Abstract
This paper analyses the outcome of an actor game aimed at finding ways to institutionalise farmer co-operation in a water catchment threatened by eutrophication from heavy use of fertilisers. Although offered several advantageous options for collective action, acting farmers stuck to their preference for individual management in spite of very draconian measures from central authorities. Theories on collective action developed by Mancur Olson and Elinor Ostrom cover some ground in explaining this puzzling outcome, as do Fritz Scharpf's models of games played out under the 'shadow of hierarchy'. However, the most decisive factor for the farmers' choice of strategy seems to stand Mancur Olson's theory on its head, and adds to the importance of trust and reciprocity emphasised by Elinor Ostrom. Because the farmers knew each other well, and because of the transparency of farmers' action in the geographically limited catchment, they turned down options of co-operation; too few farmers were considered trustworthy enough to make it worthwhile to engage in collective action. Theories of 'collective memories of the history of play' in an area or on an issue should thus be given more concern in future efforts to bring about collective action towards common pool resources. Este documento analiza el resultado de juego de actor dirigido a encontrar formas de institucionalizar la cooperación entre agricultores en la captación de agua amenazada por eutroficación de fuerte uso de fertilizantes. Aunque ofrecieron varias opciones ventajosas para la acción colectiva, los agricultores participantes se quedan apegados a sus preferencias de manejo individual a pesar de las medidas bastante draconianas de las autoridades centrales. Las teorias de acción colectiva desarrolladas por Mancur Olson y Elinor Ostrom cubren algún terreno en explicar este curioso resultado, al igual que los modelos de juego de Fritz Scharpf jugados bajo la "sombra de jerarquia". Sin embargo, el factor mas decisivo para la estrategia de decisión de los agricultores parece poner la teoria de Mancur Olson de revéz y se suma a la importancia de la confianza y reciprocidad enfatizada por Elinor Ostrom. Debido a que los agricultores se conocian bien y a la transparencia de la accion de agricultores en la captacion limitada geograficamente, ellos rechazaron opciones de cooperación; muy pocos agricultores fueron considerados de suficiente confianza para que merecieran participar en acción colectiva. Las teorias de "memorias colectivas de la historia del juego" en una área o sobre un asunto deben de esta manera estar mostrando mayor interes en esfuerzos futuros para atraer la acción colectiva hacia recursos de fondo común.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.