IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v59y2015icp19-26.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From restitution to revival: A case of commons re-establishment and restitution in Slovenia

Author

Listed:
  • Premrl, Tine
  • Udovč, Andrej
  • Bogataj, Nevenka
  • Krč, Janez

Abstract

Agrarian commons in Slovenia share a common historical origin with other commons from Central European countries. In the twentieth century, commons in some of these countries experienced the process of abolishing traditional management institutions and nationalising their property. During the transitional period in the 1990s, one third of former agrarian commons were re-established and restituted in Slovenia. In this paper, we evaluate the response of three different types of agrarian commons (forest, pasture and agriculture commons) from three different landscapes (Alps, Pannonia and Mediterranean) in the context of the legal framework in which the commons were restituted. We use the upgraded version of Ostrom's design principles to evaluate the ability of the legal framework to enable the robustness of these historical institutions. It is not the first time that governments misunderstood commons and tried to impose rules which are not common to the commons. In the case of Slovenian agrarian commons, we found that the legal framework is too rigid for re-established agrarian commons and thus affects their efficiency in resource governance. Without changes in the legal framework, the present situation can lead to the decay of these historical institutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Premrl, Tine & Udovč, Andrej & Bogataj, Nevenka & Krč, Janez, 2015. "From restitution to revival: A case of commons re-establishment and restitution in Slovenia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 19-26.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:59:y:2015:i:c:p:19-26
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2015.05.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934115300046
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2015.05.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kissling-Naf, Ingrid & Volken, Thomas & Bisang, Kurt, 2002. "Common property and natural resources in the Alps: the decay of management structures?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 135-147, June.
    2. Elinor Ostrom, 2010. "Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(3), pages 641-672, June.
    3. Norbert Schulz & Francesco Parisi & Ben Depoorter, 2002. "Fragmentation in Property: Towards a General Model," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 158(4), pages 594-613, December.
    4. Furness, Ella & Harshaw, Howard & Nelson, Harry, 2015. "Community forestry in British Columbia: Policy progression and public participation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 85-91.
    5. Ambrose-Oji, Bianca & Lawrence, Anna & Stewart, Amy, 2015. "Community based forest enterprises in Britain: Two organising typologies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 65-74.
    6. Sikor, Thomas, 2006. "Analyzing community-based forestry: Local, political and agrarian perspectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 339-349, June.
    7. Chobotova, Veronika & Kluvankova-Oravska, Tatiana, 2006. "Shifting Governance In Slovensky Raj National Park," Institutional Change in Agriculture and Natural Resources Discussion Papers 18834, Humboldt University Berlin, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    8. To, Phuc Xuan & Mahanty, Sango & Dressler, Wolfram H., 2015. "‘A new landlord’ (địa chủ mới)? Community, land conflict and State Forest Companies (SFCs) in Vietnam," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 21-28.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Louda, Jiří & Dubová, Lenka & Å paÄ ek, Martin & Brnkaľáková, Stanislava & Kluvánková, Tatiana, 2023. "Factors affecting governance innovations for ecosystem services provision: Insights from two self-organized forest communities in Czechia and Slovakia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    2. Å mid Hribar, Mateja & Hori, Keiko & Urbanc, Mimi & Saito, Osamu & Zorn, Matija, 2023. "Evolution and new potentials of landscape commons: Insights from Japan and Slovenia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    3. Weiss, Gerhard & Lawrence, Anna & Hujala, Teppo & Lidestav, Gun & Nichiforel, Liviu & Nybakk, Erlend & Quiroga, Sonia & Sarvašová, Zuzana & Suarez, Cristina & Živojinović, Ivana, 2019. "Forest ownership changes in Europe: State of knowledge and conceptual foundations," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 9-20.
    4. Kluvánková, Tatiana & Gežík, Veronika, 2016. "Survival of commons? Institutions for robust forest social – ecological systems," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 175-185.
