4.4.3 The role of state power and policy

In Chicago, when snowstorms cover the city, residents follow an unwritten rule: if you shovel out a parking space, you can claim it until the snow melts. Cleared spots are marked with chairs, crates, or anything handy, signaling the space is "reserved." This community agreement addresses scarce parking during harsh winters and feels fair to many.

However, city officials often remove these markers, arguing that public parking should remain open to all. This creates tension between local government and residents, highlighting how community rules for shared resources—like streets—can clash with the state's vision for public spaces.

This example raises key questions: Why are there tensions between the commons and the state? Can these tensions be resolved to better support commoning?

The commons and the state are often in conflict because they have different ways of viewing and managing resources.

Local community-based rules vs. standardised laws

Commons rely on flexible, community-based rules for specific needs. The state, in contrast, enforces standardised laws for fairness and order across wider society. However, these universal rules can disrupt or contradict effective local systems that work well for people, as you saw in the winter parking example in Chicago. The state may view these conflicting local rules as a threat to state authority and power.

Care and distributed value vs. value extraction

Commoners see resources as shared and cared for, with benefits fairly distributed in the community. Commoners try to find ways to meet their needs outside of the market and the state, for example by forming cooperatives, using local currencies, or managing land and water as shared resources. 

But states are often aligned with businesses in markets because there are financial benefits to doing so. For example, states often support enclosing commons as private property, allowing businesses to charge money for access (Section 3.2.3). These business activities can generate tax revenues for the state.  While not all governments are aligned with businesses like this,  such tensions are widespread.

In most places, commoning is merely tolerated by the state, and only if it doesn’t challenge state power or prevent the state from managing resources as it wants. But states can also take more supportive roles.

State trustee for the commons

A state can act as a trustee, holding resources “in trust” for the public and future generations. With this approach, communities have access to these resources and a role in their care. The resources are treated as belonging to the public rather than the state. The state trustee commons model aligns state policies with commoning principles, emphasising transparency, fairness, and in the best cases also sustainable use. 

For example, Alaska’s Permanent Fund collects revenues from oil drilling on Alaska lands and invests the money for the future. Residents get a yearly payment from the investment income. Oil drilling is problematic from an ecological perspective, but at least the monetary value of the resource is shared more widely among state residents rather than being captured mainly by private businesses. Similar trusts in other countries could ensure communities benefit directly from sustainable resource use, providing a foundation for a universal basic dividend (explored in Topic 5: State).

Commons/public partnerships (CPPs)

Commons/public partnerships (CPPs) combine the strengths of states and commons. The model is based on more well-known public-private partnerships (PPPs), where the state partners with businesses to provide services or develop infrastructure like roads, hospitals, or public transportation.

 In both CPPs and PPPs, the state usually provides land, permits and funding, while the commoners or businesses provide expertise in managing the project and may also contribute some funding. These partnerships take advantage of the strengths of the state and non-state groups, while spreading risks and maximising benefits for all.

In Barcelona, the city government partners with local commons projects. Programmes like the Citizen Asset Program encourage community groups to take over unused public buildings or manage shared spaces. The government provides legal frameworks and resources, while communities handle day-to-day management. This fosters vibrant, locally-driven approaches to city life, shaped by residents’ values and needs while benefiting from state support.

Reimagining the state’s role means shifting from control to cooperation. By offering funding, legal recognition, administrative support, and infrastructure, states can empower commons to manage resources collectively. Civic engagement often drives this shift. Strengthened partnerships between the state and commons can unlock the full potential of commoning, benefiting communities while fostering resilience and social cohesion.

Ideas for longer activities and projects are listed in Subtopic 4.5 Taking action

• Alaska Permanent Fund Video - A video explaining the Alaska Permanent Fund and how it operates to distribute oil wealth as dividends to Alaska residents. Difficulty level: easy.

• The Alaska Permanent Fund: A model for a Universal Basic Dividend? - An article by Earth4All exploring how Alaska's Permanent Fund serves as a practical example of distributing wealth from common resources to citizens, proposing it as a model for a Universal Basic Dividend. Difficulty level: medium.

• Citizen Assets in Barcelona - An article on the Barcelona City Council website about the "Citizen Assets" initiative, which gives residents access to public spaces and resources for community projects. Difficulty level: medium.

• What is Net Neutrality and Why is it Controversial? - A blog post from IT Jones breaking down the principles of net neutrality, its controversies, and its implications for internet users. Difficulty level: medium.

Ajuntament de Barcelona. (n.d.). Citizen assets. https://ajuntament.barcelona.cat/participaciociutadana/en/citizen-assets

Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation. (n.d.). Annual reports. https://apfc.org/report-archive/#14-12-annual-reports

Bollier, D. and Helfrich, S. (2019). “9. State Power and Commoning”. Free, Fair and Alive: The Insurgent Power of the Commons. Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers.

Bollier, D.  (2025). “11. Reimagining State Power”. Think Like a Commoner: A Short introduction to the Life of the Commons, 2nd edition. https://www.thinklikeacommoner.com/

Heidelberg, R. L. (2024). The Incompatibility of the Commons and the Public. International Journal of the Commons, 18</i>(1), 177–187. https://doi.org/10.5334/ijc.1236

Jones, I. T. (n.d.). What is net neutrality and why is it controversial? https://www.itjones.com/blogs/what-is-net-neutrality-and-why-is-it-controversial

Link to Quizlet interactive flashcards and terminology games for Section 4.4.3 The role of state power and policy

scarcity: when there is not enough of something

commons: a system where people self-organise to co-produce and manage shared resources.

state: a system that provides essential public services, and also governs and regulates other economic institutions

commoning: when a group of people self-organise to manage shared resources

power: the ability to influence events or the behaviour of other people

market: a system where people buy and sell goods and services for a price.

cooperative: an organisation owned and controlled by people to meet their common economic, social, and/or cultural needs

local currency: a currency that circulates at a local level and may be different from a national currency

enclosure: the process that ended traditional rights on common land formerly held in the open field system and restricted the use of land to the owner

private property: the ownership of property by private individuals and groups

tax revenue: money collected by a government from individuals and organisations used for public spending and investment

infrastructure: large scale physical systems that a society needs to function (roads, railways, electricity networks, etc)

system: a set of interdependent parts that organise to create a functional whole

net neutrality: the principle that internet service providers must treat all Internet communications equally

trustee: a person who has responsibility for managing money or assets like land that have been set aside in a trust for the benefit of someone else

state trustee commons model: when a state acts as a trustee, holding commons resources in trust for the public and future generations

sustainability: meeting people’s needs within the means of the planet

investment: money spent for the enhancement of human or physical capabilities

universal basic dividend: a way of making regular payments to all citizens from revenue raised by charging fees for the use of common resources

commons-public partnership (CPP): where the state partners with commoners to provide goods or services, or manage resources

public-private partnership (PPP): where the state partners with businesses to provide services or develop infrastructure like roads, hospitals, or public transportation

value: ideas about what is important or good