Spatiality of the Commons

Abstract

This editorial sets the scene for the special feature by explaining the importance of geography to the commons and its governance, critically appraising the existing literature on this theme, highlighting important contributions from recent research and mapping out a future research agenda. It begins by reflecting on how little explicit attention has been paid to date to the spatial dimensions of the commons. The author critiques on the one hand the literature on the commons for conceiving of spatiality primarily as the local, physical context of commons use and regulation but also, on the other hand, the spatial science literature for generally neglecting the commons, both conceptually and empirically. The paper then pinpoints important exceptions in the fields of human geography and planning studies, assessing how these works contribute to a more thorough and robust understanding of the relationship between spatiality, the commons and their governance. The analysis of these select works making explicit reference to the commons is complemented with a reflection on how broader debates in the spatial sciences can enrich spatial research on the commons. The final section turns to the papers of the special feature, summarizing each of the papers in order and indicating how they each contribute to the themes developed in the editorial.

Thule as Frontier

“…This takes us back to the far from simple question of spatiality as implicit in the delineation of the commons (Moss 2014). As suggested, 'commons [are] not so much found as produced' (Blomley 2008: 320); commons is a form of place-making.…”

Mobility in the mangroves: Catch rates, daily decisions, and dynamics of artisanal fishing in a coastal commons

“…Giordano's (2003) spatially-explicit theory of the commons is based on a typology of resource characteristics along the lines of fugitive, migratory, and open-access, which reflects variations in geography to better understand the interaction between the spatial domains of the resource base and its users. Moss (2014) points out that spatial concepts like space, place, territory, and scale have been treated more as a fixed means of categorization in the commons literature rather than an object of analysis in and of itself. Moss further highlights the essentializing tendencies of the institutional literature on the commons, which has narrowly conceived of space as a static biophysical realm, thereby failing to appreciate the dynamic human-environment interactions, cultural-political dimensions, various forms of agency, and alternative geographies that shape the production, use, and regulation of the commons (Moss, 2014).…”

“…Moss (2014) points out that spatial concepts like space, place, territory, and scale have been treated more as a fixed means of categorization in the commons literature rather than an object of analysis in and of itself. Moss further highlights the essentializing tendencies of the institutional literature on the commons, which has narrowly conceived of space as a static biophysical realm, thereby failing to appreciate the dynamic human-environment interactions, cultural-political dimensions, various forms of agency, and alternative geographies that shape the production, use, and regulation of the commons (Moss, 2014). Combining ethnographic research on the fishery commons with human behavioral ecology has the potential to address some of these deficiencies in commons theory since spatial and temporal patterns in harvesting behavior represent a dynamic human-environment interface.…”

“…Even though there is a general perception of reliable return rates on a day-to-day basis, many fishers increasingly find it challenging to let their preferred fishing grounds rest two to four weeks after a harvest according to their local ecological knowledge and understanding about resource renewal. Many fishers are also concerned about new competition and the loss of fishing space due to mangrove destruction by shrimp farms or enclosure by other custodias, pointing to the ways in which the problem of the commons is also shaped by alternative cultural, political, and economic geographies (Beitl, 2012;Martinez-Alier, 2001;Moss, 2014).…”

“…Similarly, customary marine tenure institutions have also been exalted in the literature as social systems that effectively manage resources through controlled access and regulated use (Colding & Folke, 2001;Dyer & McGoodwin, 1994;Johannes, 1978Johannes, , 2002 notwithstanding some skepticism about the assumed conservation ethics embedded within those institutions (Lu, 2001;Pollnac & Johnson, 2005;Ruttan, 1998;Thomas, 2001). Despite numerous theoretical advances about the crucial role of formal and informal institutions in environmental governance, the commons literature has given less explicit attention to how spatial-temporal dynamics of the commons are produced socially, politically and materially by various forms of human agency (Moss, 2014) and how system-level patterns can emerge out of the self-interested behaviors of individuals as a "precursor of governance" (Wilson, Yan, & Wilson, 2007). These questions are especially critical considering that research on the spatial dimensions of fishing behavior is of burgeoning interest in the fisheries science and management literature (Abernethy, Allison, Molloy, & Côté, 2007;Daw, 2008;Salas & Gaertner, 2004;Teh, Teh, & Meitner, 2012).…”