Identifying commons and mapping

Identifying commons and mapping

 

Pablo Dominguez

The surprising lack of data on European commons, while it is one of the regions of the world with more public statistics available, particularly within the EU and neighboring countries, where there is not even a single mention to the commons in the present CAP (2023-2027) nor in the EU Green Deal with its associated strategies (Biodiversity & Farm to Fork Strategies, Climate Law, etc.). I will claim that the “invisible reality” of the European commons cannot be ignored any longer, especially considering the new EU ambitious agri-environmental targets set by the new ‘green’ policies mentioned above, quite aligned also with the achievement of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals. In such a context, presenting and discussing different ongoing or possible future ways for identifying and mapping the commons at continental scale could help policy and legislation progress in favor of the commons, while considering the risks and opportunities of such a procedure.

Pablo’s presentation can be found here.

 

Matteo Sposato

LandMark is a global initiative aimed at providing Indigenous Peoples and local communities with a platform to map and communicate the lands they hold and manage, with the goal of strengthening their claims, of highlighting the contributions of these territories to solving the environmental crises of our times, and of being proactive towards governments, development agencies and other actors that could influence land tenure security.

LandMark is also an evolving initiative: from just being a repository of geospatial data, it now aspires to provide analyses and knowledge products, and also crucially to support affected groups by linking them to a community of practice and to relevant national and international advocacy spaces.

Despite featuring many landscapes held and managed by communities, Europe is critically underrepresented in LandMark. This is a gap that can and should be filled, both by promoting new mapping of community lands and by linking to existing and past initiatives; and it becomes particularly important in a phase of regionalisation for LandMark. The question then becomes: is LandMark fit to document and communicate common lands in Europe and promote their contributions towards climate and environmental pledges by governments? How can we best work collaboratively to make sure that Europe becomes a stronger region in LandMark, both in terms of data representation and in terms of coordination?

Matteo’s presentation can be found here.

 

Sarah Baumgartner

In many parts of Switzerland, common property institutions play an important role, as they own a considerable proportion of the forests, pastures (especially in the mountain regions), but also farmland and even urban areas. Nevertheless, there is still no comprehensive map or other overview. In my short presentation, I will talk about the pilot project we are preparing, the questions we would like to answer and the difficulties we may have in doing so.

Sarah’s presentation can be found here.

 

Federico Bigaran

The use of participatory techniques for public GIS implementation (i.e. OpenStreetMap) could help to broadly identify, map, and quantify the EU agro-sylvo-pastoral areas under common management (Rural Commons) and the ecosystem services and the social and cultural values associated with different types of managements and land use rights. The scope is their progressive inclusion in the land use and land cover (LULC) maps of Europe. This is a preliminary condition for the recognition of their role in cultural and biodiversity conservation. The large number and different typologies of existing Rural Commons, customs, and practices, across Europe and the difficulties in analyzing and inventorying all the juridical forms and cadastral situations suggest adopting a pragmatic approach in land mapping that in a reasonable time could provide useful information for advocacy and policy recommendations for Rural Commons reinforcement and legitimation. The active involvement of the local community is essential for understanding the real situation, risks, and potentiality concerning the environment and biodiversity conservation, access to resources, and cultural and social issues.

Moreover, according to the recent Nature Restoration Law proposal, Member States, to support the restoration and non-deterioration of terrestrial, freshwater, coastal, and marine habitats, can designate additional areas as ‘protected areas’ or ‘strictly protected areas’ to implement Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs), and to promote private land conservation measures. Which role is for Rural Commons?

 

Ilanne Kaczmarek

During this session, I would like to discuss the different ways mapping is perceived by local communities. In fact, we have been working with communities from the Chamonix Valley and mapping the commons there. Many reflections appeared when we presented the maps on whether the commons should or should not be represented and the risks involved in doing so. On the other hand, we are working with communities of the Massif Central region, where mapping the commons is asked by communities as they feel it could increase their recognition. I will present maps from both regions and the reflections related, asking how the local context may define how mapping is perceived as a strength or weakness.

We are also working with a data institution (Régie Générale des Données de Savoie) on creating an app that maps the commons around the country. At first, the aim was to make this app public, but it has been decided that it should rather be a working tool for researchers and communities, as communities are not always willing to map the commons.

Ilanne’s presentation can be found here.

