1. What is a commons? 2. List some examples of communal systems that you and your Australian partners have been a part of and identify which ones have worked and which have not.
You will need to briefly explain the nature of your examples to your Australian counterparts as they may not understand them, and likewise get them to explain their examples to you. For example: You probably won't understand what a "sharehouse" is and why there can be commons issues, so be sure you explain what a "Singapore HDB housing complex" is to them, and why it can work or fail.
3. What are some of the key determinants that dictate whether the communal systems identified above examples above have worked or not?
4. Why is it that some communal systems involved in the management of resources work while others don't? Example: Why do some group houses "work" while others don't, and why do some "tea-clubs" work but in others all the biscuits get pinched!
5. Were there any distinct international/cultural differences between Singapore and Australia that explain why some communal systems worked, while others did not? If not, why not?
Hi, I am johnny This is my ideas about the questions:
1. Common is resources that are hard to have physical control that can exclude somebody not to use it (excludability) and while other people use it, then the less that other people can use (subtractability).
2. As I am not Australian, I use my home town as example. In Macao, there is some communal system, for Instance, The Fundo de Segurança (Security fund). This is a system that Macao resident is forced to work with as they need to put a small portion of their salary, as long as they reach the retire age, government will give them back different welfare through their whole retire life until they die. In contrast, the government economic flat in Macao isn’t work very well relatively. Economic flat is an apartment which is build and sold by government which prices are much lowers that market price of other flat. Before 2011, as long as your Macao permanent resident, the application will be accepted. However, this Make lots of rich man go to buy it as investment which makes many necessity cannot buy. Although after 2011 March, government regulate resident whose salary is under salary mean can apply it, there are still lots of uncertainty in the unbalance estate development in Macao.
3. The key determinant includes Government control, law regulation, social norms and self-conscience and self interested intention.
4. This social secure system works because it is under people’s self-interested intention, law to regulate and government control which are the base of management of resources. As every worker is forced to take part in by law and government, they must put money into this system periodically. However, as the people that I knew, even the Macao government does not force them to do. They still are willing to join into this program. Their explanation is as long as they save money in Fundo de Segurança, they can get social benefit when they are retired. This can explain Macao resident is self-interested in their retire life which make them has less worry about the life without regular salary support. However, Economic flat does not work efficiently because lack of government and law control, also people self-interest and lack of conscience is other main factor These are the factor show it is lack of resources management. As government does not regulate this system through legislation, rich people can focus their own interest which is using less resource (economic house is cheaper than market price) to maximize their benefit (economic house will raise price quickly). Since rich people do not care inability people, they are lack of conscience and this individual intention is a fundamental factor makes Macao estate price develop in an unhealthy way.
These are just myself opinions, I don't know if They are correct or wrong.
Thanks for your post. I'm sad to hear that there is such indifference towards the lower income class in Macao. And for the record, I think it's impossible to have a wrong opinion! Here is my contribution:
1. Environmental resources and areas that are difficult to control and partition, for example: fisheries, wildlife, bodies of water, forests, air (airwaves)
2. Ex. Banff National Park • Canada’s first and most popular national park • Visitors from anywhere in the world are allowed to visit by paying a small fee to enter the park • Park rangers participate in conservation efforts to protect endangered species and ensure the park is kept in good condition • Fishing permits are sold, but wildlife and park resources are protected by the National Government • Tourists enjoy a range of activities from skiing to camping • This system has worked for over 100 years and has attracted millions of visitors from all over the world
3. The government has set up rules and regulations for park visitors to follow so that the park is not destructed. If these rules are not followed, the visitor is fined and their park pass is revoked. Visitors truly enjoy spending time in the Rocky Mountains skiing, hiking, camping, and river rafting. Because they appreciate these activities, they are generally inspired to take care of the park by not littering, not feeding wildlife, ensuring their camp fires stay maintained, etc. Visitors are self-motivated to respect the park because they love returning every year. However, every year there are unfortunate incidences where visitors do not respect their surroundings and are attacked by wildlife or accidently start a fire. These incidences, while rare, subtract from others’ enjoyment.
