Over the last two decades, the notion of the commons has been translated from the field of natural resources to the urban dimension. As with any translation, something is lost and something is gained.

The theory of urban commons, far from being complete or exhaustive, has also often been associated with the inflated slogan of the right to the city. This article seeks to illustrate how and why the concepts of commons, the right to the city, and urban commons are interconnected. This analysis allows us to clarify the differences between these concepts and, in doing so, to reveal their complexities and contradictions.

Urban commons are addressed through the theoretical framework of the concept of commons as studied by Hardin and Ostrom, through the notions of habit and performance as articulated by Hardt and Negri, and through the metaphor of the threshold developed by Stavrides. The conclusion highlights the relational nature of urban commons, outlining their connections to the concepts of process, time, and fugitive democracy.

This article was published in the first issue of the UOU Scientific Journal. You can find the full text in English here