Abstract
Despite the existing literature regarding institutional influence on traditional commons, there is still a comparative dearth of research that theorises property-rights structure and its impact on contemporary commons. This is particularly true for public open space (POS) governance: its management and utilisation and hence its quality, of which underinvestment and overexploitation leads to increasingly negative externalities and outcomes. An interdisciplinary study is employed here to depict the relationships of diverse property-rights structure attributes – POS title existence, community existence, POS title transfer and POS site handing-over period to local government – with quality of residential POS. A cross-sectional survey via direct structured observation with a POS quality audit tool was conducted to collect a randomly stratified sample of 155 Country Lease (CL) POS and entire 22 Native Title (NT) POS, from the districts of Kota Kinabalu and Penampang, Sabah, respectively. Archival search and document analysis on data of property-rights attributes were executed as well. Next, 2-stage Pearson’s Chi-Square ( c2) and Lambda (λ) with Proportional Reduction Error feature analyses were performed. Results showed that only these three property-rights attributes – title deed existence, community existence and POS site handing-over period to local government- are significantly associated with POS quality at significance level (p≤0.05). It is found that, although POS with title deed and community’s involvement might not contribute to good quality, these attributes were likely to provide better quality. On the other hand, it is found that the more recent the POS site handing over to government, the higher the likelihood of good POS quality and vice versa. Such empirical findings prima facie infer that: (i) current local property-rights structure does matter in contributing to POS condition, particularly the effective management right which likely leads to better POS quality; (ii) the present state-property regime in POS governance is adversarial; and (iii) the importance of an interim privatisation and communal regimes leads to a better POS. Thus, these may provide policy insights by encouraging public officials to consider reengineering the POS market via an adaptive property-rights re-alignment paradigm in the interest of addressing POS quality and sustainability issues, which warrant further research
Highlights
There have been many studies relating to preservation of public open space (POS) that were undertaken, such as the effect of perception and socioeconomic standing of stakeholders towards POS protection, spatial POS design planning model, and ‘conventional’ planning policies
Despite the existing literature regarding institutional influence on traditional commons, there is still a comparative dearth of research that theorises property-rights structure and its impact on contemporary commons. This is true for public open space (POS) governance: its management and utilisation and its quality, of which underinvestment and overexploitation leads to increasingly negative externalities and outcomes
We primarily employed the ground-breaking ‘Coase-inspired’ property-rights and transaction costs analytic framework1, (Slaev 2014). This is supplemented with the theories of common pool resources (CPRs), social dilemmas, contracts, opportunism, etc. as a heuristic paradigm to shed new insights, especially in the local residential commons POS context (Rabinowitz 2012), with the focus on analysing the effects of institutions on the social-ecological interaction as well as its outcome
Summary
There have been many studies relating to preservation of public open space (POS) that were undertaken, such as the effect of perception and socioeconomic standing of stakeholders towards POS protection, spatial POS design planning model, and ‘conventional’ planning policies. (see Cole and Ostrom 2012 call for advanced and realistic property theories) as a heuristic paradigm to shed new insights, especially in the local residential commons POS context (Rabinowitz 2012), with the focus on analysing the effects of institutions on the social-ecological interaction as well as its outcome (quality). Such institutional dimensions that generally influence social-environmental interaction, in comparison with traditional commons (e.g. natural resources like irrigation, ocean, forestry and fisheries) is, mostly under-researched or paid little attention to. It might be useful to ask, ‘what’ grants or defines the rights bundle besides the legal and self-enforced constraints?
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.