CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,328Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementSocioeconomics of Resources and ConservationSustainability and Climate Change Governance

A Review of Design Principles for Community-based Natural Resource Management

Open access
Cox, Michael, Arnold, Gwen, Villamayor Tomás, Sergio·2010·Ecology and Society
DOI 10.5751/es-03704-150438
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

In 1990, Elinor Ostrom proposed eight design principles, positing them to characterize robust institutions for managing common-pool resources such as forests or fisheries.Since then, many studies have explicitly or implicitly evaluated these design principles.We analyzed 91 such studies to evaluate the principles empirically and to consider what theoretical issues have arisen since their introduction.We found that the principles are well supported empirically and that several important theoretical issues warrant discussion.We provide a reformulation of the design principles, drawing from commonalities found in the studies.

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 · 10.5751/es-03704-150438

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 64

  1. Agrawal, A. 2002. Common resources and institutional sustainability. Pages 41-86 in E.
  2. Ostrom, T. Dietz, N. Dolšak, P. C. Stern, S. Stovich, and E. U. Weber, editors. The drama of the commons. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
  3. Agrawal, A., and A. Chhatre. 2006. Explaining success in the commons: community forest governance in the Indian Himalaya. World Development 34(1):149-166.
  4. Agrawal, A., and G. Yadama. 1997. How do local institutions mediate market and population pressures on resources? Forest panchayats in Kumaon, India. Development and Change 28 (3):435-465.
  5. Bardhan, P. 2000. Irrigation and cooperation: an empirical analysis of 48 irrigation communities in south India. Economic Development and Cultural Change 48(4):847-865.
  6. Berkes, F. 2002. Cross-scale institutional linkages: perspectives from the bottom up. Pages 293-321 in E. Ostrom, T. Dietz, N. Dolšak, P. C. Stern, S. Stovich, and E. U. Weber, editors. The drama of the commons. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
  7. Berkes, F. 2006. From community-based resource management to complex systems: the scale issue and marine commons. Ecology and Society 11(1): 45. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/ vol11/iss1/art45/.
  8. Berkes, F., J. Colding, and C. Folke. 2000. Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive management. Ecological Applications 10 (5):1251-1262.
  9. Berkes, F., and C. Folke, editors. 1998. Linking social and ecological systems: management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
  10. Blaikie, P. 2006. Is small really beautiful? Community-based natural resource management in Malawi and Botswana. World Development 34 (11):1942-1957.
  11. Bruns, B. 2007. Community priorities for water rights: some conjectures on assumptions, principles Ecology and Society 15(4): 38 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art38/ and programmes. Pages 28-45 in B. van Koppen, M. Giordano, and J. Butterworth, editors. Community-based water law and water resource management reform in developing countries. CABI, Wallingford, UK.
  12. Cinner, J. E., and T. R. McClanahan. 2006. Socioeconomic factors that lead to overfishing in small-scale coral reef fisheries of Papua New Guinea. Environmental Conservation 33(1):73-80.
  13. Cinner, J. E., A. Wamukota, H. Randriamahazo, and A. Rabearisoa. 2009. Toward institutions for community-based management of inshore marine resources in the Western Indian Ocean. Marine Policy 33(3):489-496.
  14. Cleaver, F. 1999. Paradoxes of participation: questioning participatory approaches to development. Journal of International Development 11 (4):597-612.
  15. Cleaver, F. 2000. Moral ecological rationality, institutions and the management of common property resources. Development and Change 31 (2):361-383.
  16. Coward, W. E., Jr. 1977. Irrigation management alternatives: themes from indigenous irrigation systems. Agricultural Administration 4(3):223-237.
  17. Cox, M. 2008. Balancing accuracy and meaning in common-pool resource theory. Ecology and Society 13(2): 44. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandso ciety.org/vol13/iss2/art44/.
  18. Cox, M. 2010. Exploring the dynamics of social- ecological systems: the case of the Taos Valley acequias. Dissertation. Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, USA.
  19. Demsetz, H. 1967. Toward a theory of property rights. American Economic Review 57(2):347-359.
