comma before 'such as': common ownership, such as a public park

[Huda]

I was reading about collective ownership in Wikipedia and came upon a sentence. Please read this sentence and tell me why a comma is used here:

Examples of collective ownership include modern forms of corporate ownership as well as producer cooperatives, which are in contrast to forms of common ownership, such as a public park available to everyone.

I understand that a public park is an example of common ownership, is the use of a comma necessary here?
Thanks in advance.

 

[panjandrum]

If a relative clause is sitting between two commas it should be possible to omit it without affecting the meaning of the sentence.

Original sentence:
Examples of collective ownership include modern forms of corporate ownership as well as producer cooperatives, which are in contrast to forms of common ownership, such as a public park available to everyone.

Without the relative clause this becomes:
Examples of collective ownership include modern forms of corporate ownership as well as producer cooperatives such as a public park available to everyone.

Is a public park an example of a producer cooperative?
I think not.
So it seems the sentence is not correct.


Examples of collective ownership include modern forms of corporate ownership as well as producer cooperatives, which are in contrast to forms of common ownership such as a public park available to everyone.

If you take away the second comma, a public park becomes an example of common ownership - and that makes sense, I think.
Both are contrasted with producer cooperatives - and that makes sense too.
So the sentence would be fine without the second comma

 

[Huda]

If you take away the second comma, a public park becomes an example of common ownership - and that makes sense, I think.
Both are contrasted with producer cooperatives - and that makes sense too.
So the sentence would be fine without the second comma

Thanks a lot panj. The use of comma here is incorrect.