A Cultural-Historical Activity Theory Perspective on the Sustainability Challenges of Urban Commoning
Revisiting the Material Aspect of the (Re)Production of Urban Commons
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/irtp.v3i1.167394Keywords:
urban commoning, CHAT, unpaid reproductive work, volunteeringAbstract
Urban commoning theory gives priority to value that is reproduced in the patterns of collective use of urban resources. Its theoretical aim is to reclaim this value from capital, as a commons. Urban commoning is often recognized as an alternative to capitalist reproduction in the fields of art, culture, or housing - such as in autonomous cultural centers or housing cooperatives. However, one of the key empirical issues of urban commoning is its relative unsustainability. This typically manifests in the low participation of commoners in the everyday activities of commoning. The aim of this paper was to show that commoning theory lacks the analytical tools necessary to account for these challenges and to propose a pathway to a theoretical solution. A critical re-examination of some aspects of urban commoning theory is presented, in order to better understand its shortcomings. The argument takes into account the theoretical function of an established critique of Hardin and Ostrom in the setting of the grounds for commoning theory, as well as a particular historization of commoning that contextualizes it. I argue that these established ways of contextualizing commoning theory serve to obscure its relationship to public interest, as well as to remove the notion of economic interest from commoning. Instead of a widely spread focus on values and personal emancipation, central to commoning theory, a more structural approach to commoning is proposed. Based on Silvia Federici’s notions of wages against housework and the Cultural-historical activity theory, commoning is discussed as a contradictory activity. I propose the notion of urban commoning as unpaid reproductive work that has an implicit opportunity cost for the commoners.
References
Blunden, A. (2021). Hegel, Marx and Vygotsky: Essays on social philosophy. Brill.
Bresnihan, P., & Byrne, M. (2015). Escape into the city: Everyday practices of commoning and the production of urban space in Dublin. Antipode, 47(1), 36–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12105
Brewer, M. B., & Kramer, R. M. (1986). Choice behavior in social dilemmas: Effects of social identity, group size, and decision framing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(3), 543–549. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.50.3.543
Chatterton, P. (2010). So what does it mean to be anti-capitalist? Conversations with activists from urban social centres. Urban studies, 47(6), 1205–1224. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098009360222
Dolenec, D., & Žitko, M. (2013). Ostrom and Horvat: Identifying Principles of a Socialist Governmentality. Review of Radical Political Economics, 48(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/0486613415586986
De Angelis, M. & Harvie, D. (2013). The Commons. In M. Parker, G. Cheney, V. Fournier & C. Land (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Alternative Organisation (pp. 280-294). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203725351
De Angelis, M. (2013). Does capital need a commons fix? Ephemera, 13(3), 603–615.
Eizenberg, E. (2012). Actually existing commons: Three moments of space of community gardens in New York City. Antipode, 44(3), 764–782. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.2011.00892.x
Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 19–38). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511812774.003
Engeström, Y., & Miettinen, R., (1999). Introduction. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.). Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 1–16). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511812774
Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080123238
Engeström, Y. (2015). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.3868/s110-006-017-0011-8
Federici, S. (2011). Feminism and the politics of the commons. The Commoner. https://thecommoner.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/federici-feminism-and-the-politics-of-commons.pdf
Federici, S. (1975). Wages against housework. The Commoner, 1, 1–17. https://thecommoner.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/04-federici.pdf
Fournier, V. (2013). Commoning: On the social organisation of the commons. M@n@gement, 16(4), 433–453. https://doi.org/10.3917/mana.164.0433
Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162(3859),1243–1248. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.162.3859.1243
Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2004). Multitude: War and democracy in the age of empire. The Penguin Press.
Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2009). Commonwealth. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjsf48h
Huron, A. (2015). Working with strangers in saturated space: Reclaiming and maintaining the urban commons. Antipode, 47(4), 963–979. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12141
Huron, A. (2017). Theorising the urban commons: New thoughts, tensions, and paths forward. Urban Studies, 54(4), 1062–1069. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098016685528
Kirn, G. (2016). Forgotten history of the commons in socialist Yugoslavia: A case of self-managed cultural infrastructure in the period of 1960s and 1970s. In B. Cvejić, B. Kunst, & S. Hölscher (Eds.), TkH Journal for performing arts theory, 23, 63–71.
