CHAPTER V: BACK TO THE FUTURE—POLICY IMPLICATIONS TO THE 21 ST
5.3 P OLICY I MPLICATIONS FROM THE CPR P ERSPECTIVE TO G LOBAL G OVERNANCE T ODAY 99
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
99
differences in the reproduction mechanisms in the two models of British commonfield systems, I argued that Buck’s conception that the Midlands systems was a “triumph” was overstated: the institution itself contained its own seeds of destruction (see Table 5-1). Strong manorial lordship and communalism impeded the development of innovation and possibility of transition towards a pre-capitalist society from within the institutional structure. Also, peasantry trust in the feudalist logic did not play out into their liking. As the landed class and Parliament triumphed over the Crown, the ancient rights and liberties of the tenants were forgotten. The tragedy was contained within the institution before the cards were dealt. It is no wonder that the agony of the Midlanders echoed loudly through history.
5.3 Policy Implications from the CPR Perspective to Global Governance Today
It was sheep that ate men 500 hundred years ago, just as certain interests and forces are eating the men of today. On the local level, many small-scale CPRs were doing quite robust until certain interests become associated with it. It is clear that in the local, national, and even at the international level, there should be more institutionalized channels for the exploited to voice the needs of communities, groups, and/or individuals, be represented in policy making processes, and given access to non-partisan institutional remedies when conflicts arise.
Moreover, these groups should be given social, economic, and even political and legal recognition for their causes and what they are standing up for. Local and national empowerment and recognition with rights of resource appropriation, rights of collective self-management, and rights to non-partisan institutional remedies maybe the most essential answers to many problems of today. It wouldn’t have gone international in the first place.
The importance of Ostrom’s 7th principle of minimum recognition of a higher authority is nicely illustrated in the British commons’ example. Local community-based governing institutions have the ability to operate and sustain themselves without intervention and help from outside authorities. However, basic recognition from outside authorities is needed for
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
100
the self-sustainable institution to sustain without outside intervention. In the British commons case, enclosure movement encroached bit by bit the peasants’ usage rights or appropriation rights of land and goods (hay, wood, pit, etc.) on the common waste. It was originally understood in most communities, communal and less-communal alike, that peasants had rights to collect goods from the commons, add certain number of animals to the village herd, and was entitled some scattered strips of land to cultivate. In the end, not only did they serfs and peasants lose the rights to use the commons, they were eventually evicted from their land.
When cases like this happens, then no wondering phenomena like La Via Campesina are going on the streets with radical opinions, just like the peasant revolts. Moreover, there seems to be “sheep” everywhere eating men, thus making it become a transnational agrarian movement within no more than a decade. These are all issues of democracy, transparency, representation, and legitimacy. And learning from the case study above, none of this is new, for they have happened before in the past. Now we are back in the “future”, we all know how it ended and why.
Hence, how can the case of British medieval commons shed light on the literature? It is clear that historical cases can teach us various things. In the case of the British commons, it failed miserably due to the loss of outside authority recognition, as well as inadequate legal protection and biased conflict resolution mechanisms. Interestingly, as mentioned in the introduction, various movements becoming international today were originally locally originated issues that could have been resolve at the local or national level. Calls for solutions from the bottom level are increasing and not without reason: empirical evidences prove that many communities have successfully managed their commons for centuries. Therefore, if we can learn from past cases and design a resilient institution to be sustainable and robust, or let communities design their own institutions, the government or outer authorities only need to give communities the basic recognition and/or legal protection with an unbiased remedy channel. If such a goal can be achieved, many issued of today can be addressed or at least
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
101
mitigated to a certain extent.
