Journal of Bioeconomics

, Volume 16, Issue 1, pp 3–30

Do institutions for collective action evolve?

  • Elinor Ostrom
Article

Abstract

In this paper I will provide an overview of our findings from studying irrigation systems in the field so that readers who are not familiar with our prior research gain at least an initial sense of these findings. I will provide a second short overview —this time of the institutional analysis and development (IAD) framework offering a general method for doing institutional analysis. I will then introduce the possibility of looking at the change of rules as an evolutionary process. The method for studying the evolution of rules will be based on the IAD framework and on our long-term study of rules related to irrigation systems. In the conclusion, I return to the question as to why it is important to authorize resource users’ relative autonomy in the development of their own rules and to learn from the resulting institutional diversity.

Keywords

Institutions Institutional change Rule diversity Evolution  Irrigation systems 

References

  1. Acheson, J., & Gardner, R. (2004). Strategies, conflict, and the emergence of territoriality: The case of the Maine lobster industry. American Anthropologist, 106(2), 296–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alchian, A. A. (1950). Uncertainty, evolution, and economic theory. Journal of Political Economy, 58(3), 211–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. APROSC and JMA. (1995). Nepal agriculture perspective plan (final report)—Main document. Kathmandu, Nepal: Agricultural Projects Service Center and John Miller Associates.Google Scholar
  4. Arthur, W. B. (1989). Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. Economic Journal, 99, 116–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Axelrod, R. (1984). The evolution of cooperation. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  6. Baker, M. (2005). The Kuhls of Kangra: Community managed irrigation in the western Himalaya. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bardhan, P. K. (2000). Irrigation and cooperation: An empirical analysis of 48 irrigation communities in South India. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 48(4), 847–865.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bardhan, P. K., & Dayton-Johnson, J. (2002). Unequal irrigators: Heterogeneity and commons management in large-scale multivariate research. In E. Ostrom, T. Dietz, N. Dolšak, P. Stern, S. Stonich, & E. Weber (Eds.), The drama of the commons (pp. 87–112). National Research Council (Committee on the Human Dimensions of Global Change). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  9. Bendor, J. (1985). Parallel systems: Redundancy in government. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  10. Benjamin, P., Lam, W. F., Ostrom, E., & Shivakoti, G. (1994). Institutions, incentives, and irrigation in Nepal. Decentralization: Finance & management project report. Burlington, VT: Associates in Rural Development.Google Scholar
  11. Bosselman, F. (2005). Adaptive resource management through customary law. In P. Orebech, F. Bosselman, J. Bjarup, D. Callies, M. Chanock, & H. Petersen (Eds.), The role of customary law in sustainable development (pp. 176–200). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Bousquet, F., Barreteau, O., d’Aquino, P., Etienne, M., Boissau, S., Aubert, S., Le Page, C., Babin, D., & Castella, J.-C. (2002). Multi-agent systems and role games: Collective learning processes for ecosystem management. In M. Janssen (Ed.), Complexity and ecosystem management: The theory and practice of multi-agent systems (pp. 248–285). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  13. Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (1985). Culture and the evolutionary process. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  14. Campbell, D. T. (1969). Reforms as experiments. American Psychologist, 24(4), 409–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Campbell, D. T. (1975). On the conflicts between biological and social evolution and between psychology and moral tradition. American Psychologist, 30(11), 1103–1126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cardenas, J.-C. (2000). How do groups solve local commons dilemmas? Lessons from experimental economics in the field. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 2, 305–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cardenas, J.-C., & Ostrom, E. (2004). What do people bring into the game? Experiments in the field about cooperation in the commons. Agricultural Systems, 82(3), 307–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cardenas, J.-C., Stranlund, J., & Willis, C. (2000). Local environmental control and institutional crowding-out. World Development, 28(10), 1719–1733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cox, J. (2004). How to identify trust and reciprocity. Games and Economic Behavior, 46, 260–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Crawford, S., & Ostrom, E. (2005). A grammar of institutions. In E. Ostrom (Ed.), Understanding institutional diversity (pp. 137–174). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. (Originally published in American Political Science Review, 89(3), 582–600, 1995.)Google Scholar
