Submitted by David A. Bollier on Wednesday, 2/17/2010, at 11:19 AM

 

Sorry that this posting is a bit late.  Please consider each of the questions below and offer some preliminary answers.  We will discuss more fully on Wednesday.

1.  Name some resources whose status as “private property” versus “public” or “commons” property is now contested.  What are some of the specific policy arenas in which those disputes are playing out, and who are the warring parties?  (Examples:  zoning rules may pit landowners against local residents; the naming rights of city-owned sports arenas may divide team owners and sports fans/citizens; and Facebook's "terms of service" may claim ownership in personal data over the objections of users.) 

The sky- Air traffic along with pollution contribute to the negative externalities of open space that may seem to be common property.

Oil deposits and Production Sharing Agreements in developing nations- Nigeria, and Kazakhstan are both renegotiating agreements made with oil companies over the percentage of ownership of oil in their land. Botswana did something similar with its diamond mines in the 60's.

Elements of the human body- this is evident in the battles between doctors and researchers and their patient’s rights to their cells and the scientific returns from them.

Academic work, publications, research, and discoveries by professors -- should the university retain ownership/copyright or be made publicly available (creative commons & non-patentable)

 2.  In what respects is common property an affront and perhaps even a threat to the authority and revenue-potential of businesses?  In what respects is common property a real benefit or boon to businesses?

Intellectual property that is easily shared is a significant threat to major business. The record industry and musical artists are the most obvious business entities suffering from this issue. Though music can be dispersed much more easily, the return to the creator is lessened.  The example of the community garden driving up rents and retail prices in their areas are is an example of such common property being a boon for business.

 

3.   The story of the community gardens in New York City (as described in Silent Theft) illustrates how the gift economy can generate value – and also its vulnerability to the market economy.  Speculate on some ways that the gift economy (in different manifestations) can be protected.

The government can offer tax incentives for common related projects. Further to this different legal definitions of property could be developed to protect the commons and gift system. Rational and kind behavior relying on group social development as opposed to individual growth would support the cause as well.

Legal statuses like the GPL which modify existing copyright law can also be used to prevent the gift economy from being privatized.

4.  Property rights in a market economy and a gift economy imply different types of social relationships and order.  Describe the most salient social dimensions of each.

 

Property rights in a market economy rely on individual property, as well as an empirical system by which it is valued. All property can be quantified and given its own monetary value. As a result it is protected and utilized solely by the owner.

 

The gift economy model is much more fluid. Gifts are transferred and retain a different value to different people. Further to this, gifts are constantly transferred and there is no concept of individual ownership. Rather the holder of the gift simply retains it until it is given once more. 

 

Market property also implies an arms-length, transactional form of social relationship, while a gift economy requires a community where people care about each other and their reputation in the community. There are advantages and disadvantages to each. Community and the positive feelings it generates is itself a good thing that has real value. On the other hand, it is limited in scale and scope - it is much easier to care about someone if you interact with them regularly, and your reputation is much more important if you are dealing with the same groups of people frequently. Market transactions don't require familiarity with the people you transact with to this extent, which allows you to interact with a wider pool of possible trading partners.

The expansion of communication technologies like the internet increases the potential sphere for both kinds of relationships. Ebay and Amazon allow you to find and transact with anyone in the world who has an internet connection and a shipping address, while online forums allow communities to develop between like-minded people who live far away from one another.