permaculture

[Lawrence London <lfljvenaura@gmail.com>]

On 12/16/2010 3:31 AM, tpj@life.ku.dk wrote:
> Why don't you all share with me reading chapter 6 and
> continue discussion from there?

http://arts.brighton.ac.uk/stibbe-handbook-of-sustainability/chapters/commons-thinking

Commons Thinking

Justin Kenrick    The Handbook of Sustainability Literacy, Arran Stibbe.
Supported by University of Brighton, Faculty of Arts: Sustainability Network.

«« Chapters | « Previous | Next »

Commons Thinking: the ability to envisage and enable a viable future
through connected action,
Justin Kenrick, University of Glasgow, and PEDAL Portobello Transition Town

____________________

What is Commons Thinking?

The Commons are life-sustaining or life-enhancing resources and
services that have not been divided up
and assigned a monetary value in the global economy but instead are
shared freely among members of a
community or group. They range from the air we breath, pollination
provided by bees, land that provides
food for gathering and sharing rather than selling, to words of
comfort given freely and willingly rather
than at an hourly rate. Pitted against the Commons, however, are the
forces of Enclosure, which attempt
to appropriate, own and sell resources that were once freely
accessible, often breaking up communities
and displacing people in the process. Commons regimes are communities
which resist these forces and meet
people's needs primarily or significantly through the Commons rather
than through monetary exchange,
existing both in the forests of the Amazon and in the last remaining
tight-knit local communities in
cities around the world...This chapter aims to describe one important
skill for rebuilding political,
community and personal resilience.

Click for pdf download of the full chapter 'Commons Thinking' from the
Handbook for Sustainability Literacy

http://arts.brighton.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/5737/Commons-Thinking.pdf

