« Tactical Chartering Manifesto/Engaging in Dialogue » : différence entre les versions

De Remix Biens Communs
Aller à :navigation, rechercher
Aucun résumé des modifications
Ligne 1 : Ligne 1 :
{{Objet média}}
{{Objet média}}
===Dialogue between and within the people===
Once it is decided who will participate as a resident and as an organization, a dialogue can take place where people get their needs heard, and organizations document them so that they are ready to present it to people involved in the development of the urban commons. It is important for people to set up networks so that there could be as much reach as possible. The more people participate, the more value this commons could potentially hold. The communication has to be fluid and organized, but also getting as many voices heard as possible.  
Once it is decided who will participate as a resident and as an organization, a dialogue can take place where people get their needs heard, and organizations document them so that they are ready to present it to people involved in the development of the urban commons. It is important for people to set up networks so that there could be as much reach as possible. The more people participate, the more value this commons could potentially hold. The communication has to be fluid and organized, but also getting as many voices heard as possible.  


Ligne 7 : Ligne 8 :


{{C|Network establishment}} - people should be trained to reach out to as many people as possible when recruiting for urban commons involved. That network must be officialized, established, documented, and expandable. People meeting people should give out recommendations on who to talk to, if a problem is heard from two different people and from two different location within that neighborhood, they should be able to meet, relate, and start a sub-movement within community conversation.
{{C|Network establishment}} - people should be trained to reach out to as many people as possible when recruiting for urban commons involved. That network must be officialized, established, documented, and expandable. People meeting people should give out recommendations on who to talk to, if a problem is heard from two different people and from two different location within that neighborhood, they should be able to meet, relate, and start a sub-movement within community conversation.
===Communication/Dialogue with a capable government, perhaps a municipality===
There must be a certain level of organization in order to approach a government about future development plans in a neighborhood. Governments are often subject to regulatory slippage when managing shared green spaces in a city, so communities can assume the role setting up rules and surveillance mechanisms to protect and preserve an urban commons. Governments in return should officially recognize these commons as independent and functioning institutions in order to protect and enrich the commons. Government back-up will protect the commons from become a parcel of private property and will become prioritized to received government protection and funding that is key for the permancy of urban green commons. In other words, governments might create and enforce de jure rights for commoners in urban green commons, and recognize and support de facto rights between and within commoners who wish to create, manage, and maintain within the urban commons site. De Jure rights will provide adequate and reliable protection, while de facto rights, in conjunction of de Jure rights, will create collective action and several guidelines for commoners to use and mantain the urban commons. 
{{C|Implementing De Jure Rights}} - Enforcements by governments in the form of formal and legal instrumentalities explicitly granting rights to specific individual resource users. This implies that any conflicts within property rights can be settled in a judicial setting.
{{C|Supporting De Facto Rights}} - Informal institutional set of arrangements determining resource use organized or enforced by individual users who are not officially recognized by government bodies

Version du 26 mars 2018 à 21:48



Métadonnées


Dialogue between and within the people

Once it is decided who will participate as a resident and as an organization, a dialogue can take place where people get their needs heard, and organizations document them so that they are ready to present it to people involved in the development of the urban commons. It is important for people to set up networks so that there could be as much reach as possible. The more people participate, the more value this commons could potentially hold. The communication has to be fluid and organized, but also getting as many voices heard as possible.

Group Creation, Division of Responsibility - Making groups that have succinct responsibilities, taking care of specific problems, holding on certain forms of communication

Community conversation (this is similar to the townhall meeting approach)

Network establishment - people should be trained to reach out to as many people as possible when recruiting for urban commons involved. That network must be officialized, established, documented, and expandable. People meeting people should give out recommendations on who to talk to, if a problem is heard from two different people and from two different location within that neighborhood, they should be able to meet, relate, and start a sub-movement within community conversation.

Communication/Dialogue with a capable government, perhaps a municipality

There must be a certain level of organization in order to approach a government about future development plans in a neighborhood. Governments are often subject to regulatory slippage when managing shared green spaces in a city, so communities can assume the role setting up rules and surveillance mechanisms to protect and preserve an urban commons. Governments in return should officially recognize these commons as independent and functioning institutions in order to protect and enrich the commons. Government back-up will protect the commons from become a parcel of private property and will become prioritized to received government protection and funding that is key for the permancy of urban green commons. In other words, governments might create and enforce de jure rights for commoners in urban green commons, and recognize and support de facto rights between and within commoners who wish to create, manage, and maintain within the urban commons site. De Jure rights will provide adequate and reliable protection, while de facto rights, in conjunction of de Jure rights, will create collective action and several guidelines for commoners to use and mantain the urban commons.

Implementing De Jure Rights - Enforcements by governments in the form of formal and legal instrumentalities explicitly granting rights to specific individual resource users. This implies that any conflicts within property rights can be settled in a judicial setting.

Supporting De Facto Rights - Informal institutional set of arrangements determining resource use organized or enforced by individual users who are not officially recognized by government bodies