| dc.contributor.author |
Schlager, Edella |
|
| dc.contributor.editor |
Durant, R. F. |
|
| dc.contributor.editor |
Fiorino, D. J. |
|
| dc.contributor.editor |
O'Leary, R. |
|
| dc.date.accessioned |
2010-03-19T18:25:14Z |
|
| dc.date.available |
2010-03-19T18:25:14Z |
|
| dc.date.issued |
2004 |
en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri |
https://hdl.handle.net/10535/5648 |
|
| dc.description.abstract |
From p. 146:
"The Australian fishers are not like Hardin's herders. They have avoided a tragedy of the commons. Why have Australian, but not New England, fishers figured a way out of their tragedy? Hardin's model cannot account for such success; it predicts failure. Until recently, if one turned to the very best scholarly work, one would find only explanations and predictions of failure. This chapter argues, however, that this attitude is beginning to change. Over the past fifteen years, scholars and practitioners have concluded that the tragedy of the commons is no longer the only model available to account for human use of common-pool resources." |
en_US |
| dc.language |
English |
en_US |
| dc.publisher |
MIT Press (Manuscript Draft) |
en_US |
| dc.relation.ispartof |
Environmental Governance Reconsidered: Challenges, Choices, and Opportunities |
en_US |
| dc.relation.ispartofseries |
American and Comparative Environmental Policy |
en_US |
| dc.subject |
common pool resources |
en_US |
| dc.subject |
tragedy of the commons |
en_US |
| dc.subject |
Ostrom, Elinor |
en_US |
| dc.subject |
design principles |
en_US |
| dc.subject |
cooperation |
en_US |
| dc.title |
Common-Pool Resource Theory |
en_US |
| dc.type |
Book Chapter |
en_US |
| dc.type.published |
unpublished |
en_US |
| dc.type.methodology |
Theory |
en_US |
| dc.coverage.region |
North America |
en_US |
| dc.coverage.country |
New England |
en_US |
| dc.subject.sector |
Theory |
en_US |
| dc.identifier.citationpages |
145-175 |
en_US |
| dc.identifier.citationpubloc |
Cambridge, MA |
en_US |