1
COMMONS THINKING
the ability to envisage and enable a viable future through connected action
Justin Kenrick, University of Glasgow, and PEDAL  Portobello Transition Town
____________________
What is Commons Thinking?
The further we move into this century, the more urgently we realise
that we need to relearn
the political and personal skills of envisaging and enabling a viable
future. This skill is not
new: it is at the heart of commons regimes the world over. Commons
regimes manage socioenvironmental
relations in ways that attend to the finite nature of human and natural 
systems
in a way which  paradoxically  ensures their infinite abundance
continues. Vandana Shiva
notes that in Commons or Sustenance Regimes ‘People work directly to provide 
the
conditions necessary to maintain their lives . . . Sustenance
economies exist even where
capital markets do not. Yet capital’s market cannot exist without the
sustenance economy
because externalising the social burden is the very basis of profits
and capital accumulation’
(2005: 17).
The Commons are life-sustaining or life-enhancing resources and
services that have not been
divided up and assigned a monetary value in the global economy but
instead are shared -
according to evolving arrangements and agreements - among members of a
community or
group. They range from the air we breath, pollination provided by
bees, land that provides
food for gathering, sharing, cultivating and dwelling rather than
selling, to libraries, public
parks, pavements we walk along, and on to childcare, care for the
elderly and words of
comfort given freely and willingly rather than at an hourly rate.
Pitted against the Commons,
however, are the forces of Enclosure, which attempt to appropriate,
own and sell resources
that were once accessible not through the power of money but through
the rights and
responsibilities gained by being a member of a community. The
processes of Enclosure
spread from England to the rest of the British Isles: dispossessing
people of their land,
displacing them, and using these same people to colonise and
appropriate the land of peoples
in Commons regimes the world over. However Commons regimes continue all over 
the
world. These range from place-based communities agreeing how to use
and share resources
for the well-being of all their members (whether in the rainforests of
Central Africa or through
community buyouts on the west coast of Scotland) to emerging
communities of practice -
such as educators passionate about sustainability and empowerment.
Wherever and whenever
people find ways to ensure that our well-being ensures the well-being
of others - and to refuse
the logic that asserts that our well-being depends on exploiting
(human and ecological) others
- then the we are re-asserting Commons processes and resisting
processes of Enclosure which
now threaten us with extinction.
This chapter aims to describe one important skill for rebuilding
political, community and
personal resilience: the ability to think in a Commons way. This way
of thinking is crucial to
tackling the root causes of economic and ecological meltdown, to
restoring the local, national
and global Commons, and so recovering a future that can often  to say
the least  seem
2
precarious. Commons regimes persist and re-emerge wherever people
retain the political
space to concern themselves with maintaining social and ecological
resilience. They persist in
the face of pressure from more powerful outside forces which seek to
exploit, in a shortsighted
way, the social and ecological resources upon which the community depends.
Commons thinking involves identifying the way one is complicit in the
Enclosure or
destruction of the Commons, in order to extricate oneself from such
processes and instead
identify with and strengthen the processes that maintain abundance for
all. In essence,
Commons approaches assume a world of abundant relations from which
individual entities
emerge and are sustained, whereas the Western dominance perspective
assumes a world of
scarcity where discreet entities are brought into relationship through
processes of control and
competition.
Putting it bluntly, these contrasting problem solving approaches can
be thought of in terms of:
A Commons approach which assumes that:
? we live in a common life-world upon which we all depend,
? any problems stem from a breakdown in relationships, and
? solutions are primarily about restoring these relationships
and a dominance approach which assumes that:
? one’s well-being ultimately depends on controlling the devalued
other (whether other
life forms, other humans, or other aspects of oneself),
? problems are about the lack of such control, and
? the solution involves the dominant realm (the mind, the ‘developed’
world, the adult,
the expert, or humans in general) imposing control on the supposedly
inferior realm.
How dominance thinking misrepresents the Commons
When the ‘Commons’ is referred to at all in dominant thinking, it is
usually in terms of the socalled
‘Tragedy of the Commons’, and this term is used to argue that left to 
ourselves
(without the market and government to control our behaviour) we would
each choose to
exploit our ecological context for our own individual benefit even
though this would
inevitably lead to the destruction of the ecosystems (the Commons) on
which we all depend.
In fact, the opposite is the case. Even Garrett Hardin, the inventor
of the term, later admitted
that the phrase describes, not a Tragedy of ‘Commons regimes’, but a
Tragedy of ‘Open
Access regimes’ (Kirby at al 1995).
The irony here is that an excellent example of an ‘Open Access regime’
is that of capitalism,
where the only understanding of being ‘rational’ is of acting in one’s
own immediate, narrow
self-interest. ‘Open access regimes’ describe situations where people