    5. Nieto-Romero, M. & Parra, C. & Bock, B., 2021. "Re-building historical commons: How formal institutions affect participation in community forests in Galicia, Spain," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrea Salustri, 2021. "Social and solidarity economy and social and solidarity commons: Towards the (re)discovery of an ethic of the common good?," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 92(1), pages 13-32, March.
    2. Weiss, Gerhard & Lawrence, Anna & Hujala, Teppo & Lidestav, Gun & Nichiforel, Liviu & Nybakk, Erlend & Quiroga, Sonia & Sarvašová, Zuzana & Suarez, Cristina & Živojinović, Ivana, 2019. "Forest ownership changes in Europe: State of knowledge and conceptual foundations," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 9-20.
    3. McCloskey Deirdre Nansen, 2018. "The Two Movements in Economic Thought, 1700–2000: Empty Economic Boxes Revisited," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-20, December.
    4. Andy Gouldson & Rory Sullivan, 2014. "Understanding the Governance of Corporations: An Examination of the Factors Shaping UK Supermarket Strategies on Climate Change," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 46(12), pages 2972-2990, December.
    5. David Klenert & Franziska Funke & Linus Mattauch & Brian O’Callaghan, 2020. "Five Lessons from COVID-19 for Advancing Climate Change Mitigation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(4), pages 751-778, August.
    6. Thomas Vendryes, 2014. "Peasants Against Private Property Rights: A Review Of The Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 971-995, December.
    7. Michael Peneder & Spyros Arvanitis & Christian Rammer & Tobias Stucki & Martin Wörter, 2022. "Policy instruments and self-reported impacts of the adoption of energy saving technologies in the DACH region," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 49(2), pages 369-404, May.
    8. Meyer, Camille, 2020. "The commons: A model for understanding collective action and entrepreneurship in communities," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 35(5).
    9. Numazawa, Camila T.D. & Numazawa, Sueo & Pacca, Sergio & John, Vanderley M., 2017. "Logging residues and CO2 of Brazilian Amazon timber: Two case studies of forest harvesting," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 280-285.
    10. Sophie King & Peter Kasaija, 2018. "State-movement partnership in Uganda: Co-producing an enabling environment for urban poverty reduction?," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series esid-098-18, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    11. Snower, Dennis J., 2019. "Toward global paradigm change: Beyond the crisis of the liberal world order," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 13, pages 1-19.
    12. Nomfundo Sibiya & Mikateko Sithole & Lindelani Mudau & Mulala Danny Simatele, 2022. "Empowering the Voiceless: Securing the Participation of Marginalised Groups in Climate Change Governance in South Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-20, June.
    13. William J. Luther, 2021. "Behavioral and Policy Responses to COVID-19: Evidence from Google Mobility Data on State- Level Stay-at-Home Orders," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 36(Fall 2021), pages 67-89.
    14. Silvia Scaramuzzi & Sara Gabellini & Giovanni Belletti & Andrea Marescotti, 2021. "Agrobiodiversity-Oriented Food Systems between Public Policies and Private Action: A Socio-Ecological Model for Sustainable Territorial Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-32, November.
    15. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Martiskainen, Mari, 2020. "Hot transformations: Governing rapid and deep household heating transitions in China, Denmark, Finland and the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    16. Sacchetti, Silvia & Tortia, Ermanno, 2012. "The internal and external governance of cooperatives: the effective membership and consistency of value," AICCON Working Papers 111-2012, Associazione Italiana per la Cultura della Cooperazione e del Non Profit.
    17. Holden, Stein T. & Tilahun, Mesfin, 2019. "How Do Social Preferences and Norms of Reciprocity affect Generalized and Particularized Trust?," CLTS Working Papers 8/19, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies, revised 10 Oct 2019.
    18. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/7cu18nukj78u8bq89s295bup4f is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Elisabeth A. Shrimpton & Dexter Hunt & Chris D.F. Rogers, 2021. "Justice in (English) Water Infrastructure: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-18, March.
    20. Bigoni, Maria & Camera, Gabriele & Casari, Marco, 2020. "Money is more than memory," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 99-115.
    21. Giaime Berti, 2020. "Sustainable Agri-Food Economies: Re-Territorialising Farming Practices, Markets, Supply Chains, and Policies," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-9, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:59:y:2015:i:c:p:19-26. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.