IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ratsoc/v10y1998i1p103-122.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

External Control May Destroy The Commons

Author

Listed:
  • Axel Ostmann

Abstract

In commons situations, what one user takes affect the other users' opportunities. Game-theoretical analysis predicts an overuse of the resource for a large and relevant class of these situations. Past empirical research however appears to show that individuals in a commons situation often establish institutions more or less adequate to handling the problem. This paper reports on an experimental investigation of how (costly and partial) monitoring and sanctioning of offenders affects the incentive structure and the behavior of commoners. The central finding is that even though controls and sanctions shift the Nash-equilibrium to a more favourable outcome, subjects tend not to reach the level of welfare of this equilibrium in practice. This suggests that the potential increase of efficiency by means of monitoring and inspection has to be judged very carefully; policy recommendations based on the assumption that adequate inspection and sanctions will force people to behave better are highly questionable.

Suggested Citation

  • Axel Ostmann, 1998. "External Control May Destroy The Commons," Rationality and Society, , vol. 10(1), pages 103-122, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:ratsoc:v:10:y:1998:i:1:p:103-122
    DOI: 10.1177/104346398010001005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/104346398010001005
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/104346398010001005?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marwell, Gerald & Ames, Ruth E., 1981. "Economists free ride, does anyone else? : Experiments on the provision of public goods, IV," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 295-310, June.
    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. Klaus Moeltner & James J. Murphy & John K. Stranlund & Maria Alejandra Velez, 2013. "Institutional heterogeneity in social dilemma games: a Bayesian examination," Chapters, in: John A. List & Michael K. Price (ed.), Handbook on Experimental Economics and the Environment, chapter 2, pages 67-88, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Uriel Haran & Doron Teichman & Yuval Feldman, 2016. "Formal and Social Enforcement in Response to Individual Versus Corporate Transgressions," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(4), pages 786-808, December.
    3. Kanittha Tambunlertchai & Sittidaj Pongkijvorasin, 2020. "The impacts of collective threshold requirements for rewards in a CPR experiment," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 22(4), pages 537-554, October.
    4. Tambunlertchai, Kanittha & Pongkijvorasin, Sittidaj, 2021. "Regulatory stringency and behavior in a common pool resource game: Lab and field experiments," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    5. Maria Alejandra Velez & James J. Murphy & John K. Stranlund, 2010. "Centralized And Decentralized Management Of Local Common Pool Resources In The Developing World: Experimental Evidence From Fishing Communities In Colombia," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 48(2), pages 254-265, April.
    6. Ansink, Erik & Tesfaye, Abonesh & Bouma, Jetske & Brouwer, Roy, 2017. "Cooperation in watershed management: A field experiment on location, trust, and enforcement," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 91-104.
    7. Robson, Mark & Kant, Shashi, 2007. "The development of government agency and stakeholder cooperation: A comparative study of two Local Citizens Committees' (LCCs) participation in forest management in Ontario, Canada," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(8), pages 1113-1133, May.
    8. Neuteleers, Stijn & Engelen, Bart, 2015. "Talking money: How market-based valuation can undermine environmental protection," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 253-260.
    9. Bodo Sturm & Joachim Weimann, 2006. "Experiments in Environmental Economics and Some Close Relatives," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 419-457, July.
    10. Midler, Estelle & Pascual, Unai & Drucker, Adam G. & Narloch, Ulf & Soto, José Luis, 2015. "Unraveling the effects of payments for ecosystem services on motivations for collective action," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 394-405.

    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. Robison, Lindon J. & Hanson, Steven D., 1995. "Social Capital and Economic Cooperation," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(1), pages 43-58, July.
    2. Röttgers, Dirk, 2016. "Conditional cooperation, context and why strong rules work — A Namibian common-pool resource experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 21-31.
    3. Sanchez-Pages Santiago & Straub Stéphane, 2010. "The Emergence of Institutions," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-38, September.
    4. Grigoriadis, Theocharis, 2017. "Religion, administration & public goods: Experimental evidence from Russia," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 42-60.
    5. Fujiwara, Hikojiro & 藤原, 彦次郎 & Arai, Kazuhiro & 荒井, 一博, 2008. "Group Competition and Personality in an Experimental Public Goods Game," Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 49(2), pages 149-161, December.
    6. Jindrich Matousek & Tomas Havranek & Zuzana Irsova, 2022. "Individual discount rates: a meta-analysis of experimental evidence," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 318-358, February.
    7. Patricia Champ & Richard Bishop, 2001. "Donation Payment Mechanisms and Contingent Valuation: An Empirical Study of Hypothetical Bias," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(4), pages 383-402, August.
    8. Fatas, Enrique & Nosenzo, Daniele & Sefton, Martin & Zizzo, Daniel John, 2021. "A self-funding reward mechanism for tax compliance," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    9. Faravelli, Marco, 2007. "How context matters: A survey based experiment on distributive justice," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(7-8), pages 1399-1422, August.
    10. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri & Kuhn, Michael A., 2013. "Experimental methods: Extra-laboratory experiments-extending the reach of experimental economics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 93-100.
    11. Dirk Alboth & Anat Lerner & Jonathan Shalev, 2001. "Profit Maximizing in Auctions of Public Goods," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 3(4), pages 501-525, October.
    12. Shayo, Moses & Harel, Alon, 2012. "Non-consequentialist voting," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 299-313.
    13. Janet Hua (duplicate record) Jiang & Peter Norman & Daniela Puzzello & Bruno Sultanum & Randall Wright, 2021. "Is Money Essential? An Experimental Approach," Working Paper 21-12, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond.
    14. Grimalday, Gianluca & Karz, Anirban & Proto, Eugenio, 2012. "Everyone Wants a Chance: Initial Positions and Fairness in Ultimatum Games," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 93, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    15. Tullberg, Jan, 1999. "The Ultimatum Game Revisited," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration 1999:2, Stockholm School of Economics, revised 10 Jan 2002.
    16. Claus Dierksmeier, 2020. "From Jensen to Jensen: Mechanistic Management Education or Humanistic Management Learning?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 73-87, September.
    17. Gerald Eisenkopf & Pascal A. Sulser, 2016. "Randomized controlled trial of teaching methods: Do classroom experiments improve economic education in high schools?," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(3), pages 211-225, July.
    18. Michał Krawczyk & Krzysztof Szczygielski, 2019. "Do professions curb free-riding? An experiment," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 361-376, June.
    19. Bruno Frey, 1985. "State and prospect of public choice: A European view," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 141-161, January.
    20. Croson, Rachel T. A., 1996. "Partners and strangers revisited," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 25-32, October.

    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:sae:ratsoc:v:10:y:1998:i:1:p:103-122. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.