What belongs to all belongs to no one: The problem of the commons

As part of the commemoration of International Women's Day, we present the “Women in Science” series, an effort to highlight and remember the academic work of exceptional women who have made their way into fields of knowledge typically dominated by white men. This work not only seeks to highlight their academic achievements, but also to reflect on the importance of female representation in all fields of knowledge.

It is striking that while thirteen women have been awarded the Nobel Prize in scientific fields such as medicine or physiology since 1901, in the field of economics only three women have been honored by the Swedish Academy of Sciences, and all of these distinctions have been awarded in the 21st century. This fact motivates us to highlight and celebrate the exceptional work of women in a field of such social relevance as economics.

This installment marks the beginning of a three-part series, where we will explore the lives and discuss the work of women who have overcome immense challenges to leave a legacy for humanity.

Elinor Ostrom addressed a wide range of topics throughout her career, and it is striking that her work was not in an economics department, but in a political science department. Although she explored topics such as institutions and governance, economic development, public policy design, and public choice theory, her most influential work focused on the study of the commons, which earned her the Nobel Prize “for her analysis of economic governance, especially over the commons,” her 1990 work on The Government of the Commons being central.

Contrary to the prevailing belief in economics that the commons are doomed to failure or tragedy due to overexploitation, Ostrom demonstrated that communities can, and often do, effectively manage these resources without the need for government intervention or privatization. Her work challenged Hardin's tragic view that had become the conventionally accepted standard of economic thought, and demonstrated that communities can effectively self-govern.

In addition, Ostrom's work provides a theoretical and empirical framework for understanding how communities can collaborate to manage shared resources. Her research has shown that decentralized, community-based solutions can be equally, if not more, effective than centralized or market-based solutions, thus challenging conventional assumptions about economics and politics.

Elinor Ostrom's work has had a profound impact on a variety of fields, from economics and politics to ecology and sociology. Her community-centered approach has inspired numerous resource management initiatives around the world, from the management of irrigation systems in India to the protection of forest areas in Africa.

She was the first person in her family to earn a college degree. At that time, Ostrom points out, a woman did not have high career aspirations: "In those days, it was assumed that the appropriate job for a woman was a secretary or a teacher.

Ostrom's Work: A Paradigm Shift in the Market/State Dilemma

A closer look: Reflection and critique

Elinor Ostrom: The Life of an Economic Pioneer

Governance of common resources

The problem of the commons, as we know it today, was addressed relatively late by economists. While some classics such as Smith, David Ricardo and John Stuart Mill referred to tangential issues such as private property, land use and competition, it was not until well into the 20th century that the concept of the “common good” was fully developed. This concept was based on ideas previously introduced by philosophers such as Aristotle, Locke and Hume (naturally, the issue of governance and management of the “common” proved to be of more interest to philosophers who addressed such problems in the context of morality, the state and law).

William Forster Lloyd (1794-1852) was the first to introduce the concept of “the tragedy of the commons” in his work “Two Lectures on the Checks to Population” in 1833. However, it was biologist Garrett Hardin who developed and popularized the term in his seminal 1968 essay entitled “The Tragedy of the Commons.” The tragedy of the commons states that individuals, acting rationally and pursuing their own interests, tend to exploit common resources to the maximum, without considering the long-term consequences.

Lloyd illustrated that the absence of private ownership or effective regulation around the management of the commons would lead to undesirable outcomes, such as environmental degradation, loss of biodiversity and diminished quality of life for the people who depend on those resources.

Today we can identify different commons that remain subject to the fundamental challenges of resource management. For example, rangelands, forests, irrigation systems, fisheries and even the atmosphere. Inadequate management of the commons can have serious economic, social and environmental consequences, both in the short and long term. For example, overexploitation of fishery resources can lead to the collapse of fish stocks, affecting the food security and livelihoods of coastal communities. Uncontrolled deforestation can lead to loss of natural habitats, soil erosion and climate change. Air and water pollution can cause respiratory diseases and chronic health problems in exposed populations.

The study of the commons is crucial to developing effective resource management and conservation strategies that balance human needs with long-term sustainability. This includes identifying governance principles and practices that promote collaboration, shared responsibility, and adaptability to environmental and social change.

Elinor Ostrom (1933-2012), a leading figure in the field of economics and resource management, left a legacy that continues to inspire scholars and leaders around the world. Her groundbreaking work on the governance of the commons earned her the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2009, making her the first woman to receive this prestigious recognition in the economic discipline.

Born on August 7, 1933 in Los Angeles, California, Ostrom demonstrated from an early age an innate curiosity for social systems and resource allocation and management. After completing her bachelor's degree in political science at the University of California at Los Angeles, she earned her doctorate in the same discipline from the University of California at Los Angeles in 1965.

Throughout her career, Ostrom challenged traditional conceptions of economics, largely centered on market principles and government intervention, or the typical market-state dichotomy. Her interdisciplinary approach and deep commitment to field study led her to better understand how local communities manage and protect their natural and social resources.

