I don't think there is enough evidence to go either way, but from the traditional animalistic self-preservation mindset, I don't see any large group of people willingly giving up their right to "own" things. It seems like an implied natural order of things to possess - in the presence of scarce resources, it is impossible to organize socially in a way without force that also "forces" people to give up their right to try to keep things theirs. It is also impractical for the vast majority of resources.

Factory ownership and ownership of labor I always felt wasn't an issue with property rights but with an ongoing millennial long battle with inheritance and grandfathering, compounded by race and sex biases. The elites of a thousand years ago have, indirectly, maintained perptual ownership of the upper echelons of society for hundreds of years.

If you started everyone truly equal, without one man getting a billion dollars inheritance and another being born as a crack baby, ownership rights wouldn't be much of an issue because by merit you would come to possess things you deserve through your efforts. I also think it would be easier to eliminate illogical biases and classism towards other humans than to eliminate the desire to own and possess physical goods.

The reason the industrial revolution had so many issues revolving around the introduction of wage labor was that, even then, very few owned tremendous land and material resources and there was a great wealth divide. That divide enables some to exploit the desire for goods of the other to put them in a position where they don't benefit from their own productivity.

I am for communal ownership of the workplace, and that any worker who doesn't get his share of the profits is effectively a wage slave (just at a wage they agreed to be enslaved at). But I don't think you can render all land, material goods, etc public and expect anyone to aspire or behave any certain way because on a consistent basis humans reveal themselves to act in self interest.

Maybe in another hundred years when we have robots fabbing carbon from rock and they can manufacture anything on demand for no labor and there is no scarcity, communal resource ownership will be a reality. It will at least be essential with an automated means of production as is emerging now, because if the extremely small ultrawealthy class continues to own foundries of unlimited productivity with magnitudes less human capital invested, they are going to drain everyone except other wealthy automation owners dry. It is happening now, but the extreme case is there is no need for the worker and the owner controls the resource production in entirety. I'd also argue we are in an exponential spiral towards this now that human capital is no longer the most in demand resource to consume in the market.

But I think that just requires an extremely progressive tax system (although I lean anarcho, I still can't construct a functioning society without at least some consensus representative law council, even if they can't exercise force, that can direct culture through logical process rather than mob mentality, so I call myself libertarian) to allow people to prosper, but to prevent the run away successes (Apple is the obvious candidate of our age) from accumulating absurd amounts of total economic wealth and exploiting it as ownership of the means of production.