CPR Database - Record #10187.1
Summary
The resource appropriated from Miskito Turtle Fishery is turtles. The turtle grounds extend 20 miles north, and 12 miles south of Tasbapauni, and 24 miles out into the Atlantic. The grounds include about 20 banks where turtles feed, 50 shoals where turtles sleep, and several cays where fishermen can camp. The boundary includes several physical elements, primarily banks and shoals, but the boundary is also defined by the extent the fishers can travel.
Screener and Citation
RESOURCE:
The resource appropriated from Miskito Turtle Fishery is turtles. The turtle grounds extend 20 miles north, and 12 miles south of Tasbapauni, and 24 miles out into the Atlantic. The grounds include about 20 banks where turtles feed, 50 shoals where turtles sleep, and several cays where fishermen can camp. The boundary includes several physical elements, primarily banks and shoals, but the boundary is also defined by the extent the fishers can travel.
SCREENER:
Case: Miskito Turtle Fishery, Nicaragua
The information regarding the following common-pool resource system was taken from empirical evidence from a field setting. Data on the system was extracted from a book. Currently, there are no additional documents to cite which may provide further information about this common-pool resource.
These documents describe one resource in detail. The primary resource is the Miskito Turtle Fishery, situated in Tasbapauni of Nicaragua. More generally, it is located in Central America & Caribbean. The system's sector is that of fisheries. Relatively good information has been collected about the stakes of participants who appropriate from Miskito Turtle Fishery. The condition of this resource is well understood. Complete information is available regarding the strategies used by key groups interacting with the system. There is thorough documentation of the operational rules for this resource. This is the result of a high level of confidence that the authors who recorded the features of Miskito Turtle Fishery have a complete knowledge of its particulars. Furthermore, the authors have provided sufficient data to formulate a structured coding process.
The Miskito Turtle Fishery covers approximately 1554000000.0 sq. meters. There are 51-100 total appropriator teams appropriating from the resource . At the beginning of the period discussed by the authors, there was a moderately abundant supply of biological and physical resources withdrawn compared to the number of units available. Appropriator teams for the resource are sometimes formally organized.
The Miskito once could secure adequate nutrition and raw materials from their environment by day-to-day shifts (change of focus) between fishing, hunting/gathering, and gardening. They balanced shortages and surpluses by taking advantage of diverse resources in different ecosystems, and via the socially-dictated practice of sharing. The most sought-after food was turtles; extra meat (beyond that reserved for catchers' families) was given to kin or friends (or sold, but only locally). "Turtlemen" worked in teams of two to find and harpoon turtles; beyond the two-man crew the fishery was not organized [operational rules only]. The community shifted from land to water resources and back in response to environmental conditions, not human rules. Falling turtle populations, rising human populations, growing market demand for turtle products, and incorporation of the Miskito into the cash economy have led to over-reliance by the Miskito on increasingly scarce turtles. More meat to market means less to share, resulting in less protein available, disrupted social strategies, and the turtle CPR in distress.
CITATION(S):
Nietschmann, Bernard (1972) "Hunting and Fishing Focus Among the Miskito Indians, Eastern Nicaragua." HUMAN ECOLOGY 1(1): 41-67.*
Nietschmann, Bernard (1973) BETWEEN LAND AND WATER: THE SUBSISTENCE ECOLOGY OF THE MISKITO INDIANS, EASTERN NICARAGUA. New York: Seminar Press. [G-M F1529 .M9 N67]
Resource and Location
RESOURCE INFO:
The resource appropriated from Miskito Turtle Fishery is turtles. It is produced biologically and is a renewable moving (fugitive) unit. The turtle grounds extend 20 miles north, and 12 miles south of Tasbapauni, and 24 miles out into the Atlantic. The grounds include about 20 banks where turtles feed, 50 shoals where turtles sleep, and several cays where fishermen can camp. The boundary includes several physical elements, primarily banks and shoals, but the boundary is also defined by the extent the fishers can travel.
The boundary of this resource has natural/constructed and institutional arrangements which do not limit entry. The boundaries of this resource are smaller than the location, and exist in one country, and are not divided among multiple general purpose local jurisdictions at a single level. The boundaries of this resource are independent of a development project designed by non-residents.
There are distinct and stable micro-environmental or ecological zones within this resource (highly confident). The quality and/or quantity of units is regularly better in some of the zones than in others (highly confident). The variance in quality between the zones has at some point in time created conflict among appropriators.