4. I think there has to be respect of the resource for management to work. Often times profit motivates government, companies and investors to exploit certain resources, which leads to their degradation. If people find a common valuable, then they will want to have it to themselves. In the case of Banff National Park, government regulation has been effective in protecting the park so that many visitors can effectively co-exist with nature during their stay. Communal systems fail if people try to compete for the resource instead of share it.
Thanks, Paige, you give me a good idea about the Canadian National Park management. It is very useful. Does any one want to take part in the contribution?
Hey paige and johnny, I'm Ishbel... Here is my example- It's great that you are being so active in communicating with us paige...
2)-A communal system that I have been involved in that has worked: Bundagen- a rural land co-operative in Northern NSW with 210 share-holders. My parents and grandparents own shares in the land and I have been on holiday there through out my childhood. While the politics can at times be complex and tumultuous, on the whole, this communal land ownership system operates effectively with a beautiful community ethic.
-A communal system I have been in that has not worked: Group work in high school
3)Reasons why the Bundagen land co-operative wo rks: - Those involved are there voluntarily - Members share the same values -Very selective. To become a member one has to have trial periods living on the land so it can be observed how they behave with in the dynamics of the community. - This communal system is relatively small- everyone knows each other and therefore the power of conscience is effective. -It is a definable area of land -‘Mutual coercion’ as described by Hardin in the Tragedy Of The Commons article- “mutual coercion, mutually agreed upon by the majority of the people affected.” In relation to Bundagen this means that if a member consistanly behaves in a way that adversely impacts on the community, then a vote will be taken and they may eventually be asked to leave.
Hey all! Sorry for the late reply. Here's what I think:
1. Commons are natural resources, such as forests, fisheries, oceans. They can be privatized or kept as public property to which rights to entry and use could be allocated.
2. Communal properties are resources held by an identifiable community of independent users. I think reservoirs in Singapore are considered as communal properties. People can jog around reservoirs, fish, or canoe in the reservoirs but are unable to use its water. The water is regulated by Public Utilities Board (PUB) and citizens have to pay to use the water at home.
3. A large determinant is whether people are willing to pay for the usage of the resources. In this case, water. People are willing to pay for the water and no one is trying to take control over PUB. Thus, this communal system has succeeded.
4. The failure or success of a communal system depends on the society. If people are willing to pay for its uses, the system has succeeded. If people try to compete for power - to take charge instead - the system has failed.
I've thought of another few examples for question 2. Public pools in Singapore. People have to pay to enter the swimming pools. These public pools are owned by the government and this is to ensure that the public does not misuse the swimming pools. The government also helps in the maintenance of these public pools.
2. Perhaps, golf courses are a good example of communal property. This is not the conventional “commons” but the underlying idea that this resource is held by a group of individuals who exclude outsiders and regulate the use by members of the country club apply in this context.
An example would be the Changi Golf Club. Initially, it used to be exclusive to members of the British Royal Air Force (RAF) but now it is opened to civilian members.
3. • Strict laws governing the use of the golf courses.
• High prices. This will exclude a lot of people who simply cannot afford such high prices for this sport/hobby. I think you can still use the golf course if you are not a member but the prices will be even higher because if I am not wrong, you will be charged visitor / non member rates.
• Government support. One of the projects that I did last semester was based around the controversial use of land for golf courses. (Land is especially scarce in Singapore, we need to reclaim from the sea!) There are actually 2 other golf courses near the Changi Golf Club which is kind of useless because when we did our research, we found that golf courses are grossly under-utilised. Which kind of leads to a whole other issue about the sustainability of land use in Singapore. But our PM (Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong) believes that golf is a sport that Singaporeans will especially enjoy (this is actually taken from our prof Neo’s research on golf courses in Singapore).
4. • Self-interest plays a big part in the failure communal systems. I don’t really have a solid example in this case for the golf courses. Communal systems only work if the people in the community agree on the terms and they value the overall need for the sustainable management of the resource. But if at any point, someone has a strong self-interest then the whole structure fails.
• Strict laws on regulation of use and monitoring. There should be proper governance to ensure that every member does not over-step his/her boundaries due to self-interest.
• Strong barriers against the outsiders. Because if we actually think about it, the whole premise of the communal property system is the idea of inclusion/exclusion.