  20. Feeny, D., F. Berkes, B. J. McCay, and J. M. Acheson. 1990. The tragedy of the commons: twenty-two years later. Human Ecology 18(1):1-19.
  21. Field, A. 2009. Discovering statistics using SPSS. Third edition. Sage Publications, London, UK.
  22. Gautam, A. P., and G. P. Shivakoti. 2005. Conditions for successful local collective action in forestry: some evidence from the hills of Nepal. Society and Natural Resources 18(2):153-171.
  23. Ghate, R., and H. Nagendra. 2005. Role of monitoring in institutional performance: forest management in Maharashtra, India. Conservation and Society 3(2):509-532.
  24. Gibson, C. C. 2001. Forest resources: institutions for local governance in Guatemala. Pages 71-89 in J. Burger, E. Ostrom, R. B. Norgaard, D. Policansky, and B. D. Goldstein, editors. Protecting the commons: a framework for resource management in the Americas. Island Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
  25. Gordon, H. S. 1954. The economic theory of a common-property resource: the fishery. Journal of Political Economy 62(2):124-142.
  26. Guillet, D. W. 1992. Covering ground: communal water management and the state in the Peruvian highlands. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
  27. Hanna, S., C. Folke, and K.-G. Mäler. 1995. Property rights and environmental resources. Pages 15-29 in S. Hanna and M. Munasinghe, editors. Property rights and the environment: social and ecological issues. The World Bank, Washington, D. C., USA.
  28. Hardin, G. 1968. The tragedy of the commons. Science 162(3859):1243-1248.
  29. Harkes, I. H. T. 2006. Fisheries co-management, the role of local institutions and decentralisation in Southeast Asia: with specific reference to marine sasi in Central Maluku, Indonesia. Dissertation. Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
  30. Hayek, F. A. 1945. The use of knowledge in society. American Economic Review 35(4):519-530.
  31. Johnson, K. A., and K. C. Nelson. 2004. Common property and conservation: the potential for effective communal forest management within a national park in Mexico. Human Ecology 32 (6):703-733.
  32. Klooster, D. 2000. Institutional choice, community, and struggle: a case study of forest co-management in Mexico. World Development 28(1):1-20. Ecology and Society 15(4): 38 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art38/
  33. Korten, D. C. 1980. Community organization and rural development: a learning process approach. Public Administration Review 40(5):480-511.
  34. Lane, C., and I. Scoones. 1993. Barabaig natural resource management. Pages 93-119 in M. D. Young and O. T. Solbirg, editors. The world's savannas: economic driving forces, ecological constraints, and policy options for sustainable land use. UNESCO, Paris, France.
  35. Leach, M., R. Mearns, and I. Scoones. 1999. Environmental entitlements: dynamics and institutions in community-based natural resource management. World Development 27(2):225-247.
  36. López Gunn, E., and N. Hernandez Mora. 2001. La gestión colectiva de las aguas subterráneas en La Mancha: análisis comparativo. Pages 405-474 in N. Hernandez Mora and M. R. Llamas, editors. La economía del agua subterránea y su gestión collectiva. Fundación Marcelino Botín and Mundi- Prensa, Madrid, Spain.
  37. Mandondo, A. 2001. Use of woodland resources within and across villages in a Zimbabwean communal area. Agriculture and Human Values 18 (2):177-194.
  38. Morrow, C. E., and R. W. Hull. 1996. Donor- initiated common pool resource institutions: the case of the Yanesha Forestry Cooperative. World Development 24(10):1641-1657.
  39. Mosse, D. 1997. The symbolic making of a common property resource: history, ecology and locality in a tank-irrigated landscape in South India. Development and Change 28(3):467-504.
  40. National Research Council, editor. 1986. Proceedings of the conference on common property resource management. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
  41. Niamir-Fuller, M. 1998. The resilience of pastoral herding in Sahelian Africa. Pages 250-284 in F. Berkes and C. Folke, editors. Linking social and ecological systems: management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
  42. Nilsson, T. 2001. Management of communal grazing land: a case study on institutions for collective action in Endabeg Village, Tanzania. Thesis. Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.
  43. North, D. C. 1990. Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
  44. Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
  45. Pagdee, A., Y. Kim, and P. J. Daugherty. 2006. What makes community forest management successful: a meta-study from community forests throughout the world. Society and Natural Resources 19(1):33-52.