5.4 Further Research Suggestions
Now we see that the British medieval commonfields did in fact have interesting implications to nowadays governance. I do believe a more detailed evaluation of the two models (and even others) is needed for a clearer understanding of deeper contributing factors neglected in this research (i.e., religion, social capital, etc.). On making sense of the results of historical causal analysis, my intended marriage try out with Ostrom’s 8 long-enduring principles have not been excitingly fruitful. Maybe later insights of her project would help better understandings of how and why the commons worked or failed to work. However, historical details are a large constraint to overcome. On use of research approach and theoretical framework, I find the “reaction sequences” maybe a possible way to reconstruct the casual relations in the East Anglia model, which may be totally another story, but still may bring more insights to the differences of the two models. Last but not the least, understanding local conditions is still light years away from understanding the global. It is very hard for a direct relation of the two, but not impossible. From personal observations, many global level initiatives lack good national or local implementation mechanisms. Issues of monitoring, sanctioning, and free riding happen commonly. From another angle, many international issues also arise from weak national or local level governance, as mentioned in this paper. Personally, I believe that this is a possible route to marry the community and the global. However, this still requires a lot of work.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
102
Bibliography
Amt, Emilie. Medieval England, 1000-1500: A Reader. Peterborough, Ont.; Orchard Park, N.Y.: Broadview Press, 2001.
Avant, Deborah D., Martha Finnemore & Susan K. Sell. “Who Governs the Globe?” In Who Governs the Globe?, edited by Deborah D. Avant, Martha Finnemore, and Susan K. Sell, 1-31. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
Baden John A. and Douglas S. Noonan eds. Managing the Commons. 2nd ed. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1998.
Baker, Alan R. H. “Howard Levi Gray and English Field Systems: An Evaluation,”
Agricultural History 39, no. 2 (April, 1965): 86-91.
Baker, Alan R. H. and Robert A. Butlin. “Conclusion: Problems and Perspectives.” In Studies of Field Systems in the British Isles, edited by Alan R. H. Baker and Robert A. Butlin, 619-656. Cambridge, England: University Press, 1973.
Bloch, Marc. French Rural History. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1966.
Buck, Susan J. The Global Commons: An Introduction. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1998.
Byrne, Steve. Common Land, Open Country: Defining a Future for the Countryside of England and Wales. Charlbury: Jon Carpenter, 2003.
Campbell, Bruce M. S. “Commonfield Origins—the Regional Dimension.” In The Origins of Open Field Agriculture, edited by T. Rowley, 112-129. London: Croom Helm, 1981.
Campbell, Bruce M. S. “Population Change and the Genesis of Commonfields on a Norfolk Manor,” The Economic History Review 33, no. 2 (May, 1980): 180-191.
Campbell, John L. Institutional Change and Globalization. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2004.
Clapham, John. A Concise Economic History of Britain: From the Earliest Times to 1750.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
103
London: Cambridge University Press, 1949/1963.
Claude, Inis L., Jr.. "Peace and Security: Prospective Roles for the Two United Nations,"
Global Governance 2, no. 3 (1996): 289-298.
Collins, Randall, Four Sociological Traditions. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994.
Cox, Susan Jane Buck. “No Tragedy on the Commons,” Environmental Ethics 7 (Spring, 1985): 49-61.
Crowe, Beryle L. “The Tragedy of the Commons Revisited,” Science, New Series 166, no.
3909 (November, 1969): 1103-1107.
DiMaggio, Paul J. and Walter W. Powell eds., The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991.
Dyer, Christopher. Making a Living in the Middle Ages: The People of Britain 850-1520.
New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 2002.
Elms, Deborah Kay, “New Directions for IPE: Drawing from Behavioral Economics,”
International Studies Review 10 (June, 2008): 239-265.
Ertman, Thomas. Birth of the Leviathan: Building States and Regimes in Medieval and Early Modern Europe.Cambridge, U.K.; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
Feeny, David, Fikret Berkes, Bonnie J. McCay, and James M. Acheson. “The Tragedy of the Commons: Twenty-Two Years Later,” Human Ecology 18, no. 1 (1990): 1-19.
Fisher, Dana R. “COP-15 in Copenhagen: How the Merging of Movements Left Civil Society Out in the Cold,” Global Environmental Politics 10, no. 2 (2010): 11-17.
Fisher, Dana R., and Jessica Green. “Understanding Disenfranchisement: Civil Society and Developing Countries’ Influence and Participation in Global Governance for Sustainable Development,” Global Environmental Politics 4, no. 3 (2004): 65–84.