There are natural barriers within the resource, and they coincide with microzones (highly confident). There are not strategic points within the resource where the main flow of the turtles can be controlled (highly confident). There is considerable, and predictable variation over space in the availability of turtles within the resource (highly confident). There is considerable, and predictable variation in the flow of turtles within a single year (highly confident). There is not considerable-2 variation in the flow of turtles from year to year (inferred).
The bottom topography of Miskito Turtle Fishery is not indicated in the case study information.
If no rules in use were being followed, the relationship among the appropriation processes would have little adverse effects (inferred).
The boundaries of the production resource are totally seperated from the boundaries of the appropriation resource (highly confident). The boundaries of the production resource are totally seperated from the boundaries of the location (highly confident). The boundaries of the distribution resource and the boundaries of the appropriation resource overlap partially, but they are not equivalent (highly confident). The boundaries of the production resource and the boundaries of the distribution resource overlap paritally, but they are not equivalent (highly confident).
LOCATION:
The appropriation resources are situated on the eastern coast of Nicaragua, in the village of Tasbapauni and its turtling grounds. The boundaries of the location are primarily institutionally defined with the village, and the turtling grounds are both naturally and institutionally defined. The extent of the grounds is based on traditional usage of certain cays, reefs, and islands. The appropriation resource present in this location consists of turtles (coding), as well as shrimp, and wild animals. Regarding the use of the irrigation system, there were sometimes few adverse effects, and sometimes conflictual effects in the relationships among appropriation processes.
The system is located within one country. Within this country, the system's location is not divided among several general purpose local jurisdictions at the same level. A permanent population lives year round in this location (highly confident). There is frequent contact and communication between people in this location and officials in a nearby administrative center (inferred). This location is also characterized by an economy that is stable and tied to other economic networks during most of time period (confident).
The latitude of this location is 12.5 deg N, and its longitude is 83.5 deg W. The elevation of this location is 0 meters (highly confident). The highest elevation is 0. The lowest elevation of this location is 0. The region's average annual rainfall is 3810 milimeters (confident). The region's average annual evapotranspiration is 0 milimeters. The distribution of rainfall and evapotranspiration per month is as follows:
January precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
February precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
March precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
April precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
May precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
June precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
July precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
August precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
September precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
October precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
November precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
December precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
Operational Levels and Subgroup
RESOURCE:
The resource appropriated from Miskito Turtle Fishery is turtles. The turtle grounds extend 20 miles north, and 12 miles south of Tasbapauni, and 24 miles out into the Atlantic. The grounds include about 20 banks where turtles feed, 50 shoals where turtles sleep, and several cays where fishermen can camp. The boundary includes several physical elements, primarily banks and shoals, but the boundary is also defined by the extent the fishers can travel.
OPERATIONAL LEVEL:
TYPE OF SITUATION
The processes described in the related documents are primarily related to appropriation, production, distribution and use. The formal owner(s) of the resource discussed in this study is a central government. The set of individuals who have rights to withdraw from this resource is well-defined. As of the beginning of this period, the owners are not indicated as either attempting, or failing to attempt to exercise access to this resource. Since the beginning of this period, the appropriators are exercising (or attempting to exercise de facto) closed access to this resource.
EVENTS MARKING THE BEGINNING ACTION SITUATION
It is estimated that the operational level coded on this form ended in 0.0. The estimated duration of the patterns that are described in this form is 101 to 200 years. Throughout the duration there were no changes made in operational, collective, or consititutional rules. There was no change in resource size or structure. There was no new technology introduced to the system over the duration of the patterns coded on this form. There was no substantial external change in the value of the units appropriated. The quantity of units available did not change due to a change in appropriation patterns of other appropriators' withdrawals from the same production or distribution resource. There was a new local group starting to withdraw units from the appropriation resource. There was no recorded change to one or more variables internal to the operational level. The author begins the description of this case at this point in history. The author begins at this point in history because village was founded in 1860.
CONDITIONS AT THE BEGINNING AND END OF PERIOD COVERED BY THIS FORM*
For biological resources at the beginning of this period, the balance between the quantity of units withdrawn and the number of units available was quite abundant (educated guess). For biological resources at the end of this period, the balance between the quantity of units withdrawn and the number of units available was a moderate shortage (inferred). For physical resources at the beginning of this period, the balance between the quantity of units withdrawn and the quantity of units needed, given the usual patterns of use for these units was quite abundant (educated guess). For physical resources at the end of the period the balance between the quantity of units withdrawn and the quantity of units needed, given the usual patterns of use for these units, was a moderate shortage (inferred).
