Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Where Relational Commons Take Place: The City and its Social Infrastructure as Sites of Commoning

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Commons enjoy recognition as an alternative to the dichotomy of state and market. In contrast to liberal market theorists who frame the commons as resource-based, we build on alternative and critical conceptions that describe the commons as processual, social, and inherently relational. Our analysis adds to these accounts an articulation of the contemporary commons as “social infrastructure” in the urban spatial conditions where the social processes of commoning take place. We argue that the relational features of urban commons depend on social interactions and cross-sector partnerships in physical places that promote social cohesion, suggesting that the urban commons fold together the spatial and social in hitherto undertheorized ways. To theorize this relationship, we articulate the idea of the relational urban commons as sites of social interaction and relationship building—social infrastructure. This conceptualization suggests that the commons can be governed indirectly by enabling access, participation, and partnerships across sectors, fostering mixed uses and the provision of maintenance and repair. As a result, the commons are both maintained by and conducive to place-based cross-sector partnerships, anchored in place in ways that transcend resources, issues, and ownership.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allmendinger, P., & Tewdwr-Jones, M. (2010). The communicative turn in urban planning. Space and Polity, 6(1), 5–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, E. (1990). Streetwise: Race, class, and change in an urban community. University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Augé, M. (1995). Non-places: Introduction to an anthropology of supermodernity. Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod, R. (1980). Effective choice in the prisoner’s dilemma. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 24(1), 3–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bachelard, G. (1958/2014). The Poetics of Space. Penguin Classics

  • Benkler, Y. (2006). The wealth of networks: How social production transforms markets and freedom. Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berlant, L. (2016). The commons: Infrastructures for troubling times. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 34(3), 393–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackmar, E. (2006). Appropriating ‘the commons’: the tragedy of property rights discourse. In S. Low & S. Neil (Eds.), The politics of public space (pp. 49–80). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borch, C., & Kornberger, M. (2015). Urban commons: Rethinking the city. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brandtner, C. (2022). Green American City: Civic capacity and the distribution of urban innovation. Mansueto Institute for Urban Innovation Research Paper, 20. SSRN.

  • Brandtner, C., & Dunning, E. (2019). Nonprofits as Urban Infrastructure. In W. W. Powell & P. Bromley (Eds.), The Nonprofit Handbook (3rd ed.). Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bratteteig, T., & Wagner, I. (2012). Spaces for participatory creativity. CoDesign, 8(2–3), 105–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bristol, K. G. (1991). The Pruitt-Igoe Myth. Journal of Architectural Education, 44(3), 163–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bromley, P., & Meyer, J. W. (2015). Hyper-organization: Global organizational expansion. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Browning, C. R., Wallace, D., Feinberg, S. L., & Cagney, K. A. (2006). Neighborhood social processes, physical conditions, and disaster-related mortality: The case of the 1995 Chicago heat wave. American Sociological Review, 71(4), 661–678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cagney, K. A., York Cornwell, E., Goldman, A. W., & Cai, L. (2020). Urban mobility and activity space. Annual Review of Sociology, 46, 623–648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, A., & Crane, A. (2018). Cross-sector partnerships for systemic change: Systematized literature review and agenda for further research. Journal of Business Ethics, 150(2), 303–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, A., & Ordonez-Ponce, E. (2017). City scale: Cross-sector partnerships for implementing local climate mitigation plans. Public Administration Review, 2(7), 25–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (2013). Interview about Central Park, New York. Published online on 1/2/2013 at Gilded Birds.