Gonner, E.C.K. Common Land and Inclosure. London: Macmillan and Co., 1912.
Gray, Howard Levi. English Field Systems. Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1915.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
104
Grief, Avner and David D. Laitin. “A Theory of Endogenous Institutional Change,” American Political Science Review 98, no. 4 (2004): 633-652.
Hall, Peter A. and Rosemary C. R. Taylor. “Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms,” Political Studies 44 (1996): 936-957.
Hall, Peter A. and Rosemary C. R. Taylor. “The Potential of Historical Institutionalism: a Response to Han and Wincott,” Political Studies 46 (1998): 958-962.
Hampson, Fen Osler and Paul Heinbecker. “The ‘New’ Multilateralism of the Twenty-First Century,” Global Governance 17, no. 3 (2011): 299-310.
Hardin, Garrett. “The Tragedy of the Commons.” In Managing the Commons. 2nd ed, edited by John A. Baden and Douglas S. Noonan, 3-16. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1998. Originally published in Science 162 (1968): 1243-1248.
Hardin, Garrett. “The Tragedy of the Unmanaged Commons,” Trends in Ecology & Evolution 9, no. 5 (1994): 199.
Harriss, Gerald. Shaping the Nation: England, 1360-1461. Oxford, England; New York, N.Y.:
Oxford University Press, 2005.
Holt, James Clarke. Magna Carta. Cambridge: University Press, 1965.
Homans, George C. “The Explanation of English Regional Differences,” The Past and Present Society 42 (February, 1969): 18-34.
Hopcroft, Rosemary L. “The Importance of the Local: Rural Institutions and Economic Change in Preindustrial England.” In The New Institutionalism in Sociology, edited by Mary C. Brinton and Victor Nee, 277-304. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1998.
Hopcroft, Rosemary L. Regions, Institutions, and Agrarian Change in European History.
Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1999.
Ikenberry, G. J. “History’s Heavy Hand: Institutions and the Politics of the State.” Paper presented at conference on The New Institutionalism, University of Maryland, October 14-15, 1994.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
105
Karns, Margaret P. and Karen A. Mingst. International Organizations: The Politics and Processes of Global Governance. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner, 2004.
Katzenstein, Peter J. ed. Between Power and Plenty: Foreign Economic Policies of Advanced Industrial States. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1977.
Keck, Margaret E. and Kathryn Sikkink. Activists beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1998.
Krasner, Stephen D. Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1999.
La Via Campesina. “The International Peasant's Voice.” La Via Campesina: The International Peasant's Movement. La Via Campesina: International Peasant's Movement. Accessed February 9, 2011. http://viacampesina.org/en/index.php/organisation-mainmenu-44.
Lachmann, Richard. From Manor to Market: Structural Change in England, 1536-1640.
Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1987.
Lazonick, William. “Karl Marx and Enclosures in England,” Review of Radical Economics 6, no. 2 (1974): 1-59.
Levi, Margaret. Of Rule and Revenue. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988.
Mahoney, James and Daniel Schensul. “Historical Context and Path Dependence.” In The Oxford Handbook of Contextual Political Analysis, edited by Robert E. Goodin and Charles Tilly, 454-471. Oxford, England; New York, USA: Oxford University Press, 2006.
Mahoney, James and Kathleen Thelen. “A Theory of Gradual Institutional Change.” In Explaining Institutional Change, edited by James Mahoney and Kathleen Thelen, 1-38.
New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
Mahoney, James. “Path Dependence in Historical Sociology,” Theory and Society 29 (2000):
507-548.
Moore, Barrington. Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lord and Peasant in the
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
106
Making of the Modern World. Boston: Beacon Press, 1966/1993.
North, Douglass C. and Robert Paul Thomas. The Rise of the Western World: A New Economic History. London; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1973.
North, Douglass C. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance.
Cambridge, U.K.; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
Olson, Mancur, Jr. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups.
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1965.