 

Flora Mammana

The association La Foresta – Accademia di Comunità, of which I am a member, is dedicated to activating and experimenting with community economies and commons. Recognizing the urgent need to map the common lands and buildings—which make up approximately 50% of the land area in our valley—we undertook this initiative despite having no prior expertise. The mapping process sought to address the ongoing privatization, fragmentation, and substitution of collective properties with less accessible ones.

The map was never intended to be the final goal; rather, it was envisioned as both a tool and a process to raise awareness, stimulate discussions, and encourage engagement with the commons.

In my presentation, I will share concrete examples of the processes, collaborations, and creative practices that were sparked until now by this collective mapping initiative.

 

Flora’s presentation can be found here.

 

Lisa Rail

My research, based in Austria, is about identifying, describing and juxtaposing different legal categories that alpine commons are formalized as. The legal formats influence commoners’ choices of self-organzation, land-use, subsidy eligibility, and so forth – yet this is hardly accknowledged in policy making. Comparative knowledge about the workings and practical effects of different legal forms could productively inform policy choices and also commoners’ own demands and visions of how to organize differently.

Lisa’s presentation can be found here.

 

Mateja Šmid Hribar

The example of mapping the commons from Slovenia.

Commons are often cited as vital for nature and biodiversity preservation, yet precise data on their contributions remain scarce. To address this, we aimed to map Slovenian commons managed by agrarian communities. Due to lack of data at the national level we initially focused on the Gorenjska region, known for its agrarian communities. Of the 73 communities contacted, 21 provided parcel data. So we further limited ourselves to a smaller area, this time to the area of the Triglav National Park. We mapped parcel that we received and in addition obtained the missing data by searching the land register, where 400 entries can be checked per day. After the mapping will be done we will analyze the proportion of land managed by agrarian communities within Natura 2000, ecologically important areas, nature reserves, and other natural values. Additionally, in the next 2 months we will assess the park’s capacity to deliver 2 ecosystem services—pollination and recreation—and identify areas that are managed by agrarian communities to these 2 ecosystem services.

The main aim of the mapping is to get as precise data as possible and to present the important contribution of agricultural communities to the conservation of nature and biodiversity to the Slovenian government, which often makes difficult agrarian communities in Slovenia to operate.

Mateja’s presentation can be found here.

 

Meeting Summary for Identifying commons and mapping

Quick recap

The session discussed the importance of mapping and identifying commonalities in European commons, emphasizing the need for comprehensive data collection and analysis to address sustainability issues and support policy-making. The researchers highlighted various challenges in this process, including data accessibility, legal recognition, and community perceptions, while showcasing ongoing efforts to map and manage commons in different European countries. The discussion also touched on the potential benefits of creating an umbrella organization for commons, the importance of trust and impartiality in data sharing, and the need for collaboration between various stakeholders to document historical rights and support sustainable development goals.

Next steps

  • Mapping team to consider incorporating seasonal user rights and historical data when creating maps of commons.
  • Researchers to collaborate with cartographers, historians, and local communities to develop more comprehensive maps with multiple layers.
  • Researchers to explore funding opportunities and partnerships with commons organizations to reduce fees for accessing mapping data.
  • Mapping team to prioritize data provided directly by communities when creating and validating maps of commons.
  • Researchers to analyse how commons contribute to protected forests, ecosystem services, pollination, and nature-based recreation.
  • Researchers to develop strategies for sharing maps of commons while addressing potential risks and community concerns.
  • Researchers to create comparative overviews of different legal forms of commons and their effects on stakeholder involvement and land use.
  • Consider developing educational materials about commons for dissemination to local communities and educational agencies.
  • Researchers to assess the potential for creating a commons umbrella organization to support knowledge sharing and empowerment of commoners.

Summary

Mapping and Identifying Commonalities in Europe

In the meeting, Pablo discussed the importance of mapping and identifying commonalities to create policies and changes. He highlighted the significant gap in data about local communities, government systems, and comments at the European level. Pablo also mentioned a study conducted by Eurostat in 2013 on the amount of commons in 15 European Union countries which came to 7%. However, he emphasised that this was an understatement. Pablo also mentioned the ongoing work of a network of researchers from 20 countries to quantify the survey of Commons and their production. He concluded by expressing hope for meaningful efforts towards a continental scale mapping.

