tag:theconversation.com,2011:/fr/topics/elinor-ostrom-3196/articlesElinor Ostrom – The Conversation2023-12-07T16:19:33Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2176342023-12-07T16:19:33Z2023-12-07T16:19:33ZBillions have been raised to restore forests, with little success. Here’s the missing ingredient<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/564271/original/file-20231207-29-l6900w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C6720%2C4476&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/cropped-photo-african-american-farm-worker-2183118243">Yaroslav Astakhov/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Protecting and restoring forests is one of the cheapest and most effective options for mitigating the carbon emissions heating Earth. </p>
<p>Since the third UN climate change summit, held in 1997 in Kyoto, Japan, different mechanisms have been trialled to raise money and help countries reduce deforestation and restore degraded forests. First there was Kyoto’s clean development mechanism, then the UN-REDD programme initiated at COP13 in Bali in 2008. Voluntary carbon market schemes came into effect after COP21 in Paris in 2015, but all met with limited success. </p>
<p>In some cases, these schemes <a href="https://gspp.berkeley.edu/assets/uploads/page/Quality-Assessment-of-REDD+-Carbon-Crediting-EXECUTIVE-SUMMARY.pdf">interfered</a> with communities that have tended and nurtured forests for generations, restricting their access to the forest for fuel, grazing and food. Meanwhile, deforestation has proceeded under the aegis of global markets hungry for beef, palm oil <a href="https://theconversation.com/global-supply-chains-are-devouring-whats-left-of-earths-unspoilt-forests-198625">and other commodities</a>.</p>
<p>The world is far off track to reduce deforestation to zero by 2030, or meet its target of restoring over 350 million hectares.</p>
<p>At the current climate talks, COP28 in Dubai, Brazil has proposed a “tropical forests forever fund” with an outlay of US$250 billion, which would <a href="https://www.cop28.com/en/news/2023/12/COP28-Galvanizes-Finance-and-Global-Unity-for-Forests-and-the-Ocean">pay countries</a> to conserve or expand their forests. But how can the world be confident that the result will be different this time?</p>
<p>The work of one academic, Nobel laureate Elinor Ostrom, can tell us why previous efforts to restore forests have failed – and what a more effective approach might look like.</p>
<h2>Bundles of rights</h2>
<p>Nearly 295 million people in developing countries across Africa, Asia and Latin America live on land that has been identified as <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-020-01282-2#:%7E:text=Forest%2520landscape%2520restoration%2520that%2520prioritizes,environmental%2520justice%2520and%2520sustainable%2520development.">ripe for forest restoration</a>. The right to extract timber or plant trees ultimately lies with the state in these places, so it is up to the state to set targets for increasing tree coverage or how much carbon the land stores, regardless of how it affects the <a href="https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/70/11/947/5903754">communities living there</a>.</p>
<p>Over 73% (about 3 billion hectares) of global forested land is <a href="https://www.fao.org/forest-resources-assessment/2020/en/">under state control</a>. One of the arguments for allowing governments to retain ownership of these forests, including the right to manage them, is the notion of the “tragedy of the commons”: in the absence of an all-powerful governing entity, people will overuse shared resources.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Three rangers in military-style uniforms standing in a tropical forest thicket." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/564286/original/file-20231207-23-c896oq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/564286/original/file-20231207-23-c896oq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/564286/original/file-20231207-23-c896oq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/564286/original/file-20231207-23-c896oq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/564286/original/file-20231207-23-c896oq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/564286/original/file-20231207-23-c896oq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/564286/original/file-20231207-23-c896oq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Strict state control is not always a recipe for success in conservation.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/kibale-forest-uganda-oct-26-2017-1518063899">JordiStock/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In fact, Ostrom’s work on the commons in forests, fishing grounds and grazing pastures shows that communities tend to protect and sustainably use common resources – provided they have rights, tenure, and the ability to decide rules for managing them.</p>
<p>A recent <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-023-01863-6">study</a> examined forest commons in 15 tropical countries, where governments own the forest but have allowed local communities informal or customary rights of use and management. The authors noted that these forest commons had a high variety of tree species, and offered enough fodder and fuel wood to sustain livelihoods in the local community. The wealth of biomass in these forests indicated a lot of carbon was also being stored.</p>
<p>These findings seem to affirm that forests used and managed by Indigenous and rural communities can support global objectives for carbon and biodiversity, while meeting the needs of local people.</p>
<p>Ostrom’s research identified five important <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/3146375?origin=crossref">bundles of rights</a> that allow communities to sustainably manage a parcel of land in such commons. These are: access, withdrawal, management, exclusion, and alienation. </p>
<p>Access and withdrawal rights are the minimum required for communities to go into a forest and collect timber, flowers, leaves and grasses for their subsistence and to sell commercially. The most important of these rights, at least in terms of forest restoration, is management rights, including the right to decide where and what type of trees to plant in order to restore a forest.</p>
<p>But Ostrom found that these rights are worthless unless imbued with secure “<a href="https://www.fao.org/publications/card/en/c/c6ded0bb-c052-5802-9659-b93746c82019/">tenure</a>” – in other words, confidence that land users would not be arbitrarily deprived of their rights over particular parcels of land.</p>
<p>Attempts by governments to provide partial management rights to local communities in recent decades have <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/26393067?seq=8">disappointed</a> when it comes to restoring forests. For example, India has attempted to revive degraded forests since 1991 through its joint forest management programme, which offers partial rights to communities that are invited to help prepare a management plan. But without legally binding rights or secure tenure, this approach has shown <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921344909002274">limited success</a>.</p>