I hope this makes sense! Correct me if I am wrong! :)
• Commons are natural resources that tend to be publicly owned or owned by a group of people for use by whoever they allow to use it. Lakes and parks are examples of this. • Minnamurra rainforest is an example of a communal system. It is a national park on the south coast of New South Wales. It is able to be accessed by those willing to pay a fee for maintenance and this is a very small cost. There is a small staff who ensure that the wildlife is not being abused by human contact and that rubbish is being kept out. You are not permitted to hunt, fish, or burn fires in the rainforest to ensure that it is preserved. This system has meant that a rainforest that was once on the brink of being destroyed is now being maintained for the community to enjoy. • The fact that this rainforest is now monitored by the State Government with funding and staffing means that the rainforest will be preserved for people to enjoy in the future. Continuing to allow people to come and visit the rainforest and walk through it and enjoy the waterfalls leads me to believe that this communal system is working. The understanding that this is an area to look after has meant that people are generally willing to keep it litter free, not burn the growth, and respect the animals habitats. • Some communal systems that can appear very similar on the surface can work or fail due to the human element. An effective communal system can be due to motivated management or cohesive community members. A failing communal system can be due to disinterested management ( government or private) or conflicting community members about the value and purpose of the communal system. A working or failing system can be determined, possibly, by the financial incentive that the community and management receive.
Sorry for it being so late I've had trouble accessing it. All is good now.
Hey guys, sorry I haven’t had any input into this discussion. I was in Sydney over the whole weekend and have only just cracked onto the tutorial questions. It is probably no use to you now, but I’ll post up my answers ASAP. Sorry; I’ll be more involved in future discussions :)
1. Commons are resources available for the public use of a selected group, where each individual is benefiting from what the resource provides. If this system is exploited by one individual, the entire party is impacted negatively. 2. Me and my family members go on fishing trips in the waters of the South Coast, where a guide takes us to the fishing hotspots. It is not only our prerogative, but a mandatory requirement, that everyone who fishes in that area not only releases all undersize fish, but stop fishing in the area and move on to another once the group has caught a certain amount of fish. Not only does this enable us to obtain large, healthy fish in plentiful numbers, but we allow fish populations to grow both in age and in numbers by not overfishing in that area. This practice has flourished, and those who use the guide’s private knowledge of where the hotspots are, are responsible with their fishing. 3. Strict laws which are enforced, help to strictly regulate the use of public areas. Education is also a necessity, as it is important to inform users why it is important to protect the communal resource. With education comes values, ethics, and genuine respect for the particular resource. Overfishing is a global issue, and governments in different nations should work in collaboration with each other to protect this global resource, and come up with a plan to use only what is needed in the now, and leave a plentiful amount for the future. 4. Some communal systems work because of the input of laws, education, and future planning, and fail to work because of the lack thereof. There are many laws in place, which requires fishermen to have a permit, and which regulates how many/the size/where fish can be caught. The majority of the time (especially with overfishing), tragedy of the commons is due to a lack of understanding and care. Communication and competition issues with other members within the communal system could prove detrimental to the upkeep of the resources.
I am curious about the campus sustainability efforts of ANUgreen. I am wondering about the extent to which ANU students are involved in these programmes. Can you share with me your personal experiences? Do you think ANUgreen is doing enough to engage students? Thanks for your thoughts!
Hi! I realised it would be better if I could post some questions to get us thinking about campus sustainability. Here are some that I came up with.
1. What does campus sustainability mean to you?
2. Are you aware of the sustainability efforts at ANU?
3. What is the recent effort that you have contributed to?
4. How many students, on average, are involved in campus sustainability programmes?
5. Do you think that the initiatives to engage students in campus sustainability is enough? Please elaborate.
6. Are there rooms for improvement?
7. Have the sustainability efforts at ANU influenced you to be more environmentally-friendly outside ANU as well? (i.e., perhaps, now you make an effort to recycle paper at home etc.)
If you have other thoughts, please feel free to raise them as well.
We realise you are busy with your work too but just a few minutes to help us in our assignment will be very useful to us. Thank you! Hope to hear from you soon!
NUS Questions for Mar. 8th Tutorial:
ReplyDelete1. What is a commons?
2. List some examples of communal systems that you and your Australian partners have been a part of and identify which ones have worked and which have not.
