E Ergebnisse und Diskussion

  • Ulrich Frey


Dieses Kapitel beinhaltet die Ergebnisse, die Diskussion und das Gesamtfazit. Zunächst wird die Entwicklung des Erfolgsfaktorenkataloges vorgestellt. Anschließend wird die deskriptive Statistik für jeden Datensatz, die Korrelationen und die Modellergebnisse für jede Methode dargestellt. Die Relevanz der Einzelfaktoren wird aus der Modellierung extrahiert. Die Modellergebnisse werden in ihren Varianten gegenübergestellt. Es erfolgen Sensitivitäts- und Robustheitsanalysen.

Verwendete Literatur

  1. Acheson JM (1987) The Lobster Fiefs revisited: Economic and ecological effects of territoriality in the Maine Lobster Industry. In: McCay BJ, Acheson JM (Hrsg) The question of the commons. University of Arizona Press, Tucson, S 37–65Google Scholar
  2. Agrawal A (2001) Common property institutions and sustainable governance of resources. World Dev 29(10):1649–1672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Agrawal A (2002) Common resources and institutional sustainability. In: Ostrom E, Dietz T, Dolšak N, Stern PC, Stonich S, Weber EU (Hrsg) The drama of the commons. National Academy Press, Washington, S 41–85Google Scholar
  4. Agrawal A (2007) Forests. Governance, and sustainability: Common property theory and its contributions. Int J Commons 1(1):111–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Agrawal A, Chhatre A (2006) Explaining success on the commons: Community forest governance in the Indian Himalaya. World Dev 34(1):149–166. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Agrawal A, Yadama GN (1997) How do local institutions mediate market and population pressures on resources? Forest panchayats in Kumaon India. Dev Change 28(3):435–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Anderies JM, Janssen MA, Ostrom E (2004) A framework to analyze the robustness of social-ecological systems from an Institutional Perspective. Ecol Soc 9(1):18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baland J-M, Platteau J-P (1996) Halting degradation of natural resources: Is there a role for rural communities? Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  9. Basurto X, Gelcich S, Ostrom E (2013) The social–ecological system framework as a knowledge classificatory system for benthic small-scale fisheries. Global Environ Change 23(6):1366–1380. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bateson M, Nettle D, Roberts GN (2006) Cues of being watched enhance cooperation in a real-world setting. Biol Lett 2:412–414PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Baur I, Binder CR (2013) Adapting to socioeconomic developments by changing rules in the governance of common property pastures in the Swiss Alps. Ecol Soc 18:4. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Berkes F (1986) Local-level management and the commons problem: A comparative study of Turkish coastal fisheries. Mar Policy 10:215–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Berkes F (1987) Common-property resource management and Cree Indian fisheries in Subarctic Canada. In: McCay BJ, Acheson JM (Hrsg) The question of the commons. University of Arizona Press, Tucson, S 66–91Google Scholar
  14. Berkes F (1992) Success and failure in marine coastal fisheries of Turkey. In: Bromley DW, Feeny D, Peters P, Gilles JL, Oakerson RJ, Runge CF, Thomson JT (Hrsg) Making the commons work. Institute for Contemporary Studies, San Francisco, S 161–182Google Scholar
  15. Berkes F (2007) Community-based conservation in a globalized world. P Natl Acad Sci USA 104(39):15188–15193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bischoff I (2007) Institutional choice vs communication in social dilemmas - an experimental approach. J Econ Behav Organ 62:20–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bortz J, Schuster C (2010) Statistik für Human- und Sozialwissenschaftler, 7. Aufl. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Brooks JS, Waylen KA, Borgerhoff Mulder M (2012) How national context, project design, and local community characteristics influence success in community-based conservation projects. P Natl Acad Sci USA 109(52):21265–21270. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Casari M (2003) Decentralized management of common property resources: Experiments with a centuries-old institution. J Econ Behav Organ 51(2):217–247. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chhatre A, Agrawal A (2008) Forest commons and local enforcement. P Natl Acad Sci USA 105(36):13286–13291. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cinner JE, McClanahan TR, MacNeil MA, Graham NA, Daw TM, Mukminin A, Feary DA, Rabearisoa AL, Wamukota A, Jiddawi N, Campbell SJ, Baird AH, Januchowski-Hartley FA, Hamed S, Lahari R, Morove T, Kuange J (2012) Comanagement of coral reef social-ecological systems. P Natl Acad Sci USA 109(14):5219–5222. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cleaver F (2000) Moral ecological rationality. Institutions and the management of common property resources. Dev Change 31(2):361–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cox M (2010) Exploring the dynamics of social-ecological systems: the case of the Taos valley acequias. Dissertation, BloomingtonGoogle Scholar
  24. Dayton-Johnson J (2000) Determinants of collective action on the local commons: A model with evidence from Mexico. J Dev Econ 62:181–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dewulf A, Craps M, Bouwen R, Taillieu T, Pahl-Wostl C (2005) Integrated management of natural resources: Dealing with ambiguous issues, multiple actors and diverging frames. Water Sci Technol 52(6):115–124PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Dietz T, Dolšak N, Ostrom E, Stern PC (2002) The drama of the commons. In: Ostrom E, Dietz T, Dolšak N, Stern PC, Stonich S, Weber EU (Hrsg) The drama of the Commons. National Academy Press, Washington, S 1–36Google Scholar