  21. Easterly, W. (2001). The elusive quest for growth: Economists’ adventures and misadventures in the tropics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Eggertsson, T. (1990). Economic behavior and institutions. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ensminger, J., & Knight, J. (1997). Changing social norms: Common property, bridewealth, and clan exogamy. Current Anthropology, 38(1), 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Evans, P. (2004). Development as institutional change: The pitfalls of monocropping and the potentials of deliberation. Studies in Comparative International Development, 39(4), 30–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Faysse, N. (2005). Coping with the tragedy of the commons: Game structure and design of rules. Journal of Economic Surveys, 19(2), 239–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Frohlich, N., Oppenheimer, J., & Kurki, A. (2004). Modeling other-regarding preferences and an experimental test. Public Choice, 119(1–2), 91–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Frohlich, N., Oppenheimer, J., & Young, O. (1971). Political leadership and collective goods. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Gautam, U., Agrawal, N. K., & Subedi, R. (Eds.). (1992). Nepal: Managing large surface irrigation project: A participatory review. Study document NEP/89/006. Kathmandu, Nepal: Department of Irrigation and Consolidated Management Services.Google Scholar
  29. Gibson, C., Andersson, K., Ostrom, E., & Shivakumar, S. (2005). The Samaritan’s dilemma: The political economy of development aid. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gibson, C., McKean, M., & Ostrom, E. (Eds.). (2000). People and forests: Communities, institutions, and governance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  31. Gibson, C. C., Williams, J. T., & Ostrom, E. (2005). Local enforcement and better forests. World Development, 33(2), 273–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gintis, H. (2004). The genetic side of gene-culture coevolution: Internalization of norms and prosocial emotions. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 53(1), 57–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Greif, A., & Laitin, D. D. (2004). A theory of endogenous institutional change. American Political Science Review, 98(4), 633–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Güth, W., & Kliemt, H. (1998). The indirect evolutionary approach: Bridging the gap between rationality and adaptation. Rationality and Society, 10(3), 377–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162, 1243–1248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hayes, T. M., & Ostrom, E. (2005). Conserving the world’s forests: Are protected areas the only way? Indiana Law Review, 38(3), 595–617.Google Scholar
  37. Hilpinen, R. (Ed.). (1981). New studies in deontic logic: Norms, actions, and the foundations of ethics. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  38. Hodgson, G. M. (2004). The evolution of institutional economics: Agency, structure and Darwinism in American institutionalism. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Jacob, F. (1977). Evolution and tinkering. Science, 196(4295), 1161–1166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Janssen, M. A. (Ed.). (2002). Complexity and ecosystem management: The theory and practice of multi-agent systems. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  41. Janssen, M. A. (2007). Coordination in irrigation systems: An analysis of the Lansing–Kremer model of Bali. Agricultural Systems, 93, 170–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Janssen, M., Anderies, J. M., & Ostrom, E. (2007). Robustness of social-ecological systems to spatial and temporal variability. Society and Natural Resources, 20(4), 307–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Janssen, M., & Ostrom, E. (2006). Governing social-ecological systems. In L. Tesfatsion & K. L. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of computational economics: Agent-based computational economics (Vol. 2, pp. 1465–1509). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  44. Joshi, N. N., Ostrom, E., Shivakoti, G., & Lam, W. F. (2000). Institutional opportunities and constraints in the performance of farmer-managed irrigation systems in Nepal. Asia-Pacific Journal of Rural Development, 10(2), 67–92.Google Scholar
  45. Kiser, L., & Ostrom, E. (1982). The three worlds of action: A metatheoretical synthesis of institutional approaches. In E. Ostrom (Ed.), Strategies of political inquiry (pp. 179–222). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  46. Lam, W. F. (1998). Governing irrigation systems in Nepal: Institutions, infrastructure, and collective action. Oakland, CA: ICS Press.Google Scholar
