The Use of the Institutional Grammar 1.0 for Institutional Analysis: A Literature Review

IF 1.8 3区 经济学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES International Journal of the Commons Pub Date : 2023-08-08 DOI:10.5334/ijc.1214
Leah Pieper, Santiago Virgüez, Edella Schlager, Charlies M. Schweik
{"title":"The Use of the Institutional Grammar 1.0 for Institutional Analysis: A Literature Review","authors":"Leah Pieper, Santiago Virgüez, Edella Schlager, Charlies M. Schweik","doi":"10.5334/ijc.1214","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since Crawford and Ostrom proposed the Institutional Grammar (IG), a conceptual tool for breaking down and organizing institutional statements, a burgeoning literature has used it to study institutions contained in single documents and to conduct comparative institutional analysis across multiple countries and time periods. Moreover, rapid advances in text analysis and computational methods are creating new analytic opportunities to study rules, norms and strategies by leveraging the IG syntax. At this stage, it is important to assess the existing literature to understand how the IG has supported institutional analysis across a variety of contexts, including commons governance. Based on a corpus of 48 empirical articles published between 2010 and 2021, we explore how analysts have operationalized institutional statements using the IG. We also synthesize the IG-based metrics and theoretical concepts developed in these articles to illustrate the contributions of IG for measurement of challenging concepts such as polycentricity, discretion, and compliance, among others. Our findings indicate that the IG is a flexible and adaptable tool for institutional analysis, especially for making empirical contributions from text-based data, and it holds promise toward building a potentially new emerging subfield we call Computational Institutional Analysis.","PeriodicalId":47250,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of the Commons","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of the Commons","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/ijc.1214","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since Crawford and Ostrom proposed the Institutional Grammar (IG), a conceptual tool for breaking down and organizing institutional statements, a burgeoning literature has used it to study institutions contained in single documents and to conduct comparative institutional analysis across multiple countries and time periods. Moreover, rapid advances in text analysis and computational methods are creating new analytic opportunities to study rules, norms and strategies by leveraging the IG syntax. At this stage, it is important to assess the existing literature to understand how the IG has supported institutional analysis across a variety of contexts, including commons governance. Based on a corpus of 48 empirical articles published between 2010 and 2021, we explore how analysts have operationalized institutional statements using the IG. We also synthesize the IG-based metrics and theoretical concepts developed in these articles to illustrate the contributions of IG for measurement of challenging concepts such as polycentricity, discretion, and compliance, among others. Our findings indicate that the IG is a flexible and adaptable tool for institutional analysis, especially for making empirical contributions from text-based data, and it holds promise toward building a potentially new emerging subfield we call Computational Institutional Analysis.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
制度语法1.0在制度分析中的应用:文献综述
自从克劳福德和奥斯特罗姆提出制度语法(Institutional Grammar, IG)这一分解和组织制度陈述的概念工具以来,新兴的文献利用它来研究单个文件中包含的制度,并在多个国家和多个时期进行比较制度分析。此外,文本分析和计算方法的快速发展为利用IG语法研究规则、规范和策略创造了新的分析机会。在这个阶段,重要的是评估现有文献,以了解IG如何支持各种背景下的制度分析,包括公地治理。基于2010年至2021年间发表的48篇实证文章的语料库,我们探讨了分析师如何使用IG操作机构声明。我们还综合了这些文章中开发的基于IG的度量标准和理论概念,以说明IG对测量具有挑战性的概念(如多中心性、自由裁量权和遵从性等)的贡献。我们的研究结果表明,IG是一种灵活且适应性强的制度分析工具,特别是在从基于文本的数据中做出实证贡献方面,它有望建立一个潜在的新兴子领域,我们称之为计算制度分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of the Commons
International Journal of the Commons ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
10.50%
发文量
17
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊最新文献
Can the Indonesian collective action norm of Gotong-Royong be strengthened with economic incentives? Comparing the implementation of an aquaculture irrigation policy program The Drivers of Farmers’ Participation in Collaborative Water Management: A French Perspective The Use of the Institutional Grammar 1.0 for Institutional Analysis: A Literature Review Diagnosing Participation and Inclusion in Collective Decision-Making in the Commons: Lessons from Ecuador Westphalian Sovereignty and the Free-Rider Conundrum in the Atmospheric Commons: Examining Global Governance Regimes for Addressing Climate Change Adaptation
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1