Sage Advice for Occupy? from Nobel winner Elinor Ostrom

Dr. Elinor Ostrom, 2009 Nobel Prize Winner in Economics for her 30+ years of research and study of commons* management, is joined by many other commons supporters in saying that the “tragedy of the commons” is that of the unmanaged or unsuccessfully managed commons.  What we have now is an entire paradigm managed for the 1% that is a tragedy for the 99% and the Earth.

*The commons can be defined as follows: Commons, n., gifts of nature and society; Commons are the wealth we inherit or create together and must pass on, undiminished or enhanced, to future generations; a sector of the economy that complements and counterweights the corporate sector; commons governance provides a check and balance to the corporate drive for profit and undue influence on government.

Some examples of commons we want to protect ~ clean air and water, healthy forests and ecosystems, good schools and health care, and strong diverse  local economies including open access to information, transportation, manufacturing, food production, energy, monetary systems etc.

In this sense, the Occupy movement is a commons:  It is creating value, sharing information, attempting to balance government and business excess.  What more might Occupy do to become a well-managed and effective commons?  How can the movement collaborate to transform our systems to provide immense value for all, including future generations?

Ostrom’s 8 design principles to govern commons was recently printed in Yes! Magazine.  Many, if not all, of these commons design principles have been shown to be present in the best managed and long term sustainable community endeavors across the globe.  They provide good guidelines for governance of Occupy projects everywhere.  These principles ensure that the new processes and institutions we create to protect our communities and the resources upon which we depend are sustainable and just.

1. Define clear group boundaries.

 2. Match rules governing use of common goods to local needs and conditions.

 3. Ensure that those affected by the rules can participate in modifying the rules.

 4. Make sure the rulemaking rights of community members are respected by outside authorities.

5. Develop a system, carried out by community members, for monitoring members’ behavior.

6. Use graduated sanctions for rule violators.

7. Provide accessible, low-cost means for dispute resolution.

8. Build responsibility for governing the common resource in nested tiers from the lowest level up to the entire interconnected system.

Read on for key questions that Occupy can ask relating to these commons principles, along with some commons management models for  sustainability, sharing and justice…

Ostrom’s 8 Design Principles for Well Managed Commons…

1. Define clear group boundaries.

Who gets to make decisions for whom?  Who gets to benefit from community created value or local resources?   Who is a legitimate stakeholder of any commons and who, if any, should be excluded?

Since so many decisions  made by governments and big business are affecting the 99%, maybe we need new models to enable decision-making closer to legitimate stakeholders and their affected resources, so that legislation is truly by and for the people… not by and for distant or monied interests.  Occupy assemblies around the globe are modeling this via the many modes for deliberative democratic decision-making for internal operations and collective action.

A next step may be gathering our communities to write our own legislation… Occupy the Law!

Right to self-govern is given lip-service in many countries, but the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund, Celdf.org, shows citizens from Bolivia, to Ecuador, to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania how to write their own ordinances for legislation by and for the people, challenging corporate influence in constitutional law.  CELDF also provides roving low-cost Democracy Schools for Occupy teach-ins on reclaiming self-governance for communities that want to protect and improve their local quality of life.

2. Match rules governing use of common goods to local needs and conditions.

What does the community need?  What is lacking or being degraded?  What of value needs to be preserved?

Each community and every commons is unique, so guidelines for protection and decisions for management should be tied directly to each locality.  Occupy has a unique opportunity to develop these conversations and ideas locally, to cooperatively share information and models across boundaries and between scales, and to thus form associations towards positive wide-scale change for people and planet.

3. Ensure that those affected by the rules can participate in modifying the rules.

The best designed deliberative democratic processes allow the wisdom of the crowd to emerge.  Do the decision-making processes ensure some few don’t dominate or benefit unduly?  Is community and resource security sought while value depletion/ resource destruction is not tolerated?

One method for modifying rules is participatory budgeting, funding those things which serve the community, defunding those things that serve only special interests or negatively impact community health and stability.  For example, the City of Belo Horizonte, Brazil may be the only city in the world to effectively eliminate hunger and greatly improve local food production and security through prioritizing a municipal subsidy for growing, processing and distribution of food by local producer and users.  The people of Belo allocated 2% of their city budget for food security programs, and the investment has paid big dividends to all residents.

See this 11 minute film high-lighting Belo’s efforts to create a society where no one lacks access to healthy food:

The City that beat hunger: Belo Horizonte wins the 2009 Future Policy Award

4. Make sure the rulemaking rights of community members are respected by outside authorities.

Do those who govern or enjoy business privileges support best practices for the needs of the vast majority in the community, including the long-term health of local ecosystems?   Either way, citizens can claim their sovereignty to create  commons-based institutions for social cohesion and resource protection outside of direct government and business influence, demanding their recognition to ensure checks and balances between government, business interest, and the 99% (we and the earth and our social systems are the commons!).