<p>In contrast, India’s forest rights act 2006, the first of its kind globally, provided local communities that had traditionally used an area of forested land with <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934123001685?casa_token=zZCXQa7V2yoAAAAA:sRJJ2wisUYVvAx-FagvRHcnfmioWoaUOQgyGYm3t808u_67LNIpcBV6YUk7_I2ASTNVim8E2FQ">full management rights and secure tenure</a>. The result has been restored forests and communities benefiting from increased sales of bamboo and tendu (leaves for rolling tobacco), <a href="https://www.epw.in/journal/2020/18/special-articles/implementation-community-forest-rights.html">improving livelihoods</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Two women making bidi cigarettes out of tendu leaves." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/564287/original/file-20231207-29-iy7909.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/564287/original/file-20231207-29-iy7909.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/564287/original/file-20231207-29-iy7909.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/564287/original/file-20231207-29-iy7909.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/564287/original/file-20231207-29-iy7909.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/564287/original/file-20231207-29-iy7909.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/564287/original/file-20231207-29-iy7909.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Indian women making bidi, traditional handmade cigarettes.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/burhanpur-madhya-pradesh-india-05-jan-1903477321">Parikh Mahendra N/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Empower forest communities</h2>
<p>To restore Earth’s forests and mitigate climate change, states should devolve management rights to the communities in these land parcels and grant them secure tenure.</p>
<p>But how should these commons be governed? Ostrom’s many years of research are, again, a useful guide. She <a href="https://www.onthecommons.org/magazine/elinor-ostroms-8-principles-managing-commmons/index.html">advocated</a> for clear boundaries defining the community’s rights, rules for forest use, the rights of all members of a community to participate in making those rules (including women and marginal communities), collective decision-making on managing resources, effective monitoring, graduated sanctions for rule violations, conflict resolution mechanisms, and a nested governance structure when multiple communities have rights over the same resources.</p>
<p>There are clear limitations on Indigenous and forest-dependent communities to access the finance that might aid them in their restoration work. Brazil’s proposed fund, and existing climate finance mechanism such as REDD+ and the green climate fund, must be made accessible to these forest communities. This would be easier if they had secure rights and tenure, with a clear set of management rules.</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="Imagine weekly climate newsletter" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong><em>Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?</em></strong>
<br><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/imagine-57?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=Imagine&utm_content=DontHaveTimeTop">Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead.</a> Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/imagine-57?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=Imagine&utm_content=DontHaveTimeBottom">Join the 20,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.</a></em></p>
<hr><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/217634/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dhanapal Govindarajulu does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>When forest communities have secure rights and tenure, the results can be miraculous.Dhanapal Govindarajulu, Postgraduate Researcher, Global Development Institute, University of ManchesterLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1175652019-06-12T11:30:10Z2019-06-12T11:30:10ZCompanies’ self-regulation doesn’t have to be bad for the public<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278726/original/file-20190610-52758-189aq1l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C162%2C5184%2C3282&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Managing a shared resource doesn't have to involve fences.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/sheep-new-zealand-421561492">Caroline Ryan</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>If Boeing is allowed to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/how-the-faa-allows-jetmakers-to-self-certify-that-planes-meet-us-safety-requirements/2019/03/15/96d24d4a-46e6-11e9-90f0-0ccfeec87a61_story.html">certify that a crash-prone aircraft is safe</a>, and Facebook can <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/07/opinion/zuckerberg-privacy-facebook.html">violate users’ privacy expectations</a>, should companies and industries ever be <a href="https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/the-administration/436328-corporate-self-regulation-is-failing">allowed to police themselves</a>? The debate is <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tech-antitrust-legal-explainer/explainer-should-big-tech-fear-u-s-antitrust-enforcers-idUSKCN1T62K3">heating up</a> particularly in the U.S. tech sector with growing calls to regulate – or even break up – the likes of <a href="https://www.marketwatch.com/story/amazon-retail-chief-says-scrutiny-is-warranted-but-companys-breakup-is-not-2019-06-05">Google, Apple and Amazon</a>. </p>
<p>It turns out to be possible, at least sometimes, for companies and industries to govern themselves, while still protecting the public interest. Groundbreaking work by <a href="http://www.aei.org/publication/elinor-ostrom-and-the-solution-to-the-tragedy-of-the-commons/">Nobel Prize-winning political economist Elinor Ostrom</a> and her husband Vincent found a solution to a classic economic quandary, in which people – and businesses – self-interestedly enrich themselves as quickly as possible with <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/ablj.12116">certain resources</a> including <a href="http://bierdoctor.com/papers/Rader_derived_data_abstract_May_2017.pdf">personal data</a>, thinking little about the secondary costs they might be inflicting on others.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278729/original/file-20190610-52771-1j02bnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278729/original/file-20190610-52771-1j02bnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278729/original/file-20190610-52771-1j02bnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=892&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278729/original/file-20190610-52771-1j02bnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=892&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278729/original/file-20190610-52771-1j02bnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=892&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278729/original/file-20190610-52771-1j02bnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1121&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278729/original/file-20190610-52771-1j02bnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1121&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278729/original/file-20190610-52771-1j02bnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1121&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Elinor Ostrom in 2009, when she won the Nobel Prize in Economics.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nobel_Prize_2009-Press_Conference_KVA-30.jpg">Holger Motzkau/Wikimedia Commons</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>As the director of the <a href="https://ostromworkshop.indiana.edu/research/internet-cybersecurity/index.html">Ostrom Workshop Program on Cybersecurity and Internet Governance</a>, I have been involved in numerous projects studying how to solve these sorts of problems when they arise, both online and offline. Most recently, my <a href="https://illinoislawreview.org/print/vol-2017-no-2/when-toasters-attack/">work</a> has looked at how to manage the massively interconnected world of sensors, computers and smart devices – what I <a href="https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en_us/solutions/industries/docs/gov/everything-for-cities.pdf">and others</a> call the “<a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3266188">internet of everything</a>.” </p>