  27. Falk A, Fehr E, Fischbacher U (2003) On the nature of fair behavior. Econ Inq 41(1):20–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Feeny DH (1992) Where do we go from here? Implications for the Research Agenda. In: Bromley DW, Feeny D, Peters P, Gilles JL, Oakerson RJ, Runge CF, Thomson JT (Hrsg) Making the commons work. Institute for Contemporary Studies, San Francisco, S 267–292Google Scholar
  29. Fehr E, Fischbacher U (2003) The nature of human altruism. Nature 425(6960):785–791. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Fehr E, Schmidt KM (1999) A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. Q J Econ 114(3):817–868CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Frey UJ, Villamayor-Tomas S, Theesfeld I (2016) A continuum of governance regimes. A new perspective on co-management in irrigation systems. Environ SciPolicy 66:73–81. Google Scholar
  32. Gächter S, Renner E, Sefton M (2008) The long-run benefits of punishment. Science 322:1510. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gibson CC, Williams JT, Ostrom E (2005) Local enforcement and better forests. World Dev 33(2):273–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gruber E (2008) Key principles of community-based natural resource management: A synthesis and interpretation of identified effective approaches for managing the commons. Environ Manage 45:52–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Gutiérrez NL, Hilborn R, Defeo O (2011) Leadership, social capital and incentives promote successful fisheries. Nature 470(7334):386–389. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hardin G (1968) The tragedy of the commons. Science 162:1243–1248PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Herrfahrdt-Pähle E, Pahl-Wostl C (2012) Continuity and change in social-ecological systems: The role of institutional resilience. Ecol Soc 17:2. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Jensen K, Hare B, Call J, Tomasello M (2006) What's in it for me? Self-regard precludes altruism and spite in chimpanzees. Proc Biol Sci 273(1589):1013–1021PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Knüppe K, Pahl-Wostl C (2011) A framework for the analysis of governance structures applying to groundwater resources and the requirements for the sustainable management of associated ecosystem services. Water Resour Manag 25(13):3387–3411. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kosfeld M, Okada A, Riedl A (2009) Institution Formation in Public Goods Games. Am Econ Rev 99(4):1335–1355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lam WF (1998) Governing irrigation systems in Nepal: Institutions, infrastructure, and collective action. Institute for Contemporary Studies, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  42. Madrigal-Ballestero R, Schlüter A, Claudia Lopez M (2013) What makes them follow the rules? Empirical evidence from turtle egg harvesters in Costa Rica. Mar Policy 37:270–277. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. McKean MA (1992) Management of traditional common lands (Iriaichi) in Japan. In: Bromley DW, Feeny D, Peters P, Gilles JL, Oakerson RJ, Runge CF, Thomson JT (Hrsg) Making the commons work. Institute for Contemporary Studies, San Francisco, S 63–98Google Scholar
  44. Meinzen-Dick R (2007) Beyond panaceas in water institutions. P Natl Acad Sci USA 104(39):15200–15205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Nagendra H (2007) Drivers of reforestation in human-dominated forests. P Natl Acad Sci USA 104(39):15218–15223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Olson M (1968) Die Logik des kollektiven Handelns: Kollektivgüter und die Theorie der Gruppen. Mohr Siebeck, TübingenGoogle Scholar
  47. Olsson P, Folke C, Berkes F (2004) Adaptive comanagement for building resilience in social–ecological systems. Environ Manage 34(1):75–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ostrom E (1992a) Crafting institutions for self-governing irrigation systems. Institute for Contemporary Studies, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  50. Ostrom E (1992b) The rudiments of a theory of the origins, survival, and performance of common-property institutions. In: Bromley DW, Feeny D, Peters P, Gilles JL, Oakerson RJ, Runge CF, Thomson JT (Hrsg) Making the commons work. Institute for Contemporary Studies, San Francisco, S 293–318Google Scholar
  51. Ostrom E (2007) A diagnostic approach for going beyond panaceas. P Natl Acad Sci USA 104(39):15181–15187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ostrom E, Janssen MA, Anderies M (2007) Going beyond panaceas. P Natl Acad Sci USA 104(39):15176–15178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ostrom E (2009) A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science 325:419–422PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pagdee A, Kim Y-S, Daugherty PJ (2006) What makes community forest management successful: A meta-study from community forests throughout the world. Soc Natur Resour 19:33–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Pahl-Wostl C (2002) Participative and stakeholder-based policy design, evaluation and modeling processes. Integr Assess 3(1):3–14. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pahl-Wostl C (2006) Transitions towards adaptive management of water facing climate and global change. Water Resour Manag 21(1):49–62. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Pahl-Wostl C, Craps M, Dewulf A, Mostert E, Tabara D, Taillieu T (2007) Social learning and water resources management. Ecol Soc 12(2)Google Scholar
