Inherent contradictions and challenges in urban commons management: Focusing on ‘Gyeong-Eui Railway Commons'

박인권; 김진언; 신지연

doi:10.19097/kaser.2019.29.3.62

Space and Environment

P-ISSN1225-6706
E-ISSN2733-4295
KCI

Home

ISSN : 1225-6706

Article Contents

Prev Next

e-Submission

Vol.29 No.3

Citation Share

Inherent contradictions and challenges in urban commons management: Focusing on ‘Gyeong-Eui Railway Commons'

Space and Environment / Space and Environment, (P)1225-6706; (E)2733-4295

2019, v.29 no.3, pp.62-113

https://doi.org/10.19097/kaser.2019.29.3.62

& (2019). Inherent contradictions and challenges in urban commons management: Focusing on ‘Gyeong-Eui Railway Commons'. Space and Environment, 29(3), 62-113, https://doi.org/10.19097/kaser.2019.29.3.62

copy

Abstract

Urban commons movements are being deployed all over the world to resist state control and the privatization and commodification of resources in modern cities and to practice the value of ‘commoning’ as an alternative order. Urban commons exist in the setting of ‘the urban’ and have unique characteristics that differ from the traditional commons in the rural or natural setting. In particular, the ‘urban’ attributes conflict with the conditions of ‘commons’, which is effectively managed, causing inherent contradictions in urban commons management. This study explores the difficulties and challenges that urban commons face due to their inherent nature as a new commons concept, and examines how efforts are made to solve them. For this purpose, we analyze the case of Gyeong-Eui Railway Commons (GRC) in Seoul, Korea, focusing on the inherent contradictions in managing urban commons in terms of the three dimensions of commons, i.e., community, institution and resources. The results show that, from the management’s point of view, the urban attributes and the efficient management conditions for GRC create a state of tension with each other, sometimes conflicted, and sometimes compromised in all three dimensions of community, institution, and resource, putting GRC in an unstable equilibrium. In addition, it can be seen that not only the efforts of the members of the GRC community but also the involvement of civil society are important for new development through maintaining this equilibrium and overcoming inherent contradictions. These findings are expected to help understand and address the root causes of urban commons management problems.

keywords: 도시 커먼즈, 공유지, 내재적 모순, 경의선공유지, 무단점유, Urban commons, commons, inherent contradictions, GyeongEui Railway Commons, squatting, Seoul

Reference

권범철. 2017. ｢현대 도시의 공통재와 재생산의 문제｣. ≪공간과 사회≫ 27(2), 119∼149쪽.

김동완. 2014. ｢‘날것’으로서 공공 공간과 타자의 복원: 로열 페스티벌 홀을 사례로｣. ≪공간과 사회≫ 24(3), 178∼209쪽.

김용창. 2015. ｢신자유주의 도시화와 도시 인클로저(I): 이론적 검토｣. ≪대한지리학회지≫ 50(4), 431∼449쪽.

박인권. 2017. ｢도시의 사회적 약자 불안정화 과정: 불안계급 이론의 비판과 확장｣. ≪공간과 사회≫ 27(4) 36∼78쪽.

박인권·이선영. 2012. ｢서울의 저항과 대안의 공간 및 운동 변화 분석｣. ≪공간과사회≫ 22(4), 5∼50쪽.

이병천. 2018. ｢커먼즈론은 공동재산/권을 어떻게 보는가?: 세 가지 시선｣. ≪시민과세계≫ 33, 239∼262쪽.

이승원. 2019. ｢도시 커먼즈와 민주주의: 도시 커먼즈 운동의 특징과 동학에 관한이론적 재고찰｣. ≪공간과 사회≫ 29(2), 134∼174쪽.

정영신. 2016. ｢엘리너 오스트롬의 자원관리론을 넘어서: 커먼즈에 대한 정치생태학적 접근을 위하여｣. ≪경제와사회≫ 20(1), 399∼442쪽.

최현. 2019. ｢공동자원의 새로운 정의와 제주의 공동자원: 바다밭을 중심으로｣. ≪경제와사회≫ 23(1), 12∼39쪽.

10.

한윤애. 2016. ｢도시공유재의 인클로저와 테이크아웃드로잉의 반란적 공유 실천 운동｣. ≪공간과 사회≫ 26(3), 42∼76쪽.

11.

황진태. 2016. ｢발전주의 도시에서 도시 공유재 개념의 이론적·실천적 전망｣. ≪한국도시지리학회지≫ 19(2), 1∼16쪽.

12.