are persuaded to act in a
way that has no consideration for the longer term of themselves, their
children or others.
Commons regimes, in sharp contrast, always have unwritten or written
rules about who can
use what resource when and for how long, in order to ensure everyone’s
well-being over the
longer term (Kirby at al 1995, Kenrick 2005). Some may be wealthier
than others, and there is
3
always negotiation, argument or conflict as the rules are changed,
kept, or broken; but the
basic principle is that you don’t get a free lunch (getting a free
lunch is exactly what
advertisers, political parties and any other open access regime pundit
tries to persuade us we
can get). Commons regimes are how humans have effectively
self-organised for millennia;
and it is somehow typical (in an Orwellian 1984 kind of way) that the
term is then used to
denote a ‘tragedy’ in order to assert that our only hope is a market
system regulated by
government, when it would be blindingly obvious to a Martian
anthropologist that such a
system has brought us to the brink of extinction, and that we need to
change it fast.
Commons systems have recently re-emerged in the UK  both through the land 
reform
movement and community buy-outs that have swept through rural Scotland
since the mid 90s,
and through the proliferation of Transition initiatives (see Quilley,
this volume) in Ireland,
Scotland, England and Wales since the mid 2000s. These are recent
examples of Commons
regimes re-emerging because people realise that it is more rational to
base their well-being on
collectively caring about those around them, than to believe they can
over the long term -
improve their own lives at the expense of their neighbours. The
Transition approach embodies
Commons thinking and is a creative, empowering, and immediately
gratifying proof that  if
we come at problems from a Commons perspective  our solutions will
improve life for us
all, rather than deal with symptoms in ways that exacerbate the
original problem.
Naming the problem: Ecological Collapse, or why it is Rational to be Scared
The first step in bringing Commons thinking to bear is to recognise
the problem, and the way
in which all aspects of it are related. In today’s Sunday Herald
newspaper (2009.03.29) under
the headline: ‘Two Months to Save the World’, Professor Jacqueline
McGlade, the European
Environment Agency’s executive director, states that:
Even if all the current promises to cut greenhouse gas emissions are
honoured, the world
will still see global temperatures rise by an average of four degrees
centigrade by the
end of the century. . . This is hot enough to make most of the world
uninhabitable.
Climate change demonstrates that it is short-sighted in the extreme to
base our well-being on
destroying the life support system upon which we depend, and hoping
that imposing
technological or political solutions can protect us from the
consequences. Climate change is a
consequence of a system in which: companies are legally obliged to
maximise profits for
shareholders, profits are made by externalising the social and
environmental costs, and if
companies aren’t willing to externalise these costs to make these
profits, then they are simply
swallowed up by those who will. Ongoing destruction of the earth’s
life support system
ensues. From a Commons perspective, climate change is as much a reason
to be hopeful as a
reason to be fearful, since it is an urgent wake up call to stop this
socio-ecological devastation
which would destroy us sooner rather than later if we don’t act now.
To take a brief snapshot of the current ecological situation, we can
see accelerating climate
change feedback loops are evident in the Arctic, which  as recently as
2007 - was predicted
by the UN’s IPCC to be ice free in summer by 2100, but is now
predicted to be ice free by
2011-2015. Accelerating climate change feedback loops are also evident
in the Amazon,
Southern Europe and Australia, where drying out forests and bush are
vulnerable to
4
devastating fires; and in the weakening of the planet’s carbon sinks
especially the Southern
Ocean  to absorb our carbon pollution (Climate Safety 2008). Meanwhile
we are persuaded
that only economic growth can meet our needs. The responses to climate
change by corporate
compliant governments focus on carbon trading, which does not directly
reduce the CO2
going into the atmosphere, but turns it into a tradable commodity. The
focus is also on
maintaining the so-called ‘carbon sink’ forests of the Global South so
that economic growth
can continue unchecked, while justifying Global players appropriation
of local peoples’
forests and livelihoods (Griffiths 2007).
Recovering a Commons way of thinking, or why it is Rational to be hopeful
Moving towards a society based on Commons sufficiency requires
recovering a Commons
way of thinking and relinquishing dominance thinking, the dualistic
problem solving approach
underpinning non-egalitarian and unsustainable social systems. Several
questions follow from
this:
? How do we make the transition from a system in which problems are
made worse by
the way solutions are imposed  imposed by a supposedly superior realm on a
supposedly inferior realm - to a system that no longer divides the
world into superior
and inferior realms?
? How do we move towards a recognition that  in the current system - 
development
workers, police, doctors, social workers and teachers are entirely
dependent on others’
poverty, criminal acts, ill-health, social problems and supposed lack
of education? For
example, how do we recognise that ending poverty in Africa does not require 
the
supposedly ‘superior’ wealthy and educated ‘West’ to intervene with charity, 
but
requires the ‘West’ to stop building its wealth on forces of
extraction and domination
that impoverish Africa?