<p>I’ve found that there are ways <a href="https://doi.org/10.1162/002081898550789">companies can become leaders</a> by <a href="https://ssrn.com/abstract=2573787">experimenting with business opportunities</a> and collaborating with peers, while still working with regulators to protect the public, including both in the air and in cyberspace.</p>
<h2>Tragedy revisited</h2>
<p>In a classic economic problem, called “<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons">the tragedy of the commons</a>,” a parcel of grassland is made available for a community to graze its livestock. Everyone tries to get the most benefit from it – and as a result, the land is overgrazed. What started as a resource for everyone becomes of little use to anyone. </p>
<p>For many years, economists thought there were only two possible solutions. One was for the government to step in and limit how many people could graze their animals. The other was to split the land up among private owners who had exclusive use of it, and could sustainably manage it for their individual benefit.</p>
<p>The Ostroms, however, found a third way. In some cases, they revealed, <a href="http://www.aei.org/publication/elinor-ostrom-and-the-solution-to-the-tragedy-of-the-commons/">self-organization can work well</a>, especially when the various people and groups involve can <a href="https://www.iucn.org/downloads/policy_matters_19_preface__introductions_and_chapters_1_5.pdf">communicate</a> effectively. They called it “polycentric governance,” because it allows regulation to come from more than just one central authority. Their work can help determine if and when companies can effectively regulate themselves – or whether it’s best for the government to step in.</p>
<h2>A polycentric primer</h2>
<p>The concept can seem complicated, but in practice it is increasingly popular, in federal programs and even as a goal for <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/10/07/internet-operations-chief-snowden-disclosures-make-my-job-easier/">governing the internet</a>. </p>
<p>Scholars such as Elinor Ostrom produced a broad swath of research over decades, looking at <a href="https://books.google.hr/books/about/Polycentricity_and_Local_Public_Economie.html?id=iBZ32c7KLWUC&redir_esc=y">public schools and police department performance</a> in Midwestern U.S. cities, coastal overfishing, forest management in nations like Nepal, and even <a href="https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj/vol37/iss3/7">traffic jams</a> in New York City. They identified <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1304697">commonalities among all these studies</a>, <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2018/06/ostrom_lecture.pdf">including</a> whether the group’s members can help set the rules by which their shared resources are governed, how much control they have over who gets to share it, how disputes are resolved, and how everyone’s use is monitored.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/T6OgRki5SgM?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Nobel Prize winner Elinor Ostrom explains her work in a 2010 lecture.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>All of these factors can help predict whether individuals or groups will successfully self-regulate, whether the challenge they’re facing is <a href="https://ssrn.com/abstract=1494833">climate change</a>, <a href="https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1888&context=aulr">cybersecurity</a>, or anything else. <a href="http://escotet.org/2010/11/interview-with-nobel-laureate-elinor-ostrom/">Trust is key</a>, as Lin Ostrom said, and an excellent way to build trust is to let <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2490">smaller groups make their own decisions</a>.</p>
<p>Polycentric governance’s embrace of self-regulation involves relying on <a href="https://www.ubs.com/microsites/nobel-perspectives/en/laureates/elinor-ostrom.html">human ingenuity</a> and collaboration skills to solve difficult problems – while focusing on practical measures to address specific challenges.</p>
<p>Self-regulation does have its limits, though – as has been clear in the revelations about how <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/faa-let-boeing-self-regulate-software-believed-737-max-crashes-2019-3">the Federal Aviation Administration allowed Boeing</a> to <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/faa-let-boeing-self-regulate-software-believed-737-max-crashes-2019-3">certify the safety</a> <a href="https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2019/03/boeing-downplayed-737-max-software-risks-self-certified-much-of-planes-safety/">of its own software</a>. Facebook has also been heavily criticized for failing to block an <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/facebooks-biggest-fails-before-cambridge-analytica/">anonymous horde</a> of <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/facebook-passwords-plaintext-change-yours/">users across the globe</a> from <a href="https://theconversation.com/facebooks-social-responsibility-should-include-privacy-protection-94549">manipulating people</a>’s <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/25/technology/facebook-regulation-ftc-fine.html">political views</a>.</p>
<p>Polycentric regulation is a departure from the idea of “<a href="https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2012/06/14/jeffrey-weiss-elinor-ostroms-enduring-trust-in-the-commons">keep it simple, stupid</a>” – rather, it is a call for engagement by numerous groups to grapple with the complexities of the real world. </p>
<p>Both Facebook and Boeing now need to convince themselves, their employees, investors, policymakers, users and customers that they can be trusted. Ostrom’s ideas suggest they could begin to do this by engaging with peers and industry groups to set rules and ensure they are enforced.</p>
<h2>Governing the ‘internet of everything’</h2>
<p>Another industry in <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/annashedletsky/2018/08/06/why-industrial-iot-is-usually-a-failure-and-how-to-fix-it/#2fe576d042ed">serious need of better regulations</a> is the smart-device business, with tens of billions of connected devices around the world, and little to no <a href="https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Passcode/Passcode-Voices/2016/1026/Opinion-How-to-fix-an-internet-of-broken-things">concern</a> for user security or privacy.</p>