  47. Lam, W. F., Lee, M., & Ostrom, E. (1994). An institutional analysis approach: Findings from the NIIS on irrigation performance. In J. Sowerwine, G. Shivakoti, U. Pradhan, A. Shukla, & E. Ostrom (Eds.), From farmers’ fields to data fields and back: A synthesis of participatory information systems for irrigation and other resources (pp. 69–93). Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Irrigation Management Institute, and Rampur, Nepal: IAAS.Google Scholar
  48. Lam, W. F., & Shivakoti, G. P. (2002). Farmer-to-farmer training as an alternative intervention strategy. In G. P. Shivakoti & E. Ostrom (Eds.), Improving irrigation governance and management in Nepal (pp. 204–221). Oakland, CA: ICS Press.Google Scholar
  49. Landau, M. (1969). Redundancy, rationality, and the problem of duplication and overlap. Public Administration Review, 29(4), 346–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Landau, M. (1973). Federalism, redundancy, and system reliability. Publius, 3(2), 173–196.Google Scholar
  51. Lansing, J. S. (1991). Priests and programmers: Technologies of power in the engineered landscape of Bali. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Levi, M. (1988). Of rule and revenue. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  53. Libecap, G. D. (1989). Contracting for property rights. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  54. McCay, B. J., & Acheson, J. M. (1987). The question of the commons: The culture and ecology of communal resources. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
  55. Miller, G. (1992). Managerial dilemmas: The political economy of hierarchy. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Nelson, R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Netting, R. M. C. (1974). The system nobody knows: Village irrigation in the Swiss Alps. In T. E. Downing & M. Gibson (Eds.), Irrigation’s impact on society (pp. 67–75). Tucson: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
  58. Netting, R. M. C. (1981). Balancing on an Alp: Ecological change and continuity in a Swiss mountain community. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  59. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. North, D. C. (2005). Understanding the process of institutional change. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  61. NRC (National Research Council). (1986). Proceedings of the conference on common property resource management. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  62. NRC (National Research Council). (2002). The drama of the commons. In E. Ostrom, T. Dietz, N. Dolšak, P. Stern, S. Stonich, & E. Weber (Eds.), Committee on the human dimensions of global change. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  63. Orbell, J. M., Schwarz-Shea, P., & Simmons, R. T. (1984). Do cooperators exit more readily than defectors? American Political Science Review, 78, 147–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Ørebech, P., Bosselman, F., Bjarup, J., Callies, D., Chanock, M., & Petersen, H. (2005). The role of customary law in sustainable development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Ostrom, E. (1992). Crafting institutions for self-governing irrigation systems. San Francisco, CA: ICS Press.Google Scholar
  66. Ostrom, E. (1995). Self-organization and social capital. Industrial and Corporate Change, 4(1), 131–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Ostrom, E. (1998). A behavioral approach to the rational choice theory of collective action. American Political Science Review, 92(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Ostrom, E. (1999). Coping with tragedies of the commons. Annual Review of Political Science, 2, 493–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  70. Ostrom, E. (2007). A diagnostic approach for going beyond panaceas. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(39), 15181–15187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Ostrom, E. (2010). Beyond markets and states: Polycentric governance of complex economic systems. American Economic Review, 100(3), 641–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Ostrom, E., Gardner, R., & Walker, J. (1994). Rules, games, and common-pool resources. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  73. Ostrom, E., Lam, W. F., Pradhan, P., & Shivakoti, G. (2011). Improving irrigation in Asia: Sustainable performance of an innovative intervention in Nepal. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Ostrom, V. (1997). The meaning of democracy and the vulnerability of democracies: A response to Tocqueville’s challenge. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  75. Pitman, G. (2002). Bridging troubled waters: Assessing the WB water resources strategy. Washington, DC: WP-Operations Evaluation Department.Google Scholar
  76. Poteete, A., Janssen, M., & Ostrom, E. (2010). Working together: Collective action, the commons, and multiple methods in practice. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  77. Pradhan, P. (1989). Increasing agricultural production in Nepal: Role of low-cost irrigation development through farmer participation. Kathmandu, Nepal: International Irrigation Management Institute.Google Scholar