Kuzmanović, B. (1984). Motivaciono-vrednosna osnova odnosa prema samoupravljanju i učešća u samoupravljanju [The motivational and values foundations of attitudes toward self-management and participation in self-management]. Psihološka istraživanja, 3, 465–546.
Kopelman, S., Weber, J. M., & Messick, D. M. (2002). Factors influencing cooperation in commons dilemmas: A review of experimental psychological research. In E. Ostrom, T. Dietz, N. Dolšak, P. C. Stern, S. Stonich, & E. U. Weber (Eds.), The drama of the commons (pp. 113–156). National Academy Press.
Lefebvre, H. (1996). Writings on cities. Blackwell.
Linebaugh, P. (2008). The Magna Carta manifesto: Liberties and commons for all. University of California Press.
Lutz, M. (2015). Uncommon claims to the commons: Homeless tent cities in the US. In M. Dellenbaugh , M. Kip , M. Bieniok, A. Müller, & M. Schwegmann (Eds.), Urban Commons: Moving Beyond State and Market (pp. 101–116). Birkhäuser. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783038214953-007
Marx, K. (1867). Capital: A critique of political economy (Vol. 1). Marxists Internet Archive. https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Capital-Volume-I.pdf
Noterman, E. (2015). Beyond tragedy: Differential commoning in a manufactured housing cooperative. Antipode, 48(2), 433–452. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12182
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge university press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807763
Popović, I. (2022). Praktikovanje zajedničkog iz perspektive kulturno-istorijske teorije delatnosti: Studija slučaja kulturnog centra Magacin [Practices of commoning from a Cultural-historical activity theory perspective: A case study of The Cultural center Magacin, Unpublished master's thesis]. University of Belgrade.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4
Vygotsky, L. S. (1999). Tool and sign in the development of the child. In R. W. Rieber & M. J. Hall (Eds.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky, Volume 6: Scientific legacy (pp. 39–285). Springer. (Original work published 1930)
Timotijević, J. (2018). Grad i prostorna zajednička dobra [The city and the spatial common goods]. In A. Matković (Ed.), Zajednička dobra i granice kapitalizma (pp. 66–75). https://zajednicko.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Zajednicka-dobra-i-granice-kapitalizma.pdf
Vidović, D., Žuvela A., & Mišković, D. (2018). Sudioničko upravljanje u kulturi u Republici Hrvatskoj [Participatory management in culture in the Republic of Croatia]. In D. Vidović (Ed.), Uradimo zajedno: Prakse i tendencije sudioničkoga upravljanja u kulturi u Republici Hrvatskoj (pp. 44–95).
Volk, S., Thöni, C., & Ruigrok, W. (2012). Temporal stability and psychological foundations of cooperation preferences. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 81(2), 664–676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2011.10.006
Wang, X., Lam, W. F., & Lorenzo, T. (2024). A synthesis of rational choice and critical urban commons debates. International Journal of the Commons, 18(1), 475–489. https://doi.org/10.5334/ijc.1277
Williams, M. J. (2018). Urban commons are more‐than‐property. Geographical Research, 56(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-5871.12262
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Isidora Popović
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
IRTP operates based on a non-exclusive publishing agreement, according to which the journal retains the right of first publication, but authors are free to subsequently publish their work. The copyright of all work rests with the author(s).
All content published in IRTP is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This license allows authors and readers to share and adapt content for non-commercial purposes, provided that they abide by the following terms:
- Give credit to the original author(s)/creator(s) and attribution parties (i.e., IRTP);
- Provide a link to the original source, to the extent practicable;
- Include the copyright notice and/or indicate the corresponding Creative Commons license;
- Indicate what, if any, adaptations were made to the original; and
- Share adapted content under the same license as the original.
Authors are encouraged to familiarize themselves with the various Creative Commons licenses. Readers are advised to consult the licensing information embedded in each published work to ensure that they are familiar with the terms of use that apply.
