Commons (economics): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Daniel Mietchen (started as lemma) |
imported>Roger A. Lohmann No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{subpages}} | {{subpages}} | ||
< | |||
"The commons is neither private nor public: neither business firm nor state utility, neither jealously guarded private plot nor national or city park. But it is not usually open to all: the relevant local community typically decides who uses it and how. Indeed, commons regimes can be defined more through their social and cultural organization than their physical location: for example, local or group power, distinctions between members and non-members, rough parity among members, a concern with common safety rather than accumulation, and an absence of the constraints which lead to economic scarcity." <ref> Nicholas Hildyard, Larry Lohmann, Sarah Sexton and Simon Fairlie. Reclaiming the Commons. Paper presented at the 1995 Annual Conference of the Political Studies Association of the United Kingdom, York.</ref> | |||
Revision as of 07:13, 4 September 2020
"The commons is neither private nor public: neither business firm nor state utility, neither jealously guarded private plot nor national or city park. But it is not usually open to all: the relevant local community typically decides who uses it and how. Indeed, commons regimes can be defined more through their social and cultural organization than their physical location: for example, local or group power, distinctions between members and non-members, rough parity among members, a concern with common safety rather than accumulation, and an absence of the constraints which lead to economic scarcity." [1]
- ↑ Nicholas Hildyard, Larry Lohmann, Sarah Sexton and Simon Fairlie. Reclaiming the Commons. Paper presented at the 1995 Annual Conference of the Political Studies Association of the United Kingdom, York.