<p>Customers often buy the cheapest smart-home camera or digital sensor, <a href="https://www.schneier.com/books/click_here/">without looking at competitors’</a> security and privacy protections. The results are predictable – hackers have hijacked thousands of internet-connected devices and used them to attack the <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/davelewis/2017/10/23/the-ddos-attack-against-dyn-one-year-later/#4765cbe51ae9">physical network of the internet</a>, take control of <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-30575104">industrial</a> equipment, and spy on private citizens through their smartphones and <a href="https://www.marketwatch.com/story/woman-claims-hacker-used-baby-monitor-to-spy-on-her-in-her-bedroom-2018-06-07">baby monitors</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278730/original/file-20190610-52789-1oe6wxi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278730/original/file-20190610-52789-1oe6wxi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278730/original/file-20190610-52789-1oe6wxi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278730/original/file-20190610-52789-1oe6wxi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278730/original/file-20190610-52789-1oe6wxi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278730/original/file-20190610-52789-1oe6wxi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278730/original/file-20190610-52789-1oe6wxi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278730/original/file-20190610-52789-1oe6wxi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Who else might be watching this view, over the internet?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/closeup-baby-monitor-security-538634722">Saklakova/Shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Some governments are starting to get involved. The state of California and the European Union are exploring laws that promote “<a href="https://www.natlawreview.com/article/california-law-iot-devised-to-have-reasonable-security-feature">reasonable</a>” security requirements, at least as a baseline. The EU is encouraging companies to band together to establish <a href="https://iapp.org/news/a/will-the-gdpr-incite-sectoral-codes-of-conduct/">industry-wide codes of conduct</a>. </p>
<h2>Getting governance right</h2>
<p>Effective self-governance may seem impossible in the “Internet of everything” because of the scale and variety of groups and industries involved, but polycentric governance does provide a useful lens through which to view these problems. Ostrom has asserted this approach may be <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1304697">the most flexible and adaptable way</a> to manage rapidly changing industries. It may also help avoid conflicting government regulations that risk stifling innovation in the name of protecting consumers without helping either cause. </p>
<p>But success is not certain. It requires active engagement by all parties, who must share a sense of responsibility to the customers and mutual trust in one another. That’s not easy to build in any community, let alone the <a href="https://www.digitalistmag.com/digital-economy/2018/07/20/digital-transformation-modern-form-of-creative-destruction-06179806">dynamic tech industry</a>.</p>
<p>Government involvement can help build bridges and solidify trust across the private sector, as happened with cybersecurity efforts from the <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2446631">National Institute for Standards and Technology</a>. Some states, like <a href="https://www.techrepublic.com/article/ohio-law-creates-cybersecurity-safe-harbor-for-businesses/">Ohio</a>, are even rewarding firms for using appropriate self-regulation in their cybersecurity decision-making.</p>
<p>Polycentric governance can be flexible, adapting to new technologies more appropriately – and often more quickly – than pure governmental regulation. It also can be more efficient and cost-effective, though it’s not a cure for all regulatory ills. And it’s important to note that regulation can spur innovation as well as protect consumers, especially <a href="https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/the-simple-rules-of-disciplined-innovation">when the rules are simple</a> and outcome focused.</p>
<p>Consider the North American Electric Reliability Council. That organization was originally created as a group of companies that came together voluntarily in an effort to protect against blackouts. NERC standards, however, were eventually made legally enforceable in the aftermath of the <a href="http://www.eenews.net/stories/1059985876/print">Northeast blackout of 2003</a>. They are an example of an organic code of conduct that was voluntarily adopted and subsequently reinforced by government, consistent with professor Ostrom’s ideas. Ideally, it should not require such a crisis to spur this process forward. </p>
<p>Ultimately, what’s needed – and what professor Ostrom and her colleagues and successors have called for – is more experimentation and less theorizing. As the 10-year anniversary of Ostrom’s Nobel Prize approaches, I believe it is time to put her insights to work, offering industries the opportunity to self-regulate where appropriate while leaving the door open for the possibility of government action, including antitrust enforcement, to protect the public and promote <a href="https://ndias.nd.edu/news-publications/ndias-quarterly/the-meaning-of-cyber-peace/">cyber peace</a>.</p>
<p>[ <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=thanksforreading">Thanks for reading! We can send you The Conversation’s stories every day in an informative email. Sign up today.</a></em> ]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/117565/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Scott Shackelford does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A Nobel Prize-winning political economist found a way to promote good governance and protect users without the need for heavy-handed government regulation.Scott Shackelford, Associate Professor of Business Law and Ethics; Director, Ostrom Workshop Program on Cybersecurity and Internet Governance; Cybersecurity Program Chair, IU-Bloomington, Indiana UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/882012017-11-30T14:03:18Z2017-11-30T14:03:18ZDisaster zones could soon be salvaged by teams of smart devices – here’s how<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/196987/original/file-20171129-12048-1387n3e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Drones being used to find survivors after an earthquake in Ecuador in 2016. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/portoviejo-ecuador-april-18-2016-drone-409095937?src=NUtpZVKd5yu0p5Vd2Rq6Zw-1-82">Fotos593</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>We will remember 2017 as an appalling year for natural disasters. The US <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-26/the-most-expensive-u-s-hurricane-season-ever-by-the-numbers">has endured</a> its most expensive hurricane season, amounting to over $200 billion (£151 billion) of damage. Mexico City <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/19/americas/mexico-earthquake/index.html">experienced</a> a terrible earthquake that killed over 200 people, while severe tropical storms forced tens of thousands of evacuations in <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/24/typhoon-hato-leaves-16-dead-27000-evacuated-china/">Macau, Hong Kong</a> and <a href="http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/10/deadly-typhoon-lan-hits-toyko-171023092944487.html">Tokyo</a>. </p>
