* Originally Published in revista 22.
A good deal of economic and political thinking of the 20th century stood under the sign of the following argument: when it works perfectly, is something admirable. But the market has failures. And the State must intervene and get things right. Together with authors like James Buchanan and Gordon Tullock, or Vincent Ostrom, Elinor Ostrom is among those thinkers who, since the 1960s, have regarded the proposition "market e imperfecta, therefore the State is" not through political or ideological doctrines method, but through the prism of logic and empirical evidence. "To demonstrate that a particular institutional arrangement leads to an suboptimala performance, writes Ostrom, not equivalent, however, demonstrate that another institutional arrangement will lead to a better result." The fact that in the 20th century many of the best minds from the social sciences had to fight to prove the falsity of sentences and a slur so obviously flawed as "market fails, hence the State is the solution," says something meaningful about the intellectual atmosphere of this century.
Elinor Ostrom has gone beyond demonstrating empirically that many cases does not state is the solution. Her argument is different from Buchanan colleagues or Tullock. The State, Buchanan and Tullock, saying not only that it is not an effective mechanism for the implementation of economic operations typically performed by firms, but it is not effective even for sweeping administrative and regulatory intervention on the markets. The idea that we have this State institution, we believe the key and populated with some wonderful people competency-politicians and bureaucrats, who don't think than the public good and behave as such, without being tempted at all to use levers and influence in their own interest-it is a myth. State failure is even more perverse than the systematic market. I had, up to now, a theory of market failure which would justify State intervention through implication. Now, we have a theory of failure. State intervention can no longer be invoked. Be punctual and not full of demands imposed by definition. Effective they must be proven, not postulata. Buchanan and Tullock briefly looked like the more serious state and fail than the market.
Elinor Ostrom makes a step forward. She looks at the positive side of things. Thus proving how, even when we are talking about public goods and services that the market cannot provide and on which the State claims that it offers effective, people may develop institutional arrangements through which the complex to produce and distribute goods and services in question. They can solve the complex problems of cooperation and coordination and that do not require advice or force the State to do so. For example, conventional approach going on the idea that the problems of the environment and natural resources should be resolved centrally. Or even more, by a "world State" as the UN. Let free, destroying individuals biotechnologies, so. .. the State must intervene.
Ostrom showed through ingenious, analysis by laboratory experiments and the theoretical arguments that there are solutions to problems such as the abusive exploitation of resources in common, property solutions that people invent themselves, without making an appeal to force. Moreover, as these solutions are not hypothetical or theoretical. That are practiced and were practiced by the human communities across the globe since the world. Default Elinor Ostrom reveals a fact of great importance: How did bias statista raging in the 20th century makes us deem insignificant functional solutions and institutional arrangements. Forget that people can self-govern without Governments.
Elinor Ostrom's work is thus ultimately a profound argument in favor of self-governance and human freedom. In short, a challenge to the statismului address. Deliberately or by accident, the Nobel Committee awarded this prize, an award that those closest to him his Elinor il few years expect, in a very special moment. The recent economic crisis has led to the exacerbation of the ferocious rhetoric statiste. Typical logic doctrines "market fails, hence the State is the solution" as well as Keynesismul, ravage the global scale in our minds anyway affected by intellectual who believes pathology/sees a role for the State in all and in all. Perhaps recognizing the value of public school of thinking represented by Elinor Ostrom change the current atmosphere? In the short term, pretty unlikely. But let's not forget what Keynes himself has taught us:
"The ideas of economists and those who write philosophy politics, even when they are wrong, are more influential and important than it thinks indeobste. Indeed, the world is governed almost entirely by them. People practices, what fancy to be outside any intellectual influences, are usually the slaves of ideas any economist or another long gone among the righteous. With fixatie and a pathological, they extracted from confusion to any copyright of yesteryear. I believe that the power of personal and group interests is much supraestimata in relation to that of the image gradually and stealthily penetrate the minds of the people. Of course, not immediately, but sooner or later the power of ideas will make their presence felt; because in the field of economy and political philosophy, there are too many people who influenced by new theories before they exceed 20 or 30 years have been proposed, so that the ideas applied current events of politicians … are far from being the latest in the field. But eventually, sooner or later, this world is influenced in the right or wrong of not personal or group interests, but of ideas. "