An Architektur. 2010. “On the Commons: A Public Interview with Massimo De Angelis and Stavros Stavrides.” e-flux journal 17, pp. 1∼17.

13.

Brenner, N. 1999. “Globalisation as Reterritorialisatioin: The Re-scaling of Urban Governance in the European Union.” Urban Studies 36(3), pp. 431∼451.

14.

Bresnihan, P., & Byrne, M. 2015. “Escape into the City: Everyday Practices of Commoning and the Production of Urban Space in Dublin.” Antipode 47(1), pp. 36∼54.

15.

Bunce, S. 2016. “Pursuing Urban Commons: Politics and Alliances in Community Land Trust Activism in East London.” Antipode 48(1), pp. 134∼150.

16.

Caffentzis, G., & Federici, S. 2014. “Commons against and beyond capitalism.” Community Development Journal 49(1), pp. i92∼i105.

17.

Castells, M. 1977. The Urban Question: A Marxist Approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

18.

Castells, M. 1978. City, class, and power. London: Macmillan.

19.

Garnett, N. S. 2012. “Managing the Urban Commons.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 160(7), pp. 1995∼2027.

20.

Gerometta, J. et al. 2005. “Social Innovation and Civil Society in Urban Governance: Strategies for an Inclusive City.” Urban Studies 42(11), pp. 2007∼2021.

21.

Habitat III Secretariat. 2017. New Urban Agenda. UN Habitat. Retrieved August 7, 2019, from http://habitat3.org/wp-content/uploads/NUA-English.pdf

22.

Han, D. K., & Imamasa, H. 2015. “Overcoming Privatized Housing in South Korea:Looking through the Lens of “Commons” and “the Common”.” in Dellenbaugh, M. et al(eds.). Urban Commons: Moving Beyond State and Market. Basel, Switzerland:Birkhäuser Verlag AG, pp. 91∼100.

23.

Hardin, G. 1968. “The tragedy of the commons.” Science 162(3859), pp. 1243∼1248.

24.

Harvey, D. 1982. The Limits to Capital. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

25.

Harvey, D. 2001. “Globalization and the “Spatial Fix”.” Geographische Revue 3(2), pp. 23∼30.

26.

Harvey, D. 2012. Rebel Cities: From the Right to the City to the Urban Revolution. London: Verso Books.

27.

Hess. C. 2008. “Mapping the New Commons.” Presented at “Governing Shared Resources: Connecting Local Experience to Global Challenges” the 12th Biennial Conference of the International Association for the Study of the Commons. University of Gloucestershire. Cheltenham. England. July 14-18. 2008.

28.

Huron, A. 2015. “Working with Strangers in Saturated Space: Reclaiming and Maintaining the Urban Commons.” Antipode 47(4), pp. 963∼979.

29.

Huron, A. 2017. “Theorising the urban commons: New Thoughts. tensions and paths forward.” Urban Studies 54(4), pp. 1062∼1069.

30.

Kip, M. et al. 2015. “Seizing the (Every)Day: Welcome to the Urban Commons!” in Dellenbaugh, M. et al(eds.). Urban Commons: Moving Beyond State and Market. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhäuser Verlag AG, pp. 9∼24.

31.

Netting, R. 1976. “What Alpine Peasants Have in Common: Observations on Communal Tenure in a Swiss Village.” Human Ecology 4(2), pp. 135∼146.

32.

Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.

33.

Putnam, R. D. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon&Schuster.

34.

Radywyl, N., & Bigg, C. 2013. “Reclaiming the commons for urban trasformation.” Journal of Cleaner Production 50, pp. 159∼170.

35.

경의선공유지신문. 2019. 제4호 겨울, 3쪽. https://blog.naver.com/commons16/221501137624 (최종접속일: 2019.08.07).

36.

김보현. 2019. “[현장] 공덕역 경의선 부지 개발 둘러싼 ‘4각 갈등’.” ≪비즈한국≫ 2019.07.26. http://www.bizhankook.com/bk/article/18191 (최종접속일: 2019.08.06).

37.

정창환. 2019. “한국철도시설공단 <해명> “공덕역 경의선 공유지, 시민자치 공간으로 유지해야” 관련.” ≪레일뉴스≫ 2019.05.08. http://www.itrailnews.co.kr/news/article.html?no=34743 (최종접속일: 2019.08.06).

바로가기메뉴

Article Contents

Vol.29 No.3

Inherent contradictions and challenges in urban commons management: Focusing on ‘Gyeong-Eui Railway Commons'

Abstract

Reference

Space and Environment