Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T07:00:07.017Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Addressing misperceptions of Governing the Commons

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2018

ASHUTOSH SARKER Open the ORCID record for ASHUTOSH SARKER [Opens in a new window]  and
WILLIAM BLOMQUIST
ASHUTOSH SARKER*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, Monash University Malaysia, Sunway, Selangor, Malaysia
WILLIAM BLOMQUIST*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, Indianapolis, IN, USA
*
*Email: ashutosh.sarker@monash.edu
**Email: blomquis@iupui.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Nobel Laureate in Economic Sciences Elinor Ostrom's authoritative book Governing the Commons, published in 1990, and almost every other text she has published on the subject of the commons, strongly criticized Garrett Hardin's much-cited 1968 Science article “The Tragedy of the Commons.” Hardin's “tragedy” refers metaphorically to the eventual destruction of a commons as a result of collective overuse. Hardin claimed that statist solutions and privatization provisions are the only two policy means for addressing the tragedy. Ostrom explored user self-governance as a third alternative to avert the tragedy. Ostrom's exploration and her critical stance, however, have caused the misperception of her work as anti-Hardin, anti-tragedy, or more specifically, anti-statist and anti-privatization. This paper argues that despite Ostrom's clear criticism of Hardin's claim and her regard for user self-governance or community-based management, her work was not anti-statist or anti-privatization.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Institutional Economics , Volume 15 , Issue 2 , April 2019 , pp. 281 - 301
Copyright
Copyright © Millennium Economics Ltd 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aligica, P. D. (2014), Institutional Diversity and Political Economy: The Ostroms and Beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aligica, P. D. and Boettke, P. J. (2009), Challenging Institutional Analysis and Development: The Bloomington School. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Andersson, K. and Ostrom, E.. (2008), ‘Analyzing Decentralized Resource Regimes from a Polycentric Perspective’, Policy Sciences, 41 (1): 71–93Google Scholar
Arrow, K., Keohane, R. O., and Levin, S. A.. (2012), ‘Elinor Ostrom: An Uncommon Woman for the Commons’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109 (33): 13, 135–136.Google Scholar
Bisaro, A. and Hinkel, J. (2016), ‘Governance of Social Dilemmas in Climate Change Adaptation’, Nature Climate Change, 6 (4): 354–359.Google Scholar
Block, W. E. (2011), ‘Review of Ostrom's Governing the Commons’, Libertarian Papers, 3 (art. 21).Google Scholar
Block, W. E. (2013), ‘Tragedy of the Commons and Species Extinction’, LewRockwell.com, last accessed at https://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/10/walter-e-block/that-sexist-walter-block/ on 28 December 2017.Google Scholar
Block, W. and Jankovic, I. (2016), ‘Tragedy of the Partnership: A Critique of Elinor Ostrom’, American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 75: 289–318.Google Scholar
Ciriacy-Wantrup, S. V. and Boshop, R. C. (1975), ‘Common Property as a Concept in Natural Resource Policy’, Natural Resources Journal, 15: 713–727.Google Scholar
Coase, R. (1960), ‘The Problem of Social Cost’, Journal of Law and Economics, 3: 1–44.Google Scholar
Coase, R. H. (1937), ‘The Nature of the Firm’, Economica, 4 (16): 386–405.Google Scholar
Cole, D. H. (2011), ‘From Global to Polycentric Climate Governance’, Climate Law, 2: 395–413.Google Scholar
Cole, D. H. (2015), ‘Advantages of a Polycentric Approach to Climate Change Policy’, Nature Climate Change, 5 (2), 114–118.Google Scholar
Cole, D. H. and Grossman, P. Z. (2010), ‘Institutions Matter! Why the Herder Problem is not a Prisoner's Dilemma’, Theory and Decision, 69 (2): 219–231.Google Scholar
Cole, D. H. and McGinnis, M. D. (eds) (2014), Elinor Ostrom and the Bloomington School of Political Economy, Volume 1: Polycentricity in Public Administration and Political Science. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Cole, D. H. and McGinnis, M. D. (eds) (2015), Elinor Ostrom and the Bloomington School of Political Economy, Volume 2: Resource Governance. Lanham, MD: Lexington BooksGoogle Scholar
Frischmann, B. M. (2013), ‘Two Enduring Lessons from Elinor Ostrom’, Journal of Institutional Economics, 9 (4): 387–406.Google Scholar
Gallagher, K. (2009), ‘Elinor Ostrom Breaks the Nobel Mould’, The Guardian, October 14.Google Scholar
Giltsoff, T. (2010), ‘Observations on the Year behind Us & Some Predictions for 2010’, last accessed at www.sustainablebrands.com/news_and_views/articles/observations-year-behind-us-some-predictions-2010 on 28 December 2017.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. (2013), ‘Editorial Introduction to the Elinor Ostrom Memorial Issue’, Journal of Institutional Economics, 9 (4): 381–385.Google Scholar
Hardin, G. (1968), ‘The Tragedy of the Commons’, Science, 162 (3859): 1243–1248.Google Scholar
Jankovic, I. and Block, W. E. (2013), ‘Tragedy of the Partnership: A Critique of Elinor Ostrom’, unpublished manuscript, last accessed at www.academia.edu/7758312/The_Tragedy_of_the_Partnership_A_Critique_of_Elinor_Ostrom_with_Walter_Block on 28 December 2017.Google Scholar
Keohane, R. O. and Ostrom, E. (eds) (1995), Local Commons and Global Interdependence. London, Thousand Oaks, New Dehli: Sage.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, J. (2010), ‘Beyond the Tragedy of the Commons: A Discussion of Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action’, Perspectives on Politics, 8 (2): 569–593.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, J. (2014), ‘The Role of the State in Governing the Commons’, Environmental Science and Policy, 36: 8–10.Google Scholar
McGinnis, M. D. and Ostrom, E. (2012), ‘Reflections on Vincent Ostrom, Public Administration, and Polycentricity’, Public Administration Review, 72 (1): 15–25.Google Scholar