<p>It comes months after the UN’s head of disaster planning <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2016/apr/24/world-heading-for-catastrophe-over-natural-disasters-risk-expert-warns">warned that</a> the world is not adequately preparing for disasters. This, he said, risks “inconceivably bad” consequences as climate change makes disasters more frequent and severe. </p>
<p>In such circumstances, modern technologies like smartphones, sensors and drones could help enormously, particularly if we can get them to act like an intelligent network. But first, we software engineers have to figure out how to make this viable. The good news is there are signs of progress – with a little help from some completely different areas of expertise. </p>
<h2>Temporary measures</h2>
<p>When an area is hit by a hurricane, earthquake or volcanic eruption, a functioning communications system is vital. Good communications can be the difference between life and death when it comes to coordinating rescue efforts; relaying public information about things like shelters and supplies; and enabling inhabitants to communicate with family and friends. </p>
<p>Disasters go hand in hand with communications outages, of course. The next best thing is ad hoc networks of multiple devices that gather and relay information. This <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2015/08/24/us/robot-disaster-technology/index.html">could soon</a> regularly include sensors dropped from planes to sample the environment; swarms of drones looking for victims; and clean-up robots. The potential is for all these to work together, alongside people sending information on smartphones. </p>
<p>And it might go further still: devices still need power, and the main electricity sources are likely to be offline, too. The grid will probably be pulling in <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-artificial-intelligence-could-be-key-to-future-proofing-the-grid-71775">temporary power</a> from small devices ranging from small generators to solar panels – all ideally coordinated in real time. </p>
<p>Making this ecosystem work in unison requires several levels of organisation. At one level, each class of devices needs to interact. The bandwidth of the temporary communications network will probably be very limited, for example, creating the complex problem of deciding which transmissions to prioritise and how to route them efficiently through the network. </p>
<p>The broader network also has to organise, responding to new events as appropriate. A relatively simple current example is <a href="http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7306577/">this online flooding platform</a> in Jakarta. It pools information for inhabitants based on feeds from a network of street sensors and people on smartphones. </p>
<p>To build a more complex system and make it run smoothly, it becomes harder and harder to rigidly pre-engineer software: no centralised control is possible, especially in a wide disaster area where communications between devices are too slow or multi-layered. </p>
<h2>Great inspirations</h2>
<p>Software engineers have yet to develop such a system – despite <a href="http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S157411921400162X">significant advances</a> in algorithms. Our best pre-programmed efforts tend to quickly unravel, coming up against unforeseen variables. Improving these systems is challenging to say the least. </p>
<p>Neither is it just an issue for disaster areas. The world is increasingly instrumented with interconnected devices, each running with some form of algorithmic intelligence. They are <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-319-17837-0_9">managing</a> city traffic light systems, for example. They are <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-artificial-intelligence-could-be-key-to-future-proofing-the-grid-71775">managing electricity</a> supply and demand across the grid. </p>
<p>Some programmers have looked beyond computer science to improve such systems. One inspiration is the American political economist Elinor Ostrom. Her <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/2009/ostrom-lecture.html">Nobel Prize winning work</a> identified how communities in places as diverse as Kenya, Guatemala, Turkey, Nepal and Los Angeles self-govern and share resources while leaving enough for future generations. </p>
<p>Ostrom discerned eight common characteristics, and derived principles that could be applied anywhere. One was that you must ensure those affected by the rules can participate in modifying them, for example. Another was the need for a system for monitoring community members’ behaviour carried out by the members themselves. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/196991/original/file-20171129-12069-1zlpnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/196991/original/file-20171129-12069-1zlpnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/196991/original/file-20171129-12069-1zlpnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=422&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/196991/original/file-20171129-12069-1zlpnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=422&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/196991/original/file-20171129-12069-1zlpnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=422&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/196991/original/file-20171129-12069-1zlpnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=530&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/196991/original/file-20171129-12069-1zlpnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=530&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/196991/original/file-20171129-12069-1zlpnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=530&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Elinor Ostrom.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nobel_Prize_2009-Press_Conference_KVA-31.jpg#/media/File:Nobel_Prize_2009-Press_Conference_KVA-31.jpg">Wikimedia</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The German-American philosopher Nicholas Rescher is also helping programmers. Rescher <a href="http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/fairness-theory-and-practice-of-distributive-justice/">argued</a> that when deciding how to distribute rewards/punishments fairly, seven “canons” should be taken into account: equality, need, ability, effort, productivity, social utility and supply and demand. The idea is to identify which canon is most appropriate in a given situation. Programmers are using these principles to help networks make judgements about allocating scarce resources, for example, and resolving conflicts between different devices. </p>
<p>Jeremy’s recent co-authored work <a href="https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=2382570.2382575">has shown</a> how Ostrom and Rescher’s ideas <a href="https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=2676689.2629567">could be</a> expressed as algorithms for managing device networks. The benefits have been demonstrated in a relatively static environment where the population and number of devices is generally stable or predictable – distributing energy and protecting against overloads within a local community, say. But in a disaster scenario where the number, location and availability of devices is continually changing and almost completely unpredictable, the model needs extending.</p>
