SIMON'S COMPLAINT THAT ROBINSON CRUSOE WAS NOT A RESOURCE ALLOCATOR SUFFERS FROM A FAILURE TO DEFINE WHAT IS MEANT BY A "RESOURCE," BY A FAILURE TO ELABORATE A MEANINGFUL CONCEPT OF TECHNOLOGY AND TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE, BY AN OVERSTATED POSITION ON THE IMPORTANCE OF CRUSOE AS A HEURISTIC DEVICE, AND BY THE PERSISTENT BELIEF THAT POPULATION GROWTH HOLDS THE SECRET TO THE SALVATION OF PLANET EARTH. ALONE, THESE FAILINGS ARE SERIOUS FOR ANY MEANINGFUL DISCUSSION OF ECONOMICS AND RESOURCE POLICY; IN CONCERT THEY ARE MORE SO.
The general distinctions between open access, state property, common proerty and private property are now well established in the academic literature. When applied to African rangelands, however, common property admits a wide variety of resource management regimes. To formulate effective policies it is necessary to understand the structure and operations of particular regimes. In this paper we discuss three examples of common property regimes, two from the southern African nation of Lesotho and one from the west African nation of Senegal, to illustrate some of the key characteristics of common property regimes. In particular, it is important to understand the structure of governance, the types of institutions that govern behavior, and the compatibility between governance, institutions and individual incentives. A common property regime can only be effective if its institutionsare compatible with the structure of governance. The extent of its effectiveness also depends upon the incentives and expectations of individuals expected to enforce the rules of the institutions or comply with their terms. At present, most African governments lack the organizational capacity and political will necessary to implement state property regimes, official regulations on resource use, or individual property rights for rangelands resources. In many cases it is more appropriate for governments to define and enforce group rights to particular resources, then help to establish conditions in which internal group dynamics yield efficient resource management outcomes.
It has been suggested that African rangelands would be utilized and managed on a more sustainable and profitable basis if they were governed by co-management arrangements, with state governments defining group rights and governing inter-group interactions and local organizations governing interactions among members within particular groups. In this paper we develop a discrete-time dynamic model of a rangeland to investigate the possibilities for internal management of resource use interactions within a common property regime. We find that there can be effective internal management without any formal institutional structure within the regime if: (1) group members are confident that the boundaries of the regime will be effectively protected; (2) the group of resources users is kept relatively small; (3) future pasture potential is not overly sensitive to changes in the current stocking rate; and (4) individuals do not discount future payoffs too heavily.