Occupying and changing the law may be one necessary step, but often we also need to ask how can we change the way we manage certain commons?

In order to create the most social cohesion in ways that work for the vast majority, do we need to change the rules for the management of our water or food systems? healthcare systems? education systems? energy systems? And even our monetary system?

As the Arab Spring blazed the path for the Occupy Movement, so too the creation of a new form of commons-based consultation is being developed in the Middle East via designed deliberative democracy.  Through the creation of a social charter process, driven foremost by and for the people through the West Asia-North Africa (WANA) Forum,  the respect and participation of authorities across the region is being compelled.  See the initiating goals and directives of this historic consultative document, the West Asia – North Africa Social Charter here.

5. Develop a system, carried out by community members, for monitoring members’ behavior.

Whatever system is developed, setting clear guidelines for use and operations is necessary.  Then the questions are, how to ensure transparency of  actions and information flows to stakeholders?  In other words, is monitoring for progress and transgression enabled?

6. Use graduated sanctions for rule violators.

Is this being considered as the guidelines for participation in a commons are developed?  Are sanctions designed to, first, encourage learning about and support of common goals/ common good?  Are further sanctions or exclusion scaled appropriately to protect the whole and provide opportunities for reparation?

7. Provide accessible, low-cost means for dispute resolution.

Conflicts and disputes are a natural process in groups, especially around shared value/ resources.  Where are the best functioning groups/ projects?  What can they share to teach Occupy about conflict resolution?  What are the lessons learned in the failures?  How can we develop mechanisms to address disputes and conflict creatively, early and often?

8. Build responsibility for governing the common resource in nested tiers from the lowest level up to the entire interconnected system.

Interconnection is the key concept here.  How can Occupy build it’s responsibility, power and influence via mutual support and cooperation, local to global?  How can Occupy prevent the privatization of resources and social and ecological systems from the local to the global scale?  And conversely, how can Occupy empower local to global models that support each community at the level of their home commons while not allowing the degradation of anyone’s home commons?

This is an especially challenging question when one considers that many global commons such as the arctic, sea bed minerals, the broadcast spectrum or atmosphere are currently unmanaged and thus literally “up for grabs”, to the tune of trillions of dollars of commercial and industrial profit each year… and much ecological devastation.  If these global commons were managed for the benefit of all humanity and the earth, in trust, the resources available for sustainable development, ecological restoration and enforcement would be sufficient to cover the needs of all.

One amazing all-win model addresses the need for equitably managing the global atmosphere commons and thus fairly addressing climate change crises.  Many groups around the globe are working on this, and the Irish think tank, Feasta (The Foundation for the Economics of Sustainability) has some of the most inclusive ideas.  The key Ostrom-identified concept here is the need to build responsibility for governing the common resource of our atmosphere in nested tiers from the lowest level up to the entire interconnected system.

The Feasta Cap and Share model does just this.  Here’s the jist — the Cap and Share model here referred to as an “Earth Climate Commons Trust” –

A diverse group of citizens, acting on behalf of the whole human family and all life on Earth, establish an independent Earth Climate Commons Trust (ECCT). Acting on independent climate science, the Trust sets an annually reducing cap on the total amount of fossil fuels that can be introduced into the global economy and issues permits up to the amount of the cap, available for purchase by fuel companies for full market value. The proceeds of sale are paid to or applied for the benefit of all adult citizens in the world in equal shares, via a network of national and local citizen’s climate trusts. Nation-state governments collaborate with the Trust by banning the introduction of the fuels into their territory without an ECCT permit. So long as not all state governments have agreed to collaborate, the ECCT limits the total number of permits issued in the same proportion as the use of fossil fuels in the countries participating, in relation to total global use.    

- John Jopling, Feasta.   Excerpt from proposal submitted by the NGO Major Group for The Ten Year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable Production and Consumption, UN Commission for Sustainable Development (2010)

For any questions, resources, or additional contacts regarding any of these commons models, please contact marybeth.steisslinger@gmail.com

Mary Beth Steisslinger, MS

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA

Tags: Cap and Share, Citizen Legislation, , Commons Design Principles, , commons management, , Democracy School, Earth Climate Commons Trust, Elinor Ostrom, , participatory budgeting, , social charter, social cohesion, sustainable commons, WANA Forum

Categories: Academics, Commons, Frameworks & Models, Research

Connect

Subscribe to our Social Profiles

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

Please log in to WordPress.com to post a comment to your blog.

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s