State powers can oversee macro concerns that may exceed the capacities of individual commons to solve, such as conflict resolution or cross-border negotiations and standing coordination. States may also have a role to play in assuring that commons respect fundamental human rights -- i.e, in aligning collective action with commons principles and prevent commons-washing. DB: Ah, but is the state going to get into the business of determining what constitutes "commons principles"? I have fears about that! DB: Generally, a right exists only if the state recognizes it. An exception is "human rights," which are asserted as a pre-state ethical concept that can be aspirational (i.e., not necessarily recognized by state law).

# Assure fundamental rights States have a role to play for assuring commons and commoning principles (cf Dimensions of Commoning) are performed. This would imply the respect of human rights including second and third generation human rights. There might also be a need to prevent collective action from degenerating in mafias or maras. Examples: the Italian mafia cannot be considered an example of collective self-organization according to commons-principles [because.....???]; organized crime exploiting public-trust access to wild berries in Sweden.

to be discussed

- we can leave a) here (conciliate commons & HHRR) ?