  46. Pomeroy, R. S., B. M. Katon, and I. Harkes. 2001. Conditions affecting the success of fisheries co- management: lessons from Asia. Marine Policy 25 (3):197-208.
  47. Rowland, M. 2005. A framework for resolving the transboundary water allocation conflict conundrum. Ground Water 43(5):700-705.
  48. Ruddle, K. 1996. Boundary definition as a basic design principle of traditional fishery management systems in the Pacific Islands. Geographische Zeitschrift 84(2):94-102.
  49. Sandström, C., and C. Widmark. 2007. Stakeholders' perceptions of consultations as tools for co-management-a case study of the forestry and reindeer herding sectors in northern Sweden. Forest Policy and Economics 10(1-2):25-35.
  50. Sarker, A., and T. Itoh. 2001. Design principles in long-enduring institutions of Japanese irrigation common-pool resources. Agricultural Water Management 48(2):89-102. Ecology and Society 15(4): 38 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art38/
  51. Schlager, E., W. Blomquist, and S. Y. Tang. 1994. Mobile flows, storage, and self-organized institutions for governing common-pool resources. Land Economics 70(3):294-317.
  52. Schmidtz, D., and E. Willott. 2003. Reinventing the commons: an African case study. U.C. Davis Law Review 37(1):203-232.
  53. Scott, J. C. 1998. Seeing like a state: how certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
  54. Singleton, S., and M. Taylor. 1992. Common property, collective action and community. Journal of Theoretical Politics 4(3):309-324.
  55. Skjølsvold, T. M. 2008. The institutional reality of common pool resources. Thesis. Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
  56. Stavins, R. N. 1998. What can we learn from the grand policy experiment? Lessons from SO 2 allowance trading. Journal of Economic Perspectives 12(3):69-88.
  57. Steins, N. A. 1999. All hands on deck: an interactive perspective on complex common-pool resource management based on case studies in the coastal waters of the Isle of Wight (UK), Connemara (Ireland), and the Dutch Wadden Sea. Dissertation. University of Wageningen, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
  58. Steins, N. A., and V. M. Edwards. 1999. Collective action in common-pool resource management: the contribution of a social constructivist perspective to existing theory. Society and Natural Resources 12 (6):539-557.
  59. Trawick, P. B. 2001. Successfully governing the commons: principles of social organization in an Andean irrigation system. Human Ecology 29 (1):1-25.
  60. Tucker, C. M. 1999. Common property design principles and development in a Honduran community. Fletcher Journal of Development Studies XV. [online] URL: http://fletcher.tufts.edu/ praxis/archives/xv/Tucker.pdf.
  61. Tucker, C. M., J. C. Randolph, and E. J. Castellanos. 2007. Institutions, biophysical factors and history: an integrative analysis of private and common property forests in Guatemala and Honduras. Human Ecology 35(3):259-274.
  62. Turner, M. D. 1999. Conflict, environmental change, and social institutions in dryland Africa: limitations of the community resource management approach. Society and Natural Resources 12 (7):643-657.
  63. Yandle, T. 2006. Sharing natural resource management responsibility: examining the New Zealand rock lobster co-management experience. Policy Sciences 39(3):249-278.
  64. Young, O. R. 2002. The institutional dimensions of environmental change: fit, interplay, and scale. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cox, M., Arnold, G., & Villamayor Tomás, S.
Affiliations
Indiana University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Ecology and Society
Publisher
Resilience Alliance, Inc.
Published
2010
Volume
15
Issue
4
ISSN
1708-3087 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.5751/es-03704-150438
OpenAlex
W2326322218
Cited by
1,328
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 87 · 2025: 71 · 2024: 70 · 2023: 114 · 2022: 111 · 2021: 121 · 2020: 133 · 2019: 121 · 2018: 89 · 2017: 77 · 2016: 88 · 2015: 70 · 2014: 74 · 2013: 54 · 2012: 28
FWCI
28.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Ecology and Society (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Digital Library Of The Commons Repository (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (0527744)
  • Lincoln Institute of Land Policy
  • Fundación Caja Madrid
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Socioeconomics of Resources and Conservation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
Keywords
Elinor Ostrom, design principles, community-based natural resource management, common-pool resources, institutional robustness, commons governance, forest management, fisheries management

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