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]
正如上贴所言,为何无人识,确实非常奇怪的,国内学者好像很少引用这本书,研究新制度经济学的,对这本书好像推荐不多?自己还是上西方财政学时,老师在讲公共品时,对这本书有初步的介绍。作者研究的是社区合作,而这不在政府与市场之内,也许这就是被经济学家们忽略的...
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...
评分 评分最近想结合自己的行业写点东西,但读的书少,读政治经济学得东西更少。来这里向各位书友请教。先向各位道声谢谢! 产品的供给,一种模式是政府严格管理,提高标准,人为造成产品高端化,从而导致产品供给的不足,同时政府需要承担不达标产品的监督与检查及欺骗行为。如目前国...
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,????????
评分"前代理论假定博弈结构的外在限制恒定,国家市场等机制皆有过分简化的定义,故解决方法不是外来权力就是产权安排,奥女士则着重考察小型社区情境中个人如何在互动中设定和改变博弈规则、分配公用资源,提出社区产权的第三条路。" 引自熊猫。只读了第一三六章的Chris
评分作者实在是太considerate了,每一个道理都讲得相当透彻,经常是我刚刚写下心得就发现下一句正是我写的心得的意思...
评分谭老师退休,想起来奥斯特罗姆夫妇,想起来我开政治学系还留存什么遗产,想起来我始终不是学政治科学的料,谭老师及之后Wilson所带给我的那些丝微的兴趣,也许只是斯德哥尔摩。
评分因为经典,所以近于常识;语言平顺,逻辑清晰。
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
© 2025 book.quotespace.org All Rights Reserved. 小美书屋 版权所有