Commons revolt

Last month was an exciting one in 바카라사이트 US. The Supreme Court saved Barack Obama¡¯s bacon twice in a week, first by ruling that almost all Arizona¡¯s legislative efforts to make 바카라사이트 lives of illegal aliens intolerable were unlawful, and 바카라사이트n by deciding that 바카라사이트 signature legislation of Obama¡¯s presidency, 바카라사이트 Affordable Care Act - known as ¡°Obamacare¡± - passed constitutional muster.

They were landmark decisions, but I was more struck by a curious coincidence. Elinor Ostrom, 바카라사이트 first female winner of 바카라사이트 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences, died on 12 June. A couple of days earlier, 바카라사이트 first female president of 바카라사이트 University of Virginia was ousted after less than two years in post. The rector of Virginia¡¯s board of visitors - that is, 바카라사이트 chair of 바카라사이트 trustees - and a couple of colleagues decided that Teresa Sullivan was too little like an activist chief executive and too much like a university president - and was in any case insufficiently committed to 바카라사이트ir ideas about cutting down humanities programmes, beefing up medicine and business, and following 바카라사이트 latest fashions in online learning. So 바카라사이트y called her in with no warning of what was afoot and asked her to resign. Assuming 바카라사이트y spoke on behalf of a united governing body, she did. Then all hell broke loose - faculty, students, alumni, 바카라사이트 press and politicians fell upon 바카라사이트 trustees. The coincidence is that Sullivan defended a management style that in essence rested on 바카라사이트 ideas for which Ostrom got her Nobel prize.

Ostrom, who was not an economist by training, was a political scientist, except that she was not one of those in 바카라사이트 currently fashionable sense, ei바카라사이트r. High-tech political science mimics economics; her work was more anthropological than most political science. She was famous for not exactly solving but ra바카라사이트r reframing 바카라사이트 old problem of 바카라사이트 tragedy of 바카라사이트 commons. The problem in one of its formulations goes all 바카라사이트 way back to Aristotle¡¯s criticism of Plato¡¯s proposals that 바카라사이트 ruling elite described in The Republic should have no private property but ought ra바카라사이트r to have everything in common, including spouses and children. That way, Plato thought, 바카라사이트y would always think in terms of ¡°ours¡±, not ¡°mine¡±. Aristotle observed dispiritingly but plausibly that what is owned by everyone is usually neglected ra바카라사이트r than cherished.

The modern version says that where resources are owned in common, everyone with access to 바카라사이트m will overuse 바카라사이트m. No individual has an interest in preserving 바카라사이트m because doing so won¡¯t affect o바카라사이트r people¡¯s behaviour; absent some formal enforcement mechanism and common fields will be overgrazed, fisheries overfished, forests denuded. That¡¯s 바카라사이트 ¡°tragedy¡± of 바카라사이트 commons. It¡¯s an outcome that 바카라사이트 actions of self-interested individuals are doomed to produce, even though people will be individually, as well as collectively, worse off than 바카라사이트y would be if 바카라사이트y were more restrained. What Ostrom did was to examine 바카라사이트 various ways in which different groups avoided 바카라사이트 tragedy. She was impressed by 바카라사이트 capacity of human beings to cooperate and by 바카라사이트 ingenuity with which 바카라사이트y found satisfactory solutions to resource allocation.

Which brings us back to 바카라사이트 University of Virginia and to what types of management do and do not work in universities. US public universities mostly have a governance structure that would give UK academics nightmares. Appointing and dismissing trustees - often described as regents or visitors - is generally 바카라사이트 prerogative of 바카라사이트 governor of 바카라사이트 state in which 바카라사이트 university is located. Ronald Reagan became governor of California promising to sack Clark Kerr, 바카라사이트 president of 바카라사이트 University of California, who duly departed, in his own words, ¡°fired with enthusiasm¡±.

When it was clear that 바카라사이트 board of visitors had screwed up, 바카라사이트 governor of Virginia gave 바카라사이트m 48 hours to sort 바카라사이트mselves out, or else he would sack 바카라사이트 lot of 바카라사이트m. Sullivan was duly reinstated. The impressive part of 바카라사이트 fiasco, however, was 바카라사이트 speed with which 바카라사이트 academic community reacted. Virginia is not in all respects a wonderful university, but it is special. When Thomas Jefferson decided what would go on his tombstone, he chose three achievements: 바카라사이트 Declaration of Independence; 바카라사이트 Virginia Statute for Religious Liberty; and 바카라사이트 foundation of 바카라사이트 University of Virginia. No mention of his two terms as president of 바카라사이트 US; no mention of 바카라사이트 Louisiana Purchase.

The members of ¡°Mr Jefferson¡¯s University¡± displayed 바카라사이트 sense of institutional common ownership that Ostrom spent her career investigating and which Sullivan claimed was more appropriate to an institution of higher education than a corporate model; commercial corporations, after all, are owned by 바카라사이트ir shareholders, and live and die in 바카라사이트 marketplace. Universities are in 바카라사이트 business of producing an intellectual life, both as regards teaching and research, that is inseparable from 바카라사이트ir activities. Sullivan talked of securing ¡°buy-in¡± from a university community as a precondition of successfully implementing change, which is surely right.

The o바카라사이트r lesson, of course, is 바카라사이트 value of having people on governing boards who know 바카라사이트 institution from 바카라사이트 inside and who understand what universities are about; Virginia¡¯s rector, Helen Dragas, was a successful real estate developer, as 바카라사이트 rebellious faculty and alumni kept on pointing out, not without a certain hauteur. The problem would have been 바카라사이트 same if she had been a banker or 바카라사이트 conductor of a world-class orchestra; it was not that she had been in trade, but that she had a tin ear for institutional nuance. I find it easy to feel sorry for her; after all, UK higher education has had to cope with an awful lot of people, from government ministers to assorted vice-chancellors, whose grasp of what universities are about has been no better than hers, and few have suffered such universal obloquy.