Talk:Common-pool resource

Economics Mid‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cooperatives (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cooperatives, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CooperativesWikipedia:WikiProject CooperativesTemplate:WikiProject CooperativesCooperatives articles

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 January 2021 and 21 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jimzhen21. Peer reviewers: ToharZamir, Alexdaviesmorris, SaraParkwood.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:09, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merge common good here?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

No consensus, over a span of 11 years, to merge Common-pool resource and Common good (economics). Klbrain (talk) 15:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which term is more popular (in economics): common good or common pool resource? I have to say that during my studies I have only encountered the common good one, and common good in economics context is much more popular then common pool resource.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 01:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My sense is that they should remain seperate from the moment. CPR is a bit more specific (typically used in resource economics) and so should probably merit an article that can be linked to from other pages. Joel Kincaid 19:16, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Common Goods and CPR are different in that Common Goods are non-excludable and rivalrous by definition, whereas CPR are non-excludable only at the individual level, but excludable at the community level. This implies that the rivalry/excludability-table in various articles (as for example in the "Common Good" article) should show "Common good" instead of "Common-pool resource".Krol:k 13:35, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I came to this page after encountering, "complex commons": "Before the sixteenth century, no one in England owned land, not even Richard II. It existed within a bewildering index of tenures and estates, defining who could use it, what could be done with it, and for how long. It did not slide from hand to hand in the alienable form that we know. It was wrapped and bundled in customary rights that cascaded downward from king to knight to peasant. They all lived off a complex commons. A commons is any set of resources that is used or controlled by a village, town, nation, or some other group. It is a managed environment, with households or individuals possessing specific rights to plow, hunt, or gather. A commons is not free for all but exists under certain rules. English peasants and lords each had different kinds of rights to the commons, called tenures."

Stoll, Steven. Ramp Hollow: The Ordeal of Appalachia (pp. 53-54). Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Kindle Edition.

I'm pretty sure the same underlying idea is involved. User:Fred Bauder Talk 05:48, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Removal of the section on the Kyoto Protocol and Climate Change

I removed the following section. Reason: the example does not fit the definition of a common-pool resource used in the article (global climate is not excludable and therefore a common good). The Kyoto Protocol could however be seen as an example where inter-governmental regulation and tradeable allowances in fact do not work as expected to prevent excessive pollution (CO2-emissions will eventually decrease because of Peak Oil and not due to the Kyoto Protocol; the Kyoto Protocol could at best be seen as an instrument to manage Peak Oil internationally, but not to curb emissions - or am I being too negative about that?). Krol:k (talk) 10:13, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"An example of a global common-pool regime is the Kyoto Protocol, which aims to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases. These disrupt the common-pool resource of a moderate global climate and induce significant climate change. However, though global warming is controversial and there is debate over the attribution of recent climate change by a loud minority refuting the role of man-made pollution, there is a scientific opinion on climate change. Debates and controversy over attribution of access and changes to common-pool resources, as well as its causes, form part of the issue over regulation of a common-pool resource."

What is the CPR facility?

The article states, that

A common-pool resource typically consists of a core resource, which defines the stock variable, while providing a limited quantity of extractable fringe units, which defines the flow variable. While the core resource is to be protected or entertained in order to allow for its continuous exploitation, the fringe units can be harvested or consumed.

Whereas Ostrom, Gardner, Walker seem to add a third component to the consistence of CPR's - the CPR "facility".

A CPR "facility" creates the conditions for the existence of a stock of resource units. This stock makes available a flow of resource units over time that are appropriable and subtractable in use. ^[1]

How can this be understood?

Is this CPR facility the precondition for the core resource? To use the fish example: The CPR facility is a system (e.g. the ocean) that creates the condition for the existence of fish in general. The core resource (=stock variable) is a swarm of fish that can easily compensate certain losses that are attributable to fishery and the fringe units (=flow variable) is amount of fish that can be fished? Or do I get something completely wrong here? - Torstenphilipp (talk) 15:52, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

^ Ostrom, Gardner, Walker - Rules, Games & Common pool resources (1994) S. 8

A proposal

when reading i kind of feel that i need a reference in the section before "critique", does ostrom say this? she has studied small systems but has she also studied bigger once? if so, the statement is correct, otherwise I suggest a (ref). How do I connect this section with the ref?

