1. TESTING THE APPLICATION OF
ADAPTIVE GOVERNANCE OF COMMON
POOL RESOURCES:
AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE
Andrea Torvinen, Grant Snitker and Rhian
Stotts

2. ADAPTIVE GOVERNANCE

3. ADAPTIVE GOVERNANCE
 Elinor Ostrom – Governing the Commons (1990)

4. ADAPTIVE GOVERNANCE
 Elinor Ostrom – Governing the Commons (1990)
 Institutional analysis focuses on documenting social-ecological
systems involving the management of common pool resources
CPRs

5. ADAPTIVE GOVERNANCE
 Elinor Ostrom – Governing the Commons (1990)
 Institutional analysis focuses on documenting social-ecological
systems involving the management of common pool resources
CPRs
 Management systems must be localized to SES conditions and
have the ability to adapt to changing conditions and
circumstances

6. ADAPTIVE GOVERNANCE
 Elinor Ostrom – Governing the Commons (1990)
 Institutional analysis focuses on documenting social-ecological
systems involving the management of common pool resources
CPRs
 Management systems must be localized to SES conditions and
have the ability to adapt to changing conditions and
circumstances
 Framework that evolves over time and is used to analyze multi-
level governance strategies

7. ADAPTIVE GOVERNANCE
 Elinor Ostrom – Governing the Commons (1990)
 Institutional analysis focuses on documenting social-ecological
systems involving the management of common pool resources
CPRs
 Management systems must be localized to SES conditions and
have the ability to adapt to changing conditions and
circumstances
 Framework that evolves over time and is used to analyze multi-
level governance strategies
 Eight “design principles” have been identified

8. DESIGN PRINCIPLES
 Clearly defined boundaries
 Proportional equivalence between benefits and costs
 Collective-choice arrangements
 Effective monitoring
 Graduated sanctions
 Conflict-resolution mechanisms
 Minimal right to organize
 Nested enterprises

9. SOCIAL-ECOLOGICAL SYSTEM (SES)
FRAMEWORK
Ostrom (2007:15182, Figure 1)

10. Ostrom (2007:15183, Table 1)

11. APPLYING THE SES FRAMEWORK TO
ARCHAEOLOGICAL CASES
 Methodology involves three stages:
 Identify the second-tier variables supported by archaeological data
 Describe each case using Ostrom’s (1990) narrative format
 Determine which design principles are present in each case

12. APPLYING THE SES FRAMEWORK TO
ARCHAEOLOGICAL CASES
 Methodology involves three stages:
 Identify the second-tier variables supported by archaeological data
 Describe each case using Ostrom’s (1990) narrative format
 Determine which design principles are present in each case
 Archaeological record allows for documentation of implementation
strategies

13. APPLYING THE SES FRAMEWORK TO
ARCHAEOLOGICAL CASES
 Methodology involves three stages:
 Identify the second-tier variables supported by archaeological data
 Describe each case using Ostrom’s (1990) narrative format
 Determine which design principles are present in each case
 Archaeological record allows for documentation of implementation
strategies
 Archaeological case studies provide long-term perspectives on
CPR management

14. APPLYING THE SES FRAMEWORK TO
ARCHAEOLOGICAL CASES
 Methodology involves three stages:
 Identify the second-tier variables supported by archaeological data
 Describe each case using Ostrom’s (1990) narrative format
 Determine which design principles are present in each case
 Archaeological record allows for documentation of implementation
strategies
 Archaeological case studies provide long-term perspectives on
CPR management
 North Atlantic Biocultural Organisation case studies

15. APPLYING THE SES FRAMEWORK TO
ARCHAEOLOGICAL CASES
First- Tier SES Variables Archaeological Data Historical Data Environmental Data
Trade documents, political
Social, Economic and Settlement patterns, Resource distribution on
organization, records of
Political Settings archaeofauna landscape
social hierarchy
Archaeofauna, settlement
Geomorphology,
Resource System patterns, archaeobotanical Descriptions of landscape
ecology, pollen record
remains
Archaeofauna, settlement Resource documents,
Resource Units Geomorphology, ecology
patterns inventories
Settlement patterns,
Governance System Written laws, treaties, etc --
archaeobotanical remains
Settlement patterns,
Users archaeobotanical remains, -- Pollen record
archaeofauna
Archaeofauna, settlement
Descriptions of trade and
Interactions patterns, archaeobotanical --
commerce
remains
Outcomes Archaeobotanical remains -- Geomorphology, ecology
Related Ecosystems Settlement patterns -- Climate proxies

16. NORTH ATLANTIC CASE STUDIES
Dugmore et al. (2009:98, Figure 7.1)

17. GRAZING SYSTEM OF THE FAROE
ISLANDS
Thomson et al. (2007:740, Figure 1)

18. WOODLAND MANAGEMENT IN
EYJAFJALLAHREPPUR, SOUTH ICELAND

19. WOODLAND CONSERVATION IN
MARKARFLJÓT VALLEY
Dugmore et al. (2007:23, Figure 4)

20. DESIGN PRINCIPLES

21. DESIGN PRINCIPLES
 Clearly defined boundaries

22. DESIGN PRINCIPLES
 Clearly defined boundaries
 Proportional equivalence between benefits and costs

23. DESIGN PRINCIPLES
 Clearly defined boundaries
 Proportional equivalence between benefits and costs
 Collective-choice arrangements

