Jean-David Gerber Geographisches Institut Universität Bern IASC 2017 New commons and resilience: Do CSR schemes compensate for “commons grabbing”? Corporate Social Responsibility Jean-David Gerber Geographisches Institut Universität Bern Tobias Haller Sozialanthropologisches Institut Universität Bern

Sociospatial effects of LSLAs 2

Sociospatial effects of LSLAs 3

Input / output / benefit / compensation Discourse on wasteland Discourse on progress “development” “modernization” profit Agricultural produce local jobs knowledge LSLA Land Water Commons Capital Compensation CSR schemes 4

Questions Are compensation and CSR measures to be considered “new commons” as a new CPR managed by a common property institutions? Who benefits from the new commons? Who gets access and who is excluded? Who was using the old commons?  Resilience? Is there a gender dimension to the new commons? Do men and women differently get included or excluded? New commons might also attract new commoners: Who are these, how do they shape the rules of the game? Processes of institution shopping and ideological justification: Which rules, regulations and laws are used by whom to define and legitimate the distribution of compensatory measures? 5

Conceptual distinction: CPR CPRI Issues at stake: long-term Why «new commons»? Conceptual distinction: CPR CPRI Issues at stake: long-term co-decision in / out perception gender power ideology 6

7

Added-value of the concept of new commons in connection with LSLA? Discussion Added-value of the concept of new commons in connection with LSLA? 8

Defining the CPRI is a political issue  who is in favor of them? Discussion Relevance of the distinction between CPR (commons) and CPRI (institutions) Perception of commons commons as a relict of the past? commons as a legitimation strategy? commons as a political objective? commons as “anti-politics machine”? Defining the CPRI is a political issue  who is in favor of them? investors? local elites? marginal groups? 9

Defining the new commons and their CPRI Membership Discussion Defining the new commons and their CPRI Membership Gender issue in the definition of CPRI incl. class specific position of women Power differences in the old commons in the new commons Ideology pushing toward privatization male-dominated management of the resource 10

Formality vs. informality Discussion Formality vs. informality Who has the power to claim rights? who has access to the formal? who has access to justice?  Issue of managing the informality Old commons managed by customary law or informal rules; new commons managed by soft law or formal rules Fair rules a the formal level… which do not translate into fairness on the ground (even worse: they may be used as excuses) Commons were constitutive of the old system. They are at odd with the new system Old commons were long-term. Compensation and CSR schemes are short-term Development projects (e.g. LSLA) tend to widen the gap between those – the minority – who are included and the others 11

Conclusion How should compensation and CSR schemes be conceived in order to be “new commons”? 12

Thank you 13 What do we mean by new commons? Also from a gender perspective? We do not show enough the power differences in the traditional common system Commons = CPR Common pool resource institution Perception of commons Legitimation strategy Defining the CPRI is a political issue  politics of creation of the commons Gender issue in the definition of CPRI, incl. class specific position of women Membership Front stage discourse: this is a CPR Back stage reality: the new resource is privatized What are the existing CPR that are put at risk by the investment? Are they managed by CPRIs? Importance of ideology pushing toward privatization and male-dominated management of the resource. Is there a resistance against this shift toward privatization? Commons as an ideology to fight for Commons as an antipolitics machine Formality vs. informality. How has the power to claim rights? Access to the formal. Access to justice. Managing the informality Old commons managed by customary law or informal rules; new commons managed by soft law or formal rules (e.g. do quota for women really work?) There are often fair rules a the formal level, but they do not translate into fairness on the ground (even worse: they are often used as excused on paper) This shift from customary to formal law has implications. Commons were constitutive of the old system. They are at odd with the new system. Development projects (linked with LSLA and others) tend to widen the gap between those – the minority – who are included and the others 13

14

LSLAs lead to the privatization of land Spatial effects What do we mean by new commons? Also from a gender perspective? We do not show enough the power differences in the traditional common system Commons = CPR Common pool resource institution Perception of commons Legitimation strategy Defining the CPRI is a political issue  politics of creation of the commons Gender issue in the definition of CPRI, incl. class specific position of women Membership Front stage discourse: this is a CPR Back stage reality: the new resource is privatized What are the existing CPR that are put at risk by the investment? Are they managed by CPRIs? Importance of ideology pushing toward privatization and male-dominated management of the resource. Is there a resistance against this shift toward privatization? Commons as an ideology to fight for Commons as an antipolitics machine Formality vs. informality. How has the power to claim rights? Access to the formal. Access to justice. Managing the informality Old commons managed by customary law or informal rules; new commons managed by soft law or formal rules (e.g. do quota for women really work?) There are often fair rules a the formal level, but they do not translate into fairness on the ground (even worse: they are often used as excused on paper) This shift from customary to formal law has implications. Commons were constitutive of the old system. They are at odd with the new system. Development projects (linked with LSLA and others) tend to widen the gap between those – the minority – who are included and the others LSLAs lead to the privatization of land 15

LSLAs lead to the privatization of land Spatial effects What do we mean by new commons? Also from a gender perspective? We do not show enough the power differences in the traditional common system Commons = CPR Common pool resource institution Perception of commons Legitimation strategy Defining the CPRI is a political issue  politics of creation of the commons Gender issue in the definition of CPRI, incl. class specific position of women Membership Front stage discourse: this is a CPR Back stage reality: the new resource is privatized What are the existing CPR that are put at risk by the investment? Are they managed by CPRIs? Importance of ideology pushing toward privatization and male-dominated management of the resource. Is there a resistance against this shift toward privatization? Commons as an ideology to fight for Commons as an antipolitics machine Formality vs. informality. How has the power to claim rights? Access to the formal. Access to justice. Managing the informality Old commons managed by customary law or informal rules; new commons managed by soft law or formal rules (e.g. do quota for women really work?) There are often fair rules a the formal level, but they do not translate into fairness on the ground (even worse: they are often used as excused on paper) This shift from customary to formal law has implications. Commons were constitutive of the old system. They are at odd with the new system. Development projects (linked with LSLA and others) tend to widen the gap between those – the minority – who are included and the others LSLAs lead to the privatization of land 16