<p>To solve this, the final piece of the jigsaw comes from biology, where different animals adapt to changes in their environment. Individual creatures learn over their lifetimes, while a species adapts over many generations <a href="https://www.britannica.com/science/survival-of-the-fittest">through evolution</a> – more successful traits becoming dominant while less successful ones are bred out. </p>
<p>Emma was involved, for example, in <a href="https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2897372">creating a system</a> for robotic swarms that handle change far better than alternative approaches. It enables the robots both to “learn” from experience and adapt the parameters of their algorithm, and “evolve” completely new behaviours where the environment has changed so much that existing algorithms won’t suffice. </p>
<p>We <a href="https://www.napier.ac.uk/research-and-innovation/research-search/outputs/for-flux-sake-the-confluence-of-socially-and-biologically-inspired-computing-for">recently outlined</a> how these three strands from political theory, social science and biology could be brought together to develop a new paradigm for complex device networks. We see <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=56&v=YGL5YxO10zs">encouraging signs</a> that such thinking is starting to catch on among researchers. </p>
<p>These ideas should enable us to develop new approaches that will underpin and enhance a wide variety of human activities – not least when the next disaster strikes. It might even mitigate the effects of climate change, making us better at foreseeing catastrophes and taking steps to avert them.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/88201/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Emma Hart receives funding from the EPSRC and the Leverhulme Trust. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jeremy Pitt has most recently received funding from Leverhulme Trust Research Fellowship RF-2016-451, but has also been awarded Resaerch Grants from the EU and UK ESPRC.</span></em></p>Stand by for drones, robots and sensors to the rescue.Emma Hart, Chair in Natural Computation, Edinburgh Napier UniversityJeremy Pitt, Professor of Intelligent and Self-Organising Systems, Imperial College LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/77552012-06-20T20:43:22Z2012-06-20T20:43:22ZRio+20: Small steps could get us out of the climate quicksand<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/11877/original/bkkh5g4t-1340065376.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Big, ambitious strides aren't the way to escape from this mess.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Zsolt Szigetvary</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><strong><a href="https://theconversation.com/rio-20-multi-lateralism-staggers-how-to-make-it-run-7647">Yesterday</a>, Nick Rowley looked at the history of sustainability agreements and why we’ve reached the impasse of Rio+20. Today he suggests a different approach.</strong></p>
<p>Back in November 2005, your perspective on the Kyoto Protocol was the shorthand way to judge your climate change bona fides. Even express constructive criticism of the existing treaty arrangements under Kyoto and you ran the risk of being pilloried by environmental advocates as some sinister force of darkness. </p>
<p>In that month, UK Prime Minister Tony Blair convened the first meeting of the G8+5 group of nations at Lancaster House, a grand Victorian building behind London’s Mall. The delegates came together to discuss how to achieve a more effective international response to the climate problem. Delegates from all G8 nations and the rapidly developing economies of Mexico, South Africa, China, India and Brazil attended. It was an early move in crafting the case for a more effective global climate treaty with the right group of decision makers.</p>
<p>In his presentation, Blair stated the case for “a post Kyoto agreement”. Given that the provisions of the protocol only lasted until 2012, this was a perfectly clear and rational way to describe what was required. Fifteen minutes later, the heads of two of the world’s best-known environmental organisations were on the phone talking the language of “betrayal”. The front page of two broadsheet newspapers spoke of the Prime Minister having “rejected” Kyoto. </p>
<p>The story simply illustrates the enduring immaturity of environmental politics. Just at the point when the captain has assembled a team with the skill and ability to win, the fans berate him for his pre-match team talk, undermining his authority and making some of the star recruits wonder why they bothered to turn up.</p>
<p>Genuine, lasting progress on these issues can only be achieved when governments and political leaders see them as central. The Rio+20 conference later this week comes as a footnote to the G20 in Mexico. Some heads of state will be stopping off on their way home. Many won’t. Economy first, sustainability second; it’s every G20 leader’s itinerary.</p>
<p>The choreography of major United Nations conferences is now well rehearsed. First, compelling scientific research reveals the parlous state of the world’s natural environment and systems. Second, there are demands for a more effective global political response to these problems. Third, there are revelations of the lack of political consensus and the potential breakdown of negotiations around an agreed text, followed by the final act: an eleventh hour agreement on text describing a process for reaching future agreement.</p>
<p>The UN meeting in Bali in 2007 agreed on two years to establish a more adequate global climate treaty. At Copenhagen, individual states pledged their future commitments through the Copenhagen Accord. In South Africa last year the “Durban Platform” agreed that a legally binding treaty would be established in 2015 and be implemented in 2020.</p>
<p>And so it will be at Rio+20. A text will, at the last moment, be agreed. Having sustainable development goals similar to the Millennium Development Goals has merit, but it will be agreement to future commitment. Words without finance and institutional capacity run the risk of being forgotten until the next meeting.</p>
<p>There are many reasons for this merry dance. Richer countries have the wealth and capacity to adopt new low emissions technologies, infrastructure and processes. Countries such as Brazil, China, India and South Africa, in the midst of their first experience of rapid industrial development, are understandably unreceptive to taking lessons from the Europeans. These divisions are powerful. They are born of political economy, history and culture: factors that will not be overcome by agreements at any single point in time.</p>
<p>Despite all the evidence of the potentially catastrophic future effects of climate change, and catastrophic climate events such as the current drought in the Sahel, many are a long way from accepting the psychological truth that humanity is a major driver of these events. Humanity, so long striving to contain and master the power of our natural systems, is now undermining the global dynamics that sustain us. This is highly confronting for our ethical, religious and personal values. Even among those who “accept” the scientific evidence, it is hard to make the personal, policy or business decisions consistent with that acceptance.</p>