  • Corcoran, M. (2006). The challenge of urban regeneration in deprived European neighbourhoods: A partnership approach. The Economic and Social Review, 37(3), 399–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornée, S., Le Guernic, M., & Rousselière, D. (2020). Governing common-property assets: Theory and evidence from agriculture. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04579-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornelius, N., & Wallace, J. (2010). Cross-sector partnerships: City regeneration and social justice. Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 71–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidoff, P. (1965). Advocacy and pluralism in planning. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 31(4), 331–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Angelis, M. (2010). On the commons: A public interview with Massimo De Angelis and Stavros Stavrides. e-Flux Journal, 17, 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Angelis, M. (2017). Omnia Sunt Communia. On the Commons and the Transformation to Postcapitalism. Zed Books.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • De Angelis, M., & Harvie, D. (2014). The commons. In M. Parker, G. Cheney, V. Fournier, & C. Land (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Alternative Organization (pp. 280–294). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dellenbaugh, M., Kip, M., Bieniok, M., Müller, A., & Schwegmann, M. (2015). Urban commons: Moving beyond state and market. Birkhäuser.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, G. C. C. (2014). Do-it-yourself urban design: The social practice of informal ‘Improvement’ through unauthorized alteration. City & Community, 13(1), 5–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, G. C. C. (2018). The help-yourself city: Legitimacy and inequality in DIY Urbanism. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, G. C. C. (2020). Kong at the gates: Guerrilla Urbanism and the possibility of resistance. Urban Design International, 25, 203–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duneier, M. (1999). Sidewalk. In O. Carter (Ed.), Photographs. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eizenberg, E. (2012). Actually existing commons: Three moments of space of community gardens in New York City. Antipode, 44(3), 764–782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elyachar, J. (2010). Phatic labor, infrastructure, and the question of empowerment in cairo. American Ethnologist, 37(3), 452–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elyachar, J. (2011). The political economy of movement and gesture in cairo. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 17(1), 82–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Federici, S. (2018). Re-enchanting the world: Feminism and the politics of the commons. Pm Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster, S. R. (2011). Collective action and the urban commons. Notre Dame Law Review, 87, 57–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster, S., & Iaione, C. (2016). The city as a commons. Yale Law & Policy Review, 34(2), 281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garnett, N. S. (2012). Managing the Urban commons. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 160, 1995–2027.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson-Graham, J. K., Cameron, J., & Healy, S. (2016). Commoning as a postcapitalist politics. In A. Amin & P. Howell (Eds.), Releasing the commons: Rethinking the futures of the commons. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gidwani, V., & Baviskar, A. (2011). Urban commons. Economic and Political Weekly, XLV, I(50), 42–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, M. (1997). ‘Customs in Common’: The epistemic world of the commons scholars. Theory and Society, 26(1), 1–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., & Thrift, N. (2007). Understanding repair and maintenance. Theory, Culture, and Society, 24(3), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, B., & Wood, D. J. (1991). Collaborative alliances: Moving from practice to theory. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 27(1), 3–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons: The population problem has no technical solution; it requires a fundamental extension in morality. Science, 162(3859), 1243–1248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Politics of the Common. Contribution to the Reimagining Society Project hosted by ZCommunications, Boston

  • Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2009). Commonwealth. Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, D. (2011). The future of the common. Radical History Review, 109, 101–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, D. (2012). Rebel cities: From the right to the city to the Urban revolution. Verso Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Healey, P. (1992). Planning through debate: The communicative turn in planning theory. The Town Planning Review, 143−162.

  • Heathcott, J. (2015). The bold and the bland: Art, redevelopment and the creative commons in post-industrial New York. City, 19(1), 79–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heben, A. (2012). Tent city urbanism: From self-organized camps to tiny house villages. The Village Collaborative.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herbert, C. W. (2021). A detroit story: Urban decline and the rise of property informality. University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hess, C., & Ostrom, E. (2007). Understanding knowledge as a commons: From theory to practice. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirshberg, P. (2014). Burning Man: The pop-up city of self-governing individualists. In D. Bollier & J. Clippinger (Eds.), From bitcoin to burning man: The quest for identity and autonomy in a digital society. ID3/Off the Common Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard, E. (1965/1902). Garden Cities of To-morrow. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Hull, A. (2000). Neighborhood renewal: A toolkit for regeneration. GeoJournal, 51(4), 301–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huron, A. (2015). Working with strangers in saturated space: Reclaiming and maintaining the Urban commons. Antipode, 47(4), 963–979.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huron, A. (2018). Carving out the commons: Tenant organizing and housing cooperatives in Washington. University of Minnesota Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great American Cities. Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jain, A., & Moraglio, M. (2014). Struggling for the use of Urban streets: Preliminary (Historical) comparison between European and Indian Cities. International Journal of the Commons, 8(2), 513–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jerram, L. (2015). The false promise of the commons: historical fantasies, sexuality and the ‘really-existing’urban common of modernity. In Urban commons: Rethinking the city (pp. 47–67). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • John, G. S. (2004). Counter-tribes, global protest, and carnivals of reclamation. Peace Review, 16(4), 421–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kidder, J. L. (2009). Appropriating the city: Space, theory, and bike messengers. Theory and Society, 38(3), 307–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, N. (2001). Reclaiming the Commons (pp. 81–89). New Left Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klinenberg, E. (2015/2002). Heat Wave: A Social Autopsy of Disaster in Chicago. 2nd Ed. University of Chicago Press.

