The governance of natural resources used by many individuals in common is an issue of increasing concern to policy analysts. Both state control and privatisation of resources have been advocated, but neither the state nor the market have been uniformly successful in solving common pool resource problems. Offering a critique of the foundations of policy analysis as applied to natural resources, Elinor Ostrom here provides a unique body of empirical data to explore conditions under which common pool resource problems have been satisfactorily or unsatisfactorily solved. Dr Ostrom first describes three models most frequently used as the foundation for recommending state or market solutions. She then outlines theoretical and empirical alternatives to these models in order to illustrate the diversity of possible solutions. In the following chapters she uses institutional analysis to examine different ways - both successful and unsuccessful - of governing the commons. In contrast to the proposition of the tragedy of the commons argument, common pool problems sometimes are solved by voluntary organisations rather than by a coercive state. Among the cases considered are communal tenure in meadows and forests, irrigation communities and other water rights, and fisheries.
Elinor Ostrom (née Awan; born August 7, 1933) is an American political economist.[2] She was awarded the 2009 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences, which she shared with Oliver E. Williamson, for "her analysis of economic governance, especially the commons."[3] She was the first, and to date, the only woman to win the prize in this category. Her work is associated with the new institutional economics and the resurgence of political economy.[4]
Ostrom lives in Bloomington, IN, and is on the faculty of both Indiana University and Arizona State University. She holds a Distinguished Professor at Indiana University and is the Arthur F. Bentley Professor of Political Science and Co-Director of the Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis at Indiana University in Bloomington, as well as Research Professor and the Founding Director of the Center for the Study of Institutional Diversity at Arizona State University in Tempe. Ostrom also serves as a lead researcher for the Sustainable Agriculture and Natural Resource Management Collaborative Research Support Program (SANREM CRSP), managed by Virginia Tech and funded by USAID.[5]
比较经典的一本书,对于徘徊在利维坦与私有化之外的广泛的社会自组织进行了研究。实质上而言,是关于人类集体行动逻辑的一次深刻发觉,发人深省。对于全球范围内的典型个案做了对比性分析。本书推理出的自组织与自主治理的八大特征有非常重要的指导意义。
评分《公共事物的治理之道》✋ 来个记录:刚开始读这本书有点困难,翻译蹩脚,看到中间才渐入佳境。这位女士精彩地通过案例分析(选了些小范围的公共池塘资源)建构出整个制度变迁的框架,了解公共池塘资源的哪些内外部变量起了促进作用或阻碍作用。书中介绍了三个传统分析公共物...
评分经济运行的基本模型即市场机制,市场作为“看不见的手”,以价格为信号引导着人们追求自我利益最大化,而很多时候,也“无心插柳”地促进了社会的公共利益。但是,面对垄断、外部性、信息不完全和公共物品领域等,市场存在着失灵的现象,这时便需要引入政府管制对模型进...
评分 评分奥斯特罗姆通过大量的事例,向我们介绍关于公共事务治理方法,并进行后续分析。由三个理论引出本书的内容分析,包括哈丁的“公地灾难”、“囚犯难题”及奥尔森的“集体行动的逻辑”。这些理论模型都说明,个人的理性行动最终导致的却是集体无理性的结果。 对此,以往认为的解...
CPR
评分classic. 为了thesis读的书,相见恨晚获益匪浅。虽然理论的实践总是面对诸多困难,但至少提供了一种可探索的模式。个人对广泛适用的简单模型不是很感冒,因为通常模型越简单,现实越打脸,所以这种多方考量商量着来留出余地的讨论反而比较合我胃口。
评分4星。当年轰动一时,而且让作者得了诺贝尔经济学奖。但是仔细想想有一些过誉。作者真正的贡献在于提出解决CPR问题不能只靠国家或者市场,因为二者(尤其是前者)可能会缺乏地方信息。但这一点实际上哈耶克很早就讲了(大约作者写这书50年前),所以不是很清楚这本书真正的贡献在什么地方。作者提出的8条解决CPR的建议都需要严格的论证和实证检验,而这些是这本书没有提供的。作者的分析方法主要是比较案例,但是没有回答为什么要关心这些案例?以90年代的标准看,这本书依然是上乘之作,但是放在今天,阅读的收获会比较小。最重要的是,为什么自治组织不能产生特殊利益?这是我在美国最常见的一种问题,所以我觉得Olson还是更高一筹。
评分It begins with scenarios and numbers, and needs a lot of logic, so definitely not for bed reading. I gave up after about ten pages.
评分针对公地问题私有化&政府管制外的第三条道路,非常有启发性!(作者是第一位女性诺贝尔经济学奖获得者,🐂🍺
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2026 book.wenda123.org All Rights Reserved. 图书目录大全 版权所有