




































Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal 2 (2): 121–124, July 2019 

 
REPORT 
 

Building an Alliance on the Commons 
 

Harini Nagendra  and Rucha Ghate  
 
India is facing several ecological, economic and social challenges related to 
the management of natural resources. These challenges are interconnected. 
Collective action on the management of commons can play a pivotal role in 
addressing such challenges. Well-managed commons such as rivers, tanks, 
grazing pastures, forests, woodlots and wetlands play an important role in 
mitigating poverty and distress migration through income generation and 
livelihood support for hundreds of millions of poor. Collective action can 
also help us address issues like cooperative management of farms and 
community restoration of ponds to name a few. In addressing global 
challenges like climate change, collective action is required at multiple 
levels. Instead of focusing on this positive role that the commons can play, 
we largely focus on narratives of the supposed ―tragedy of the commons‖, 
an idea borrowed from a western narrative popularized by Garret Hardin in 
the 1960s, which gained much currency in international circles.  

We need an alternative narrative that critically discusses the possibilities for 
commons to thrive and flourish. In that direction, the Foundation for 
Ecological Security held four consultation meetings over a period of 14 
months. The first meeting was held on 16 November 2017 in Anand, 
Gujarat; the second on 12 December 2017 in New Delhi, the third (in 
collaboration with Azim Premji University) on 13 and 14 November 2018 
in Bangalore, and the fourth from 4 to 7 December 2018, again in Anand. 
These four meetings helped to collectively bring together over 50 
participants, representing different stakeholders like academia, grass root 

                                                           
 School of Development, Azim Premji University, Pixel B, PES campus, Hosur Road, 

Electronic City, Bangalore 560035; harini.nagendra@apu.edu.in.  
 Foundation for Ecological Security, Post Box No. 29, Jahangirpura, PO – Gopalpura, 
Vadod 388 370 Hadgud, District Anand; rucha@fes.org.in 

Copyright © Nagendra and Ghate 2019. Released under Creative Commons Attribution-
NonCommercial 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC 4.0) by the author.  

Published by Indian Society for Ecological Economics (INSEE), c/o Institute of Economic 
Growth, University Enclave, North Campus, Delhi 110007.  

ISSN: 2581-6152 (print); 2581-6101 (web). 

DOI: https://doi.org/10.37773/ees.v2i2.82  

https://doi.org/10.37773/ees.v2i2.82


Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [122] 

workers, donors, bureaucrats, legal experts, NGOs etc. The meetings 
brought together experience and perspectives from people working in 
different parts of the country and outside, from a range of types of 
commons, and different backgrounds and disciplinary perspectives. These 
conversations provided a rich set of observations and ideas, discussed 
further in this paper, that can help to galvanise an alliance for the commons 
in the coming years. 

Participants in all four meetings agreed on the need for broadening the 
research topics to feed into better policy and practice on the commons to 
address the prevailing challenge of commons in India, especially to 
reconcile its aspirations towards development and sustainability. At present, 
commons constitute one of India’s most neglected resources. Between 40-
60 million hectares of village and forest commons is informally used by 
local communities (constituting de facto commons), but their rights of access, 
withdrawal and management on most of this area were not legally 
recognised (i.e. not de jure commons) until recently. Unfortunately, many of 
the village commons, especially in rocky and grassy areas are often labelled 
as ―wasteland‖, leaving them open to private capture. The need to restore 
the commons is immense with equally weighty challenges. Local 
communities seeking to manage their commons face difficulties ranging 
from the erasure and fragmentation of local institutions, norms and 
practices of commons governance, to inadequately staffed and ill-trained 
local government bodies, and opaque, unapproachable, and difficult policy 
and regulatory mechanisms. 

Some types of commons have achieved more success than others. In 
response to grassroots movements by adivasi and local communities, forest 
commons have been handed over to communities under the Forest Rights 
Act. Civil society groups, local communities and local panchayats have also 
spurred efforts to restore village tanks across many parts of rural India. 
Other types of commons such as community pastures and grazing lands, 
rivers, wetlands, urban and coastal commons have, however, been 
converted into open access areas. These commons are neither monitored 
and managed by the state nor are these handed over to local communities. 
In the absence of clear management onus, they have become open access 
areas, and are being steadily eroded. Much needs to be done to help 
communities gain formal recognition over their commons, as well as for 
strengthening local institutions and knowledge networks that can influence 
and create impact. The meetings emphasized the need for co-produced 
research on the commons, that is, through collaborations between 
academics, local communities and NGOs to see how commons restoration 
can simultaneously address livelihoods.  



[123] Harini Nagendra and Rucha Ghate 

 

Given this background, many participants expressed the need for an 
alliance of different groups working on the commons, from practice, policy, 
advocacy and research angles. Such an alliance, engaging closely with 
governments and decision makers, is important to shape the national 
discourse on commons. This can contribute to strategic policy development 
and influence action on the ground.  

For a greater strategic impact, participants identified three areas — forest, 
pasture and water commons — where such an alliance could focus, to 
begin with.. At the same time, the Foundation recommended engagement 
on other equally important but neglected commons such as community 
radio and internet, cultural and knowledge commons, genetic resources, 
urban commons, and coastal waters. It also recommended an integrated 
focus on outcomes, with equal emphasis on ecological, livelihood and 
equity aspects.  

An alliance for the commons could work in different ways. A gap 
assessment identified a number of important missing pieces, including the 
lack of shared vocabulary of commons, a comprehensive commons 
database, inadequate understanding of behavioural motivations, and 
research on technology as an enabler or barrier for communities. Across all 
meetings, participants consistently identified important action points. These 
included developing polycentric institutions with networks of communities, 
development organisations, civil society and government agencies. The 
Foundation emphasized the need to plan and commission research to fill 
knowledge gaps in important areas such as motivation for behavioural 
change and levers of transformation. 

After the 54th round of the National Sample Survey (NSSO, 1999), which 
collected information on common property resources at the household and 
village level across the country, there has been no national follow-up study. 
A carefully designed national survey is necessary to identify major changes 
in the status of commons, type of dependence and economic and livelihood 
relevance. One way to do this could be through a participatory 
collaboration. Participatory databases on commons can integrate 
technologies such as GIS and remote sensing with field surveys on 
institutional norms and practices. Such information can also be used to fill 
gaps in less known areas like urban commons. These are not, of course, 
separate points for action, but are in fact mutually reinforcing, and must be 
worked on in parallel.  

In addition, participants identified a number of key mainstream government 
policies and programmes, including MGNREGA, National Rural 
Livelihood Mission, Green India Mission, REDD+ action plans, and 



Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [124] 

programmes to meet Sustainable Development Goals. They felt that the 
alliance for the commons needs to engage state and national governments 
to integrate commons issues into their agendas — as well as into enabling 
laws such as the Biodiversity Act and Forest Rights Act. 

The meetings concluded by identifying three broad focal areas for an 
alliance on the commons. First, a need to build knowledge, by bringing 
together a suite of knowledge products, behavioural games, tools and 
decision support systems to support the practice of the commons, and 
influence institution building. Second, to convene forums to improve 
exchanges, advance action, enable cross-learnings, federate community 
groups to increase their collective bargaining power, and celebrate 
successes. Third, and most important, such an alliance must play the role of 
a bridge between community actors, advocacy groups, practitioner NGOs, 
academic institutions, and Governments, to join the dots between science, 
practice and policy. The need is immense, and the time for action has never 
been more urgent for collective, synergistic action on the commons. 

 

REFERENCES 

NSSO. 1999. Common Property Resources in India. Results of the NSS 54th Round, 
January-June 1998, Report No. 452(54/31/4). New Delhi: National Sample Survey 
Organisation, Department of Statistics and Programme Implementation, 
Government of India. 


