IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v14y2025i7p1374-d1691108.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The COMmons Places ASSessment (COMPASS) Framework for the Governance of Common Goods: A Comparison of Evolving Practices

Author

Listed:
  • Maria Cerreta

    (Department of Architecture (DiARC), University of Naples Federico II, Via Forno Vecchio, 36, 80134 Naples, Italy)

  • Fabrizia Cesarano

    (Scuola Superiore Meridionale, 80138 Naples, Italy)

  • Stefano Cuntò

    (Department of Architecture (DiARC), University of Naples Federico II, Via Forno Vecchio, 36, 80134 Naples, Italy)

  • Laura Di Tommaso

    (Department of Architecture (DiARC), University of Naples Federico II, Via Forno Vecchio, 36, 80134 Naples, Italy)

  • Ludovica La Rocca

    (Department of Architecture (DiARC), University of Naples Federico II, Via Forno Vecchio, 36, 80134 Naples, Italy)

  • Caterina Loffredo

    (Department of Architecture (DiARC), University of Naples Federico II, Via Forno Vecchio, 36, 80134 Naples, Italy)

  • Sveva Ventre

    (Department of Architecture (DiARC), University of Naples Federico II, Via Forno Vecchio, 36, 80134 Naples, Italy)

  • Piero Zizzania

    (Department of Architecture (DiARC), University of Naples Federico II, Via Forno Vecchio, 36, 80134 Naples, Italy)

Abstract

In recent years, the concept of the commons has gained relevance across academic, legal and civic spheres as an alternative framework for managing shared resources. Rooted in Elinor Ostrom’s seminal work on collective governance, contemporary debates on the commons increasingly challenge the traditional binary of private versus public ownership by foregrounding the social function of these resources and the role of their communities in their administration. Urban commons, in particular, have emerged as dynamic spaces of experimentation, where local actors reclaim underutilised or abandoned assets and activate them through bottom-up processes of care, cultural production, and civic innovation. While international literature provides a robust conceptual foundation for understanding commoning practices, their practical implementation mostly depends on local specificities, such as legal and social contexts. Despite the important milestone of the Rodotà Commission’s proposal (2007) and Law 168/2017 on collective domains, the Italian regulatory framework remains highly fragmented, with regional and municipal regulations pioneering policies and practices frequently driven by community-led efforts to redefine the use and governance of public assets. This paper contributes to the growing debate on urban commons by investigating how, since 2011, experiences of collaborative care of the commons in Southern Italy have rekindled interest in the issue raised in 2007, highlighting a strong connection between the regulatory and social dimensions of these processes. The study develops a methodological framework—the COMmons Places ASSessment (COMPASS)—to evaluate the enabling conditions and governance dynamics of these processes. The research specifically focuses on five case studies in the Campania region, where diverse actors have mobilised to reclaim and transform public heritage through cultural, social, and creative activities. From the results, insights on collective management practices emerge potentials and criticalities of the analysed governance, as well as of the designed decision-making process and their effectiveness for the open, participatory, and sustainable management of urban commons.