24. DESIGN PRINCIPLES
 Clearly defined boundaries
 Proportional equivalence between benefits and costs
 Collective-choice arrangements
 Effective monitoring

25. DESIGN PRINCIPLES
 Clearly defined boundaries
 Proportional equivalence between benefits and costs
 Collective-choice arrangements
 Effective monitoring
 Graduated sanctions

26. DESIGN PRINCIPLES
 Clearly defined boundaries
 Proportional equivalence between benefits and costs
 Collective-choice arrangements
 Effective monitoring
 Graduated sanctions
 Conflict-resolution mechanisms

27. DESIGN PRINCIPLES
 Clearly defined boundaries
 Proportional equivalence between benefits and costs
 Collective-choice arrangements
 Effective monitoring
 Graduated sanctions
 Conflict-resolution mechanisms
 Minimal right to organize

28. DESIGN PRINCIPLES
 Clearly defined boundaries
 Proportional equivalence between benefits and costs
 Collective-choice arrangements
 Effective monitoring
 Graduated sanctions
 Conflict-resolution mechanisms
 Minimal right to organize
 Nested enterprises

29. EVALUATION OF DESIGN PRINCIPLES
Grazing System of the Woodland Management in
Faroe Islands Adaptive Governance South Iceland
Design Principle
Degree Present? Present? Degree
Low Yes Clearly defined boundaries Yes Low
Moderate Yes Proportional equivalence No --
Low Yes Collective-choice arrangements No Moderate
-- Possible Effective monitoring Possible --
-- Possible Graduated sanctions Possible --
Low Yes Conflict-resolution mechanisms Yes Low
Low Yes Minimal right to organize No Low
Moderate Yes Nested enterprises Yes Moderate

30. EVALUATION OF DESIGN PRINCIPLES
Grazing System of the Woodland Management in
Faroe Islands Adaptive Governance South Iceland
Design Principle
Degree Present? Present? Degree
Low Yes Clearly defined boundaries Yes Low
Moderate Yes Proportional equivalence No --
Low Yes Collective-choice arrangements No Moderate
-- Possible Effective monitoring Possible --
-- Possible Graduated sanctions Possible --
Conflict-resolution
Low Yes Yes Low
mechanisms
Low Yes Minimal right to organize No Low
Moderate Yes Nested enterprises Yes Moderate

31. EVALUATION OF DESIGN PRINCIPLES
Grazing System of the Woodland Management in
Faroe Islands Adaptive Governance South Iceland
Design Principle
Degree Present? Present? Degree
Low Yes Clearly defined boundaries Yes Low
Moderate Yes Proportional equivalence No --
Low Yes Collective-choice arrangements No Moderate
-- Possible Effective monitoring Possible --
-- Possible Graduated sanctions Possible --
Low Yes Conflict-resolution mechanisms Yes Low
Low Yes Minimal right to organize No Low
Moderate Yes Nested enterprises Yes Moderate

32. EVALUATION OF DESIGN PRINCIPLES
Grazing System of the Woodland Management in
Faroe Islands Adaptive Governance South Iceland
Design Principle
Degree Present? Present? Degree
Low Yes Clearly defined boundaries Yes Low
Moderate Yes Proportional equivalence No --
Low Yes Collective-choice arrangements No Moderate
-- Possible Effective monitoring Possible --
-- Possible Graduated sanctions Possible --
Low Yes Conflict-resolution mechanisms Yes Low
Low Yes Minimal right to organize No Low
Moderate Yes Nested enterprises Yes Moderate

33. CONCLUSIONS
 SES Framework can be applied to archaeological cases

34. CONCLUSIONS
 SES Framework can be applied to archaeological cases
 Archaeological cases provide insights into implementation of design
principles and the costs/benefits associated with maintenance over
longue durée

35. CONCLUSIONS
 SES Framework can be applied to archaeological cases
 Archaeological cases provide insights into implementation of design
principles and the costs/benefits associated with maintenance over
longue durée
 Interdisciplinary approach is necessary

36. CONCLUSIONS
 SES Framework can be applied to archaeological cases
 Archaeological cases provide insights into implementation of design
principles and the costs/benefits associated with maintenance over
longue durée
 Interdisciplinary approach is necessary
 Design principles are essential for successful CPR management in
North Atlantic cases
 Grazing system had all eight design principles and continues to this day
 Woodland management had only five design principles – widespread deforestation
did occur early on, but core areas were maintained through management
strategies

37. CONCLUSIONS
 SES Framework can be applied to archaeological cases
 Archaeological cases provide insights into implementation of design
principles and the costs/benefits associated with maintenance over
longue durée
 Interdisciplinary approach is necessary
 Design principles are essential for successful CPR management in
North Atlantic cases
 Grazing system had all eight design principles and continues to this day
 Woodland management had only five design principles – widespread deforestation
did occur early on, but core areas were maintained through management
strategies
 Archaeological data and analysis have a demonstrated utility in
creating long-term sustainable CPR systems for the present and
future

38. THANK YOU