  78. Pritchett, L., & Woolcock, M. (2004). Solutions when the solution is the problem: Arraying the disarray in development. World Development, 232(2), 191–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Rapoport, A. (1966). Two-person game theory: The essential ideas. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  80. Regmi, A. (2007). The role of group heterogeneity in collective action: A look at the intertie between irrigation and forests. Case studies from Chitwan, Nepal. PhD dissertation, Indiana University.Google Scholar
  81. Richerson, P. J., & Boyd, R. (2005). Not by genes alone: How culture transformed human evolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  82. Satz, D., & Ferejohn, J. (1994). Rational choice and social theory. Journal of Philosophy, 91(2), 71–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Shepsle, K. A. (1979). Institutional arrangements and equilibrium in multidimensional voting models. American Journal of Political Science, 23(1), 27–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Shepsle, K. A. (1989). Studying institutions: Some lessons from the rational choice approach. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 1(2), 131–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Shivakoti, G., & Ostrom, E. (2001). Improving irrigation governance and management in Nepal. Oakland, CA: ICS Press.Google Scholar
  86. Shukla, A., Gajurel, K., Shivakoti, G. P., Poudel, R., Pandit, K. N., Adhikari, K. R., Thapa, T., Shakya, S. M., Yadav, D. N., Joshi, N. R., Shrethsa, A. P. (1993). Irrigation resource inventory of East Chitwan. Rampur, Chitwan, Nepal: Institute of Agriculture and Animal Science, Irrigation Management Systems Study Group.Google Scholar
  87. Stake, J. E. (2004). The property ‘instinct’. Working paper. Indiana University, Maurer School of Law, Bloomington.Google Scholar
  88. Tang, S. Y. (1992). Institutions and collective action: Self-governance in irrigation. San Francisco, CA: ICS Press.Google Scholar
  89. Tsebelis, G. (1990). Nested games: Political context, political institutions and rationality. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  90. Turral, H. (1995). Recent trends in irrigation management: Changing directions for the public sector. London: Overseas Development Institute.Google Scholar
  91. Varughese, G., & Ostrom, E. (2001). The contested role of heterogeneity in collective action: Some evidence from community forestry in Nepal. World Development, 29(5), 747–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. von Wright, G. H. (1951). Deontic logic. Mind, 60, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. von Wright, G. H. (1963). Norm and action: A logical enquiry. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  94. Walker, J. M., Gardner, R., Herr, A., & Ostrom, E. (2000). Collective choice in the commons: Experimental results on proposed allocation rules and votes. Economic Journal, 110(460), 212–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. WECS/IIMI (Water and Energy Commission Secretariat, Nepal, and International Irrigation Management Institute). (1990). Assistance to farmer-managed irrigation systems: Results, lessons and recommendations from an action-research project. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Irrigation Management Institute.Google Scholar
  96. Williamson, O. E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  97. Wilson, D. S. (2007). Evolution for everyone: How Darwin’s theory can change the way we think about our lives. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  98. Wilson, D. S., & Gowdy, J. (2011). Evolution as a general theory for economics and public policy. Working paper, Binghamton University, Binghamton, NY.Google Scholar
  99. Winpenny, J. T. (1994). Managing water as an economic resource. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  100. Yoder, R. D. (1991a). Assistance to farmer managed irrigation systems: Experiences from WECS/IIMI/FORD action research project in Indrawati Watershed Basin. In N. Ansari & P. Pradhan (Eds.), Assistance to farmer-managed irrigation systems: Experience from Nepal. Kathmandu, Nepal: Ministry of Water Resources, Department of Irrigation, Planning Design and Research Division.Google Scholar
  101. Yoder, R. D. (1991b). Peer training as a way to motivate institutional change in farmer-managed irrigation systems. In Proceedings of the workshop on democracy and governance, decentralization: Finance & management project report (pp. 53–67). Burlington, VT: Associates in Rural Development.Google Scholar
  102. Yudelman, M. (1985). The World Bank and agricultural development: An insider’s view. World Resources Paper no. 1. Washington, DC: World Resources Institution.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elinor Ostrom
    • 2
    • 1
  1. 1.Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Department of Political ScienceIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA
  2. 2.Center for the Study of Institutional DiversityArizona State UniversityTempeUSA

Personalised recommendations