When the enemy is the state: common lands management in northwest Spain (1850–1936)

Abstract

Abstract:In the 19th century, the Spanish government, led by a liberal political project, put up for sale the common properties of villages, and deprived local village authorities of their capacities, powers and laws to manage common woodlands, which were passed to the Forestry Service. This paper, based on Ostrom's hypothesis that state intervention can have negative consequences for the conservation of common resources, is a case study of what happened in the province of León. It is shown that, although the conservation of common resources was endangered because those who were more directly concerned with protecting them were deprived of the means to do so, peasant communities staunchly defended the commons by maintaining traditional practices and uses in their commons.

Forestry conflict in Spain: Rethinking peasant protest and resistance

“…In sum, and as we have seen, without offering anything in return, the forestry authorities proposed a radical change in the use of the common lands. Given that these lands played a key role in the peasants' economic reproduction throughout the entire NW of the Iberian Peninsula, it is only to be expected that the rural population mobilized itself in its defence, using all the means at its disposal, both legal and “illegal” (GEHR, , ; Hervés et al, ; Serrano‐Álvarez, ). First, therefore, forestry infractions need to be understood as the peasants' outright refusal to see themselves stripped of a right considered to be inalienable, namely, deciding for themselves when and how they would exploit the commons, as they had always done.…”

“…As in other times and places (Agrawal, , p. 11), it appears that peasants in León turned to the authorities when matters became serious or could not be resolved locally, or in the case of persistent reoffending, when there was no “other” way of putting matters right. Nonetheless, the state authorities were also used to settle disputes over the use of the commons; with several examples to be found during the Second Republic (1931–1936), livestock farmers went to the Institute of Agrarian Reform to protest against unregulated ploughing, as well as to report the seizure and misappropriation of common lands by the rich and powerful (Serrano‐Álvarez, ).…”

“…Scott might not have realized that the mechanisms of social protest are fuelled by local traditions of resistance (Guha, ), and specifically in León, those issues with a bearing on the community were addressed collectively and openly at village assemblies or councils. It may even be that the state's assault reaffirmed this manner of proceeding, as in 19th century Spain in general, the defence of communal uses not only generated a legitimating discourse but also called for an “old” world of solidarity (Guha, ; López‐Morán, ; Serrano‐Álvarez, ), with collective action revealing the discourse and values of the Ancien Régime (Redondo, ).…”

Transition towards a food commons regime: re-commoning food to crowd-feed the world

“…The processes undoing the communal regime continued through the late nineteenth and the twentieth centuries, relentlessly pursued by the state and wealthy private owners realising the value of land for the production of food and other goods (cotton, sugar, rubber, etc.). Internationally, it was first promoted by imperial trading companies supplying to mother countries and then continued in the post-colonial context; in North America, it took the form of the barbed-wire fencing of open range, while in the Soviet Union, land was 'consolidated' in the collectivisation drive of the 1930s; generally, it was propelled by the need for rural areas to supply the growing urban populations and later justified by the idea that communal property was an obstacle to economic growth and did not guarantee conservation of resources (Serrano-Alvarez, 2014). Finally, over the last thirty years, common lands have suffered a third, global wave of commodification and enclosure, 'land-grabbing' spurred by the dominant neoliberal doctrine and competition for non-renewable natural resources and supported now by the evolutionary theory of land rights (Barnes & Child, 2012).…”

“Goths and Vandals” or “Civilized” Farmers? Common Lands and Agricultural Productivity in Early-Twentieth-Century Spain

“… 40. See, e.g., Iriarte (1998: 135), Balboa (1999: 113), Linares (2001: 43), and Serrano Álvarez (2005: 445; 2014: 112–14). The expansion of cropping on land held in common was also a widespread mechanism to cope with the increasing demand for land during the eighteenth century (Sánchez Salazar 1988).…”