POLICY MATTERS 2014: REMEMBERING ELINOR OSTROM
20
Management and Rainfed Farming’ and sub
group on ‘Institutions and Commons’ for the
12th Plan preparation, in which the need
for favourable land tenure arrangements,
institutional design and programme
architecture was highlighted for effective
governance and management of commons.
Following direction from the Lok Adalat
(people’s court) of Karnataka, two districts
in Karnataka have also embarked on a
programme to improve their commons
management.
These new directions for commons regimes,
while focusing to date on land, hold promise
for other commons of importance to India
such as fisheries, water (and ground water in
particular), genetic sources such as agricultural
seeds, and patenting of traditional knowledge
systems, traditional health practices and
medicines. However, while the direction taken
by the Indian Supreme Court, the policy and
programmatic level decisions of the Central
Government, many State Governments, and the
Planning Commission all provide ways forward,
there remains a lack of integration in efforts to
address the issue of commons governance at a
national level. In this context, a Model Common
Lands Bill or such like could provide important
direction for State Governments. One approach
could include tethering the MGNREGA with a
‘commons regime’, such that the institutional
dimensions currently found wanting would be
filled. The right to employment and the right
over resources combined together can have
a significant impact in protecting ecological
resources and creating robust institutional
regimes.
CONCLUDING THOUGHTS
In conclusion, the ethics and value systems
espoused by Elinor Ostrom, and her
pathbreaking insights into the commons,
as well as her research on the principles
governing their effective, equitable and
sustainable management, has tremendous
implications for the governance of shared
resources in India. India is home to a grand
diversity of common pool resources ranging
from forests to grazing lands, from fresh
water to marine areas, with both rural and
urban communities exhibiting widespread
dependence on these resources for meeting
Plate 3: Elinor Ostrom with the authors of this manuscript (and Harini Nagendra’s daughter) in Bangalore in February
2012, on the last day of her final visit to India (Photo credit: Venkatachalam Suri).
POLICY MATTERS 2014: REMEMBERING ELINOR OSTROM
21
a range of economic, social, cultural and
spiritual needs. Ostrom’s theoretical and
empirical observations of the commons
provide a framework for governance
that respects diversity and rights to local
self-governance, while at the same time
recognizing the need for multi-level
governance that require governments to fulfil
their social responsibilities towards equity
and sustainability. India has a long standing
diversity of traditional common property
systems, with new forms of innovative
commons governance evolving in areas such
as patent rights, and in urban commons.
Recent initiatives by the Supreme Court of
India, coupled with various Indian State
Government initiatives in some states, and the
national policy changes brought about by the
Forest Rights Act, indicate signs of progress
that are promising. Yet much remains to be
done. Large scale changes are needed, whilst
keeping in mind the central pillar of Ostrom’s
vision — self-governance of the commons at a
local level that permits flexibility, adaptation
and innovation, with the ultimate goal of
ensuring equitable and sustainable access to
the commons for all citizens.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
HN acknowledges financial support from
the Department of Science and Technology,
Government of India through a Ramanujan
Fellowship. This article draws substantively on
a previous paper—H. Nagendra, R. Ghate and J.
Rao (2013). Governing the commons. Seminar
India 641: 88-93.
REFERENCES
Agrawal, Arun and Ashwini Chhatre. 2006.
“Explaining success on the commons:
Community forest governance in the Indian
Himalaya”. World Development 34: 149-166.
Chhatre, Ashwini and Arun Agrawal. 2008.
“Forest commons and local enforcement”.
PNAS 105: 13286-13291.
D’Souza, Rohan and Harini Nagendra. 2011.
“Changes in public commons as a consequence
of urbanization: The Agara lake in Bangalore,
India”. Environmental Management 47: 840-850.
Foundation for Ecological Security (FES).
2011. Dr. Elinor Ostrom and Shri Jairam
Ramesh’s Address at the Prof. Bharat Ram
Memorial Lecture, New Delhi, January 5, 2011.
Accessed 14 May 2013. http://fes.org.in/
commons/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Dr.-
Ostrom-Day-in-Delhi-Jan-5-11.pdf.
Foundation for Ecological Security (FES).
2012. A Commons Story: In the Rain Shadow of
Green Revolution
. Anand, Gujarat: Foundation
for Ecological Security.
Ghate, Rucha. 2004. Uncommons In The
Commons: Community-Initiated Forest Resource
Management.
New Delhi: Concept Publishing
Company.
Ghate, Rucha and Harini Nagendra. 2006. “Role
of monitoring in institutional performance:
forest management in Maharashtra, India”.
Conservation and Society
3: 509-532.
Ghate, Rucha, Suresh Ghate and Elinor
Ostrom. 2013. “Indigenous communities,
communication and cooperation: Taking
experiments to the field.” International Journal
of the Commons
7(2): 498-520.
Ghate, Rucha, Suresh Ghate and Elinor Ostrom.
2013. “Can communities plan, grow and
sustainably harvest from forests?” Economic
and Political Weekly
XLVIII: 59-67.
Ghate, Rucha, Harini Nagendra and
Deepshikha Mehra. 2012. “Is JFM really
helping communities and forests? The
need to focus on institution building”. In:
Bandyopadhyay, Jayant, Kanchan Chopra
and Nilanjan Ghosh (eds.), Environmental
Governance: Approaches, Imperatives,
and Methods
(pp. 163-189). New Delhi:
Bloomsbury and Indian Society for Ecological
Economics.
Hardin, Garret. 1968. “The tragedy of the
commons.” Science 162: 1243-1248.
Jodha, Narpat S. 1986. “Common property
resources and rural poor in dry regions of
India”. Economic and Political Weekly 21: 1169-
1181.
Mahapatra, Richard. 2012. “Uncommon swing
for commons”. Down to Earth, June 15.
Nagendra, Harini. 2012. “Elinor Ostrom: 1933-