You will need to briefly explain the nature of your examples to your Australian counterparts as they may not understand them, and likewise get them to explain their examples to you. For example: You probably won't understand what a "sharehouse" is and why there can be commons issues, so be sure you explain what a "Singapore HDB housing complex" is to them, and why it can work or fail.
3. What are some of the key determinants that dictate whether the communal systems identified above examples above have worked or not?
4. Why is it that some communal systems involved in the management of resources work while others don't? Example: Why do some group houses "work" while others don't, and why do some "tea-clubs" work but in others all the biscuits get pinched!
5. Were there any distinct international/cultural differences between Singapore and Australia that explain why some communal systems worked, while others did not? If not, why not?
Hi, I am johnny
ReplyDeleteThis is my ideas about the questions:
1. Common is resources that are hard to have physical control that can exclude somebody not to use it (excludability) and while other people use it, then the less that other people can use (subtractability).
2. As I am not Australian, I use my home town as example. In Macao, there is some communal system, for Instance, The Fundo de Segurança (Security fund). This is a system that Macao resident is forced to work with as they need to put a small portion of their salary, as long as they reach the retire age, government will give them back different welfare through their whole retire life until they die. In contrast, the government economic flat in Macao isn’t work very well relatively. Economic flat is an apartment which is build and sold by government which prices are much lowers that market price of other flat. Before 2011, as long as your Macao permanent resident, the application will be accepted. However, this Make lots of rich man go to buy it as investment which makes many necessity cannot buy. Although after 2011 March, government regulate resident whose salary is under salary mean can apply it, there are still lots of uncertainty in the unbalance estate development in Macao.
3. The key determinant includes Government control, law regulation, social norms and self-conscience and self interested intention.
4. This social secure system works because it is under people’s self-interested intention, law to regulate and government control which are the base of management of resources. As every worker is forced to take part in by law and government, they must put money into this system periodically. However, as the people that I knew, even the Macao government does not force them to do. They still are willing to join into this program. Their explanation is as long as they save money in Fundo de Segurança, they can get social benefit when they are retired. This can explain Macao resident is self-interested in their retire life which make them has less worry about the life without regular salary support.
However, Economic flat does not work efficiently because lack of government and law control, also people self-interest and lack of conscience is other main factor These are the factor show it is lack of resources management. As government does not regulate this system through legislation, rich people can focus their own interest which is using less resource (economic house is cheaper than market price) to maximize their benefit (economic house will raise price quickly). Since rich people do not care inability people, they are lack of conscience and this individual intention is a fundamental factor makes Macao estate price develop in an unhealthy way.
These are just myself opinions, I don't know if They are correct or wrong.
Hey Johnny,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your post. I'm sad to hear that there is such indifference towards the lower income class in Macao. And for the record, I think it's impossible to have a wrong opinion! Here is my contribution:
1. Environmental resources and areas that are difficult to control and partition, for example: fisheries, wildlife, bodies of water, forests, air (airwaves)
2. Ex. Banff National Park
• Canada’s first and most popular national park
• Visitors from anywhere in the world are allowed to visit by paying a small fee to enter the park
• Park rangers participate in conservation efforts to protect endangered species and ensure the park is kept in good condition
• Fishing permits are sold, but wildlife and park resources are protected by the National Government
• Tourists enjoy a range of activities from skiing to camping
• This system has worked for over 100 years and has attracted millions of visitors from all over the world
3. The government has set up rules and regulations for park visitors to follow so that the park is not destructed. If these rules are not followed, the visitor is fined and their park pass is revoked. Visitors truly enjoy spending time in the Rocky Mountains skiing, hiking, camping, and river rafting. Because they appreciate these activities, they are generally inspired to take care of the park by not littering, not feeding wildlife, ensuring their camp fires stay maintained, etc. Visitors are self-motivated to respect the park because they love returning every year. However, every year there are unfortunate incidences where visitors do not respect their surroundings and are attacked by wildlife or accidently start a fire. These incidences, while rare, subtract from others’ enjoyment.
4. I think there has to be respect of the resource for management to work. Often times profit motivates government, companies and investors to exploit certain resources, which leads to their degradation. If people find a common valuable, then they will want to have it to themselves. In the case of Banff National Park, government regulation has been effective in protecting the park so that many visitors can effectively co-exist with nature during their stay. Communal systems fail if people try to compete for the resource instead of share it.
