USA: The first woman to win the Nobel Prize in Economics, he does validating anarchist principles
Elinor Ostrom, in his book that refutes the "Tragedy of the Commons "has challenged the conventional view that common property is always a poorly maintained and should be regulated by a central authority or it privatized. Based on numerous studies made by users of fish, pastures, forests, lakes and groundwater basins, Ostrom concludes that the results are, more often than not, better than those predicted by standard theories. The choice of Elinor Ostrom como co-ganadora del Premio Nobel de Economía de 2009 hará mucho por el avance de la teoría anarquista entre la intelectualidad.
Ostrom ha sido citada por su obra sobre la gestión de las fuentes o estanques comunes, o los "comunes", y debería inspirar a más pensadores a reconocer el potencial para las soluciones a los problemas que parecen inmunes tanto para soluciones de propiedad privada como para las soluciones de propiedad gubernamental.
Su obra ofrece munición para aquellos de nosotros que NO creemos que una sociedad libre requiera que toda la propiedad sea privatizada, ya que ella ha hecho muchas investigaciones empíricas sobre, por ejemplo, la gestión de los bosques. Su obra también tiene aplicaciones further guidance on solving problems of all kinds of "commons" that seem to stop thinking libertarian.
strongly recommend that people read his 1990 book, Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action, but I would like in this post above summarize the principles she identified in successful attempts to address the problem of " Tragedy of the Commons "pointed in the classic paper by Garrett Hardin. Applying these principles to all types of public policies could take us a lifetime (which, of course, is one of the reasons why I could not make a centrally planned society.) In their studies
what distinguishes the management efforts succeed common failures is:
1. Clarity on the limits and standards. As we are cool people, anarchists have much appreciation of the minimization of unnecessary conflicts. When people know what is and what is not acceptable behavior of others, it is easier for us to adapt our actions according to these expectations. Of course, the idiots who released nonsense like, "ignorance of the law is no excuse to" act government prosecutors inevitably, the rest understand that the common law gives his greatest service to clarify the expectations of people can interact a cooperative and peaceful.
2. Local information and acceptance of these rules. Friedrich Hayek, co-winner of the first Nobel laureate in economics, would be proud. A closer someone is in a situation, the more I know that others do not know. Central planning, even when performed angels, does not produce good standards for information problems. The fact that angels are in charge is, of course, another problem. Ostrom is well informed about the theory of "public choice" and know that government regulators are human with your own information and incentive problems.
3. Active involvement of those Commons likely to be used in monitoring their use. To those who are more interested, they need either involved directly or delegate the monitoring trust. Again, central planning, particularly with regard to government officials accountable if they do, to a variety of people much larger than the mere interest in common and are engaged in a variety of activities that goes beyond the simple management of common, can not effectively monitor and accountability. If the people who most need the commons can not dismiss those who protect them, the tragedy is inevitable.
4. Conflict resolution methods. Is basic anarchist theory to the idea that the conflicting parties accept mediation or arbitration of a third party in that conflict. One of the injustices of government is that any dispute between a government and private individuals is allocated by the government itself. The evolution of the common law was much more than an ad hoc choice of an arbitrator to agreements allowing the parties know in advance how to resolve disagreements. Conflicts are inevitable conflict resolution is necessary, and evolves.
5. Penalties on violators. Naturally, those who are trusted to the arbitrators, or, worse, those who are declared "unlawful" to refuse any discretion a third person may need to be encouraged to enforce sanctions provided. Anarchists in general emphasize the value of ostracism and boycott, as effective tools against those who are part of the local community, but recognize that sometimes force is needed against some violators. Clearly, you may need to restrict the saboteurs physically to protect the forest. Even when local acceptance and monitoring of standards is strong, violations are rare, usually accidental, and typically resolved without the need for violence.
Inevitably, this award will bring the emergence of literature available on Ostrom's ideas and their implications, will encourage more academic research on voluntary governance institutions and how they arise, and give credibility to the point of view "libertarian left" that denies the need for traditional formulations of property rights to solve all the problems (but not deny that a better understanding of property rights as a set of rights rather than as an absolute dominion over a territory is a way to see many of these solutions, as the libertarian communist support to the "possession" can be reformulated as an interpretation specific property rather than its rejection). Dr. Ostrom
A: Bravo!
infoshop.org . ALB results
No comments:
Post a Comment