Suggested Citation

  • Maria Cerreta & Fabrizia Cesarano & Stefano Cuntò & Laura Di Tommaso & Ludovica La Rocca & Caterina Loffredo & Sveva Ventre & Piero Zizzania, 2025. "The COMmons Places ASSessment (COMPASS) Framework for the Governance of Common Goods: A Comparison of Evolving Practices," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-24, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:14:y:2025:i:7:p:1374-:d:1691108
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/7/1374/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/7/1374/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sen, Amartya K, 1979. "Personal Utilities and Public Judgements: Or What's Wrong with Welfare Economics?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 89(355), pages 537-558, September.
    2. Maria Cerreta & Alessia Elefante & Ludovica La Rocca, 2020. "A Creative Living Lab for the Adaptive Reuse of the Morticelli Church: The SSMOLL Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-20, December.
    3. Wall, Derek, 2017. "Elinor Ostrom's Rules for Radicals," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, number 9780745399355, October.
    4. Maria Patrizia Vittoria & Stefania Ragozino & Gabriella Esposito De Vita, 2023. "Urban Commons between Ostrom’s and Neo-Materialist Approaches: The Case of Lido Pola in Naples, Southern Italy," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, February.
    5. Fabiana Forte & Paolo Cupo, 2024. "The Collective Domains in the Ecological Transition: A Preliminary Analysis in an Inner Area in the Campania Region, Italy," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-23, May.
    6. Mariana Mazzucato, 2024. "Governing the economics of the common good: from correcting market failures to shaping collective goals," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1), pages 1-24, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Mina Baliamoune-Lutz, 2004. "On the Measurement of Human Well-being: Fuzzy Set Theory and Sen's Capability Approach," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2004-16, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    2. Kjell Brekke & Hilde Lurå & Karine Nyborg, 1996. "Allowing disagreement in evaluations of social welfare," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 63(3), pages 303-324, October.
    3. Vincenzo Atella & Jay Coggins & Federico Perali, 2005. "Aversion to inequality in Italy and its determinants," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 2(2), pages 117-144, January.
    4. Tony J Culyer & Alan Wagstaff, 1991. "Need, equality and social justice," Working Papers 090chedp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    5. Antoinette Baujard, 2016. "Utilitarianism and anti-utilitarianism," Chapters, in: Gilbert Faccarello & Heinz D. Kurz (ed.), Handbook on the History of Economic Analysis Volume III, chapter 40, pages 576-588, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Suzumura, Kotaro & Xu, Yongsheng, 2001. "Characterizations of Consequentialism and Nonconsequentialism," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 423-436, December.
    7. Simplice A. Asongu & Jacinta C. Nwachukwu, 2018. "Increasing Foreign Aid for Inclusive Human Development in Africa," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 138(2), pages 443-466, July.
    8. Costantini, Valeria & Monni, Salvatore, 2008. "Environment, human development and economic growth," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 867-880, February.
    9. Paul Anand & Laurence S. J. Roope & Anthony J. Culyer & Ron Smith, 2020. "Disability and multidimensional quality of life: A capability approach to health status assessment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(7), pages 748-765, July.
    10. John A. Weymark, 2017. "Conundrums for nonconsequentialists," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(2), pages 269-294, February.
    11. Blackorby, Charles & Bossert, Walter, 2004. "Interpersonal comparisons of well-being," Economic Research Papers 269605, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.
    12. Thomas Aronsson & Sugata Ghosh & Ronald Wendner, 2023. "Positional preferences and efficiency in a dynamic economy," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 61(2), pages 311-337, August.
    13. Bossert, Walter & Suzumura, Kotaro, 2012. "Product filters, acyclicity and Suzumura consistency," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 258-262.
    14. Paul Anand & Laurence Roope, 2016. "The development and happiness of very young children," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(4), pages 825-851, December.
    15. Antoinette Baujard, 2016. "Welfare economics," Chapters, in: Gilbert Faccarello & Heinz D. Kurz (ed.), Handbook on the History of Economic Analysis Volume III, chapter 42, pages 611-624, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Valeria Costantini & Chiara Martini, 2010. "A Modified Environmental Kuznets Curve for sustainable development assessment using panel data," International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 10(1/2), pages 84-122.
    17. Walter Bossert & Kotaro Suzumura, 2015. "Multi-Profile Intertemporal Social Choice: A Survey," Studies in Choice and Welfare, in: Constanze Binder & Giulio Codognato & Miriam Teschl & Yongsheng Xu (ed.), Individual and Collective Choice and Social Welfare, edition 127, pages 109-126, Springer.
    18. Veisten, Knut, 2007. "Contingent valuation controversies: Philosophic debates about economic theory," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 204-232, April.
    19. Diane Coyle & Mark Fabian & Eric Beinhocker & Tim Besley & Margaret Stevens, 2023. "Is it time to reboot welfare economics? Overview," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(2), pages 109-121, June.
    20. Charles Blackorby & Walter Bossert & David Donaldson, 2005. "Multi_profile welfarism: a generalization," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 25(1), pages 227-228, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:gam:jlands:v:14:y:2025:i:7:p:1374-:d:1691108. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.