The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Enclosure, Common Right and the Property of the Poor
Open accessAbstract
Although considerable research has been conducted into the dynamics of commons in rural settings, we still know very little about common property within cities. Given the hegemony of certain models of property, the urban commons has been overlooked and ignored. Urban commons do not look like property to us. This can lead, I argue, to real injustice. Based, in part, on empirical research in Vancouver, I attempt to map out the urban commons of the poor, particularly in relation to the dynamics of inner-city gentrification. This commons, produced through intensive patterns of use and collective habitation, is fiercely moral, reliant upon political claims and the exclusion of interests that threaten enclosure. For inner-city activists contesting displacement, the commons is real. As such, gentrification, and related dynamics, can usefully be thought of as forms of enclosure, or what David Harvey terms `dispossession by accumulation'. I conclude by asking what urban policy, political praxis and property theory might look like if they acknowledged the collective property interest of the poor in the inner-city commons.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action
Ostrom, E. (1990) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511807763 · Cited by 20,653
Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action
Field, B. C., & Ostrom, E. (1992) · Land Economics · doi:10.2307/3146384 · Cited by 18,859
Harvey, D. (2003) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780199264315.001.0001 · Cited by 7,037
Multitude: war and democracy in the age of empire
(2005) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.42-3066 · Cited by 4,670
(2000) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511563836 · Cited by 3,562
Revisiting the commons: local lessons, global challenges.
Ostrom, E., Burger, J., Field, C. B., Norgaard, R. B., & Policansky, D. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.284.5412.278 · Cited by 2,798
New Globalism, New Urbanism: Gentrification as Global Urban Strategy
Smith, N. (2002) · Antipode · doi:10.1111/1467-8330.00249 · Cited by 2,375
Bernstein, H. L., Horowitz, D. L., Lange, D. L., Powell, H. J., Shimm, M. G., Weistart, J. C., Danner, R. A., Germain, C., Baccari, B. A., Eichhorn, L. A., et al. (1990) · Cited by 1,803
Liberalism, Neoliberalism, and Urban Governance: A State–Theoretical Perspective
Jessop, B. (2002) · Antipode · doi:10.1111/1467-8330.00250 · Cited by 1,459
The Tragedy of the Commons: Twenty-two years later
Feeny, D., Berkes, F., McCay, B. J., & Acheson, J. M. (1990) · Human Ecology · doi:10.1007/bf00889070 · Cited by 1,433
Cited by
Ben-Slimane, K., Justo, R., & Khelil, N. (2020) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-020-04601-6 · Cited by 23
Metadata
- Authors
- Blomley, N.
- Venue
- Social & Legal Studies
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-09
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 311-331
- ISSN
- 0964-6639 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7390
- OpenAlex
- W2021268188
- Cited by
- 273
- References
- 41
- FWCI
- 18.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Enclosure, Common Right and the Property of the Poor. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0964663908093966
- The paper
- Blomley, N. (2008). Enclosure, Common Right and the Property of the Poor. Social & Legal Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/0964663908093966
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.