IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/revpoe/v34y2022i4p665-691.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Framing Institutional Choice, 1937–1973: New Institutional Economics and the Neglect of the Commons

Author

Listed:
  • Maxime Desmarais-Tremblay
  • Aleksandar Stojanović

Abstract

Progressives the world over cherish high hopes in the development of institutions for collective actions. Among these institutions, commons have a long history in western Europe. While a new institutional economics emerged in the 1960s, commons were not taken seriously in postwar economics before the seminal work of Elinor Ostrom in the late 1980s. How can we explain this belated integration of commons in economics? In this paper, we trace some of the origins of the neoclassical comparative institutional analysis. By advocating an institutional comparison in terms of the costs or the value of production under alternative allocations of property rights, Ronald Coase contributed to the narrow theoretical approach taken by new institutional economists. In the late 1960s, neoclassical economists who came to be interested in environmental questions dismissed commons as inefficient solutions to allocation problems. Within this narrow framework, the private enterprise system more often than not was hailed as the best alternative.

Suggested Citation

  • Maxime Desmarais-Tremblay & Aleksandar Stojanović, 2022. "Framing Institutional Choice, 1937–1973: New Institutional Economics and the Neglect of the Commons," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(4), pages 665-691, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:revpoe:v:34:y:2022:i:4:p:665-691
    DOI: 10.1080/09538259.2022.2096284
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09538259.2022.2096284
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09538259.2022.2096284?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:revpoe:v:34:y:2022:i:4:p:665-691. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CRPE20 .

    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.