Commons -I

The commons are what humanity shares in this world. They are the things which are accessible to everyone without discrimination. These things are governed by customs and are decided upon without any financial concerns. Commons include many things which could be sorted into 4 different categories. Urban Commons, Environmental Commons, Cultural Commons and Knowledge Commons. For this case, the focus will be on urban commons.

There could be a confusion between what is public and what is common when thinking about common places or urban commons. Public space has many definitions but our understanding is that, public spaces are places that are accessible to everyone but maintain their operation under the control of government. This causes public spaces to have an visible/invisible barrier that one needs to pass to be able to use it, even though it is marketed as accessible to everyone. Common spaces on the other hand, are governed by emergent customs and maintain their operation with the contributions of their users. Thus these spaces could be considered more accessible. When a place is common the interaction between that space and the individual who is using it is, more undisturbed. Meaning the contribution that the user can make to the common space and the fact that there is no authority watching over you helps form a better connection with the space.

Comparison of a city square and village square can be used to understand the difference between common space and public space even though the distinction is not completely clear. In a village everyone that lives there can have a say on what goes on the square, or can easily contribute to the space by watering the tree, sweeping the ground etc. However, in a city square especially in a city like Istanbul, individuals cannot contribute because municipality takes care of the space. Thus the decisions regarding the square are given by the local authorities.

In commons and especially common spaces contribution of the users are very important. If nobody gives back after constant usage the “Tragedy of Commons” is inevitable. According to Garret Hardin’s “Tragedy of Commons” theory, a common source shared by a group would be consumed in a short time. Contrary to this theory, commonality could result in common wealth rather than consuming of the sources. Because the commons concept is based on the principle of achieving a common wealth after the collective labor of the participants. Therefore, the continuity of the common areas is actually provided by the contributions of the participants, and as these contributions increase, the wealth grows.

by Asude Erdoğmuş and Hümeyra Yeşilyurt