Orwin C.S. and Orwin C.S. The Open Fields. 3rd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1967.
Ostrom, Elinor, Roy Gardner, and James Walker. Rules, Games, and Common-pool Resources.
Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press, 1994.
Ostrom, Elinor. “Background on the Institutional Analysis and Development Framework,”
The Policy Studies Journal 39, no. 1 (2011): 7-27.
Ostrom, Elinor. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action.
New York, NY.: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
Overton, Mark. Agricultural Revolution in England: The Transformation of the Agrarian Economy 1500-1850. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
Patriquin, Larry. Agrarian Capitalism and Poor Relief in England, 1500-1860. New York:
Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.
Pierson, Paul and Theda Skocpol, “Historical Institutionalism In Contemporary Political Science.” In Political Science: The State of the Discipline, edited by Ira Katznelson and Helen V. Milner, 693-721. New York: Norton; Washington, D.C.: American Political Science Association, 2002.
Pierson, Paul. Politics in Time: History, Institutions, and Social Analysis. Princeton, N.J.:
Princeton University Press, 2004.
Poole, Austin Lane. From Domesday book to Magna Carta, 1087-1216. 2nd ed. Oxford:
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
107
Clarendon Press, 1955.
Roberts, B. K. “Field Systems of the West Midlands.” In Studies of Field Systems in the British Isles, edited by Alan R. H. Baker and Robert A. Butlin, 188-231. Cambridge, England: University Press, 1973.
Rosenau James N.. “Governance, Order and Change in World Politics.” In Governance Without Government: Order and Change in World Politics, edited by James N. Rosenau and Ernst-Otto Czempiel, 1-29. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1992.
Rosenau, James N. “Governance in the Twenty-first Century,” Global Governance 1, no. 1 (1995): 13-43.
Rosenau, James N. “Sovereignty in a Turbulent World.” In Beyond Westphalia? State Sovereignty and International Intervention, edited by Michael Mastanduno and Gene Lyons, 191-227. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995.
Rueschemeyer D., Stephens E.H., Stephens J.D. Capitalist Development and Democracy.
Chichago: University Chicago Press, 1992.
Scholte, Jan A.. “Civil Society and Democracy in Global Governance,” Global Governance 8, no. 3 (2002): 281-304.
Scott, W. Richard. Institutions and Organizations: Ideas and Interests. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, 2001.
Skocpol, Theda. Protecting Soldiers and Mothers: The Political Origins of Social Policy in the United States. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993.
Stinchcombe, Arthur L., Constructing Social Theories. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1968.
Strange, Michael. “Discursivity of Global Governance: Vestiges of ‘Democracy’ in the World Trade Organization,” Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 36, no. 3 (2011): 240-256.
Thelen, Kathleen. “Historical Institutionalism in Corporative Politics,” Annual Review of Political Science 2 (1999): 369-404.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
108
Thirsk, Joan. “Field of the East Midlands.” In Studies of Field Systems in the British Isles, edited by Alan R. H. Baker and Robert A. Butlin, 232-280. Cambridge, England:
University Press, 1973.
Thirsk, Joan. “Preface to the Third Edition.” In The Open Fields, edited by C. S. Orwin and C.
S. Orwin, v-xv. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1967.
Thirsk, Joan. “The Common Fields,” Past & Present 29 (December, 1964): 3-25.
Titow, J. Z., “Medieval England and the Open-Field System,” The Past and Present Society 32 (December, 1965): 86-102.
Weiss, Thomas G. “Governance, Good Governance and Global Governance: Conceptual and Actual Challenges,” Third World Quarterly 21, no. 5 (2000): 795-814.
Weiss, Thomas G., Tatiana Carayannis, and Richard Jolly. “The ‘Third’ United Nations,”
Global Governance 15, no. 1 (2009): 123-142.
Willets, Peter. Non-governmental Organizations in World Politics: The Construction of Global Governance. London; New York: Routledge, 2011.
Zysman, John, “How Institutions Create Historically Rooted Trajectories of Growth,”
Industrial and Corporate Change 3, no. 1 (1994): 243-283.