The following includes the available statistics on the use of this resource at the beginning of the time period, followed by the end of the time period:
Tons of fish harvested per year at the end of the period: 82 (confident)
*In fisheries and other biological systems, this is the maximum sustainable number of units. In irrigation, this refers to the optimal water requirements of the crops in the established fields served by this system.
As of the beginning of the period, the quality of the units being withdrawn from the resource was high (inferred). As of the end of the period, the quality of the units being withdrawn from the resource was passable (inferred). At the beginning of the period of the study, there were no problems of pollution in this or other resources, due to the way units are being appropriated (inferred). At the end of the period of the study, there were no problems of pollution in this or other resources due to the way units are being appropriated (inferred). As of the beginning of the period, the extent of technical externalities resulting from the appropriation activities of participants from this resource was not indicated. As of the end of the period, the extent of technical externalities resulting from the appropriation activities of participants from this resource was not indicated. At the beginning of this study, the interference between the appropriation technology for this resource and the appropriation processes for other resources in this location was not recorded in the case information. At the end of this study, the interference between the appropriation technology for this resource and the appropriation processes for other resources in this location was moderate (inferred). At the beginning of this study, holding all inputs constant 0. At the end of this study, holding all inputs constant 0. At the beginning of this period the appropriators shared moderate to high levels of mutual trust (e.g. oral promises given high credence) (inferred). At the end of the period the appropriators shared moderate to high levels of mutual trust (e.g. oral promises given high credence) (inferred). ## Unknown command: Start ##By the end of this period no change had occurred in the property rights regime related to the appropriation resource (inferred). At the end of this period the owners were exercising, or attempting to exercise, de jure and effective closed access to this resource (inferred). At the end of the period the appropriators were exercising, or attempting to exercise, de facto closed access to this resource (confident).
INFORMATION LEVELS
There are no maps or charts of the appropriation resource for use by the appropriators (educated guess). Maps and/or charts of the production and distribution resources are not available to the appropriators (educated guess). The appropriators of this resource can be seen by each other while withdrawing and delivering units (educated guess). No appropriators are in radio communication with each other while appropriating from the resource (inferred). There was no information provided to indicate whether or not there are actions being taken, by appropriators or officials, to generate information about the condition of the resource. There are not records of the withdrawals from this resource kept in a systematic way (inferred). There was no information in the study about whether or not there are records of the physical factors which directly affected the resource kept in a systematic way. There are arenas being used for the exchange of information about conditions of the resource (inferred). Appropriators get together to discuss mutual problems of the resource daily (inferred). The appropriators have an intimate knowledge of the characteristics of this resource (highly confident).
POTENTIAL ACTIONS AND LEVELS OF CONTROL
The quality or quantity of the units available to the appropriators are adversely affected by the strategies of prior appropriators (highly confident). This study did not include information on whether or not there are problems of pollution resulting from activities of others who are not appropriators of this resource or inhabitants of this location (e.g. acid rain, sewage disposal). Almost all appropriators sell this resource in multiple markets (confident). There appears to be an insurance mechanism available to the appropriators related to variability of income from the resource (inferred).
PATTERNS OF INTERACTION
Differences between subgroups relating to gender identification does not exist (highly confident). Differences between subgroups relating to ethnic identification does not exist (highly confident). Differences between subgroups relating to clan identification does not affect communication (highly confident). Differences between subgroups relating to racial identification does not exist (highly confident). Differences between subgroups relating to religious identification does not affect communication (highly confident). Differences between subgroups relating to languages spoken does not affect communication (highly confident). Differences between subgroups relating to general cultural views of the resource system and its use are small and created only mild communication problems (inferred). Differences between subgroups relating to any problems that affect communication does not exist (highly confident).
The general manner in which appropriators related to one another during this study is a relatively positive, reciprocal manner -- the presumption was made that long-term relationships are involved and positive actions are undertaken without a specific expectation of return (inferred). The documents present evidence of specific types of cooperative activities between the appropriators related to other local resources, as well as evidence that the appropriators have a general cultural pattern that stressed various types of cooperative activities besides the management of this resource (confident).