Thanks, Paige, you give me a good idea about the Canadian National Park management. It is very useful.
ReplyDeleteDoes any one want to take part in the contribution?
Hey paige and johnny,
ReplyDeleteI'm Ishbel... Here is my example- It's great that you are being so active in communicating with us paige...
2)-A communal system that I have been involved in that has worked:
Bundagen- a rural land co-operative in Northern NSW with 210 share-holders. My parents and grandparents own shares in the land and I have been on holiday there through out my childhood. While the politics can at times be complex and tumultuous, on the whole, this communal land ownership system operates effectively with a beautiful community ethic.
-A communal system I have been in that has not worked: Group work in high school
3)Reasons why the Bundagen land co-operative wo
rks:
- Those involved are there voluntarily
- Members share the same values
-Very selective. To become a member one has to have trial periods living on the land so it can be observed how they behave with in the dynamics of the community.
- This communal system is relatively small- everyone knows each other and therefore the power of conscience is effective.
-It is a definable area of land
-‘Mutual coercion’ as described by Hardin in the Tragedy Of The Commons article- “mutual coercion, mutually agreed upon by the majority of the people affected.” In relation to Bundagen this means that if a member consistanly behaves in a way that adversely impacts on the community, then a vote will be taken and they may eventually be asked to leave.
Hey all! Sorry for the late reply. Here's what I think:
ReplyDelete1. Commons are natural resources, such as forests, fisheries, oceans. They can be privatized or kept as public property to which rights to entry and use could be allocated.
2. Communal properties are resources held by an identifiable community of independent users. I think reservoirs in Singapore are considered as communal properties. People can jog around reservoirs, fish, or canoe in the reservoirs but are unable to use its water. The water is regulated by Public Utilities Board (PUB) and citizens have to pay to use the water at home.
3. A large determinant is whether people are willing to pay for the usage of the resources. In this case, water. People are willing to pay for the water and no one is trying to take control over PUB. Thus, this communal system has succeeded.
4. The failure or success of a communal system depends on the society. If people are willing to pay for its uses, the system has succeeded. If people try to compete for power - to take charge instead - the system has failed.
I've thought of another few examples for question 2. Public pools in Singapore. People have to pay to enter the swimming pools. These public pools are owned by the government and this is to ensure that the public does not misuse the swimming pools. The government also helps in the maintenance of these public pools.
ReplyDeleteHi, sorry for this late reply!
ReplyDelete2. Perhaps, golf courses are a good example of communal property. This is not the conventional “commons” but the underlying idea that this resource is held by a group of individuals who exclude outsiders and regulate the use by members of the country club apply in this context.
An example would be the Changi Golf Club. Initially, it used to be exclusive to members of the British Royal Air Force (RAF) but now it is opened to civilian members.
3.
• Strict laws governing the use of the golf courses.
• High prices. This will exclude a lot of people who simply cannot afford such high prices for this sport/hobby. I think you can still use the golf course if you are not a member but the prices will be even higher because if I am not wrong, you will be charged visitor / non member rates.
• Government support. One of the projects that I did last semester was based around the controversial use of land for golf courses. (Land is especially scarce in Singapore, we need to reclaim from the sea!) There are actually 2 other golf courses near the Changi Golf Club which is kind of useless because when we did our research, we found that golf courses are grossly under-utilised. Which kind of leads to a whole other issue about the sustainability of land use in Singapore. But our PM (Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong) believes that golf is a sport that Singaporeans will especially enjoy (this is actually taken from our prof Neo’s research on golf courses in Singapore).
4.
• Self-interest plays a big part in the failure communal systems. I don’t really have a solid example in this case for the golf courses. Communal systems only work if the people in the community agree on the terms and they value the overall need for the sustainable management of the resource. But if at any point, someone has a strong self-interest then the whole structure fails.
• Strict laws on regulation of use and monitoring. There should be proper governance to ensure that every member does not over-step his/her boundaries due to self-interest.
• Strong barriers against the outsiders. Because if we actually think about it, the whole premise of the communal property system is the idea of inclusion/exclusion.
