• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of institutional economics >Addressing misperceptions of Governing the Commons
【24h】

Addressing misperceptions of Governing the Commons

机译：解决对公地治理的误解

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Nobel Laureate in Economic Sciences Elinor Ostrom's authoritative book Governing the Commons, published in 1990, and almost every other text she has published on the subject of the commons, strongly criticized Garrett Hardin's much-cited 1968 Science article "The Tragedy of the Commons." Hardin's "tragedy" refers metaphorically to the eventual destruction of a commons as a result of collective overuse. Hardin claimed that statist solutions and privatization provisions are the only two policy means for addressing the tragedy. Ostrom explored user self-governance as a third alternative to avert the tragedy. Ostrom's exploration and her critical stance, however, have caused the misperception of her work as anti-Hardin, anti-tragedy, or more specifically, anti-statist and anti-privatization. This paper argues that despite Ostrom's clear criticism of Hardin's claim and her regard for user self-governance or community-based management, her work was not anti-statist or anti-privatization.
机译：诺贝尔经济学奖获得者埃里诺·奥斯特罗姆（Elinor Ostrom）于1990年出版的权威著作《治理公地》以及她发表的有关公地主题的几乎所有其他文章都强烈批评了加勒特·哈丁（Garrett Hardin）1968年被科学界引用的文章《公地的悲剧》。哈丁的“悲剧”在隐喻上是指由于集体过度使用而最终破坏公地。哈丁声称，国家解决方案和私有化规定是解决这一悲剧的仅有的两种政策手段。 Ostrom探索了用户自治作为避免悲剧的第三种选择。然而，奥斯特罗姆（Ostrom）的探索和批评立场使她误以为是反哈丁，反悲剧，或更具体地说是反国家主义和反私有化的作品。本文认为，尽管奥斯特罗姆（Ostrom）对哈丁的主张有明确的批评，并且她对用户自治或基于社区的管理有所重视，但她的工作并不是反国家主义或反私有化。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号