Elinor Ostrom (née Awan, born August 7, 1933) is an American political economist. She was awarded the 2009 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences, which she shared with Oliver E. Williamson, for "her analysis of economic governance, especially the Commons." She is the first woman to win the prize in this category. Her work is associated with the NewInstitutionalEconomics and the resurgence of political economy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elinor_Ostrom
- Among the many aspects in current NIE analyses are these: organizational arrangements, Property Rights, Transaction Cost-s, credible Commitment-s, modes of Governance, persuasive abilities, social norms, ideological Value-s, decisive perceptions, gained control, enforcement mechanism, asset specificity, human assets, Social Capital, asymmetric information, strategic behavior, bounded rationality, opportunism, Adverse Selection, Moral Hazard, contractual safeguards, surrounding uncertainty, monitoring costs, incentives to collude, hierarchical structures, bargaining strength, etc. Major scholars associated with the subject include Harold Demsetz, Avner Greif, Claude Menard and four Nobel laureates — Ronald Coase, Douglass North, Elinor Ostrom and Oliver Williamson.
Kevin Carson reviews GoverningTheCommons - In all her work, Ostrom never lost sight of one central truth: collective institutions, whether they’re called governments, corporations, or commons, are all framed from the same crooked human timber. Advocates of government activity and critics/skeptics of anarchism, all too often, simply assume a level of omniscience on the part of the state that’s denied to the state, or handwave away the actual problem of detecting and punishing infractions. A good example is the question of how a stateless society would prevent something like the Deepwater Horizons oil spill — when the EPA and its regulations in our actual statist society failed to prevent it. But giving an official name to the collectivity does nothing to alter the fact that it’s just a bunch of human beings doing stuff together. And they don’t cease to be fallible, limited in perspective, and influenced by self-interest just because they have official titles or claim to be working in the name of the public or the shareholders.
Summaries at CooperationCommons.
ChristopherAllen breaks up her principles into 12 different ones, but I have retained her old numbering system as there are large number of works that refer to the original 8. In addition, there appears to be some differences in thoughts on number 8, so I've included two variations.
Edited: | Tweet this!