  • Klinenberg, E. (1999). Denaturalizing disaster: A social autopsy of the 1995 Chicago heat wave. Theory and Society, 28(2), 239–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klinenberg, E. (2018). Palaces for the people: How social infrastructure can help fight inequality, polarization, and the decline of civic life. Crown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klitsie, E. J., Ansari, S., & Volberda, H. W. (2018). Maintenance of cross-sector partnerships: The role of frames in sustained collaboration. Journal of Business Ethics, 150(2), 401–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohn, M. (2016). The death and life of the Urban commonwealth. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kornberger, M. (2021). Strategies for distributed and collective action: Connecting the dots. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kornberger, M., Leixnering, S., Meyer, R. E., & Höllerer, M. A. (2017). Rethinking the sharing economy: The nature and organization of sharing in the 2015 refugee crisis. Academy of Management Discoveries, 4(3), 314–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, S.-W., Heflin, C., & Ruef, M. (2013). Community social capital and entrepreneurship. American Sociological Review, 78(6), 980–1008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lefebvre, H. (2009/1966). Theoretical Problems of Autogestion, in N. Brenner and S. Elden, eds., State, Space, World: Selected Essays, trans. G. Moore, N. Brenner and S. Elden. Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press

  • Lessig, L. (2004). The creative commons. Montana Law Review, 65, 1.

  • Linebaugh, P. (2008). The Magna Carta Manifesto. University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Linebaugh, P. (2010). Enclosures form the bottom up. Radical History Review, 108, 11–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Löfgren, O. (2015). Sharing an atmosphere: spaces in urban commons. Urban commons: Rethinking the city (pp. 68–91). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Löw, M. (2015). Managing the urban commons Urban Commons: Rethinking the City (pp. 109–126). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lydon, M., Castro, A., & Tomey, A. (2020). Streets for Voting: A Guide for Improving the Pandemic Voting Experience (Version 1.0). New York: Street Plans with the Center for Tech and Civic Life and Futures Action Network. https://issuu.com/streetplanscollaborative/docs/streets_for_voting-_version_1.0. Accessed 16 Mar 2023.

  • Manning, S., & Roessler, D. (2014). The formation of cross-sector development partnerships: How bridging agents shape project agendas and longer-term alliances. Journal of Business Ethics, 123(3), 527–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McAdam, D., & Kloos, K. (2014). Deeply divided: racial politics and social movements in Post-War America. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKeever, E., Jack, S., & Anderson, A. (2015). Embedded entrepreneurship in the creative re-construction of place. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(1), 50–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, C., & Hudon, M. (2019). Money and the commons: An investigation of complementary currencies and their ethical implications. Journal of Business Ethics, 160(1), 277–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, A. W., & Dacin, M. T. (2020). Water wars in detroit: Custodianship and the work of institutional renewal. Academy of Management Journal, 63(5), 1455–1484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moshtari, M., & Vanpoucke, E. (2021). Building successful NGO–business relationships: A social capital perspective. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 57(3), 104–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moss, T. (2014). Spatiality of the commons. International Journal of the Commons, 8(2), 457–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neill, W. J. V., & Schwedler, H.-U. (2001). Urban planning and cultural inclusion: Lessons from Belfast and Berlin. Palgrave.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, G. (2015). Mediated exclusion from the urban commons: Journalism and poverty Urban commons: Rethinking the city (pp. 137–162). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novy, J., & Colomb, C. (2013). Struggling for the right to the (Creative) City in Berlin and Hamburg: New Urban social movements, new ‘Spaces of Hope’? International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37(5), 1816–1838.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien, D. T. (2018). The urban commons: How data and technology can rebuild our communities. Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, M. (1965). Logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (2010). Beyond markets and states: Polycentric governance of complex economic systems. American Economic Review, 100(3), 641–672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E., Burger, J., Field, C. B., Norgaard, R. B., & Policansky, D. (1999). Revisiting the commons: local lessons. Global Challenges. Science, 284(5412), 278–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parikh, R. B. (2019). Build it as Your Home! Revivifying the space and quality of life within Homeless Encampments. Graduate Planning Report, San José State University Masters of Urban Planning Program.

  • Park, R. (1925/1969). The City: Suggestions for the Investigation of Human Behavior in the Urban Environment, in R. Sennet, ed., Classic Essays on the Culture of Cites. Appelton-Century-Crofts, 91–130

  • Peredo, A. M., & Chrisman, J. J. (2006). Toward a theory of community-based enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 31(2), 309–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peredo, A. M., Haugh, H., Hudon, M., & Meyer, C. (2020). Mapping concepts and issues in the ethics of the commons: Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Business Ethics, 166, 659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peredo, A. M., Haugh, H., & McLean, M. (2018). Common property: Uncommon forms of prosocial organizing. Journal of Business Venturing, 33(5), 591–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pflieger, G., & Rozenblat, C. (2010). Introduction. Urban networks and network theory: The city as the connector of multiple networks. Urban Studies, 47(13), 2723–2735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickerill, J., & Chatterton, P. (2006). Notes towards autonomous geographies: Creation, resistance, and self-management as survival tactics. Progress in Human Geography, 30(6), 730–746.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. D. (2001). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. D., & Garrett, S. R. (2020). The upswing: How we came together a century ago and how we can do it again. Swift Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinecke, J. (2018). Social movements and prefigurative organizing: Confronting entrenched inequalities in occupy London. Organization Studies, 39(9), 1299–1321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Relph, E. C. (1976). Place and Placelessness. London: Pion.