? How do we move to a Commons society in which sufficiency and security are
grounded in the ability to respond to fear and lack by continually rebuilding
relationships of trust? How do we create a society in which the
other’s problem is
recognised as arising from a mutual world, and in which solutions are
sought through
dialogue and engagement?
Commons thinking recognises the rich resources available to us by
starting from ensuring the
well-being of locality, and the well-being of others in their
localities, rather than from a
system of competition over resources made scarce by that very
competition. Resources are
assumed to be abundant, and are made abundant by ensuring that all
people and other species
(all ecosystems) have sufficient to meet their needs and to ensure
their flourishing. This is
predicated on the notion that my well-being depends on your
well-being, and on the
assumption that solving problems involves working to restore
relationships of trust rather than
seeking to impose solutions on others.
As Lohmann (2005:20) points out ‘Communal use adapts land, water and
work to local needs
rather than transforming them for trade and accumulation’. In the
sustenance economy
‘satisfying basic needs and ensuring long-term sustainability are the
organizing principles for
natural resource use’ (Shiva 2005: 18). Such Commons approaches can
perhaps best be
understood as Life Projects:
5
Life Projects are about living a purposeful and meaningful life. In
this sense, their
political horizons cannot be located in the future, just as living in
the present cannot be
put on hold in pursuit of a future goal. . . Life Projects have no
political horizon; they
are the political horizon. They are not points of arrival, utopian
places, narratives of
salvation or returns to paradise. They are the very act of maintaining
open-endedness as
a politics of resilience. (Blaser 2004: 48)
Life Projects are coming into focus not only through standing out as a
force to be reckoned
with in the Global South and North, but also through their ability to
build alliances through
which to wrest political space from corporation controlled
governments. This is evident in the
way indigenous people have moved to take control of national
governments in places like
Bolivia, to secure degrees of autonomy through legal means in places
like Canada, or through
creative modes of resistance in places like Mexico. In the UK, it is
evident in crofting
communities’ successful campaigns to take back collective control of
their communities,
which led to the Scottish Land Reform Act securing that right for a
whole range of rural
communities. It is also evident in the emerging movement of Transition
Initiatives in villages,
towns and cities where local people are seeking to enable their
communities to make the
transition from an oil based economy, to a local economy where local
decision-making can
ensure sufficiency for all.
Activity
In small groups, in pairs or by yourself try bringing a Commons way of
thinking to problem
solving. As you attempt the exercise, notice if your response
persistently seeks to revert to
habitual dominant, dualistic problem solving approach:
Think of a political problem that is bothering you (an example given
above is that of
Poverty in Africa, others could be: the role of air travel in
generating carbon emissions,
population growth and poverty, ways of ensuring well-being while reducing 
carbon
emissions to zero, supporting an ageing population, the lack of
affordable childcare, or
‘ghost-town’ high streets due to out-of-town supermarkets).
Instead of thinking about how this problem can be solved by the
wealthy/ powerful/
intelligent/ experts imposing a solution on those deemed poor/
powerless/ stupid/ nonexperts,
imagine that the problem does not lie in the devalued lacking
something but in the
powerful imposing something; imagine that the solution lies in
supporting connections
rather than controlling others; imagine that it lies in discovering,
respecting and
responding to people’s real needs.
How can we identify the processes that trap us in relations of
domination, and how can we
challenge such processes in a way which builds (rather than
undermines) common cause
between all concerned?
____________________
6
Blaser, Mario (2004) Life projects: indigenous peoples' agency and
development. In Mario
Blaser, Harvey Feit and Glenn McRae (eds) In the way of development: 
indigenous
peoples, life projects and globalisation. London: Zed Books
Climate Safety. www.climatesafety.org [a report which provides a
summary of the latest
science and describes ways to avert climate change]
Forest People’s Programme. www.forestpeoples.org [organisation
supporting Forest People’s
rights]
Griffiths, Tom (2007) Seeing RED?: Avoided deforestation and the
rights of indigenous
peoples and local communities. Moreton in Marsh: Forest Peoples Programme
Holyrood 350. www.holyrood350.org [describes four action points for
the Scottish Parliament
for averting climate change]
Kenrick, Justin (2005) Equalising processes, processes of
discrimination and the forest people
of Central Africa. In T. Widlock and W. Tadesse (eds) Property and
equality: Vol. 2
encapsulation, commercialization, discrimination. Oxford: Berghahn. pp 104-128
www.gla.ac.uk/media/media_106649_en.pdf
Kirkby, John, Phil O'Keefe and Lloyd Timberlake (eds) (1995) The
Earthscan reader in
sustainable development. London: Earthscan
Lohmann, Larry (2005) What next? activism, expertise, commons Dag Hammarskjold
Foundation www.thecornerhouse.org.uk/item.shtml?x=369050
Shiva, Vandana (2005) Earth democracy: justice, sustainability and
peace. London: Zed
Books
The Corner House. www.thecornerhouse.org.uk [organisation which
supports democratic and
community movements for environmental and social justice]
Transition Towns. www.transitiontowns.org