I hope this makes sense! Correct me if I am wrong! :)
• Commons are natural resources that tend to be publicly owned or owned by a group of people for use by whoever they allow to use it. Lakes and parks are examples of this.
ReplyDelete• Minnamurra rainforest is an example of a communal system. It is a national park on the south coast of New South Wales. It is able to be accessed by those willing to pay a fee for maintenance and this is a very small cost. There is a small staff who ensure that the wildlife is not being abused by human contact and that rubbish is being kept out. You are not permitted to hunt, fish, or burn fires in the rainforest to ensure that it is preserved. This system has meant that a rainforest that was once on the brink of being destroyed is now being maintained for the community to enjoy.
• The fact that this rainforest is now monitored by the State Government with funding and staffing means that the rainforest will be preserved for people to enjoy in the future. Continuing to allow people to come and visit the rainforest and walk through it and enjoy the waterfalls leads me to believe that this communal system is working. The understanding that this is an area to look after has meant that people are generally willing to keep it litter free, not burn the growth, and respect the animals habitats.
• Some communal systems that can appear very similar on the surface can work or fail due to the human element. An effective communal system can be due to motivated management or cohesive community members. A failing communal system can be due to disinterested management ( government or private) or conflicting community members about the value and purpose of the communal system. A working or failing system can be determined, possibly, by the financial incentive that the community and management receive.
Sorry for it being so late I've had trouble accessing it. All is good now.
Hey guys, sorry I haven’t had any input into this discussion. I was in Sydney over the whole weekend and have only just cracked onto the tutorial questions. It is probably no use to you now, but I’ll post up my answers ASAP. Sorry; I’ll be more involved in future discussions :)
ReplyDelete1. Commons are resources available for the public use of a selected group, where each individual is benefiting from what the resource provides. If this system is exploited by one individual, the entire party is impacted negatively.
ReplyDelete2. Me and my family members go on fishing trips in the waters of the South Coast, where a guide takes us to the fishing hotspots. It is not only our prerogative, but a mandatory requirement, that everyone who fishes in that area not only releases all undersize fish, but stop fishing in the area and move on to another once the group has caught a certain amount of fish. Not only does this enable us to obtain large, healthy fish in plentiful numbers, but we allow fish populations to grow both in age and in numbers by not overfishing in that area. This practice has flourished, and those who use the guide’s private knowledge of where the hotspots are, are responsible with their fishing.
3. Strict laws which are enforced, help to strictly regulate the use of public areas. Education is also a necessity, as it is important to inform users why it is important to protect the communal resource. With education comes values, ethics, and genuine respect for the particular resource. Overfishing is a global issue, and governments in different nations should work in collaboration with each other to protect this global resource, and come up with a plan to use only what is needed in the now, and leave a plentiful amount for the future.
4. Some communal systems work because of the input of laws, education, and future planning, and fail to work because of the lack thereof. There are many laws in place, which requires fishermen to have a permit, and which regulates how many/the size/where fish can be caught. The majority of the time (especially with overfishing), tragedy of the commons is due to a lack of understanding and care. Communication and competition issues with other members within the communal system could prove detrimental to the upkeep of the resources.
Hi ANU friends,
ReplyDeleteI am curious about the campus sustainability efforts of ANUgreen. I am wondering about the extent to which ANU students are involved in these programmes. Can you share with me your personal experiences? Do you think ANUgreen is doing enough to engage students? Thanks for your thoughts!
Hi!
ReplyDeleteI realised it would be better if I could post some questions to get us thinking about campus sustainability. Here are some that I came up with.
1. What does campus sustainability mean to you?
2. Are you aware of the sustainability efforts at ANU?
3. What is the recent effort that you have contributed to?
4. How many students, on average, are involved in campus sustainability programmes?
5. Do you think that the initiatives to engage students in campus sustainability is enough? Please elaborate.
6. Are there rooms for improvement?
7. Have the sustainability efforts at ANU influenced you to be more environmentally-friendly outside ANU as well? (i.e., perhaps, now you make an effort to recycle paper at home etc.)
If you have other thoughts, please feel free to raise them as well.
We realise you are busy with your work too but just a few minutes to help us in our assignment will be very useful to us. Thank you! Hope to hear from you soon!