 

Addressing Sustainability in Europe

Matteo discusses the need for actionable knowledge and support for data sharing and analysis to address sustainability issues in Europe. He highlights the importance of this work for the European Union’s new strategic period. The key challenges are defining boundaries, accessing data, and addressing uncertainty about future environmental impacts. Matteo notes some progress in data sharing initiatives but emphasises the large scope of the problem across Europe.

 

Common Property Institutions and Mapping

Sarah discussed the importance of common property institutions, particularly in Switzerland, and their significant role in land ownership, traditions, and political influence. She mentioned a project to investigate Swiss comments and the challenges of defining what constitutes important information. Sarah also touched on the issue of data accessibility, noting that some cantons charge high fees for data access.

 

Mapping Perceptions and Legal Bases

Ilanne discussed the varying perceptions of mapping in different contexts. She noted that mapping is generally well-received when there is a legal basis and when it’s done on a small scale. She then shifted the discussion to perceptions of local communities on mapping, using the example of the Chamonix Valley in France. She highlighted the difference between large and small scales in mapping, and the varying legal recognition of common property institutions. Ilanne mentioning the French government’s attempts to dismantle these institutions. She concluded by emphasizing the difference between mapping and sharing maps, and the need to consider the implications of sharing maps in different contexts.

 

Mapping Commons in Riva Del Gaza

Flora discussed the community’s efforts to map and manage the commons in their valley, which is facing issues such as land pressure, unobserved privatizations, and lack of accessible data. Despite the challenges, Flora managed to collect and document historical data from provincial offices and municipalities, and even gained access to the Land Registry Office to gather more information. This led to the creation of an open-source map, which has been used for exploratory walks, parades, and workshops to rethink the management of common lands. The mapping process has attracted new people and is continuing in Riva del Gaza.

 

Austrian Legal Forms and Commons

Lisa discussed his work on creating an overview of the various legal forms in Austria, focusing on the structural gaps and lack of knowledge in this area. She highlighted the limitations of his ethnographic research, which was geographically limited, and the challenges of understanding the rules of internal organization and adaptation to change within the Commons. Lisa emphasised the need for accessible knowledge for commoners and the potential value of an umbrella organization for the Commons. She also pointed out the issue of unequal access to maps, which is tied to power, and the need for comprehensive maps for scientific analysis and decision-making.

 

Slovenian Commons and Agrarian Communities

Mateja discussed the reestablishment of commons in Slovenia after its dependency, noting that there were about 640 of them, with data on their land sizes and uses. However, the exact locations of these commons were unknown. Mateja’s team aimed to digitally map Slovenian commons managed by agrarian communities. They found eight such communities in a particular area, which presented about 20% of the length of the only national park in Slovenia. Additionally, they found 10% of the land belonging to a larger number of owners, potentially agrarian communities, but without specific data. Mateja emphasized the importance of recognizing agrarian communities as strong stakeholders due to their contribution to the national park.

 

Community Contributions to Protected Forests

Pablo led a discussion about the analysis of community contributions to protected forests and ecosystem services such as pollination and nature-based recreation. He suggested that the team could imagine a future mapping of the Commons in Europe, considering risks, opportunities, and future developments. A question was raised about why certain systems are not shown on the instruction map, with Pablo suggesting that it might be due to the complexity of the concept of use rights and the lack of interest from private actors. He also mentioned the possibility of counter-mapping, where unofficial data is used to challenge official data.

 

Trust, Impartiality, and Dormant Territories

Researchers discussed the importance of trust in their internal processes, highlighting a unique level of trust within their organization. They expressed concern about potential misuse of their initiatives and emphasized the need for impartiality. They also touched on the concept of dormant territories and the potential for community mobilization. Mention was made of a previous data upload process and the need for careful consideration in future initiatives.

 

Data Sharing, Validation, and Sustainable Goals

Discussed the importance of data shared by communities and the validation process when conflicting information arises. It was emphasised the priority given to data from communities willing to share it, and the potential risks of sharing sensitive information. It was also highlighted the need for stronger communities in negotiations, even without legal backing, and the importance of mapping historical rights and seasonal user rights. It was suggested collaboration between cartographers, historians, and local people to document history and the potential for mapping with two layers of fixed boundaries and more flexible ones. It was also stressed the importance of sustainable development goals and the need for funding for such projects, suggesting cooperation with commoners in order to lower fees to land registry.