On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Julio Huato <[email protected]> wrote:
> > For those who are interested in Ellinor Ostrom's work on running the > commons, I have come to the conclusion that -- insofar as she proves > anything with her highly idiosyncratic but interest models -- is the > need for a communist party (or however you may wish to call it). Paul Burkett (2003): Ecology and marx's vision of communism, Socialism and Democracy, 17:2, 41-72: > The potential for ecological management of production through a > communalization of natural conditions is clear from Elinor Ostrom's survey > of communal property systems in common pool resources (CPRs) (Ostrom, > 1990), and from Peter Usher's analysis of "aboriginal property systems in > land and resources" in Canada (Usher, 1993). Both argue that communal > management is a credible alternative to either private property with > markets or centralized government control. Experience shows, however, that > communal systems are most effective when they are run through associations > set up and governed by resource users themselves, where "user" is defined > in the broad sense of anyone whose well-being is significantly dependent on > the CPRs in question. These associations ensure "the formal recognition of > a non-moneyed property interest... a property right that arises from use" > (Usher, 1993, p. 102). *This basically corresponds to Marx's conception > of "self-government of the producers" based on communal appropriation of > the conditions of production (Marx, 1985, p. 72).* -- Cheers, Tom Walker (Sandwichman)
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
