IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v7y2015i1p584-611d44297.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can the Concept of Integrative and Segregative Institutions Contribute to the Framing of Institutions of Sustainability?

Author

Listed:
  • Konrad Hagedorn

    (Division of Resource Economics, Department of Agricultural Economics; Workshop in Institutional Analysis of Social-Ecological Systems (WINS); Berlin Institute of Cooperative Studies, Humboldt University Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, Berlin 10099, Germany)

Abstract

This paper begins with the question “What is special about those institutions that bring about sustainability”? In an attempt to answer this, I use the Institutions of Sustainability (IoS) framework, which structures sustainability analytically according to four main categories, namely: transactions, actors, institutions and governance structures. I then argue that sustainability has to do with balancing two sorts of costs an actor may face while being constrained by institutions. One is the costs from the integrative effects of institutions on his individual decision making. The other is the costs from the segregative effect of institutions. In this way, sustainability can be understood as societies’ compromise between institutions that integrate individual actors’ decisions in a wider system, holding them fully responsible for more or less all of the effects of their choices and those institutions that partly free individual decision makers from parts of such responsibilities. If a governance problem is characterized by a high degree of “decomposability”, segregative rules may be sufficient. The more a governance problem is characterized by complexity due to low modularity and high functional interdependencies, the more accurate integrative rules may be. The paper concludes by identifying “sustainability area of institutional embedding” as a regulative idea in understanding sustainability.

Suggested Citation

  • Konrad Hagedorn, 2015. "Can the Concept of Integrative and Segregative Institutions Contribute to the Framing of Institutions of Sustainability?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-28, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:1:p:584-611:d:44297
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/1/584/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/1/584/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    2. Oliver E. Williamson, 2000. "The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking Ahead," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(3), pages 595-613, September.
    3. Paavola, Jouni & Adger, W. Neil, 2005. "Institutional ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 353-368, May.
    4. Paavola, Jouni, 2007. "Institutions and environmental governance: A reconceptualization," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 93-103, June.
    5. Konrad Hagedorn, 2008. "Particular requirements for institutional analysis in nature-related sectors," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 35(4), pages 606-606, December.
    6. Vatn, Arild, 2005. "Rationality, institutions and environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 203-217, November.
    7. Boulding, Kenneth E, 1969. "Economics as a Moral Science," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(1), pages 1-12, March.
    8. Daly, Herman E., 1990. "Toward some operational principles of sustainable development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-6, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ionel Bostan & Flavian Clipa & Raluca Irina Clipa, 2016. "Informal Institutions And Economic Performance," Knowledge Horizons - Economics, Faculty of Finance, Banking and Accountancy Bucharest,"Dimitrie Cantemir" Christian University Bucharest, vol. 8(2), pages 53-58, June.
    2. Bhatt, Brijesh & Singh, Anoop, 2021. "Power sector reforms and technology adoption in the Indian electricity distribution sector," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 215(PA).
    3. Rongyu Wang & Rong Tan, 2018. "Rural Renewal of China in the Context of Rural-Urban Integration: Governance Fit and Performance Differences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-22, February.
    4. Marco Setti & Matteo Garuti, 2018. "Identity, Commons and Sustainability: An Economic Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-12, February.
    5. Griewald, Yuliana, 2018. "The Art of the State to Intervene: Insights Into Agricultural Land Management in Russia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 1-9.
    6. Thiel, Andreas & Schleyer, Christian & Hinkel, Jochen & Schlüter, Maja & Hagedorn, Konrad & Bisaro, Sandy & Bobojonov, Ihtiyor & Hamidov, Ahmad, 2016. "Transferring Williamson's discriminating alignment to the analysis of environmental governance of social-ecological interdependence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 159-168.
    7. Srigiri, Srinivasa Reddy & Dombrowsky, Ines, 2021. "Governance of the water-energy-food nexus for an integrated implementation of the 2030 Agenda: Conceptual and methodological framework for analysis," IDOS Discussion Papers 2/2021, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    8. Ilkhom Soliev & Insa Theesfeld, 2017. "Reframing for Sustainability: Exploring Transformative Power of Benefit Sharing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-23, August.
    9. Bhatt, Brijesh & Singh, Anoop, 2020. "Stakeholders’ role in distribution loss reduction technology adoption in the Indian electricity sector: An actor-oriented approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    10. Grundmann, Philipp & Ehlers, Melf-Hinrich, 2016. "Determinants of courses of action in bioenergy villages responding to changes in renewable heat utilization policy," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 183-192.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. McCann, Laura, 2013. "Transaction costs and environmental policy design," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 253-262.
    2. Padmanabhan, Martina & Jungcurt, Stefan, 2012. "Biocomplexity—conceptual challenges for institutional analysis in biodiversity governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 70-79.
    3. Bisaro, Alexander & Roggero, Matteo & Villamayor-Tomas, Sergio, 2018. "Institutional Analysis in Climate Change Adaptation Research: A Systematic Literature Review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 34-43.
    4. Konrad Hagedorn, 2013. "Natural resource management: the role of cooperative institutions and governance," Journal of Entrepreneurial and Organizational Diversity, European Research Institute on Cooperative and Social Enterprises, vol. 2(1), pages 101-121, September.
    5. Skurray, James H., 2015. "The scope for collective action in a large groundwater basin: An institutional analysis of aquifer governance in Western Australia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 128-140.
    6. Daedlow, Katrin & Beckmann, Volker & Schlüter, Maja & Arlinghaus, Robert, 2013. "Explaining institutional persistence, adaptation, and transformation in East German recreational-fisheries governance after the German reunification in 1990," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 36-50.
    7. Gendron, Corinne, 2014. "Beyond environmental and ecological economics: Proposal for an economic sociology of the environment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 240-253.
    8. Paavola, Jouni, 2011. "Reprint of: Sewage Pollution and Institutional and Technological Change in the United States, 1830-1915," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1289-1296, May.
    9. Van Hecken, Gert & Bastiaensen, Johan & Vásquez, William F., 2012. "The viability of local payments for watershed services: Empirical evidence from Matiguás, Nicaragua," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 169-176.
    10. Oliver Maaß & Philipp Grundmann, 2018. "Governing Transactions and Interdependences between Linked Value Chains in a Circular Economy: The Case of Wastewater Reuse in Braunschweig (Germany)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-29, April.
    11. Wang, Rongyu & Tan, Rong, 2020. "Patterns of revenue distribution in rural residential land consolidation in contemporary China: The perspective of property rights delineation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    12. Eckehard Rosenbaum, 2017. "Green Growth—Magic Bullet or Damp Squib?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-18, June.
    13. Nantongo, Mary & Vatn, Arild, 2019. "Estimating Transaction Costs of REDD+," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 1-11.
    14. Prévost, Benoît & Rivaud, Audrey, 2018. "The World Bank’s environmental strategies: Assessing the influence of a biased use of New Institutional Economics on legal issues," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 370-380.
    15. Tateishi, Henrique Ryosuke & Bragagnolo, Cassiano & de Faria, Rosane Nunes, 2020. "Economic and environmental efficiencies of greenhouse gases’ emissions under institutional influence," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    16. Thiel, Andreas, 2013. "Towards Understanding the Scalar Re-Organisation of Natural Resource Governance: Factors Derived from Water Governance in Spain, Portugal and Germany," 53rd Annual Conference, Berlin, Germany, September 25-27, 2013 156967, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    17. Jiřina Jílková & Lenka Slavíková, 2009. "Ekonomie životního prostředí na rozcestí [Economics of the Environmental Protection on the Crossroad]," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2009(5), pages 660-676.
    18. Thiel, Andreas & Schleyer, Christian & Plieninger, Tobias, 2011. "Characteristics of resources and the provision of biodiversity and ecosystem services in Germany: the cases of fruit tree meadows and wolf protection," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 116082, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Thiel, Andreas & Schleyer, Christian & Hinkel, Jochen & Schlüter, Maja & Hagedorn, Konrad & Bisaro, Sandy & Bobojonov, Ihtiyor & Hamidov, Ahmad, 2016. "Transferring Williamson's discriminating alignment to the analysis of environmental governance of social-ecological interdependence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 159-168.
    20. Zhun Chen & Yuefei Zhuo & Guan Li & Zhongguo Xu, 2021. "What Drives Different Governance Modes and Marketization Performance for Collective Commercial Construction Land in Rural China?," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-23, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:1:p:584-611:d:44297. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.