|
Abstract:
|
"'Common pool resources''common property regimes', 'collective actions'-the propriety of such terms has already been established. not so clear is the concept of institutions and organisations with respect to CPR. Current developments demand that this distinction be made thoroughly. For quite some time several concepts of 'institutions were in use. To the property rights theorists institutions were synonymous to implicit and invisible rules. Whole analyzing the visible firms Williamson understood institutions as governance structures. North and Thomas had admitted both types of understandings, by differentiating 'institutional environment' from 'institutional arrangement.' In his recent book, however, North changed the terms calling only the former 'institutions' and the latter 'organisations'. This definition of institutions includes rules, norms of behavior, and the way they are enforced. Organisations are firms, trade unions, political bodies. IASCP seems to have been subscribing to this terminology. Scopes of confusion however, are still there. For example, Elinor Ostrom named her book 'Governing the Commons'--resembling Williamsons' typology. it was followed by a subtitle 'Institutions for Collective Action'. Does it mean that proper terms will be 'common property (pool) organization' and 'institutional collectives?'"
|