Commoning simultaneously shapes and is shaped by its practitioners

Evidence

Commoning is a dynamic process that reflects and reproduces members’ subjectivities, visions and social practices, as well as the social contexts in which they operate. — Yael Arbell, The Circle of Commoning, 36

Categorization

• DEFINE: Core working definition of commoning as a reflexive, dynamic process rather than a static thing or asset arrangement.
• corroborated: 5 independent passages support this claim — Yael Arbell, The Circle of Commoning:…, 36
• XREF: connects to: Commoning joins producing shared goods with cultivating collective skills and character. — Laura Albareda and Alejo Jose G. Sison, Commons Organizing: Embedding Common…, 99; Commoning should be analysed through internal and external dynamics among subjectivities, visions and practices. — Yael Arbell, The Circle of Commoning:…, 6; Commoning transforms participants’ identities even as it embeds practices of power and difference — Jessica Carrick-Hagenbarth, Institutional Bricolage and Commoning…, 15 (+2 more)

Related

• Social practices drive ongoing formation of commoning subjects. (similarity 0.91)
• Commoning should be analysed through internal and external dynamics among subjectivities, visions and practices. (similarity 0.90)
• Becoming a commoner, visions, and social practices shape each other cyclically (similarity 0.90)
• Commoning practices simultaneously produce group relations, member subjectivities, and material culture. (similarity 0.90)
• Commoning communities vary with context and adapt over time. (similarity 0.87)
• Commoning transforms participants’ identities even as it embeds practices of power and difference (similarity 0.86)
• Commoning joins producing shared goods with cultivating collective skills and character. (similarity 0.85)
• Commoning practices vary with each commons’ unique context, aims, membership and culture. (similarity 0.83)
• Commoner subjectivities emerge historically through practice rather than being fixed identities. (similarity 0.82)
• Members’ class and racial identities shape how communities do commoning. (similarity 0.82)
• Commons governance proceeds through a fixed cycle of subjectivity, vision, and practice. (similarity 0.81)
• Commons are best understood as dynamic processes of commoning, not static resources. (similarity 0.80)
• Commoning is always contextual and admits no universal best practice. (similarity 0.79)

Broader Connections

• Becoming a commoner, visions, and social practices shape each other cyclically #epitomizes (0.95) — Yael Arbell, The Circle of Commoning, 38
• Commoning transforms participants’ identities even as it embeds practices of power and difference #corroborates (0.92) — Jessica Carrick-Hagenbarth, Institutional Bricolage and Commoning…, 15
• Commoning practices simultaneously produce group relations, member subjectivities, and material culture. #expands (0.90) — Yael Arbell, The Circle of Commoning, 70