Common-pool resources differ from public goods in being rivalrous yet costly to exclude.
Evidence
These are rivalrous goods that are shared by a community (e.g., forests, irrigation systems, etc.). Excluding their use by owners and beneficiaries is costly. Common goods are different from other economic goods, in particular, public goods (e.g., public education), which are also non-excludable but non-rivalrous. Public goods are accessible to all members of society but distributed by the State; consequently, individuals cannot be excluded from using them. — Laura Albareda and Alejo Jose G. Sison, Commons Organizing, 56
Categorization
- DEFINE: Establishes the rivalrous/non-excludable vs non-rivalrous/non-excludable taxonomy for common-pool resources versus public goods.
- corroborated: 5 independent passages support this claim — Laura Albareda and Alejo Jose G. Sison, Commons Organizing: Embedding Common…, 56
- XREF: connects to: The resource-cost distinction between right types is contestable — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market: Human Rights…, 195; People conserve shared resources when they expect others to reciprocate restraint.
Related
Broader Connections
- The resource-cost distinction between right types is contestable
#complicates(0.82) — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market, 195 - People conserve shared resources when they expect others to reciprocate restraint.
#qualifies(0.78)