Cited by 61

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year.

Beating the bounds: how does ‘open source’ become a seed commons?

Montenegro de Wit, Maywa·2019·The Journal of Peasant Studies

Abstract

In response to ongoing plant genetic enclosures, the Open Source Seed Initiative (OSSI) is creating a ‘protected commons’ for seed. It is a project, I argue, that reflects characteristics of a growing transnational commoning movement. From the Zapatistas to seed wars, such movements draw attention to commons not simply as a resource, but as a dynamic and evolving social activity: commoning. In the US, OSSI includes 38 plant breeders, 48 seed companies and 377 crop varieties. Yet challenges remain for OSSI to gain wider legitimacy for ‘freed seed’, to build trust in a moral pledge, and to establish fair guidelines for which people and which seed can participate in making the commons. Using the metaphor of ‘beating the bounds’ – a feudal practice of contesting enclosures – I ask how OSSI defends the commons in intersecting arenas. The first way is legal, as OSSI negotiates a move from contract law toward moral economy law. Next is epistemic, as an informal breeder network revitalizes farmer knowledge, while proving more structurally able and culturally equipped to lead commoning efforts. Finally, I reflect on the nature of boundary beating itself, aided by Global South movements. Seed sovereignty perspectives suggest room for a pluriverse of commons to grow.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/03066150.2017.1383395

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 70

  1. 10.1177/1466138111400721 · DOI
  2. 10.3362/9781780442150 · DOI
  3. Aoki K., 2008, Seed wars: Controversies and cases on plant genetic resources and intellectual property
  4. Aoki K., 2009, Fordham Law Review, 77, 2275
  5. 10.1177/0896920516661856 · DOI
  6. Barlow M., 2005, Blue gold: the fight to stop the corporate theft of the world’s water
  7. Barnes P., 2001, Who owns the sky?
  8. 10.1080/1369118X.2012.670661 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Benkler Y., 2011, The penguin and the leviathan: The triumph of cooperation over self-Interest
  10. Bollier D., 2003, Silent theft: The private plunder of our common wealth
  11. Bollier D., 2005, Brand name Bullies: The quest to own and control culture
  12. Bollier D., 2014, Think like a commoner: A short introduction to the life of the commons
  13. Bollier D., 2015, Patterns of commoning
  14. 10.1002/9781119107743.ch5 · DOI
  15. Carney J.A., 2001, Black rice: The African origins of rice cultivation in the Americas, 10.4159/9780674029217 · DOI
  16. Cavanagh John, 2002, Alternatives to economic globalization: A better world is possible
  17. 10.2307/3481419 · DOI
  18. 10.1163/1569206041551609 · DOI
  19. Deppe C., 1993, Breed your own vegetable varieties: The gardener’s and farmer’s guide to plant breeding and seed saving
  20. Escobar A., 1994, Encountering development: The making and unmaking of the third world
  21. Escobar A., 2015, Patterns of commoning, 348
  22. 10.1111/gec3.12070 · DOI
  23. 10.4324/9780203444894 · DOI
  24. 10.1007/s10460-013-9428-8 · DOI
  25. Gramsci A., 1971, Selections from the prison notebooks of Antonio Gramsci
  26. Grossman L.S., 1998, The political ecology of bananas: Contract farming, peasants, and agrarian change in the Eastern Caribbean, 10.37234/DQPRQJHJ · DOI
  27. Hamilton L.M., 2014, Virginia Quarterly Review, 90, 56
  28. 10.1126/science.162.3859.1243 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Harvey D., 2003, The new imperialism, 10.1093/oso/9780199264315.001.0001 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Hindle S., 2003, The poor in England, 1700–1850: An economy of makeshifts, 52
  31. 10.3390/su1041266 · DOI
  32. 10.2135/cropsci2014.09.0669 · DOI
  33. Howard P.H., 2016, Concentration and power in the food system: Who controls what we eat?, 10.5040/9781474264365 · DOI
  34. 10.1080/14747731.2014.957587 · DOI
  35. Illich Ivan., 1981, Shadow Work
  36. 10.3390/su1020120 · DOI
  37. 10.1057/978-1-137-52261-0_6 · DOI
  38. Kloppenburg J.R., 1988, First the seed: The political economy of plant biotechnology, 1492–2000
  39. 10.1080/03066150.2013.875897 · DOI
  40. Kloppenburg J.R., 2014, Organic seed growers conference proceedings, 144
  41. Lessig L., 2004, Free culture: How big media uses technology and the law to lock down culture and control creativity
  42. Linebaugh P., 2008, The Magna Carta manifesto: Liberties and commons for All, 10.1525/9780520932708 · DOI
  43. Linebaugh P., 2014, Stop, thief! The commons, enclosures and resistance
  44. 10.1002/9781119279723.ch6 · DOI
  45. 10.2135/cropsci2014.10.0708 · DOI
  46. Madison M.J., 2009, Cornell Law Review, 95, 657
  47. Marx K., 1977, Capital: A critique of political economy, 1
  48. 10.1111/j.1467-9523.2006.00406.x · DOI
  49. 10.1007/s12571-015-0528-8 · DOI · Paper page
  50. 10.1080/03066150.2016.1168405 · DOI
  51. Mooney P.R., 1983, Seeds of the earth: A private or public resource?
  52. 10.2305/IUCN.CH.2005.EPLP.57.en · DOI
  53. Morton F., 2014, Organic seed growers conference proceedings, 147
  54. 10.1079/RAF200486 · DOI
  55. 10.1017/CBO9780511807763 · DOI · Paper page
  56. 10.2307/143449 · DOI
  57. 10.1080/03066150.2016.1264581 · DOI
  58. Robbins P., 2012, Political ecology: A critical introduction. 2nd ed. Critical introductions to geography
  59. 10.1080/03066150.2016.1234455 · DOI
  60. Shiva V., 1997, Biopiracy: The plunder of nature and knowledge
  61. Smith C., 2016, The relationship between intellectual property rights and small-scale farmer innovations
  62. Tapia M., 2013, Common pools of genetic resources: Equity and innovation in international biodiversity law, 79
  63. 10.1093/past/50.1.76 · DOI · Paper page
  64. Thompson E.P., 1975, Whigs and hunters: The origin of the Black Act
  65. 10.3362/9781780445588 · DOI
  66. UPOV, 1961, International convention for the protection of new varieties of plants
  67. 10.1111/j.1758-5899.2011.00156.x · DOI
  68. 10.1080/03066150.2015.1130702 · DOI
  69. Watts M., 2000, A companion to economic geography, 257
  70. Zimmerer K.S., 1996, Changing fortunes: Biodiversity and peasant livelihood in the Peruvian Andes, 10.1525/9780520917033 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 61

Metadata

Authors
Montenegro de Wit, M.
Venue
The Journal of Peasant Studies
Published
2017-10-25
Volume
46
Issue
1
Pages
44-79
ISSN
  • 0306-6150
  • 1743-9361
Cited by
61
References
0
Language
en
Funders
National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Beating the bounds: how does ‘open source’ become a seed commons? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/03066150.2017.1383395
The paper
Montenegro de Wit, M. (2019). Beating the bounds: how does ‘open source’ become a seed commons? The Journal of Peasant Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2017.1383395