IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-00655829.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A New Institutional Approach of Resource Use Conflicts: The Case of Poitou-Charentes

Author

Listed:
  • Ornella Boutry

    (CRIEF [Poitiers] - Centre de recherche sur l'intégration économique et financière [EA 2249] - UP - Université de Poitiers = University of Poitiers)

Abstract

New Institutional Economics, based on the Coasean comparative approach, offers a highly useful framework for research on environmental problems. We propose a tentative analytic framework for environmental problems and we try its heuristic power by first applying it to the Poitou-Charentes region, which encounters problems of negative externalities concerning its water resource. We can thus identify the characteristics of this environmental issue through the lens of the transaction costs theory. Finally, we draw conclusions about the relative efficiency of the various governance institutions potentially available to deal with the problems of externalities in the area in question.

Suggested Citation

  • Ornella Boutry, 2010. "A New Institutional Approach of Resource Use Conflicts: The Case of Poitou-Charentes," Post-Print hal-00655829, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00655829
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-00655829v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-00655829v1/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McCann, Laura & Colby, Bonnie & Easter, K. William & Kasterine, Alexander & Kuperan, K.V., 2005. "Transaction cost measurement for evaluating environmental policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 527-542, March.
    2. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    3. Christophe Depres & Gilles Grolleau & Naoufel Mzoughi, 2008. "Contracting for Environmental Property Rights: The Case of Vittel," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 75(299), pages 412-434, August.
    4. Laura McCann & K. William Easter, 1999. "Transaction Costs of Policies to Reduce Agricultural Phosphorous Pollution in the Minnesota River," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 75(3), pages 402-414.
    5. Yoram Barzel, 2004. "Standards and the Form of Agreement," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 42(1), pages 1-13, January.
    6. Douadia Bougherara & Gilles Grolleau & Naoufel Mzoughi, 2012. "How can Transaction Cost Economics Help Regulators Choose Between Environmental Policy Instruments?," Research in Law and Economics, in: Research in Law and Economics, pages 105-128, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    7. Oliver E. Williamson, 2002. "The Lens of Contract: Private Ordering," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 438-443, May.
    8. William M. Dugger, 1996. "The Mechanisms of Governance," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(4), pages 1212-1216, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Coggan, Anthea & Buitelaar, Edwin & Whitten, Stuart & Bennett, Jeff, 2013. "Factors that influence transaction costs in development offsets: Who bears what and why?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 222-231.
    2. Douadia Bougherara & Gilles Grolleau & Naoufel Mzoughi, 2009. "The ‘make or buy’ decision in private environmental transactions," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 79-99, February.
    3. Nguyen, N.P. & Shortle, J.S. & Reed, P.M. & Nguyen, T.T., 2013. "Water quality trading with asymmetric information, uncertainty and transaction costs: A stochastic agent-based simulation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 60-90.
    4. Schleyer, Christian & Theesfeld, Insa & Hagedorn, Konrad & Aznar, Olivier & Callois, Jean-Marc & Verburg, Rene & Yelkouni, Martin & Olsson, Johanna Alkan, 2007. "Approach towards an operational tool to apply institutional analysis for the assessment of policy feasibility within SEAMLESS-IF," Reports 9295, Wageningen University, SEAMLESS: System for Environmental and Agricultural Modelling; Linking European Science and Society.
    5. Coggan, Anthea & Whitten, Stuart M. & Bennett, Jeff, 2010. "Influences of transaction costs in environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1777-1784, July.
    6. Sauer, Johannes & Walsh, John, 2011. "ESS versus NVZ – The Cost-Effectiveness of Command-and-Control versus Agreement Based Policy Instruments," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108963, Agricultural Economics Society.
    7. Grolleau, Gilles & McCann, Laura M.J., 2012. "Designing watershed programs to pay farmers for water quality services: Case studies of Munich and New York City," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 87-94.
    8. Kim, Jongwook & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2008. "A Strategic Theory of the Firm as a Nexus of Incomplete Contracts: A Property Rights Approach," Working Papers 08-0108, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    9. Alain‐Désiré Nimubona & Jean‐Christophe Pereau, 2022. "Negotiating over payments for wetland ecosystem services," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(3), pages 1507-1538, August.
    10. Jens Abildtrup & Anne Stenger, 2022. "Report on valuation methods," Working Papers hal-04068881, HAL.
    11. Bachev, Hrabrin, 1999. "Организация На Аграрните Иновации [Organisation of agrarian inovation]," MPRA Paper 76498, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Marshall, Elizabeth P. & Weinberg, Marca, 2012. "Baselines in Environmental Markets: Tradeoffs Between Cost and Additionality," Economic Brief 138922, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    13. Wang, Sen & Bogle, Tim & van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 2012. "Forestry and the New Institutional Economics," Working Papers 130818, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    14. Mehrdad Vahabi, 2011. "Appropriation, violent enforcement, and transaction costs: a critical survey," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 147(1), pages 227-253, April.
    15. Dedeurwaerdere, Tom, 2005. "From bioprospecting to reflexive governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 473-491, June.
    16. Houdet, Joël & Trommetter, Michel & Weber, Jacques, 2012. "Understanding changes in business strategies regarding biodiversity and ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 37-46.
    17. Bachev, Hrabrin, 2014. "Environmental Management in Agriculture – Case of Bulgaria," MPRA Paper 59054, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Volker Meyer & Sally Priest & Christian Kuhlicke, 2012. "Economic evaluation of structural and non-structural flood risk management measures: examples from the Mulde River," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 62(2), pages 301-324, June.
    19. Christine Léger-Bosch, 2019. "Farmland tenure and transaction costs: Public and collectively owned land vs conventional coordination mechanisms in France [Régime de tenure foncière et coûts de transaction: terres publiques et c," Post-Print hal-02573765, HAL.
    20. Phan, Thu-Ha Dang & Brouwer, Roy & Davidson, Marc David, 2017. "A Global Survey and Review of the Determinants of Transaction Costs of Forestry Carbon Projects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 1-10.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:hal:journl:hal-00655829. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.