POSITIONS AND PARTICIPANTS
At the end of the period studied the position of non-appropriator (individuals prevented from using the resource) did not exist (inferred). There was a close estimate of 0 participant(s) in this position. At the beginning of the period there was a general estimate of some undocumented number appropriators. There was a general estimate of 51-100 appropriators at the end of the period (highly confident). A general estimate of the number of participants in the team appropriation process was not included in the case study, at the beginning of the period. A general estimate of the number of participants in the team appropriation process was 51-100, at the end of the period (highly confident). The \"official\" position of monitor (apart from the willingness of all appropriators to monitor) does not exist (inferred).
The case study did not include information regarding whether or not the appropriators monitor the appropriation activities of each other apart from the monitoring of any \"official\" guards.
NUMBER AND RELATIONSHIPS AMONG SUBGROUPS
There will be 2.0 subgroup form(s) completed in relation to this operational level form. The ID number(s) of the subgroup(s) coded are as follows: 37.1 - 38.1 - 0.0 - 0.0
Subgroups 37.1 and 38.1 do not differ in legal rights to appropriate units, exposure to variations in supply, and the way they use the appropriation units.
Subgroups 37.1 and 38.1 differ in withdrawal rates from the resource and levels of dependency on the units withdrawn from this resource.
EVALUATION OF RESULTS
The study did not indicate whether or not there are appropriators who were consistently disadvantaged in this period. The study did not indicate whether or not the relatively worst off appropriators have or have not been cut out of their benefits from this resource or substantially harmed.
AUTHOR'S EVALUATION AND CAUSAL ASSUMPTIONS
In this coding form the author on the readers' concept of results and the evaluation of results.
The productive capacity of turtle grounds is declining. The size of units caught in pounds and the effort in appropriation as well as how units are used, were all poor. These results were based on the value of the unit appropriated, the type of economy (market or subsistence), the length of time appropriators used resource, and the appropriators' world view. The author discusses withdrawals per unit of effort based on Price per pound per hour takes to produce; calories per pound per hour takes to produce.
SUBGROUP:
Participants:
This subgroup includes males who live in Tasbapauni and who turtle part-time. The criteria for who is a member is well defined (highly confident). 0. This group ended with a membership of 26 (highly confident).
The following statements characterize the composition of this subgroup's population with respect to variables that may affect the capacity to communicate effectively:
Gender identification causes no difference in composition (highly confident). 0% Ethnic or cultural identification causes no difference in composition (highly confident). Most members of this subgroup are ethnically identified as Miskito Indian. The difference in composition with regard to clan identification does not affect communication (highly confident). Racial identification causes no difference in composition (highly confident). Most members of this subgroup are racially identified as Indian. The difference in composition with regard to the languages spoken does not affect communication (highly confident). The language spoken by most members of the subgroup is Miskito.
The appropriation process is organized as a team process consisting of 13 groups. Appropriation team size is on average 2.
Legal Rights:
Members of this subgroup have de jure rights of access (inferred). The right to withdraw is held by this subgroup de jure (inferred). Rights to participate in management of this resource is held de facto (inferred). Exclusion from use of the entire resource is exercised de facto (inferred). Members of this subgroup cannot exercise the right to decide who can be excluded from particular zones within the resource either de facto nor de jure. (inferred). The separable right of transfer to the flow of units from this resource is not held either by de jure nor de facto (inferred). The separable rights to exercise transfer to shares of this appropriation resource, or closely related production and/or distribution resources are neither held de jure nor de facto (educated guess).
Stakes and Resources:
The length of time this subgroup has regularly appropriated from this resource is 101 through 200 years (confident). Around 91%-100% of members reside in or adjacent to this resource (confident). 0 to build or to earn enough income to purchase the equipment for an appropriation team. The specified dollar amount required to set up an appropriation team is $100(approximate year of estimate:1969). Given the assets of members, the capital required to set up an appropriation team does not place pressure upon the appropriators to get immediate returns from appropriation (inferred). Around 91%-100% of this subgroup work a substantial amount of time in activities not associated with appropriation from this resource (confident). The proportion of this subgroup that currently appropriates similar units from other resources is less than 10% (inferred). Given the economy of the location, the average annual family income (including all non-monetary forms of income) is considered average (inferred). The variance of the average annual family income across families is low (inferred). Capital is owned by 91%-100% of this subgroup (confident). No real alternatives for the supply unit are available (confident).