  • Rodriguez, A. D. (2021). Diverging space for deviants: The politics of Atlanta’s public housing. University of Georgia Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, C. M. (1986). The comedy of the commons: Custom, commerce, and inherently public property. The University of Chicago Law Review, 53(2), 711–781.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenzweig, R., & Blackmar, E. (1992). The park and the people: A history of Central Park. Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, J. (2008). The parallel economy of the commons. In W. Institute (Ed.), State of the World 2008 (pp. 138–150). Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, A., Branzei, O., Geiger, S., & Haugh, H. (2020). Putting Partnerships in Their Place: Moral and Material Processes of Place Based Respect, Repair and Renewal. Journal of Business Ethics, Call for Papers [replace with Introduction to Special Issue].

  • Schmid, B. (2019). Repair’s diverse transformative geographies: Lessons from a repair community in Stuttgart. Ephemera: Theory & Politics in Organization, 19(2), 229–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schor, J. B., & Vallas, S. P. (2021). The sharing economy: Rhetoric and reality. Annual Review of Sociology, 47, 369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schumaker, P., & Gettter, R. W. (1977). Responsiveness bias in 51 American communities. American Journal of Political Science, 21(2), 247–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, J. C. (1998). Seeing like a state: How certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selsky, J. W., & Parker, B. (2005). Cross-sector partnerships to address social issues: Challenges to theory and practice. Journal of Management, 31(6), 849–873.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sennett, R. (1970). The use of disorder. Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serres, M. (1982/2007). The Parasite. London; Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

  • Setti, M., & Garuti, M. (2018). Identity, commons and sustainability: An economic perspective. Sustainability, 10(2), 409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmel, G. (1903). The Metropolis and Mental Life. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simone, A. M. (2004). People as infrastructure: Intersecting fragments in Johannesburg. Public Culture, 16(3), 407–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siqueira, A. C. O., Honig, B., Mariano, S., & Moraes, J. (2020). A Commons Strategy for Promoting Entrepreneurship and Social Capital. Journal of Business Ethics, 166, 711.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Small, M. L. (2004). Villa victoria: The transformation of social capital in a Boston Barrio. University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Small, M. L. (2009). Unanticipated gains: Origins of network inequality in everyday life. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Small, M. L., & Adler, L. (2019). The role of space in the formation of social ties. Annual Review of Sociology, 45, 111–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stavrides, S. (2016). Common space: The city as commons. Zed Books.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tonkiss, F. (2013). Austerity Urbanism and the Makeshift City. City, 17(3), 312–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuan, Y.-F. (1977). Space and place: The perspective of experience. University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, C. (2016). It takes a village: Designating tiny house villages as transitional housing campgrounds. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 50, 931.

    Google Scholar 

  • Volont, L. (2019). DIY Urbanism and the lens of the commons: Observations from Spain. City & Community, 18(1), 257–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. A. (1988). Building successful partnerships. Sloan management review, Summer (pp. 17–23). MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. A. (1991). A typology of social partnership organizations. Administration & Society, 22(4), 480–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warner, M., & Sullivan, R. (2004). Putting Partnerships to Work: Strategic Alliances for Development Between Government, the Private Sector and Civil Society. Greenleaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, D. (2017). Critical urban theory, common property, and the political: Desire and drive in the city. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, C., Haugh, H., Göbel, M., & Leonardy, H. (2021). Pathways to lasting cross-sector social collaboration: A configurational study. Journal of Business Ethics, 177(6), 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, M. J. (2018). Urban commons are more-than-property. Geographical Research, 56(1), 16–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zapata Campos, M. J., Zapata, P., & Ordonez, I. (2020). Urban commoning practices in the repair movement: Frontstaging the backstage. Environment and Planning a: Economy and Space, 52(6), 1150–1170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zukin, S. (2011). Reconstructing the authenticity of place. Theory and Society, 40(2), 161–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. emlyon Business School, Écully, France

    Christof Brandtner

  2. San José State University, San José, USA

    Gordon C. C. Douglas

  3. Vienna University of Economics and Business, Vienna, Austria

    Martin Kornberger

  4. Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm, Sweden

    Martin Kornberger

Authors
  1. Christof Brandtner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gordon C. C. Douglas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Martin Kornberger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christof Brandtner.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors confirm that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Brandtner, C., Douglas, G.C.C. & Kornberger, M. Where Relational Commons Take Place: The City and its Social Infrastructure as Sites of Commoning. J Bus Ethics 184, 917–932 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05361-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05361-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation