ScholarGate
עוזר

השוואת שיטות

סקרו את השיטות שבחרתם זו לצד זו; שורות שבהן יש הבדל מודגשות.

Common-Pool Resource Analysis×Public Goods Game×
תחוםPolitical Economyפסיכולוגיה חברתית
משפחהMCDMProcess / pipeline
שנת המקור19902000
הוגה השיטהGarrett Hardin & Elinor OstromExperimental economics tradition; Fehr & Gachter (cooperation and punishment)
סוגInstitutional analysis framework for shared resourcesMulti-player social-dilemma paradigm
מקור מכונןOstrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press. ISBN: 9780521405997Fehr, E., & Gachter, S. (2000). Cooperation and Punishment in Public Goods Experiments. American Economic Review, 90(4), 980-994. DOI ↗
כינוייםCommons Governance Analysis, Ostrom Design Principles, Tragedy of the Commons Analysis, CPR AnalysisVoluntary Contribution Mechanism, Common-Pool Contribution Game, Linear Public Goods Game
קשורות43
תקצירCommon-pool resource (CPR) analysis is a framework for diagnosing why shared natural and man-made resources are prone to overuse and for identifying the institutional conditions under which user communities can govern them sustainably without privatization or top-down state control. A common-pool resource is rivalrous (one user's consumption subtracts from what is available to others) yet costly to exclude users from. Garrett Hardin's 1968 'tragedy of the commons' framed the pessimistic baseline in which rational appropriators collectively destroy the resource, while Elinor Ostrom's 1990 Governing the Commons established, through extensive empirical work, eight design principles that distinguish durable self-governing commons from those that collapse.The public goods game is the canonical multi-person social dilemma used to study cooperation. Each member of a group is endowed with money and simultaneously decides how much to keep privately and how much to contribute to a common pool; the pool is multiplied and split equally among all members regardless of contribution. Because the marginal per-capita return is less than one but the group return exceeds one, every individual is privately better off free-riding while the group is collectively better off if all contribute -- the defining tension of a social dilemma. Experiments consistently show people contribute well above the self-interested zero, but contributions decay over repeated rounds unless institutions intervene. Fehr and Gachter's influential demonstration that allowing players to pay to punish free-riders restores and sustains high cooperation made the paradigm central to research on norms, altruistic punishment, and collective action.
ScholarGateמערך נתונים
  1. v1
  2. 2 מקורות
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 מקורות
  3. PUBLISHED

מעבר לחיפוש הורדת מצגת

ScholarGateהשוואת שיטות: Common-Pool Resource Analysis · Public Goods Game. אוחזר בתאריך 2026-06-25 מתוך https://scholargate.app/he/compare