Panel 3.12. Roundtable Discussion: Contemplating Opportunities and Challenges in the Integrative Study of State-Reinforced Self-Governance via the Institutional Grammar
co-Chairs: Daniel DeCaro1, Emmanuel Frimpong Boamah2, Ute Brady3, Christopher Frantz4, Tanya Heikkila5, and Saba Siddiki6
1University of Louisville, 2University at Buffalo, 3Arizona State University, 4Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 5UC Denver, 6Syracuse University
This panel will host a roundtable discussion on the opportunities and challenges posed by the integrative study of state-reinforced self-governance (SRSG) via the Institutional Grammar (IG). The panel chairs and audience will be invited to discuss the following key topics, as well as questions and topics generated by the panel moderator(s) and audience: (1) What are “commons” in state-reinforced and other societal systems, where government(s) affect (e.g., enable, constrain, contribute to) the creation, governance, and/or management of commons (reconceptualizing the State, non-state, and the commons)? (2) What can IG methods tell us about State power, Faustianing bargaining (i.e., constitutional decision-making underlying society’s fundamental social contracts), and the constitution of polycentric self-governing societies (conceptualizing State power and constitutional choice)? (3) How can concepts of power and SRSG be studied, measured, and assessed using the IG (multimethods and metrics in the study of SRSG)? and (4) How do we envision future opportunities and directions for the development of the IG, SRSG Framework, and the study of the commons (future perspectives)?
Panel 3.5. Advancing an Institutional Grammar of the “State” in State-Reinforced Self-Governance
co-Chairs: Daniel DeCaro1, Emmanuel Frimpong Boamah2, Ute Brady3, Christopher Frantz4, Tanya Heikkila5, and Saba Siddiki6
1University of Louisville, 2University at Buffalo, 3Arizona State University, 4Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 5UC Denver, 6Syracuse University
Recent developments in the concept of state-reinforced self-governance (SRSG) are enabling institutional analysts to rethink the role of the State (or states across different jurisdictional scales) in facilitating and constraining self-governing, adaptive, and transformative solutions to complex societal dilemmas. However, the methods needed to analyze formal policy documents, and informal rules-in-use, in order to evaluate SRSG are underdeveloped. This panel will convene case study papers that apply the Institutional Grammar (IG) in novel ways to examine SRSG. We also seek papers that apply novel techniques designed to simultaneously inform the IG and the SRSG conceptualization of the State, State power, self-governance, and the commons.
Panel 12.6. Using Games and Experiments for Behavioral Research: Opportunities and Challenges in an Era of Abundance
co-Chairs: Minwoo Ahn1, Nathan Cook2, Marco Janssen3, Sechindra Vallury4, and Daniel DeCaro5
1University of Arizona, 2Indiana University, 3Arizona State University, 4University of Georgia, 5University of Louisville
In commons studies, there is a long tradition of research using games and experiments to test hypotheses and simulate social interactions. These games and experiments have proven to be an exciting way to advance behavioral research in commons for over three decades. In this tradition, studies have found the importance of communication, enforcement, leadership, and informational uncertainties to improve (or undermine) cooperation. In this panel, we welcome presentations that study underlying mechanisms related but not limited to such factors as communication, rule enforcement, information. Methodologically, while behavioral research expands as digital platforms and tools are more available, there are still challenges to behavioral research including costly data collection using multi-player games and deriving systematic and comparable implications from abundant studies. While creativity is needed to further advance research such as combining existing game and experimental tools with AI-powered tools, we also need deep deliberation among researchers to sort out and make sense of contradictory findings. This panel will present different ways of conducting behavioral research using games and/or experiments and will engage in discussions on how to use existing/or new tools to overcome current challenges to better understand environmental and climate behavior around commons management.
Monday, June 16, 2025 3:30 PM – 5:00 PM Hasbrouck Hall HASA0124
Analyzing State Reinforced Self-Governance Principles Using the Institutional Grammar: a Case Study of U.S. Fishery Management Councils
in-person
Shuping Wang1, Saba Siddiki1, Daniel DeCaro2 and Ute Brady3
1Syracuse University, United States, 2University of Louisville, United States, 3Arizona State University, United States
Institutional theory and analysis are the basis for commons research in social science. Scholars continue to explore ways to improve theory and measurement to better understand institutional phenomena, such as State (governmental) involvement in collective and self-governing solutions to commons dilemmas. Recent developments in the concept of state-reinforced self-governance (SRSG) and institutional analysis through the Institutional Grammar (IG) are illustrative. This paper offers an integrated application of the SRSG and IG to formally explore theoretical and analytical opportunities, operational steps, and potential for future research. It does so in the context of fisheries management—a complex multi-scale dilemma involving diverse actors, policies, and ecological factors.