Potential Actions and Levels of Control:
Keeping in mind the physically available levels of withdrawal that are possible from this resource, the following shows the extent to which rules concerning different aspects of withdrawal constrain appropriation: technological rules heavily constrain (inferred), time limits which limit the range of choice moderately constrain (inferred), quantity rules cause unknown contraints, marginal units or units obtained by increasing levels of appropriation have a high value immediate return (highly confident).
Technology:
The most recent technological change experienced by this subgroup was 26-50 years ago (educated guess). Considering other technologies that have not changed, this technology has been in use for 101-200 years (educated guess). The appropriative power of the technology used does not threaten the balance between units withdrawn and units available even if no new users are added (inferred).
Strategies Adopted:
At the beginning of the period the rate of unit withdrawals was constant (inferred). At the end of the period the rate of unit withdrawals was accelerating (inferred). During this time period members have not invested resources, such as their own labor, in maintaining or improving the structure of the appropriation resource (inferred). Investment into constructing or improving production or distribution works for maintaining or improving their resource has not been made by members (inferred). Resources have not been expended (including time) to avoid actions that would harm the structure of the appropriation resource (inferred). Members do not have access to an alternative source of supply (inferred). In characterizing the usual behavior of the members of this subgroup with respect to local operation level rules-in-use (other than in extreme shortage), it can be said that almost all of the members follow the rules set in place (highly confident). No action has been proposed to alter the operational or collective-choice rules affecting the appropriation from this resource (inferred).
Subgroup Results:
This subgroup appropriates less than 10% of its total appropriated units at the end of this period (ambiguous). The absolute quantity of appropriation units obtained by this group has become larger (inferred).
SUBGROUP:
Participants:
This subgroup includes males who live in Tasbapauni and who turtle full-time. The criteria for who is a member is well defined (highly confident). 0. This group ended with a membership of 80 (highly confident).
The following statements characterize the composition of this subgroup's population with respect to variables that may affect the capacity to communicate effectively:
Gender identification causes no difference in composition (highly confident). 0% Difference in composition with regard to ethnic or cultural identification does not affect communication (highly confident). Most members of this subgroup are ethnically identified as Miskito Indian. The difference in composition with regard to clan identification does not affect communication (highly confident). The difference in composition with regard to racial identification does not affect communication (highly confident). Most members of this subgroup are racially identified as Indian. The difference in composition with regard to the languages spoken does not affect communication (highly confident).
The appropriation process is organized as a team process consisting of 40 groups. Appropriation team size is on average 2.
Legal Rights:
Members of this subgroup have de jure rights of access (inferred). The right to withdraw is held by this subgroup de jure (inferred). Rights to participate in management of this resource is held de facto (inferred). Exclusion from use of the entire resource is exercised de facto (inferred). Members of this subgroup cannot exercise the right to decide who can be excluded from particular zones within the resource either de facto nor de jure. (inferred). The separable right of transfer to the flow of units from this resource is not held either by de jure nor de facto (inferred). The separable rights to exercise transfer to shares of this appropriation resource, or closely related production and/or distribution resources are neither held de jure nor de facto (educated guess).
Stakes and Resources:
The length of time this subgroup has regularly appropriated from this resource is 101 through 200 years (confident). Around 91%-100% of members reside in or adjacent to this resource (confident). The specified dollar amount required to set up an appropriation team is $100(approximate year of estimate:1969). Given the assets of members, the capital required to set up an appropriation team does not place pressure upon the appropriators to get immediate returns from appropriation (inferred). Most people in this subgroup are very dependent (i.e. most of the family income) on this resource (inferred). Less than 10% of this subgroup work a substantial amount of time in activities not associated with appropriation from this resource (highly confident). The proportion of this subgroup that currently appropriates similar units from other resources is less than 10% (highly confident). Given the economy of the location, the average annual family income (including all non-monetary forms of income) is considered average (inferred). The variance of the average annual family income across families is low (inferred). Capital is owned by 91%-100% of this subgroup (confident). No real alternatives for the supply unit are available (confident).
Potential Actions and Levels of Control:
A noticeable impact on the balance of the quantity of units withdrawn and the number of units available in this resource would occur in a drastic reduction of this subgroup's appropriation activities (inferred). Keeping in mind the physically available levels of withdrawal that are possible from this resource, the following shows the extent to which rules concerning different aspects of withdrawal constrain appropriation: technological rules heavily constrain (inferred), time limits which limit the range of choice moderately constrain (educated guess), quantity rules cause unknown contraints, marginal units or units obtained by increasing levels of appropriation have a high value immediate return (highly confident).
