* Originally Published in revista 22.
The Royal Swedish Academy Committee has chosen to oppose a hasty conclusions drawn from the current economic crisis, that "where I give markets fail, the State must intervene." Leaving aside the fact that the current crisis is far from being a failure of the market, Elinor Ostrom showed that the implication given by itself is false.
She has studied just extreme cases in which markets can fail from both economically and ecologically, namely common resources: water, pastures, forests, fishing waters (Lakes, rivers, oceans), oil fields. Institutional analysis of over 3,000 cases of government resources common look as though there is no universal solution, a panacea, mostly State intervention in the management of these resources is an inferior solution autoguvernarii. It presents itself in a wide variety of institutional arrangements found in time and experienced courses independent of direct users of these resources, "locals" best interested in the smooth running of things.
In short, Elinor Ostrom says that the solutions that work are those based on the creativity of local institutional and shows why public policies of national and supranational government are vane attempts catholicon. The reason is that the universality and uniformity of public policies are incompatible with the diversity of particular public issues are resolved.
The most famous work of this research program is "Government resources", but the Award signifies a reward for everyone over 40 years of scientific activity that formed a new school of thought in the social sciences school at Bloomington. Elinor Ostrom, Vincent Ostrom and their colleagues have formulated a research program which parses all levels social reality through their institutional infrastructure: micropolitic level (or few interactions between two agents), mezopolitic level (organizations, clans, communities) and macropolitic (societies, social orders, and the constitutional election arrangements).
The relevance of these ideas is one special for countries in the developing world, in transition or posttranzitie. Not understanding or ignoring the role of institutions (for example, property rights) were the reasons for the reformist policies of the type proposed by the dominant neoliberal trends economic science from the 1990s have not paid off. Their failure has fueled a recovery in which the institutionalist version ostromiana brings the added certainty, subtlety and freshness of a conspicuous direct practice and creation of institutional change. In the local context, increased awareness of the ideas of the school at Bloomington should help us to remove noise from what is really important in politics: the quality of the resulting institutions.
From the perspective of the school at Bloomington, the order policy is the result of two types of institutions: "constitutional rules", which forms the general framework of interactions, which are the preserve of the State, and that "subconstitutionale" rules such as laws, regulations, and contractual arrangements.
The school's vision is of a polycentric order, that is a society made up of multiples "centers" or formally independent players some other girl-private individuals, organizations, communities and their organizations. Polycentric EU Constitution must allow and protect their existence and freedom of interrelationare without trying to coordinate according to any predetermined plan. This level of coordination, consisting of subconstitutionale institutions, must result from mutual and permanent adjustment of the Center. Only in this way can find individual creativity and experience of institutional and organizational arrangements that best respond to public issues. If the incentives are right, public goods and services supplied will be systematically more adequate than those we can provide centralized public administration.
The value and potential of these ideas are applied in a significant and increasing grip as illustrated that they had in the world over the past 20 years, well beyond the official recognition on the part of the Swedish Academy. The more we can now speak of a revolution in the social sciences, one that puts the individual institutional and local creativity in the Centre of the political theory and practice and reduce the State's role according to the constitutional framework-to the free interaction of individuals and not of universal regulator, father or elder brother.
