×

WHAT DOES COMMONING LOOK LIKE AROUND THE WORLD?

Curious as to what commoning looks like around the world? The international case studies chosen depict a variety of commoning practices that support and foster the revitalisation of rural village communities outside Hong Kong. From the analysis of the case studies, six key findings are derived which provide the framework for our following research on village commoning in Hong Kong.


Village association is a great starting point for the village commoning process! It is not only villager-initiated and -led, it has also proven to be a productive mode of self-governance in which villagers can set up their own structured mechanisms to evaluate community concerns and needs. The bottom-up approach observed allows villagers to take up leadership roles and simultaneously nurtures a sense of pride towards their own village and assets.

Traditional village culture relies heavily on indigeneity and clanship. “Community” in the village context refers primarily to local villagers. However, it is seen that when villagers expand the definition of their core community to include external stakeholders, such as government units, NPOs, academic insitutions, and other newly-settled villagers, the benefits are plentiful! Analysis of case studies has shown that it introduces a variety of expertise, an inclusive model of governance, and clearer definitions of private and public matters.

As there are a variety of stakeholders involved in the commoning process, the power relations between different parties when they collaborate have proven to be relevant. Commoning initiatives are seen to be most productive when all stakeholders are cognizant of the power relations involved.

A common practice observed in village commoning is the transformation of old commons to new. The modification of villages’ production commons into other forms of common assets can be seen as an updated method of addressing contemporary social and economic needs associated with village living and revitalisation.

As villages relied heavily on production commons for income in the past, that is no longer the case nowadays. Contemporary business models associated with commoning are observed to be the new collective management of commons assets to achieve a common agenda. New entrepreneurial endeavours such as agro-/ eco-/ cultural-/ heritage-tourism as commoning agendas have emerged.

The learning, sharing, and consolidation of knowledge from village history and traditional cultural practices help develop new knowledge commons which are proven to be assets; capacity building to foster stewardship towards village assets becomes essential in the contemporary commoning process. This new knowledge has been seen to allow villagers to initiate capacity building to generate sustainable commoning models, create new commons, and understand their assets and resources in order to build a sense of stewardship towards them.

×

WHAT DOES COMMONING LOOK LIKE AROUND THE WORLD?

Curious as to what commoning looks like around the world? The international case studies chosen depict a variety of commoning practices that support and foster the revitalisation of rural village communities outside Hong Kong. From the analysis of the case studies, six key findings are derived which provide the framework for our following research on village commoning in Hong Kong.


Village association is a great starting point for the village commoning process! It is not only villager-initiated and -led, it has also proven to be a productive mode of self-governance in which villagers can set up their own structured mechanisms to evaluate community concerns and needs. The bottom-up approach observed allows villagers to take up leadership roles and simultaneously nurtures a sense of pride towards their own village and assets.

Traditional village culture relies heavily on indigeneity and clanship. “Community” in the village context refers primarily to local villagers. However, it is seen that when villagers expand the definition of their core community to include external stakeholders, such as government units, NPOs, academic insitutions, and other newly-settled villagers, the benefits are plentiful! Analysis of case studies has shown that it introduces a variety of expertise, an inclusive model of governance, and clearer definitions of private and public matters.

As there are a variety of stakeholders involved in the commoning process, the power relations between different parties when they collaborate have proven to be relevant. Commoning initiatives are seen to be most productive when all stakeholders are cognizant of the power relations involved.

A common practice observed in village commoning is the transformation of old commons to new. The modification of villages’ production commons into other forms of common assets can be seen as an updated method of addressing contemporary social and economic needs associated with village living and revitalisation.

As villages relied heavily on production commons for income in the past, that is no longer the case nowadays. Contemporary business models associated with commoning are observed to be the new collective management of commons assets to achieve a common agenda. New entrepreneurial endeavours such as agro-/ eco-/ cultural-/ heritage-tourism as commoning agendas have emerged.

The learning, sharing, and consolidation of knowledge from village history and traditional cultural practices help develop new knowledge commons which are proven to be assets; capacity building to foster stewardship towards village assets becomes essential in the contemporary commoning process. This new knowledge has been seen to allow villagers to initiate capacity building to generate sustainable commoning models, create new commons, and understand their assets and resources in order to build a sense of stewardship towards them.