  58. Pahl-Wostl C (2009) A conceptual framework for analysing adaptive capacity and multi-level learning processes in resource governance regimes. Global Environ Change 19(3):354–365. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Pomeroy RS, Katon BM, Harkes I (1998) Fisheries co-management: Key conditions and principles drawn from Asian experiences. Paper presented at the 7th annual conference of the IASCP: 1–23Google Scholar
  60. Pomeroy RS, Katon BM, Harkes I (2001) Conditions affecting the success of fisheries co-management: Lessons from Asia. Mar Policy 25(3):197–208. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Pretty J (2003) Social capital and the collective management of resources. Science 302(5652):1912–1914. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Price ME (2006) Monitoring, reputation, and „greenbeard“ reciprocity in a Shuar work team. J Organ Behav 27:201–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Rawls J (1979) Eine Theorie der Gerechtigkeit. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am MainGoogle Scholar
  64. Resnick P, Zeckhauser RJ, Swanson J, Lockwood K (2006) The value of reputation on eBay: A controlled experiment. Exp Econ 9:79–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Rockenbach B, Milinski M (2006) The efficient interaction of indirect reciprocity and costly punishment. Nature 444:718–723. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Sandström C, Widmark C (2007) Stakeholders' perceptions of consultations as tools for co-management – A case study of the forestry and reindeer herding sectors in northern Sweden. For Policy Econ 10(1–2):25–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Scheberle D (2000) Moving toward community-based environmental management: Wetland protection in door county. Am Behav Sci 44(4):565–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Schlager E, Ostrom E (1992) Property-rights regimes and natural resources: A conceptual analysis. Land Econ 68(3):249–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Schurr C (2006) Zwischen Allmende und Anti-Allmende. Dissertation, kein OrtGoogle Scholar
  70. Shiferaw B, Kebede TA, Reddy RV (2008) Community watershed management in semi-arid India: The state of collective action and its effects on natural resources and rural livelihoods. Zugegriffen: 8 Juli 2012Google Scholar
  71. Sutter M, Haigner S, Kocher MG (2008) Choosing the carrot or the stick? – Endogenous institutional choice in social dilemma situations. Zugegriffen: 8. Juli 2012
  72. Tang SY (1989) Institutions and collective action in irrigation systems. Zugegriffen: 30. September 2011
  73. Tang SY (1991) Institutional arrangements and the management of common-pool resources. Public Admin Rev 51(1):42–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Tang SY (1992) Institutions and collective actions: Self-governance in irrigation. Institute for Contemporary Studies, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  75. Thomson JT, Feeny D, Oakerson RJ (1992) Institutional dynamics: The evolution and dissolution of common-property resource management. In: Bromley DW, Feeny D, Peters P, Gilles JL, Oakerson RJ, Runge CF, Thomson JT (Hrsg) Making the commons work. Institute for Contemporary Studies, San Francisco, S 129–160Google Scholar
  76. Tucker CM, Randolph JC, Castellanos EJ (2007) Institutions, biophysical factors and history: An integrative analysis of private and common property forests in Guatemala and Honduras. Hum Ecol 35:259–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Tucker CM (2010) Learning on governance in forest ecosystems: Lessons from recent research. Int J Commons 4(2):687–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Van Laerhoven F (2010) Governing community forests and the challenge of solving two-level collective action dilemmas—A large-N perspective. Global Environ Chang 20(3):539–546. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Varughese G, Ostrom E (2001) The contested role of heterogeneity in collective action: Some evidence from community forestry in Nepal. World Dev 29(5):747–765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Vollan B (2008) Socio-ecological explanations for crowding-out effects from economic field experiments in southern Africa. Ecol Econ 67:560–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Wade R (1992) Common-property resource management in South Indian Villages. In: Bromley DW, Feeny D, Peters P, Gilles JL, Oakerson RJ, Runge CF, Thomson JT (Hrsg) Making the commons work. Institute for Contemporary Studies, San Francisco, S 207–228Google Scholar
  82. Wade R (1994) Village republics: Economic conditions for collective action in South India. Institute for Contemporary Studies, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  83. Wedekind C, Milinski M (2000) Cooperation through image scoring in humans. Science 288(5467):850–852PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Williams G (2011) Data mining with Rattle and R: The art of excavating data for knowledge discovery. Springer, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Deutschland 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ulrich Frey
    • 1
  1. 1.Technische ThermodynamikDeutsches Zentrum für Luft- und RaumfahrtStuttgartDeutschland

Personalised recommendations