公共住房中的社区控制:一个概念类型学

IF 1.8 3区 经济学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES International Journal of the Commons Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.5334/ijc.1093
C. Durose, L. Richardson, Max Rozenburg, Matt Ryan, O. Escobar
{"title":"公共住房中的社区控制:一个概念类型学","authors":"C. Durose, L. Richardson, Max Rozenburg, Matt Ryan, O. Escobar","doi":"10.5334/ijc.1093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We advance theorizing on the governance of the commons through a configurative comparative analysis (CCA) of community control in the housing commons. We focus our analysis on community land trusts (CLTs), which are increasingly recognised as a potential governance mechanism for collective access to housing provision for low-income communities. Through systematic comparative analysis of CLTs in the US and UK, we extend the existing evidence base and develop a conceptual typology of community control in the housing commons. The typology suggests that whilst some social purposes for CLTs may align with notions of the commons – enrichment of community politics, conservation of community life, or creation of participatory governance – other CLTs focus on housing provision as a means of making a broader contribution to the social economy, or as an asset-lock to enable wider provision for affordable housing. By understanding this differentiation, we challenge the assumption that design principles or governance mechanisms are sufficient for or inherently offer a singly clear route to community control, and recognise that community control is achieved through different pathways informed by the multiple configurations of dynamics between different aspects of governance, as usefully illuminated by CCA. Our approach demonstrates the value to scholarship and activism on the commons of systematic comparative analysis in order to interrogate the expansion of the commons not only in practice but in spirit.","PeriodicalId":47250,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of the Commons","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Community Control in the Housing Commons: A Conceptual Typology\",\"authors\":\"C. Durose, L. Richardson, Max Rozenburg, Matt Ryan, O. Escobar\",\"doi\":\"10.5334/ijc.1093\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We advance theorizing on the governance of the commons through a configurative comparative analysis (CCA) of community control in the housing commons. We focus our analysis on community land trusts (CLTs), which are increasingly recognised as a potential governance mechanism for collective access to housing provision for low-income communities. Through systematic comparative analysis of CLTs in the US and UK, we extend the existing evidence base and develop a conceptual typology of community control in the housing commons. The typology suggests that whilst some social purposes for CLTs may align with notions of the commons – enrichment of community politics, conservation of community life, or creation of participatory governance – other CLTs focus on housing provision as a means of making a broader contribution to the social economy, or as an asset-lock to enable wider provision for affordable housing. By understanding this differentiation, we challenge the assumption that design principles or governance mechanisms are sufficient for or inherently offer a singly clear route to community control, and recognise that community control is achieved through different pathways informed by the multiple configurations of dynamics between different aspects of governance, as usefully illuminated by CCA. Our approach demonstrates the value to scholarship and activism on the commons of systematic comparative analysis in order to interrogate the expansion of the commons not only in practice but in spirit.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47250,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of the Commons\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of the Commons\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5334/ijc.1093\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of the Commons","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/ijc.1093","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

我们通过配置比较分析(CCA)对住房公地的社区控制提出了公地治理的理论。我们的分析重点是社区土地信托(clt),它越来越被认为是低收入社区集体获得住房供应的潜在治理机制。通过对美国和英国clt的系统比较分析,我们扩展了现有的证据基础,并发展了住房公地社区控制的概念类型学。该类型学表明,虽然clt的一些社会目的可能与公地的概念一致——丰富社区政治、保护社区生活或创建参与式治理——但其他clt侧重于住房供应,将其作为对社会经济做出更广泛贡献的手段,或作为资产锁定,以实现更广泛的可负担住房供应。通过理解这种差异,我们挑战了这样一种假设,即设计原则或治理机制足以或本质上为社区控制提供一条明确的单一途径,并认识到社区控制是通过不同途径实现的,这些途径是由治理不同方面之间的多种动态配置提供的,正如CCA有用地阐明的那样。我们的方法展示了系统比较分析对公共领域的学术和行动主义的价值,以便不仅在实践中而且在精神上质疑公共领域的扩张。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Community Control in the Housing Commons: A Conceptual Typology
We advance theorizing on the governance of the commons through a configurative comparative analysis (CCA) of community control in the housing commons. We focus our analysis on community land trusts (CLTs), which are increasingly recognised as a potential governance mechanism for collective access to housing provision for low-income communities. Through systematic comparative analysis of CLTs in the US and UK, we extend the existing evidence base and develop a conceptual typology of community control in the housing commons. The typology suggests that whilst some social purposes for CLTs may align with notions of the commons – enrichment of community politics, conservation of community life, or creation of participatory governance – other CLTs focus on housing provision as a means of making a broader contribution to the social economy, or as an asset-lock to enable wider provision for affordable housing. By understanding this differentiation, we challenge the assumption that design principles or governance mechanisms are sufficient for or inherently offer a singly clear route to community control, and recognise that community control is achieved through different pathways informed by the multiple configurations of dynamics between different aspects of governance, as usefully illuminated by CCA. Our approach demonstrates the value to scholarship and activism on the commons of systematic comparative analysis in order to interrogate the expansion of the commons not only in practice but in spirit.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of the Commons
International Journal of the Commons ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
10.50%
发文量
17
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊最新文献
Can the Indonesian collective action norm of Gotong-Royong be strengthened with economic incentives? Comparing the implementation of an aquaculture irrigation policy program The Drivers of Farmers’ Participation in Collaborative Water Management: A French Perspective The Use of the Institutional Grammar 1.0 for Institutional Analysis: A Literature Review Diagnosing Participation and Inclusion in Collective Decision-Making in the Commons: Lessons from Ecuador Westphalian Sovereignty and the Free-Rider Conundrum in the Atmospheric Commons: Examining Global Governance Regimes for Addressing Climate Change Adaptation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1