コモンズにおける集合行為の2つの解釈とその相互補完性

抄録

Many scholars, aid agencies and governments now focus on community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) for rural development in developing countries. During the last 20 years, theories in this regard have developed in many fields of research, particularly in economics and anthropology.

Many disagreements exist between these theories, however, especially on how community members come to form groups and take collective action to manage resources. This paper attempts to examine how these academic explanations are related when we see the real world, and how these approaches can be complemented each other.

First, two types of explanation are reviewed. One is the Rational Economic Man (REM) approach, which seeks the conditions that community members can successfully coordinate their actions for their common property resource management. The other is the Social Acting Perspective (SAP) approach, which places human actions on a broader social context and emphasizes the role of cultural aspects and identity. Finally, a review of Thai studies on this topic exemplifies these approaches.

The theoretical examinations on the dynamics of collective actions show that these two approaches are not contradictive, but complementary under some conditions. On one hand, the induced institutional innovation theory, which is a representative of the REM approach, lacks explanations on what “resource scarcity” really means and how it can lead to institutional change to form the collective action. On the other, by using the game theory, the REM framework can explain well at least some parts of the logic of the SAP approach. A more dynamic and interdisciplinary approach is thus necessary for a comprehensive understanding of collective action among the commons, especially in rapidly changing societies.