All the best and keep up the good work!

Nikarvidsson (talk) 10:47, 14 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikarvidsson (talk • contribs) 00:59, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adaptive governance

I would like to add a section on adaptive governance to this page. Ostrom advocates the use of adaptive governance in the management of common-pool resources, especially those related to the natural environment. The proposed section will outline briefly what adaptive governance is and the elements required to achieve it. Jrober (talk) 02:38, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Indented line I think that would be an ideal addition to this article, and provide some more balance - I presume you'll be referencing Dietz et al. (2003). Schmalliso (talk) 15:16, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the suggestion, I will take that source into consideration. Jrober (talk) 14:35, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References

Dietz, T., Ostrom, E., Stern, P. (2003). The Struggle to Govern the Commons, Science, 302(5652). Schmalliso (talk) 15:16, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move chart?

I was thinking of moving the chart illustrating types of goods. On the other related pages it is under the overview and currently here it at the bottom under the references. Moving it to the overview would keep the pages looking consistent for users.Jrober (talk) 17:15, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Espinola-Arredondo's comment on this article

Dr. Espinola-Arredondo has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:

"The use of many common-pool resources, if managed carefully, can be extended because the resource system forms a negative feedback loop, where the stock variable continually regenerates the fringe variable as long as the stock variable is not compromised, providing an optimum amount of consumption." This is a long sentence, split it into two parts. For instance: "The use of many common-pool resources, if managed carefully, can be extended because the resource system forms a negative feedback loop. In this case, the stock variable continually regenerates the fringe variable as long as the stock variable is not compromised, providing an optimum amount of consumption."
Definition matrix: the table should be briefly explained to the reader.
Common property tools, third line, it should say: " In order to maintain the resources, protocols coordinate" it says: " In order to maintain the resources, prorocols coordinate "
I recommend to include the following paragraph at the end of the document (before “In today’s world, there are a few ..”) since it discusses how to prevent the tragedy of the commons. "The degree of information about the total stock of the resource could help to prevent the tragedy of the commons. For instance, a fisherman who starts exploiting a resource gathers more information about the characteristics, i.e. abundance, of the fishing ground than those who have not started operating in the area yet. Hence, in the case in which the total stock is low, the information advantage allows the initial fisherman to protect the resource, since he limits his captures to make sure that potential fishermen are aware of the resource scarcity, thus, staying out of the fishing ground." See: Espínola-Arredondo, A. and F. Muñoz-García. 2011. Can incomplete information lead to under-exploitation in the commons? Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Volume 62, Issue 3, November 2011, Pages 402–413
Espinola-Arredondo, A. and F. Munoz-Garcia. 2013. Asymmetric Information may Protect the Commons: The Welfare Benefits of Uninformed Regulators.Economics Letters, 121 (3), pp. 463-67.

We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.

Dr. Espinola-Arredondo has published scholarly research which seems to be relevant to this Wikipedia article:

Reference : Ana Espinola-Arredondo & Felix Munoz-Garcia, 2010. "Can Incomplete Information Lead to Under-exploitation in the Commons," Working Papers 2010-04, School of Economic Sciences, Washington State University.

ExpertIdeasBot (talk) 13:02, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Common-pool resource. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:35, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Common property

Common property redirects here. However, the article is about the economic definition of a type of good. Common property is more about assigned ownership rather than the properties inherent in a good. Maybe a separate article would be better? Jonpatterns (talk) 19:04, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT I've made Common property redirect to Common ownership instead as it seems a better fit. Jonpatterns (talk) 19:12, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Policy Analysis

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 March 2022 and 30 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Dianaviry (article contribs).

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at University of Wikipedia supported by WikiProject Wikipedia and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2011 Q3 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:07, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Ostrom, Gardner, Walker - Rules, Games & Common pool resources (1994) S. 8

[1]