Technology:
The most recent technological change experienced by this subgroup was 26-50 years ago (educated guess). Considering other technologies that have not changed, this technology has been in use for 101-200 years (educated guess). The appropriative power of the technology used does not threaten the balance between units withdrawn and units available even if no new users are added (inferred).
Strategies Adopted:
At the beginning of the period the rate of unit withdrawals was constant (educated guess). At the end of the period the rate of unit withdrawals was accelerating (inferred). During this time period members have not invested resources, such as their own labor, in maintaining or improving the structure of the appropriation resource (inferred). Investment into constructing or improving production or distribution works for maintaining or improving their resource has not been made by members (inferred). Resources have not been expended (including time) to avoid actions that would harm the structure of the appropriation resource (inferred). Members do not have access to an alternative source of supply (inferred). In characterizing the usual behavior of the members of this subgroup with respect to local operation level rules-in-use (other than in extreme shortage), it can be said that almost all of the members follow the rules set in place (highly confident). No action has been proposed to alter the operational or collective-choice rules affecting the appropriation from this resource (inferred).
Subgroup Results:
This subgroup appropriates 91%-100% of its total appropriated units at the end of this period (confident). The absolute quantity of appropriation units obtained by this group has become larger (inferred).
Operational Rules
RESOURCE:
The resource appropriated from Miskito Turtle Fishery is turtles. The turtle grounds extend 20 miles north, and 12 miles south of Tasbapauni, and 24 miles out into the Atlantic. The grounds include about 20 banks where turtles feed, 50 shoals where turtles sleep, and several cays where fishermen can camp. The boundary includes several physical elements, primarily banks and shoals, but the boundary is also defined by the extent the fishers can travel.
OPERATIONAL RULES:
Concerning national collective choice relating to the resource, the author provides a few detailed references to operational level rules as devised by national collective choice mechanisms which have been coded below. Concerning regional collective choice, the author provides NO information about operational level rules as devised by regional collective choice mechanisms, however a regional level of government does exist.
With regard to local collective choice, a level of government or organization of appropriators exists at the location but the author provides NO information about operational level rules as devised by collective choice mechanisms.
Boundary Rules
The following rules define the requirements that must be met before individuals are eligible to harvest or withdraw units from the appropriation resource.
A rule exists requiring citizenship of a major subdivision of a country. This rule is enforced at the rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring citizenship or residence of a local community. This rule is enforced at the rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring membership in an ethnic group. This rule is enforced at the rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring an appropriator to be of a certain gender. This rule is enforced at the rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring use of a particular technology. This rule is enforced at the rules-in-use level(s).
The boundary rules do not assign substantially unequal privileges to some subgroups over others.
Authority and Scope Rules
The default conditions for both authority and scope rules do not apply.
The following paragraphs include information on rules of 1 cycle(s).
Authority Rules:
The length of the withdrawing season is 0 week(s)..
The authority and scope rules do not assign substantially unequal privileges to some subgroups above others.
Scope Rules:
Authority and scope rules do not assign substantially unequal duties among subgroups.
Information Rules
This information was recorded by ?.
This information was recorded by ?.
This information was recorded by ?.
This information was recorded by ?.
This information was recorded by ?.
This information was recorded by ?.
This information was recorded by ?.
This information was recorded by ?.
This information was recorded by ?.
Payoff Rules
The default condition, that all appropriators can retain whatever they can physically keep hold of and no external rewards, taxes, or sanctions are imposed is not imposed in this case. The authors have the following confidence level for the results of this section: inferred. The payoff rules do not assign substantially unequal rewards to some subgroups than others. The payoff rules do not assign substantially unequal punishments to some subgroups than others.
There is a single arrangement by which the appropriation process is organized by teams.The following percentages indicate the percentages assigned to individual positions. If more than one percentage is listed per position, the individual percentages refer to the different arrangements existing within the operational rules.
Owner(s) - operators(s) of primary appropriation equipment:
100.0%; 0.0%; 0.0%
Aggregation Rules
The authors have the following confidence level for the results of this section: .
Overall Questions About Rules Configuration
The general framework of the rules-in-use has governed the activities of this subgroup for 101 to 199 years.