Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 260

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Human Ecology and Resource Sustainability: The Importance of Institutional Diversity

Becker, C. D.·1995·Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics

Abstract

We define the concept of a common-pool resource based on two attributes: the difficulty of excluding beneficiaries and the subtractability of use. We present similarities and differences among common-pool resources in regard to their ecological and institutional significance. The design principles that characterize long-surviving, delicately balanced resource systems governed by local rules systems are presented, as is a synthesis of the research on factors affecting institutional change. More complex biological resources are a greater challenge to the design of sustainable institutions, but the same general principles appear to carry over to more complex systems. We present initial findings from pilot studies in Uganda related to the effects of institutions on forest conditions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.26.1.113

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Becker, C. D.
Venue
Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics
Published
1995-01-01
Volume
26
Issue
1
Pages
113-133
ISSN
0066-4162 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2173843401
Cited by
260
References
0
FWCI
5.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.