During her graduate studies, Elinor was part of a seminar studying collective action groups; the seminar supervisor was Vincent Ostrom, an associate professor of political science who was fourteen years older than Elinor and whom she married in 1963. Vincent was a significant influence on Elinor's academic career. Together they created the Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis at Indiana University, now a major research center that attracts scholars from around the world specializing in political science, economics, anthropology, ecology, sociology, law, and other fields.

In effect, Ostrom challenged the prevailing notion that the absence of private property would inevitably lead to the overexploitation of common resources. He also offered a conceptual framework for looking differently at the political and economic realities around us and approaching problems of a public nature with a broader mindset.

Through her extensive research and fieldwork, Ostrom demonstrated that communities are able to effectively manage their shared resources without the need for external intervention and identified a number of key principles that contribute to the successful management of the commons:

• Clear boundaries and rules of use: Successful communities usually establish clear rules about who can use the resources, how and when.

• User participation in decision-making: Decentralized and participatory decision-making, in which users have a voice and a vote on issues related to resource management, is fundamental to the effectiveness of commons management.

• Accountability: Users are responsible for complying with the established rules and for sanctioning those who do not, which promotes individual and collective accountability.

• Adaptability: Successful commons management systems are flexible and able to adapt to environmental, social and economic changes.

Through detailed case studies from around the world, Ostrom demonstrated that these characteristics are key to successful common pool resource management. Her work challenged the simplistic view that private ownership or government regulation are the only viable solutions to avoid overexploitation of common pool resources. Instead, he highlighted the importance of community participation, collaboration and adaptability in establishing effective commons management systems that enable the long-term sustainability of the commons.

There are several concrete examples of effective management systems that have been studied and documented by Elinor Ostrom and other researchers. These examples demonstrate that communities can successfully manage their shared resources using a variety of approaches and strategies:

• Irrigation in Nepal: In her pioneering work, Elinor Ostrom studied the management of irrigation systems in Nepal. In many cases, local communities have developed highly efficient and sustainable water management systems over centuries of practice. These systems often involve the equitable allocation of water among users, as well as collaboration in the construction and maintenance of irrigation infrastructure.

• Fisheries in Japan: Ostrom also investigated fisheries management in Japan, where she found examples of fishermen's cooperatives that have developed marine resource management systems that promote long-term conservation. These cooperatives establish fishing quotas and rules on the minimum size of fish caught, which helps prevent overexploitation and ensures the sustainability of fish stocks.

• Grazing in Switzerland: In the alpine regions of Switzerland, communities have developed community grazing systems that regulate herders' access to mountain pastures. These systems include agreements on grazing rotation, the number of animals allowed and the protection of sensitive areas, which has allowed the conservation of alpine pastures for centuries. This case contrasts with the situation observed by Lloyd with respect to the common grazing system in rural England almost two centuries ago.

• Forest management in Maine, USA: In the state of Maine, USA, forestry cooperatives have developed where landowners work together to sustainably manage forests and promote biodiversity conservation. These cooperatives establish forest management standards and practices that balance timber harvesting with maintaining the health of the forest ecosystem.

These are just a few examples that demonstrate that communities can successfully manage their shared resources when principles of collaboration, participation and shared responsibility are applied.

While Elinor Ostrom's work has been widely acclaimed and recognized, it has also faced some important criticisms.

1. Generalization of results: Some critics argue that the cases studied by Ostrom are quite specific or even exceptional, making it difficult to generalize the results of her observations and apply them in other contexts. Although Ostrom identified a number of common principles in the management of the commons, these principles may not be applicable in all circumstances and there are sociological particularities in effectively cooperating communities that have not been taken into account.

2. Emphasis on success stories: Ostrom focused on success stories where communities managed to effectively manage their shared resources. This approach can be biased and lead to wrong conclusions by omitting the analysis of failure cases or situations where external intervention was necessary (or more effective) to avoid overexploitation of common resources.

3. Methodological limitations: The methodology used by Ostrom in her case studies includes a wide variety of qualitative methods, which as we know, are subject to subjectivity and therefore biases in the perceptions and biases of the researcher. Although these research methods are quite common in areas such as sociology, anthropology and political studies, it is necessary to complement them with more quantitative approaches to validate the findings in a more comprehensive and rigorous manner.

4. Narrow focus: Ostrom focused on assessing the effectiveness of commons management systems and their ability to avoid overexploitation of resources. However, some central questions about the “commons problem” have been left aside; for example, her work does not adequately address fundamental concepts such as equity and fairness in the distribution of benefits and costs among different groups within a community (perhaps because, as we saw above, the commons problem was originally a philosophical problem rather than an economic one).

These criticisms in no way invalidate the great value of Ostrom's work or its impact on the field of the study of the commons. On the contrary, they reflect legitimate debates about the methodological approaches, conclusions and implications of her work, which continues to be the subject of research and discussion in the academic community.

We hope that Ostrom's life and work will continue to inspire future generations and serve as a starting point for questioning the dichotomous approach in which the masters of knowledge have trapped us for so many years.