<p>These tensions, and this complexity, means we have yet to establish a mature and consistent environmental politics, and with it the policies and incentives that these global problems require. Very few, if any, of the signatories to the text coming out of Rio this week accept that their state’s performance on emissions reduction and clean growth should be, or will become, the fundamental criteria whereby countries and economies are assessed over the coming century.</p>
<p>Nobel prize winning political scientist Elinor Ostrom understood these dynamics well. Before her <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-grand-philosopher-of-the-commons-in-memory-of-elinor-ostrom-7621">death last week</a> she, more than anyone else, assessed and described a path towards more a <a href="http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/IW3P/IB/2009/10/26/000158349_20091026142624/Rendered/PDF/WPS5095.pdf">more effective international response</a> to global problems such as climate change. </p>
<p>For Ostrom, the progress to agreement must be incremental, tangible and measureable. No single approach adopted at a global scale can generate sufficient trust between governments. It is only decisions and deeds at the multiple levels of firms, investors together with national, state and local governments that will now drive the response to the climate problem. </p>
<p>Having spent my time working at the pointy end of international climate negotiations I now accept that Ostrom is right: the international architecture of agreement will not be built by negotiators working for sovereign governments on text-based agreements, but by multiple stakeholders.</p>
<p>Rio+20 will conclude. The stages will be dismantled and those attending will return home. Yet the most significant decisions will not be taken beneath the chandeliers of Lancaster House, vast Brazilian plenary halls or political back rooms. They are already being taken by sovereign governments such as South Korea who have a five year plan <a href="https://theconversation.com/wake-up-australia-and-take-a-lesson-on-solar-from-korea-6245">focused on green growth</a>; corporations like General Electric whose business strategy is founded on developing and commercialising clean, low carbon technology and infrastructure and investors who, in 2011, provided more than $250 billion for new renewable energy projects. There are other examples, there need to be more, but the trends are encouraging.</p>
<p>International diplomacy is no longer the means to place climate and sustainability at the core of international geo-politics. Yet I am optimistic. It is new affiliations between investors, entrepreneurs, city governments and regional alliances between States, that will demonstrate the environmental, economic and human benefits of more efficient, clean, low emissions activities and so defeat political and policy complacency and create the momentum for meaningful, enduring international agreement.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/7755/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nick Rowley does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Yesterday, Nick Rowley looked at the history of sustainability agreements and why we’ve reached the impasse of Rio+20. Today he suggests a different approach. Back in November 2005, your perspective on…Nick Rowley, Research Fellow, Institute for Democracy and Human Rights, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/76212012-06-13T05:39:53Z2012-06-13T05:39:53ZThe grand philosopher of the Commons: in memory of Elinor Ostrom<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/11653/original/g756jwv3-1339561970.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Elinor Ostrom, the only woman to have won a Nobel prize for economics, was most famous for challenging the idea of the "tragedy of the commons": that in the absence of government intervention, people will overuse shared resources. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">acschweigert</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The grand philosopher of the Commons, <a href="http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2009/ostrom.html">Elinor Ostrom</a>, <a href="http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news/page/normal/22577.html">passed away on the 12th June 2012</a>. She was a brilliant, creative polymath; a theoretician of fine precision and great intellectual power; a deviser of masterful empirical studies; and an energetic collaborator and networker. Ostrom posed a formidable intellectual challenge to the fields of <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/13/business/elinor-ostrom-winner-of-nobel-in-economics-dies-at-78.html?_r=1">economics and the social sciences</a>
- and the advocates of central regulation, privatization, and enclosure.</p>
<p>Elinor Ostrom was a distinguished professor at Indiana University. She was both the Arthur F. Bentley Professor of Political Science in the College of Arts and Sciences, and professor in the School of Public and Environmental Affairs. Ostrom was senior research director of the Vincent and Elinor Ostrom Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis. She received a <a href="http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2009/press.html">Nobel Prize in economics in 2009 “for her analysis of economic governance, especially the commons”</a>. Her Nobel Lecture, entitled <a href="http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2009/ostrom-lecture.html">Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems</a>, encapsulated the elements of her conceptual framework.</p>
<p>Elinor Ostrom’s <a href="http://dlc.dlib.indiana.edu/dlc/browse?value=Ostrom%2C+Elinor&type=author">theoretical and empirical work</a> on the Commons is of great importance and significance in the fields of economics, natural resource management, law, and the social sciences. Indeed, her research has an important legacy for education, open access, intellectual property, and scholarly communications.</p>
<p><strong>Governing the Commons</strong></p>
<p>In her classic 1990 work, <a href="http://books.google.com.au/books/about/Governing_the_Commons.html?id=4xg6oUobMz4C&redir_esc=y">Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action</a>, Elinor Ostrom begins with the reflection: “Hardly a week goes by without a major news story about the threatened destruction of a valuable natural resource.” She notes: “The issues of how best to govern natural resources used by many individuals in common are no more settled in academia than in the world of politics.”</p>
<p>Ostrom provides a critique of three influential models - Garrett Hardin’s <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/content/162/3859/1243.full">‘tragedy of the Commons’</a>, the ‘prisoner’s dilemma game’, and Mancur Olson’s <a href="http://books.google.com.au/books?id=jzTeOLtf7_wC&source=gbs_book_similarbooks">‘logic of collective action’</a>. She observes that the three models are interesting and powerful because they capture aspects of the problem of free-riding. The models predict that those using common resources will not co-operate to achieve collective benefits. </p>
<p>Nonetheless, Ostrom argues: “What makes these models so dangerous - when they are used metaphorically as the foundation for policy - is that the constraints that are assumed to be fixed for the purpose of analysis are taken on faith as being fixed in empirical settings, unless external authorities change them.”</p>