The SRSG framework identifies four principles by which governments enable adaptive and transformative capacities of governance bodies via polycentric, self-governing systems: adequate responsibility, authority, operational resources, and flexibility/stability to engage in (a) multistakeholder cooperation (cf. Ostrom 1990) and (b) constitutional, administrative, and operational decision-making to modify important rule systems and production activities. The reliable and rigorous measurement of these principles is fundamental.
We develop the IG to support this measurement. We address several interlocking theoretical and methodological questions. For example, how are State power, State-reinforced cooperation, and capacity for self-governance represented and transmitted to key actors in formal policy? What role(s) do councils play in adaptive/transformative governance; how are these roles tied to fundamental characteristics (design principles)? What regulative and constitutive statements define critical aspects of responsibility, authority, operational resources, and flexibility/stability? What syntactic patterns emerge among principles? How can these patterns inform understanding of constitutional, administrative, and operational decision-making?
We examine the 2007 Magnuson-Stevens Act governing the formation and operation of U.S. fishery management councils. The Act is the most important legal document guiding and potentially reinforcing the operations of fishery management councils to make policy decisions. Overall, this research advances the study of SRSG by clarifying how recent IG advancements support diagnosis of SRSG principles. Theoretically, it may provide tools to address foundational questions about State involvement in adaptive/transformative governance.
Monday, June 16, 2025 3:30 PM – 5:00 PM Hasbrouck Hall HASA0124
Conceptualizing Learning and Constitutional Decision-Making in the Evolution of Self-Governing Systems: an Agent-Based Model of Boundedly Rational Constitutional Agents
in-person
Daniel DeCaro1, Christopher Franz2, Emmanuel Frimpong Boamah3, Marci DeCaro1 and Saba Siddiki4
1University of Louisville, United States, 2Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway, 3University at Buffalo, United States, 4Syracuse University, United States
The dynamics and evolution of self-governance systems are difficult to understand. Human choice plays a fundamental role. However, this relationship—especially collective behavior and institutional design—is poorly articulated in theory and research. Government involves Faustian bargaining—exchanging individual liberty for collective efficacy, security, and public good delivery. This exchange is central to concepts of the “State” and State-reinforced self-governance (SRSG)—how governments enable/constrain societal self-governance for public good provision and commons management. A behavioral theory of institutional design requires understanding of human motivation, reasoning, and decision-making, as well as learning and memory. This understanding must build on individual and group processes to articulate how boundedly rational agents conceptualize social-ecological dilemmas and governance systems. It must also account for dilemma stakeholders’ strategic positions, goals, and beliefs.
We address this challenge by building on prior attempts by Elinor and Vincent Ostrom to account for Bayesian reasoning and Faustian bargaining in constitutional choice. We integrate these perspectives with principles of social cognition and learning, developing both a conceptual framework and agent-based model (ABM) of the individual and collective learning and decision-making processes involved in creation of self-governing systems. The framework outlines core premises of boundedly rational constitutional decision-makers. Constitutional choice is conceptualized as a bargaining process, whereby stakeholders discuss alternative institutional designs in terms of (a) configurations of design features (e.g., collective choice and regulatory arrangements) that (b) bear on actors’ fundamental needs and liberties (e.g., self-determination, procedural justice, security) and (c) strategic goals. The ABM attempts to empirically test these assumptions with data from a lab experiment, investigating evolution of regulatory systems in a commons dilemma. We describe how constitutional agents form and update mental representations (mental models) via communication, and form preferences for particular institutional designs based on current mental models, goals, and needs.
We further employ the Institutional Grammar and communication coding techniques as the basis for institutional analysis and integration with SRSG and the ABM. This research informs behavioral theory underlying governance of commons, State influence, and collective action via constitutional decision-making.
Wednesday, June 18, 2025 10:00 AM – 12:00 PM Integrative Learning Center ILC 111
Does Chit Chat and Small Talk Matter? Analysis of Group Chat Data in Common Pool Resource Experiments
in-person
Minwoo Ahn1, Daniel DeCaro2, and Marco Janssen3
1University of Arizona, United States, 2University of Louisville, United States, 3Arizona State University, United States
Overuse of shared resources is a major concern for many communities. While the positive effect of deliberation and facilitation on collective action outcomes are well-recognized in the literature, there is no conclusive theory on why deliberation improves cooperative outcomes. Studies show that formal mechanism -- rule-based group deliberation – can improve cooperation among resource users, but less is known about the role of informal discourse in shared resource governance. We fill this gap by asking: what is the role of informal discourse in forging cooperation and trust? How formal mechanism intersects with informal mechanism in shaping positive outcomes? We use data from Foraging game that includes 339 rounds of communication from 113 groups and 452 participants. To answer this question, we apply structural topic models to the game dataset. Preliminary analysis suggests that there are different types of informal discourses and that the sequence and timing of informal discourse tend to have influence on cooperative outcomes. We contribute to the theory building on how informal discourse intersects with formal mechanisms in shaping positive outcomes.
