Douglass C. North: Transaction Costs, Property Rights, and Economic Outcomes

Libecap, Gary D.

doi:10.3386/w24585

Cited by 7 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, it is found a weak negative correlation between economic growth and natural resource rent. This aligns with recent studies addressing how the economy can grow under the pressure of sustainability efforts (Libecap, 2018;Waldo et al, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

“…Waldo et al (2016) conclude that implementing regulatory instruments for externalities in Nordic countries may have a significant effect on economic performance. Meanwhile, Libecap (2018), from a broader perspective, argues that the economic welfare losses for addressing externalities are mostly due to hidden transaction costs for the political process. Addressing externalities in the policies is, however, multifaceted.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Beyond sustainability: Empirical evidence from OECD countries on the connection among natural resources, ESG performances, and economic development

Naomi¹,

Akbar²

2021

Economics &Amp; Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many have seen a remarkable increase in environmental, social, and governance (ESG) practices in the context of natural resource management. ESG is practically known to help achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) with more responsible management of natural resources. Yet, limited economic literature exists to illuminate how natural resource management can affect the quality of economic development. This paper attempts to develop and test a theoretical model to understand the interlinkage between natural resource rent, ESG performance, and the quality of economic development at the country level. This study employs a data set of OECD countries during the period of 2000-2017. The path analysis model is used to define the relationship between the measured variables. Our empirical study shows a negative association between ESG performance and natural resource rent; in other words, better human development inhibits corruption and promotes improved ESG performance. This study observes the presence of bidirectional Granger causality between natural resource rent and ESG performance. It is suggested that ESG performance is more likely to be affected by the quality of institutions, rather than by the economy size. Good institutions enable the economy to reach optimum resource allocation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond sustainability: Empirical evidence from OECD countries on the connection among natural resources, ESG performances, and economic development

Naomi¹,

Akbar²

2021

Economics &Amp; Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Efforts to regulate groundwater and other common-pool resources can be susceptible to capture or obstruction by narrow interests [26]. From an institutional and resource economics perspective, the potential for groundwater governance may be affected by potential benefits and costs, including transaction costs; the ability to observe groundwater use, impacts, and boundaries; number and heterogeneity of users; and the complexity and availability of information about aquifers, recharge, and other stocks and flows [27,28].…”

Section: Difficulties In Groundwater Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Conceptually, this could also be seen as incremental steps toward partial "unitization" of a common pool resource. In the oil and gas industry in the western United States, larger-scale cooperation has been supported by legislation for unified management of oil fields by a single operator or coordinated operation of wells under shared rules [26,50]. Ideally, extraction and other activities can be managed in ways that are more efficient and avoid damage from a "race to the pump" including conflicts between neighbouring users and compaction that permanently loses storage capacity in the aquifer.…”

Section: Sharing Wells Pumps and Pipesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Polycentric Solutions for Groundwater Governance in Sub-Saharan Africa: Encouraging Institutional Artisanship in an Extended Ladder of Participation

Bruns¹

2021

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The growth of groundwater irrigation poses opportunities and challenges, particularly in Africa where substantial potential exists for increased groundwater irrigation but has been constrained by limited access to energy, technology for pumps and drilling, markets, and other factors. Conventional groundwater governance concepts for state-led regulation or co-management are problematic for conditions where state capacity or political support for regulation to reconcile conflicting interests is limited. Experience in Africa and elsewhere does offer examples that may help recognize feasible patterns for collective action that can influence the equity, efficiency, and sustainability of groundwater development. An extended ladder of participation helps look beyond state-led water governance and co-management to a more diverse range of opportunities for supporting local autonomy and initiative to expand opportunities and solve problems in groundwater development. Collective action in groundwater governance can include well spacing; sharing of wells, pumps, and pipes; protecting domestic water sources; crop coordination; groundwater recharge; water imports; and aquifer management. Even where non-state organizations and collective action play primary roles in water governance, they may still be empowered by, receive advice from, or share information with government agencies and other actors. Polycentric groundwater governance can be supported by improving information, facilitating cooperation, endorsing standards, providing a legal framework for resolving conflicts and constituting governance agreements, and through polycentric social learning. Polycentric institutional artisanship by water users and their organizations can help find feasible solutions for improving groundwater governance.

show abstract

“…However, this also reflects the fact that ultimately water rights (and sometimes related ones such as those for agricultural land and fishing), water management institutions, water boards, social norms, etc., select the spatial and temporal definitions. Theoretical and practical cases in which water resource governance (the system and structure for allocating and protecting water) is underpinned by law and other institutional regulation can be found in, e.g., [60][61][62][63][64]. Water Boards are, for example, organizations that also affect the de facto water availability, and other choices confronting management.…”

Section: 2 Towards Representing Water Heterogeneity and Its Endowmentioning

confidence: 99%

Theoretical and Empirical Characterization of Water as a Factor: Examples and Related Issues with the World Trade Model

Cazcarro

Steenge

2021

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article originates from the theoretical and empirical characterization of factors in the World Trade Model (WTM), see Duchin (2005). It first illustrates the usefulness of this type of model for water research to address policy questions related to virtual water trade, water constraints and water scarcity. It also illustrates the importance of certain key decisions regarding the heterogeneity of water and its relation to the technologies being employed and the prices obtained. With regard to WTM, the global economic input–output model in which multiple technologies can produce a “homogeneous output”, Steenge et al. (2018) showed that two different mechanisms should be distinguished by which multiple technologies can arise, i.e., from “technology-specific” or from “shared” factors, which implies a mechanism-specific set of prices, quantities and rents. We discuss and extend these characterizations, notably in relation to the real-world characterization of water as a factor (for which we use the terms technology specific, fully shared and “mixed”). We propose that the presence of these separate mechanisms results in the models being sensitive to relatively small variations in specific numerical values. To address this sensitivity, we suggest a specific role for specific (sub)models or key choices to counter unrealistic model outcomes. To support our proposal we present a selection of simulations for aggregated world regions, and show how key results concerning quantities, prices and rents can be subject to considerable change depending on the precise definitions of resource endowments and the technology-specificity of the factors. For instance, depending on the adopted water heterogeneity level, outcomes can vary from relatively low-cost solutions to higher cost ones and can even reach infeasibility. In the main model discussed here (WTM) factor prices are exogenous, which also contributes to the overall numerical sensitivity of the model. All this affects to a large extent our interpretation of the water challenges, which preferably need to be assessed in integrated frameworks, to account for the main socioeconomic variables, technologies and resources.

show abstract

Douglass C. North: Transaction Costs, Property Rights, and Economic Outcomes

Cited by 7 publications

References 23 publications

Beyond sustainability: Empirical evidence from OECD countries on the connection among natural resources, ESG performances, and economic development

Beyond sustainability: Empirical evidence from OECD countries on the connection among natural resources, ESG performances, and economic development

Polycentric Solutions for Groundwater Governance in Sub-Saharan Africa: Encouraging Institutional Artisanship in an Extended Ladder of Participation

Theoretical and Empirical Characterization of Water as a Factor: Examples and Related Issues with the World Trade Model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About