<p>Ostrom identified key design principles underlying long-term, robust common-pool resource institutions. These principles related to clearly defined boundaries; congruence between rules and local needs and conditions; collective-choice arrangements; monitoring; graduated sanctions; conflict-resolution mechanisms; minimal recognition of rights to organise; and nested enterprises.</p>
<p>Ostrom concluded: “We in the social sciences face as great a challenge in how to address the analysis of common-pool resource problems as do the communities of people who struggle with ways to avoid common-pool resource problems in their day-to-day lives.”</p>
<p><strong>Green from the grassroots: the environment, sustainable development, and climate change</strong></p>
<p>Ostrom took a lively interest in applying her theories to the international debates over the environment, sustainable development, and climate change.</p>
<p>Ostrom has been <a href="http://econpapers.repec.org/paper/wbkwbrwps/5095.htm">critical of the intransigence of the United States on the issue of climate change</a>. She lamented: “If only one country in the world tried to solve climate change — even one of the wealthier countries of the world — this would be a grossly inadequate effort.” </p>
<p>Ostrom has supported a multi-layered approach to the issue of climate change: “The advantage of a polycentric approach is that it encourages experimental efforts at multiple levels, as well as the development of methods for assessing the benefits and costs of particular strategies adopted in one type of ecosystem and comparing these with results obtained in other ecosystems.”</p>
<p>Not all are convinced by such an approach. Stephen Gardiner, for instance, in <a href="http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/HistoryOther/EnvironmentalHistory/?view=usa&ci=9780195379440">A Perfect Moral Storm</a>, expressed reservations as to whether a Commons approach could adequately address climate change, especially given the technical complexity, political fissures, and global nature of the topic.</p>
<p>On the 12 June 2012, Elinor Ostrom wrote a final op-ed on the Rio+20 Summit entitled, <a href="http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/green-from-the-grassroots">“Green from the Grassroots”</a>. There has been much debate over the <a href="http://gu.com/p/3878y/tw">draft text of the agreement</a>- with many countries asking for deletions, caveats, and reservations. There has been <a href="http://www.deccanherald.com/content/255296/rich-nations-backtrack-pacts.html">particular controversy</a> over the principle of common but differentiated responsibility; the green economy and green jobs; intellectual property and technology transfer; and finance.</p>
<p>Ostrom recognised that “inaction in Rio would be disastrous, but a single international agreement would be a grave mistake”. She argued, though: ‘We cannot rely on singular global policies to solve the problem of managing our common resources: the oceans, atmosphere, forests, waterways, and rich diversity of life that combine to create the right conditions for life, including seven billion humans, to thrive.“</p>
<p>Ostrom advocated a multi-layered, evolutionary approach to policy-making and maintained that "setting goals can overcome inertia, but everyone must have a stake in establishing them: countries, states, cities, organizations, companies, and people everywhere”.</p>
<p>Ostrom argues: 'What we need are universal sustainable development goals on issues such as energy, food security, sanitation, urban planning, and poverty eradication, while reducing inequality within the planet’s limits.’ She warns: ‘Without action, we risk catastrophic and perhaps irreversible changes to our life-support system.’</p>
<p>Ostrom’s last words in her op-ed are: ‘Our primary goal must be to take planetary responsibility for this risk, rather than placing in jeopardy the welfare of future generations.’</p>
<p>It is a timely reminder - as Hillary Clinton and the United States delegation heads off to <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18412306">Rio de Janeiro for the summit</a>.</p>
<p><strong>The Knowledge Commons</strong></p>
<p>The Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis at Indiana University - founded by Elinor and her husband Vincent Ostrom - was a great catalyst for collaborative and inter-disciplinary work on the commons. <a href="http://www.bollier.org/blog/elinor-ostrom-remembered-1933-2012">David Bollier</a> praises her scholarly warmth and collegality, and community outreach: “Ostrom built a global network of colleagues and a vast literature that explores how people can actually cooperate in managing resources.”</p>
<p>In 2004, Charlotte Hess and Elinor Ostrom hosted
a meeting entitled “Workshop on Scholarly Communications as a Commons”. From this initial meeting, Hess and Ostrom concluded that the Knowledge Commons could not be restricted to merely scholarly communication: “It became more and more apparent than any useful study of the users, designers, contributors, and distributors of this commons could not be cordoned off to the domain of the ivory tower.”</p>
<p>With Charlotte Hess, Elinor Ostrom edited the influential 2007 <a>Understanding Knowledge as a Commons: From Theory to Practice</a>. Hess and Ostrom observed that ‘an increasing number of scholars found that the concept of the “commons” helped them to conceptualize new dilemmas they were observing with the rise of distributed, digital information". The pair noted that ’<em>Commons</em> became a buzzword for digital information, which was being enclosed, commodified, and overpatented.‘</p>
<p>The theoretical and practical work of Elinor Ostrom remains influential for intellectual property law, digital libraries, open access publishing, and Commons projects, like the <a href="http://creativecommons.org/">Creative Commons</a>, the <a href="http://sciencecommons.org/about/">Science Commons</a>, the <a href="http://www.greenxchange.cc/">GreenXchange</a> and even the <a href="http://www.wbcsd.org/work-program/capacity-building/eco-patent-commons.aspx">Eco-Patent Commons</a>.</p>
<p>Her philosophy of the Knowledge Commons remains timely, <a href="http://overland.org.au/blogs/meanland-blog/2012/06/academics-are-revolting-the-open-access-frontier/">as academics, scholars, and universities rise up against the barriers and strictures of the commercial publishers</a> of scholarly works.</p>
<p>Elinor Ostrom’s legacy to education may well be that the walled gardens of commercial publishers will be torn down and replaced with open access, digital libraries.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/7621/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dr Matthew Rimmer is an Australian Research Council Future Fellow, working on Intellectual Property and Climate Change. He is an associate professor at the ANU College of Law, and an associate director of the Australian Centre for Intellectual Property. Matthew Rimmer is currently an Australian Research Council Future Fellow working on a project entitled "Intellectual Property and Climate Change: Inventing Clean Technologes" and a chief investigator in an Australian Research Council Discovery Project, “Promoting Plant Innovation in Australia”.</span></em></p>The grand philosopher of the Commons, Elinor Ostrom, passed away on the 12th June 2012. She was a brilliant, creative polymath; a theoretician of fine precision and great intellectual power; a deviser…Matthew Rimmer, ARC Future Fellow and Associate Professor in Intellectual Property, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.