Session 11. 3. C.

In the town of Casper, Wyoming, U.S., population 60,000, a stretch of land in mountain foothills has remained undeveloped, surrounded by modest housing. People all over the town use the land for hiking, biking, and horseback riding. All other stretches of mountain foothills in the town are private property with no access. This area has remained undeveloped because it belongs to the state of Wyoming, under a 130-year-old system in which states in the western U.S. were given federal public land as they gained “statehood” in the nation. The gift of land was intended to generate revenue for states to fund public schools and other needs. In Casper the land in question had been grazed by livestock for a small fee; public access to state lands has always been allowed, so people have also recreated there for many years, unaware of state ownership. Recently a local company leased the state land for gravel mining. Neighbors were unaware of the lease until exploration pits began. State officials had approved the mine lease unaware of its location. Since the mine plan became public, outrage over the state’s use of its ownership has led to packed agency meetings and generated over 5,000 opposition petition signatures. Agency action is in limbo: the company has sued county officials who tried to stop the mine. The mine operation has not begun. The town has long thrived as a supply hub for coal, oil and gas production; the gravel company represents the 3rd generation in a wealthy local oil-gas family. For two decades, however, the traditional industries have declined. This case study suggests that people in so-called “dying industrial towns” see themselves and their place as valuable. They want a sustainable community and will fight to keep what they prize about their place.

States are in a constant pressure to redefine their spatial development strategies to address discrepancies between increasing and often conflicting land demands and sustainable development. Commons, on the other hand, activated by concerns of decommodification, solidarity and equity, reclaim and provide socio-economic alternatives to restore ecological values and counteract socio-ecological crises produced by extractive capitalism. This study is part of a book that will be published in 2025 and aims to contribute to the panel’s topic by adding the discussion around the role of the state in supporting or hindering commons as alternative forms of self-organisation and governance, and critical actants of more sustainable and equitable cities.

We go through case studies that span across seven EU countries and Morocco to explore: (1) how commons emerge as socio-ecological agents, through which communities re-invent property and creatively re-define modes of ‘provisioning’, and (2) how states either hinder, or ally with-, support, or inspire commoning practices setting the ground for improved land governance. The selected cases address a diversity of themes including sustainable food systems, affordable housing provision, urban land occupation and land use planning legislation, and urban cultural commons.

The question addressed is: how can states support and enable the proliferation of commons? Since there is no single answer to this question applying to all commons, countries and contexts, we delve into different cases and state configurations to provide more nuanced answers. Therefore, state-commons interactions are approached differently in each case and discussed with theoretical lenses that range from Ostromean approaches to anarchist perspectives and stretch towards political-cultural ecology, social solidarity economy, strategic-relational institutionalism, new municipalism, socially innovative governance, and critical legal theory. This work contributes to the panel's core question by illustrating how urban commons reshape responsibility, power dynamics, and access to resources while concretely contributing to socio-ecological transitions.

The leading question of this paper is one from which only a few architects or urban planners would start when talking about innovation in urban design: how could political aspects of urbanity change the quality of daily life in urban neighborhoods? To answer this question, we will use the approach of the commons, highlighting the fact that producing alternative visions through creative patterns of the commons (Bollier, Helfrich, 2019), revealing relationships of use, innovating with institutions - and even breaking with the inherited administrative system - lead to a real exercise of political imagination (Dardot, Laval, 2015).
The Turin case study, that we intend to treat, is of particular interest in understanding the relationship between social practices, urban design and forms of governance. In recent years, the city of Turin has relied on two factors as vectors of innovation: first, the representation of a new epistemology of the crisis as a lever of transformation; urban regeneration programs using European funds such as ToNite (UIA) or national or even local funds are in this vein.
The second proposes different governance frameworks for common urban resources, moving from participation to collaboration. This is made possible by the new co-governance tools: the "Pact of Collaboration" (a civic deal through which the city and civic actors constitute a form of shared governance to regenerate, care for and manage together one or more urban commons) and the "Regulations on Collaboration between Citizens and Administration for the Care, Shared Management and Regeneration of Urban Commons" (2016).
The hypothesis of this paper is that the shift from participation to collaboration in urban practices may favour the questioning of past urban planning principles, which paid little attention to bottom-up generative forces and the human/environment relationship in terms of co-evolution. In this framework, how to create new urban patterns of commoning? Every pattern has an underlying challenge, that of bringing a different look at reality and this implies bringing into play the value system of a society. What are the values that guide the construction of new patterns of commoning? Just as Tim Ingold identifies the “path” as the metaphor of something that is continually coproduced in the collaboration of multiple people (Ingold, 2000), the pattern of commoning represents the vital movement that aims to cross different narratives, and the web of forces that can produce intercommoning and shared culture.

