Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T16:02:58.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Habraken, Jacobs, and Ostrom on governing the built environment: the case of common interest developments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 March 2021

John B. Horowitz
John B. Horowitz*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, Ball State University, Muncie, IN47306, USA
*
Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Habraken's Structure of the Ordinary (SOTO), Jacobs' view of cities, and Ostrom's Design Principles and Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework focus on essential elements and relationships for the effective governance of the environment. However, they have different perspectives about what is necessary for successful governance. This article compares and contrasts Habraken's, Jacobs', and Ostrom's views and applies them to Common Interest Developments (CIDs). Habraken, Jacobs, and Habraken discuss the importance of public territory. Habraken views public territory as relative: a territory in a built environment can be private relative to a larger, or higher level, territory, and public relative to an included, lower level, territory. Jacobs discusses the importance of connections and accommodating strangers without sacrificing safety. Ostrom views common-pool resources as goods whose use causes less to be available to others. For their part, CIDs represent a particular governance vehicle for defining what is public and private in large residential developments. For both Habraken and Ostrom, the transformation of the physical environment reflects agents' common values constrained by material, technical, cultural, and economic conditions. Rather than one mutual understanding, Jacobs wrote that balancing the commercial and the guardian values is crucial for society's health and survival.

Keywords

Club goodscommon-pool resourcescommonsenvironmentgovernanceHabrakenOstromprivate spacepublic spacetoll goodsindividualsB5-Current Heterodox ApproachesD7-Analysis of Collective Decision-MakingH4-Publicly Provided GoodsQ2-Environmental Management
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Institutional Economics , Volume 17 , Issue 4 , August 2021 , pp. 625 - 640
Copyright
Copyright © Millennium Economics Ltd 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alesina, A., Baqir, R. and Easterly, W. (1999), ‘Public Goods and Ethnic Divisions’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(4): 1243–1284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bègue, L., Beauvois, J., Courbet, D., Oberlé, D., Lepage, J. and Duke, A. A. (2015), ‘Personality Predicts Obedience in a Milgram Paradigm’, Journal of Personality, 83(3): 299–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boudreaux, D. J. and Holcombe, R. G. (2002), ‘Contractual Governments in Theory and Practice’, in Beito, D. T., Gordon, P., and Tabarrok, A. (eds.), The Voluntary City: Choice Community, and Civil Society, Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press for the Independent Institute, pp. 289–306.Google Scholar
Breit, W. and Horowitz, J. B. (1995), ‘Discrimination and Diversity: Market and Non-Market Settings’, Public Choice, 84: 63–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchanan, J. M. and Tullock, G. (1962), The Calculus of Consent: Logical Foundations of Constitutional Democracy, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, D. H. (2017), ‘Laws, Norms, and the Institutional, Analysis and Development Framework’, Journal of Institutional Economics, 13(4): 829–847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, N., González-Garzón, A. M., Foulkes, L., Levita, L. and Sharot, T. (2018), ‘Updating Beliefs Under Perceived Threat’, Journal of Neuroscience, 38(36): 7901–7911.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Habraken, N. J. (1998), The Structure of the Ordinary, Form and Control in the Built Environment, Cambridge and London: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habyarimana, J., Humphreys, M., Posner, D. N. and Weinstein, J. M. (2007), ‘Why Does Ethnic Diversity Undermine Public Goods Provision?’, American Political Science Review, 101(4): 709–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D. and Birney, M. E. (2016), ‘Questioning Authority: New Perspectives on Milgram's ‘Obedience’ Research and Its Implications for Intergroup Relations’, Current Opinion in Psychology, 11: 6–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, J. B. (2013), ‘How to Create an Externality’, Journal of economic and social policy, 15(2): 24–41.Google Scholar
Howard, E. (1902), Garden Cities of To-Morrow, London: S. Sonnenschein & Co., Ltd.Google Scholar
Jacobs, J. (1993), The Death and Life of Great American Cities, New York, NY: The Modern Library.Google Scholar
Jacobs, J. (1994), Systems of Survival: A Dialogue on the Moral Foundations of Commerce and Politics, New York, NY: Vintage Books, a Division of Random House, Inc.Google Scholar
Kashwan, P. and Holahan, R. (2014), ‘Nested Governance for Effective REDD + : Institutional and Political Arguments’, International Journal of the Commons, 8(2): 554–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiser, L. L. and Ostrom, E. (1982), ‘The Three Worlds of Action: A Metatheoretical Synthesis of Institutional Approaches’, in Ostrom, E. (ed.), Strategies of Political Inquiry, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, pp. 179–222.Google Scholar
MacCallum, S. H. (2002), ‘The case for land lease versus subdivision: Homeowners’ associations reconsidered’, in Beito, D. T., Gordon, P., and Tabarrok, A. (eds), The Voluntary City: Choice Community, and Civil Society, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press for the Independent Institute, pp. 371–399.Google Scholar
McGinnis, M. D. and Ostrom, E. (2014), ‘Social-ecological System Framework: Initial Changes and Continuing Challenges’, Ecology and Society, 19(2): 30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKenzie, E. (2006), ‘Emerging Trends in State Regulation of Private Communities in the U.S’, Geojournal, 6(1): 89–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKenzie, E. (2011), ‘Present at the Creation: The Public Administration Profession and Residential Private Government’, Public Administration Review, 71(4): 543–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKenzie, E. (2019), ‘Private Covenants, Public Laws, and the Financial Future of Condominiums’, UIC John Marshall Law Review, 52(3): 715–740.Google Scholar
Milgram, S. (1963), ‘Behavioral Study of Obedience’, The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(4): 371–378.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nelson, R. H. (2011), ‘Homeowners Associations in Historical Perspective’, Public Administration Review, 71(4): 546–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
North, D. (2005), Understanding the Process of Economic Change, Princeton: Princeton University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, V. (1980), ‘Artisanship and Artifact’, Public Administration Review, 40(4): 309–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, E. (1990), Governing the Commons, The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, E. (2007), ‘Challenges and Growth: The Development of the Interdisciplinary Field of Institutional Analysis’, Journal of Institutional Economics, 3(3): 239–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, E. (2010) ‘Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems’, The American Economic Review, 100(3): 641–672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, E. and Hess, C. (2007), ‘Private and Common Property Rights’, Encyclopedia of Law & Economics, Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar, pp. 4579.Google Scholar
Putnam, R. D. (2007), ‘E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-First Century The 2006 Johan Skytte Prize Lecture’, Scandinavian Political Studies, 30(2): 137–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarker, A. and Blomquist, W. (2019), ‘Addressing Misperceptions of Governing the Commons’, Journal of Institutional Economics, 15(2): 281–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warner, M. E. (2011), ‘Club Goods and Local Government’, Journal of the American Planning Association, 77(2): 155–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, C. (2003), ‘The Donald Robertson Memorial Prizewinner 2003 The Nature of the Neighbourhood’, Urban Studies, 40(13): 2591–2612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wildavsky, A. (1995), But Is It True? A Citizen's Guide to Environmental Health and Safety Issues, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, D. S., Ostrom, E. and Cox, M. E. (2013), ‘Generalizing the Core Design Principles for the Efficacy of Groups’, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 90(Suppl): S21–S32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar