The commons institution of Antarctica: a roadmap to governance of mankind resources
Purpose: This paper aims to draw on Ostrom’s commons theory to analyse the governance regime of Antarctic as a commons institution. Antarctic is a peculiar territorial space on Earth, which due to its unique characteristics constitutes a global common resource that very much resembles outer space re...
| Published in: | Journal of Property, Planning and Environmental Law |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/11615/70836 https://doi.org/10.1108/JPPEL-02-2021-0013 |
| Summary: | Purpose: This paper aims to draw on Ostrom’s commons theory to analyse the governance regime of Antarctic as a commons institution. Antarctic is a peculiar territorial space on Earth, which due to its unique characteristics constitutes a global common resource that very much resembles outer space resources. On these grounds, the paper highlights successful, and less successful, arrangements developed in the Antarctic commons to be considered as a blueprint or roadmap towards the governance of outer space resources as a commons. Design/methodology/approach: The paper uses first, the social-ecological system (SES) framework to outline the characteristics of Antarctic as a commons institution, and second, Ostrom’s design principles to assess the commons institution of Antarctic. The Antarctic commons institution is used next, as an analogy to reflect on the challenges outer space global resource face and the way it could be managed. Findings: The paper concludes that Antarctic enjoys a functional, credible and successful commons institution that should reinforce the twofold governance structure it exhibits. Similar cases of global common resources, such as these of outer space, that seek to establish a similar commons institution should take into account issues related the benefits spectrum and the credible commitment of actors to engage in different levels of the governance regime. What matters is not necessarily the form of the regime but rather how the commons as an institution functions, whether it fulfils the needs and interests of the driving actors and, on these grounds, how credible these arrangements are in the eyes of the committed members. Research limitations/implications: Both Antarctica and outer space are rather unique cases and domains of multiple resources. Practical implications: The paper provides an analogy to consider sustainable appropriation of global resources (“global commons”) for peace and prosperity to all. Originality/value: The paper is original, in the sense that according to the best ... |
|---|