Abstract
In the 19th century, the Spanish government, led by a liberal political project, put up for sale the common properties of villages, and deprived local village authorities of their capacities, powers and laws to manage common woodlands, which were passed to the Forestry Service. This paper, based on Ostrom’s hypothesis that state intervention can have negative consequences for the conservation of common resources, is a case study of what happened in the province of Leon. It is shown that, although the conservation of common resources was endangered because those who were more directly concerned with protecting them were deprived of the means to do so, peasant communities staunchly defended the commons by maintaining traditional practices and uses in their commons.
Highlights
The decision to award the Nobel Prize to Elinor Ostrom in 2009 resulted in a significant boost to the study of the commons, one of her contributions being that, under certain principles, traditional communal property systems can ensure efficient and sustainable resource management (Ostrom 1990)
This study has been divided into five sections: the first provides a general picture of León, highlighting the spatial importance of common lands in this province of Spain; in the second, the most characteristic common land uses and regulations in force in the 19th century are described; the third part deals with the changes which occurred with regard to liberal State intervention in the commons; in the fourth chapter the hypothesis raised is discussed in a more consistent way; the final chapter sets out the conclusions we have reached
In Spain there were no differences with the rest of Western Europe and in the 19th century, commons and the communal regime were fiercely attacked under the auspices of a liberal political project (GEHR 1994; Balboa 1999)
Summary
The decision to award the Nobel Prize to Elinor Ostrom in 2009 resulted in a significant boost to the study of the commons, one of her contributions being that, under certain principles, traditional communal property systems can ensure efficient and sustainable resource management (Ostrom 1990). It is found that the commons survived privatisation attempts and, in addition, traditional uses on them prevailed In one way, this contradicts De Moor’s hypothesis that corporate collective action needed backing from the state in order to succeed (De Moor 2008, 210). This contradicts De Moor’s hypothesis that corporate collective action needed backing from the state in order to succeed (De Moor 2008, 210) It seems that what explains the continuity of the commons was the resilience of rural societies rather than the objectives of higher overarching political powers, as maintained by Curtis (2013, 214–215). This study has been divided into five sections: the first provides a general picture of León, highlighting the spatial importance of common lands in this province of Spain; in the second, the most characteristic common land uses and regulations in force in the 19th century are described; the third part deals with the changes which occurred with regard to liberal State intervention in the commons; in the fourth chapter the hypothesis raised is discussed in a more consistent way; the final chapter sets out the conclusions we have reached
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: 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.
