将自然定义为公共资源池

J. Rosenbloom
{"title":"将自然定义为公共资源池","authors":"J. Rosenbloom","doi":"10.1017/CBO9781139519762.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One of the many ways in which we attempt to study resource use and conservation is to define natural resources as “common pool resources.” Yet in a broad sense we can understand nature more generally as a common pool resource with which we maintain a special relationship. This definition incorporates several legal, behavioral, and ecological concepts that seek to capture the intricate and complex place where nature and the governance of nature collide. Once we apply the common pool resource definition to nature, we commit to viewing nature through five distinct and specific lenses that are embedded in the common pool resource framework. This chapter explores these commitments in an effort to establish a foundation for related research on how these common pool resource-specific lenses may influence the management of nature. The chapter begins with a short background on common pool resources and the understanding of them in the legal literature. The chapter then turns to five conceptual commitments we make by labeling nature as a common pool resource. An exploration of the commitments reveals that they have both intended and unintended consequences on the way we view nature. Those consequences, in turn, have both positive and negative implications for the management of nature. Further, regardless of whether the commitments help facilitate positive or negative approaches to nature management, each commitment places limiting and potentially harmful constraints on the broader perspective with which we should view nature. The chapter concludes by raising the question of whether this limited perspective fully considers pertinent characteristics inherent in nature and whether we should think more broadly when defining nature.","PeriodicalId":345329,"journal":{"name":"Drake University Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Defining Nature as a Common Pool Resource\",\"authors\":\"J. Rosenbloom\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/CBO9781139519762.005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"One of the many ways in which we attempt to study resource use and conservation is to define natural resources as “common pool resources.” Yet in a broad sense we can understand nature more generally as a common pool resource with which we maintain a special relationship. This definition incorporates several legal, behavioral, and ecological concepts that seek to capture the intricate and complex place where nature and the governance of nature collide. Once we apply the common pool resource definition to nature, we commit to viewing nature through five distinct and specific lenses that are embedded in the common pool resource framework. This chapter explores these commitments in an effort to establish a foundation for related research on how these common pool resource-specific lenses may influence the management of nature. The chapter begins with a short background on common pool resources and the understanding of them in the legal literature. The chapter then turns to five conceptual commitments we make by labeling nature as a common pool resource. An exploration of the commitments reveals that they have both intended and unintended consequences on the way we view nature. Those consequences, in turn, have both positive and negative implications for the management of nature. Further, regardless of whether the commitments help facilitate positive or negative approaches to nature management, each commitment places limiting and potentially harmful constraints on the broader perspective with which we should view nature. The chapter concludes by raising the question of whether this limited perspective fully considers pertinent characteristics inherent in nature and whether we should think more broadly when defining nature.\",\"PeriodicalId\":345329,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Drake University Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-11-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Drake University Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139519762.005\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drake University Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139519762.005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

我们试图研究资源利用和保护的许多方法之一是将自然资源定义为“公共池资源”。然而,从广义上讲,我们可以更普遍地将自然理解为一种共同的资源池,我们与它保持着特殊的关系。这一定义结合了几个法律、行为和生态概念,试图捕捉自然和自然治理冲突的错综复杂的地方。一旦我们将公共池资源定义应用于自然,我们就承诺通过嵌入在公共池资源框架中的五个不同而具体的镜头来观察自然。本章探讨这些承诺,努力为这些共同池资源特定镜头如何影响自然管理的相关研究奠定基础。本章首先简要介绍了公共资源的背景以及法律文献中对公共资源的理解。然后,本章转向我们通过将自然标记为公共资源池而做出的五个概念性承诺。对这些承诺的探索表明,它们对我们看待自然的方式既有有意的后果,也有无意的后果。这些后果反过来对自然的管理既有积极的影响,也有消极的影响。此外,无论这些承诺是否有助于促进积极或消极的自然管理方法,每一项承诺都对我们应该以更广泛的视角看待自然造成了限制和潜在的有害限制。本章最后提出的问题是,这种有限的视角是否充分考虑了自然固有的相关特征,以及我们在定义自然时是否应该考虑得更广泛。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Defining Nature as a Common Pool Resource
One of the many ways in which we attempt to study resource use and conservation is to define natural resources as “common pool resources.” Yet in a broad sense we can understand nature more generally as a common pool resource with which we maintain a special relationship. This definition incorporates several legal, behavioral, and ecological concepts that seek to capture the intricate and complex place where nature and the governance of nature collide. Once we apply the common pool resource definition to nature, we commit to viewing nature through five distinct and specific lenses that are embedded in the common pool resource framework. This chapter explores these commitments in an effort to establish a foundation for related research on how these common pool resource-specific lenses may influence the management of nature. The chapter begins with a short background on common pool resources and the understanding of them in the legal literature. The chapter then turns to five conceptual commitments we make by labeling nature as a common pool resource. An exploration of the commitments reveals that they have both intended and unintended consequences on the way we view nature. Those consequences, in turn, have both positive and negative implications for the management of nature. Further, regardless of whether the commitments help facilitate positive or negative approaches to nature management, each commitment places limiting and potentially harmful constraints on the broader perspective with which we should view nature. The chapter concludes by raising the question of whether this limited perspective fully considers pertinent characteristics inherent in nature and whether we should think more broadly when defining nature.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信