Commoning within the city implies collaboratively transforming spaces to address the basic needs of urban dwellers through collective action. Urban food commoners are developing various methods for producing, distributing, transforming, and sharing food, often through voluntary labor or independent organizations, including NGOs. This research considers such practitioners’ utopian imaginaries of feeding/nourishing/eating in the city.
Utopian imaginaries encompass beliefs, desires, and actions that shape perceptions of possibility. Exploring the utopian imaginaries of urban food commoning practitioners can reveal transformative pathways to desirable alternative futures.
The research develops a novel methodology for commons research by utilizing the future creating workshop (FCW) paired with Ruth Levitas’ Imaginary Reconstitution of Society’ (IRS) or 'utopia as method'. This approach is infused with artistic activities to explore and articulate the desired present-futures envisioned by urban food commoning practitioners.
The FCW provides a space for individuals to express their commitment to shared issues, emphasizing participants’ interests and lived experiences. It consists of three phases: Critique (identifying problems), Utopia (envisioning an ideal future), and Realization (strategizing implementation). To enhance discussions during the Utopia and Realization phases, we incorporate IRS modes—archaeology, ontology, and architecture—to articulate detailed utopian visions. Crafting these utopias involves recognizing present opportunities and determining the values and systems to support them. By integrating artistic activities such as image theater, drawing, and collage, the FCW creates engaging sessions that consider different means of expression, encourage diverse perspectives, and facilitate collaborative meaning-making.
In this presentation, we provide an overview of the use of these methodologies in a research project to imagine the urban as a regenerative space for food commoning. We also present the outcomes of using this methodology with research participants who express their aspirations, hope, and strategies for life-sustaining collective action.

Commons are widely studied for their ability to govern resources beyond state or market control without leading to depletion (Ostrom 1990). Feminist and political economy research highlights commoning as a challenge to neoliberalism and a path to equitable social relations (Linebaugh 2008; Caffentzis & Federici 2014; Huron 2015; De Angelis 2017). Yet, empirical studies on urban commons in the Global South remain scarce. In rapidly urbanising Africa, this gap overlooks critical knowledge, particularly given West Africa’s history as a central site of racialised enclosure and commodification, as well as counter-hegemonic resistance.
This paper examines the governance, motivations, and societal impacts of marginalised groups—including women and youth—commoning resources such as land amid increasing commodification. Using a feminist political ecology framework and a Black feminist approach, we investigate how collective action emerges and how intersecting identities (e.g., class, race, age, marital status) shape access to and visions for urban commons in multiple sites in Ghana. Our central question: How does urban commons governance both reproduce and challenge hierarchical power dynamics and social inequities?
Three case studies ground this study. The first explores a widows’ farming and shea-processing collective in Bolgatanga, where landless women mobilise rotational savings, cooperative farming, and advocacy to navigate exclusion from landholding and markets. The second examines a Ga youth-led beach cleanup in Accra, where volunteers reclaim coastlines from ecological degradation and commercial encroachment. The third examines a volunteer group of professionals who clean drains to mitigate flooding and mobilise self-organisation.
Findings suggest that in neoliberal city-making, commoning arises from material necessity, exclusion, and solidarity-building, shaped by the social dimensions of customary tenure systems. Rather than existing outside dominant structures, commoners navigate state, market, and traditional institutions, revealing constraints and opportunities for alternative social infrastructures. These efforts underscore commoning’s role in securing livelihoods and challenging unequal urban resource management.