The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Success on the Commons: A Comparative Examination of Institutions for Common Property Resource Management
Abstract
The notorious `tragedy of the commons' is incorrectly held to be the eventual fate of all resources that are used collectively rather than by individual private owners. This essay reviews several examples around the world of successful collective management of environmental resources - institutional regimes that have operated for decades or even centuries without resulting in degradation of resources. It then explores the features shared by these historically unconnected institutional regimes in order to begin specifying the characteristics of regimes that circumvent tragedy. Successful systems usually have well defined communities of eligible user-managers and clear, easily enforced and environmentally cautious rules to constrain resource use. But they vary greatly in terms of the allocation of the harvested supply of the resource, from hierarchical systems of rights with unequal allocation of the resource to very egalitarian systems that assign equal shares by lottery.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Institutions and the Free Rider: The Assurance Problem in Collective Action
Runge, C. F. (1984) · The Journal of Politics · doi:10.2307/2130438 · Cited by 290
Cited by
Revisiting the commons: local lessons, global challenges.
Ostrom, E., Burger, J., Field, C. B., Norgaard, R. B., & Policansky, D. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.284.5412.278 · Cited by 2,798
Explaining success on the commons: Community forest governance in the Indian Himalaya
Agrawal, A., & Chhatre, A. (2006) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2005.07.013 · Cited by 462
(2009) · CGSPace A Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research) · Cited by 161
Metadata
- Authors
- McKean, M. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Theoretical Politics
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1992-07
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 247-281
- ISSN
- 0951-6298 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-3667
- OpenAlex
- W1980313689
- Cited by
- 305
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 5.61
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Success on the Commons: A Comparative Examination of Institutions for Common Property Resource Management. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0951692892004003002
- The paper
- McKean, M. A. (1992). Success on the Commons: A Comparative Examination of Institutions for Common Property Resource Management. Journal of Theoretical Politics. https://doi.org/10.1177/0951692892004003002
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.