Abstract

Despite the commons being a long-standing site of conflict, the role of social movements in common-pool resource management has been underaddressed. By exploring the role of environmental justice organizing in the San Joaquin Valley during California’s landmark groundwater reform process as a commoning practice, this article seeks to fill this gap and advance our understanding of how collective action can, and is, being leveraged to advance just and sustainable transitions. I argue that through three principal strategies of challenging participation, scope, and authority, the movement has played a formative role in a landscape of intensive enclosure. Applying a commoning lens to the case highlights the important role of not only social movements in commons management but also of commons management as a venue for the rearticulation of regional socionatural relations. Such opportunities are particularly important in underinstitutionalized rural areas where opportunities to renegotiate these relations are often few and far between. Understanding the emergence and growth of commoning communities engaged in such efforts provides several important lessons. Individual commoning strategies can help identifying principal constraints and opportunities to transcend them. To be fully understood, however, they need to be considered collectively as well as in context. In doing so, the critical importance of focusing on the work commons do, rather than produce, becomes apparent. Commoning is both a tool and a goal in itself.

Highlights

  • Groundwater Sustainability Plans must include a sustainability goal which is the vision for groundwater for the region

  • Clean, purified, everyone has access at an affordable base rate without having to buy filters or bottles, everyone has water. Both groups have been gathered to discuss and respond to draft Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) recently released for public comment by newly formed Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) in their areas. These local agencies have been meeting for years to prepare their plans, many local residents are hearing about the law that mandated them, known as the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), for the first time

  • The organizing strategies detailed in this case clearly align with existing literature on the California environmental justice movement and social movements more broadly including the movements’ prefigurative politics (Yates, 2020), scale shifting (Kurtz, 2003; Sze et al, 2009; Perkins, 2015; London, 2016; Mendez, 2020), focus on participation (London et al, 2008; London, 2016), use of public comment (Cole & Foster, 2001; London, 2016), and use of coalitions (London, 2016; Mendez, 2020) among others

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Groundwater Sustainability Plans must include a sustainability goal which is the vision for groundwater for the region. Potentially opening the door for direct participation by SJV communities in resource governance (as opposed to a top-down state-controlled program; Harrington, 2015), it cedes decision-making to local jurisdictions (cities and counties) along with special districts, all of which are highly unrepresentative of the hundreds of low-income rural unincorporated communities who have continually been excluded from the material benefits of local government since colonization (Pannu, 2012) In this way, enclosure is not just the reason for groundwater reform via SGMA and the context in which it would be performed. We once again see how these forums were not just used to expose/critique and to amplify the movement’s comprehensive vision of what sustainable management could and should mean for the SJV, encouraging new shared imaginaries

Findings
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call