Posted by alexandra_k on September 23, 2013, at 5:58:27
In reply to Re: the commons, posted by Dr. Bob on September 22, 2013, at 22:55:02
> > Ostrom won the Nobel prize already for looking at anthropological solutions to tragedy of commons.
> What anthropological solutions did Ostrom find?That there were some.
That some peoples do manage subtractable resources in sustainable ways without the imposition of top-down government.
(How is that for a different take on the problem?)
Apparently there was a commons where the locals had the rule that you could graze only as many cows on the commons over the summer as you could keep through the winter - and that prevented overgrazing. She has examples such as these. Her favorite example seems to be water irrigation in Nepal. She is fairly scathing about the actions of US engineers and policy makers who go on in there and try and impose "better" systems that end up not even working at all because they lack local ecological knowledge / knowledge of constraints that need to be plugged into their optimality models (e.g., that there are a few main springs and thus you will need to tap into one of those).
She characterises Hardin as posing a problem where the only solution was top down governmental control / regulation. Because that is what he suggests. But of course that is no solution at all. The problem recurrs at the level of government: Why co-operate rather than being selfish? This solution also gives us no traction on the problem of how once upon a time we weren't particularly co-operative but now we are highly co-operative. And fairly darned altruistic to our non-genetic kin. How the hell did that happen?
> These early empirical studies led over time to the development of the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework. A common framework consistent with game theory enabled us to undertake a variety of empirical studies including a meta-analysis of a large number of existing case studies on common-pool resource systems around the world. Carefully designed experimental studies in the lab have enabled us to test precise combinations of structural variables to find that isolated, anonymous individuals overharvest from common-pool resources. Simply allowing communication, or "cheap talk," enables participants to reduce overharvesting and increase joint payoffs contrary to game theoretical predictions. Large studies of irrigation systems in Nepal and forests around the world challenge the presumption that governments always do a better job than users in organizing and protecting important resources.
>... the application of empirical studies to the policy world leads one to stress the importance of fitting institutional rules to a specific social-ecological setting. "One size fits all" policies are not effective. The frameworks and empirical work that many scholars have undertaken in recent decades provide a better foundation for policy analysis.
Hmm.
http://bnp.binghamton.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Ostrom-2010-Polycentric-Governance.pdf
I didn't take a lot of time with it... Economics isn't really my strong point...
You might like:
>The classic models have been used to view those who are involved in a prisoner's dilemma game or other social dilemmas as always trapped in the situation withuot capabilities to change the structure themselves... Whethe ror not the individuals, who are in a situation, have capacities to transform the external variables affecting their own situation varies dramatically from one situation to the next. It is an empirical condition that varies from situation to sitaution rather than a lgoical universality... When analysts perceive the human beings they model as being trapped inside perverse situations, they then assume that other human beings external to those involved - scholars and public officials - are able to analyze the situation, ascertain why counterproductive outcomes are reached, and posit what changes in the rules-in-use will enable participants to improve outcomes. Then, external officials are expected to impose an optimal set of rules on those individuals involved. It is assumed that the momentum for change must come from outside the situation rather than from the self-reflection and creativity of those within a situation to restructure their own patterns of interaction.
>dramatic incidents of overharvested resources had captured widespread attention, while studies by anthropologists, economic historians, engineers, philosophers, and political scientists of local governance of smaller to medium scale common-pool resources over long periods of time were *not* noticed by many theorists and public officials.
Usenet is probably a case of one of them.
Babble isn't.
Yeah?
> Thanks for sharing that link, I hadn't seen it before. Do their conclusions apply to Babble?> > > Babble is a remarkable institution which enables cooperation, however significant shortcomings remain.
> > > Babble has a double edge: monitoring is easier, but sanctioning becomes more difficult: communication costs are lower, but defecting costs increases: it's easier to find people with similar interests and collaborate, but it is also easier to be disrupted by people who want to prevent collaboration;
> > > "Babble may not need to resolve these problems, it may simply become a public space in cyberspace where the balance between order and autonomy is decided in favor of the latter."To the best of my knowledge... They are mostly focused on the unmoderated areas of usenet. It is primarily due to the lack of a moderator that they say it comes down on automomy over order. I guess your presence tips things in favor or order. Or that is how they would view it, anyway.
> > You can send your criminals to Australia but ... Australians (now) aren't as criminal as they once were. Perhaps.
> Becoming less criminal sounds like a good thing. How did that happen?
I don't know much about the history of Australia (the demographic breakdown of immigrants) but I suspect it would be nicer being one of the guys (a mate, if you will) in Aussie than being one of the poor trying to make ones way in a class/heredity-based London.
poster:alexandra_k
thread:1047868
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20130914/msgs/1051168.html