North, D. C. (1990), Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Obeng-Odoom, F. (2016), ‘The Meaning, Prospects, and Future of the Commons: Revisiting the Legacies of Elinor Ostrom and Henry George’, American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 75: 372–414.Google Scholar
Olson, M. (1965), The Logic of Collective Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (1986a), ‘A Method of Institutional Analysis’, in Kaufmann, F. X., Majone, G., and Ostrom, V. (eds), Guidance, Control, and Evaluation in the Public Sector. Berlin: de Gruyter, pp. 459–475.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (1986b), ‘An Agenda for the Study of Institutions’, Public Choice 48 (1): 3–25.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (1986c), ‘How Inexorable is the ‘Tragedy of the Commons?’ Institutional Arrangements for Changing the Structure of Social Dilemmas’, Working Paper W86-8. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (1987), ‘Institutional Arrangements for Resolving the Commons Dilemma: Some Contending Approaches’, in McCay, B. J. and Acheson, J. M. (eds), The Question of the Commons: The Culture and Ecology of Communal Resources. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press, pp. 250–265.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (1990), Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (1993), ‘Self-Governance, the Informal Public Economy, and the Tragedy of the Commons’, in Berger, P. J. (ed.), Institutions of Democracy and Development. San Francisco, CA: ICS Press, pp. 75–125.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (2005), Understanding Institutional Diversity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (2006), ‘Not Just One Best System: The Diversity of Institutions for Coping with the Commons’, in Cernea, M. M. and Kassam, A. H. (eds), Researching the Culture in Agri-Culture: Social Research for International Development. Cambridge, MA: CABI Publishing, pp. 329–360.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (2007), ‘A Diagnostic Approach for Going beyond Panaceas’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104 (39): 15181–15187.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (2008), ‘Polycentric Systems as One Approach for Solving Collective-Action Problems’, Working Paper W08-6. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (2009), ‘A General Framework for Analyzing Sustainability of Social-Ecological Systems’, Science, 325 (5939): 419–22.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (2010), ‘Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems’, American Economic Review, 100: 641–672.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (2012), ‘Polycentric Systems: Multilevel Governance Involving a Diversity of Organizations’, in Brousseau, E., Dedeurwaerdere, T., Jouvet, P.-A. and Willinger, M. (eds), Global Environmental Commons: Analytical and Political Challenges. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 105–125.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (2014), ‘A Polycentric Approach for Coping with Climate Change’, Annals of Economics and Finance, 15 (1): 71–108.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E., Burger, J., Field, C. B., Norgaard, R. B., and Policansky, D. (1999), ‘Revisiting the Commons: Local Lessons, Global Challenges’, Science, 284 (5412): 278–282.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E., Gardner, R., and Walker, J. (1994), Rules, Games and Common-Pool Resources. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E., Janssen, M. A. and Anderies, J. M. (2007), ‘Going beyond Panaceas’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104 (39): 15,176–15,178.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E., Lam, W. F., and Lee, M. (1994), ‘The Performance of Self-governing Irrigation Systems in Nepal’, Human Systems Management, 13 (3): 197–207.Google Scholar
Ostrom, V. and Ostrom, E. (1977), ‘Public Goods and Public Choices’, in Savas, E. S. (ed.), Alternatives for Delivering Public Services: Towards Improved Performances. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, pp. 7–49.Google Scholar
Ostrom, V., Tiebout, C. M., and Warren, R. A. (1961), ‘The Organization of Government in Metropolitan Areas: A Theoretical Inquiry’, American Political Science Review, 55 (4): 831–842.Google Scholar
Pagano, U. and Vatiero, M. (2015), ‘Costly Institutions as Substitutes: Novelty and Limits of the Coasian Approach’, Journal of Institutional Economics, 11 (2): 265–281.Google Scholar
Pal, A. (2010), ‘Elinor Ostrom’, The Progressive, 33–5 (June).Google Scholar
Place, F., Ajayi, O. C., Torquebiau, E., Detlefsen, G., Gauthier, M., and Buttoud, G. (2012), ‘Improved Policies for Facilitating the Adoption of Agroforestry’, in Kaonga, M. L. (ed.), Agroforestry for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services: Science and Practice. Rijeka, Croatia: InTech, pp. 113–128.Google Scholar
Sarker, A. 2013. ‘The role of state‐reinforced self‐governance in averting the tragedy of the irrigation commons in Japan’, Public Administration, 91 (3): 727–743.Google Scholar
Sarker, A., Ikeda, T., Abe, T., and Inoue, K. (2015), ‘Design principles for managing coastal fisheries commons in present-day Japan’, Ecological Economics, 117: 32–8.Google Scholar
Shivakoti, G. and Ostrom, E. (2002), Improving Irrigation Governance and Management in Nepal. Oakland, CA: ICS Press.Google Scholar
Toonen, T. (2010), ‘Resilience in Public administration: The Work of Elinor and Vincent Ostrom from a Public Administration Perspective’, Public Administration Review, 70 (2): 193–202.Google Scholar
Wagner, J. R. (2012), ‘Water and the Commons Imaginary’, Current Anthropology, 53 (5): 617–641.Google Scholar
Wall, D. (2014), The Sustainable Economics of Elinor Ostrom: Commons, Contestation and Craft. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wall, D. (2017), Elinor Ostrom's Rules for Radicals. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (1975), Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications: A Study in the Economics of Internal Organization. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar