowledge off small parts of it. But if an area proves has been divorced from the medium used to important because it is especially scenic or disseminate it and become freely accessible in is home to some rare species, then it should digital form. Indeed, we are seeing the devel- be protected in the public interest” 6. Here opment of open source platforms, open access Sulston raises the question of the common- to scientific knowledge (for example, with the pool resource as a natural good or a man- creation of the Public Library of Science in made good, implying that man-made goods 2000 and free access to the review Biology ), such as roads and certain digital products can licences 5, etc. be considered common-pool resources. The advantage claimed for such common- Other types of goods – such things as pool resources is that they foster innovation geostationary orbits clogged with satel- lite debris, or the accessible fraction of the electromagnetic spectrum – may be classi- fied as common-pool resources in the future, 5. These licences offer a legal alternative to people who do not wish with controversial political, economic and to protect their work through their country’s standard rights. The goal is to encourage the simple and legal cir- culation of work, exchange, and creativity (especially in the sense that certain types of licences allow a piece of work to be supple- mented or changed by a third party). 6. John Sulston, Le Monde diplomatique , December 2002, p. 28-29.

  EDECONOMIC DIPLOMACY

legal implications. The issue of common- us to develop new ways of managing natural pool resources has become crucial in the resources (such as ), and the technolog- current globalization era, with the economic ical crisis requiring us to rethink our relation- crisis challenging existing modes of property ship with the living world and outer space. The management, the environmental crisis obliging debate has likely only just begun. í

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Philippe Aigrain, Cause commune : l’information entre bien commun et propriété , Paris, Fayard, 2005. Collectif, « Biens communs et propriété », Développement durable & territoires , dossier n° 10, 2008, disponible sur http://developpementdurable.revues.org/5143 Garrett Hardin, « The Tragedy of the Commons », Science , vol. 162, n° 3859, 1968, pp. 1243-1248. Elinor Ostrom, La Gouvernance des biens communs , Bruxelles, éditions De Boeck, 2010. Riccardo Petrella, L’Eau, bien commun public, alternatives à la « pétrolisation » de l’eau , La Tour d’Aigues, Éditions de l’Aube, 2004. Oran R. Young, « Gérer les biens communs planétaires », Critique internationale , n° 9, octobre 2000, pp. 147-161.

cTVUKLZc5V