Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35639252›Full record

ReviewAmbio2022

Polycentric and resilient perspectives for governing the commons: Strategic and law and economics insights for sustainable development.

Andrea Gatto

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Ambio, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Andrea GattoWenzhou-Kean University, Wenzhou, 325060, Zhejiang, China. a.gatto@greenwich.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1005-3571

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Commons governance theory is central to identifying and managing conflicts arising from natural and cultural resources traps. Scholars - using game theory and economic analysis of law - have proposed alternative models, consisting of a set of mitigated scenarios, multiple players, and new equilibria in commons governance. Likewise, novel legal innovations of the commons have also been designed. Reinterpreting the commons in light of political economy, ecology, and pluralistic approaches, a critical review of existing scholarship, economic analysis of law, and case study investigations are performed. Examining an array of views - including governance of water in Ecuador, Bolivia, and Italy - a research and policy agenda is put forward to offer original interpretations and novel holistic perspectives. Germane environmental policy implications deriving from SDGs, resilient governance, and polycentric perspectives are thus extrapolated. Finally, pluralistic frameworks drafted by mitigation and adaptation are measured by improved sustainable development performance in commons, resource, and water governance.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesSustainable DevelopmentEcologyEnvironmental PolicyWaterWaterCommon-pool resourcesCooperative game theoryElinor ostromRegulationRodotà commissionWater governance

Identifiers

PMID35639252
PMCPMC9287511

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.