BEYOND the likes or dislikes FIGURE FROM THE AUTHOR, AN INTERESTING TEXT AROUND THE RECENT NOBEL ECONOMICS, overshadowed by that of peace. Apparently the academy
Nobelist WIDE TO THE FIELD OF ECONOMIC ADJUSTMENT OF ACCOUNTS THAT HAS AWARDED IN RECENT YEARS AND IN VARIOUS AREAS TO PERSONS SHOTS from peripheral countries, former colonies, or vision "ALTERNATIVES", etc, AS YOU MAY THINK THE REDEMPTION OF THE SENSE OF GUILT OR WESTERN INSTITUTIONAL whitewash. OR BOTH AND MANY MORE.
** Professor of Indiana University studied and promoted the common good
self
Elinor Ostrom: a Well deserved Nobel Prize for Economics Mario Bunge
Congratulations to the Directors of the Bank of Sweden and the Swedish Academy of Sciences. This time matched to give the 2009 award to Elinor Ostrom. It was time to give it a progressive socio-economist, rather than give it to a caveman ideologue, as has been wont to do.
was also time which recognizes a woman, the first since 1982, when it awarded a sociologist Alva Myrdal, wife and collaborator Gunnar Myrdal, winner in 1974, and one of the architects of the modern Swedish state.
What is the main academic merit of Dr. Ostrom, Professor Indiana University? He studied and led to the self for the common good, as it has done every Thursday at noon the Tribunal de Aguas de Valencia, since it was installed the Moors in 960.
Why does this aspect of the work of Ostrom? Because it has been ignored by almost all political economists, not only old acquaintances from the right, but the Marxists, always enemies of cooperatives.
Indeed, almost all economists recognize only two property regimes: the private and state. Not interested in the tertium quid, self-managed collective property, which escapes both the grip of big business as the the authoritarian state.
political economy standard proposed postulates:
1. All assets should be owned by individuals or corporations. (Why? Because I Said So.)
2. The master's eye fattens the cattle: the unclaimed property is damaged, as evidenced by the tragedy of the common good, such as the ejido or village pasture. (Why? Because what Garrett Hardin said.)
3. The state should be minimal: the only role should be to ensure the functioning of free market, or capitalism without rules (Friedrich Hayek, Nobel Prize 1974, Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize 1976).
Had Popperian
left, perhaps say that Ostrom's contribution was to refute the second postulate. But anyone could argue that refute a proposition is the same as confirming its denial. No matter, moving on.
In 1968 the prestigious journal Science published the article "The tragedy of the commons, that is," The tragedy of the common good. " This became known to the author, ecologist Garrett Hardin Texan, who had already noted for his defense of the principle systems "can not do one thing" and the competitive exclusion principle (which we discuss in my seminar on the philosophy of biology, in 1962, at the University of Buenos Aires).
What is the tragedy of yore? If all the villagers have free access to a common pasture, all put to graze as many animals as possible. In this way, the grass will not have time to grow back, and grassland will end worse for everyone. Hardin took the moral is that no property owner declines to destroy.
In his book Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action (1990), Elinor Ostrom Hardin refutes. It does so using historical examples of self-governance of common property, such as communal lands (ejidos as Mexicans), forests (as many in India), irrigation (such as the River Turia) fisheries (such as Maine) and dairy (such as the Gujurat).
The net result is that what is important to preserve a property right but not the administration. So much so, that a poorly managed private company does not benefit even to their owners. Experimental economics and contemporary social psychology give us data to explain why Elinor Ostrom is right and, for the same reason, why did not Garrett Hardin.
Indeed, these sciences have shown that only a minority always tries to maximize its expected profits, regardless of whether harm to its neighbor. Most humans are concerned and cooperative. A glance the collective volume Moral Sentiments and Material Interests: The Foundations of Cooperation in Economic Life, published in 2005 by Herbert Gintis economists, Robert Boyd and Ernst Fehr. In my book
Political Philosophy (2009) often cite the work of Ostrom, in tune with a stack of documents on the operation of cooperatives of all types scattered throughout the world, especially the annuals of International Cooperative Alliance and of the International Labour Office, which holds the UN in Geneva.
In summary, Professor Ostrom, congratulations for helping to highlight the angelic side of the human beast, and for having slandered the economy and political philosophy who assume that everyone mudlarks and scavengers. It was time that I won the Nobel Prize who believes that economics and politics can be beneficial for most if Hobbes's pessimism replaced by optimism of Rousseau, and incompetence of the financial advisor for the competence of the grocer down the block . TAKEN FROM
BolPress
