This study took place in northern Tanzania in Babati district. Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs) are establishments that endorse conservation of the wildlife and the environment, development and sustainable land-use in the rural areas. The aim of the organization is to provide local communities with economic benefits and including them in the projects of wildlife and habitat conservation (Kicheleri et al., 2018). However, it is unclear if the aim of the organizations has worked that well in the field. The aim of this study is to analyze some of the local attitudes, of the villages Minjingu, Vilima Vitatu and Kakoi, towards Burunge Wildlife Management Area. This study will also analyze how the membership with WMA has changed the living conditions for the inhabitants in the three villages, by conducting semi-structured interviews on villagers, a WMA secretary and the district council officer. Results indicate that the most common perception villagers have about WMA is that the household income has decreased, and the destruction on land and crops by wildlife has increased. The villagers are unhappy about how WMA handles different situations. Due to this, the majority of the respondents from all three studied villages stated they would like to end the membership with WMA.

The challenges of sustainability and its complexities born out of overexploitation of resources, leading to climate change issues, food wastage, and scarcity, economic and health-related dilemmas, has yet to find their solution in top-down models, taking the form of hierarchical control (rulers), as such, researchers have considered other alternatives to how communities can tackle these issues, and one of such approach is the bottom-up model. Recent research and literature on collective action have focused on sequencing events like regime changes, riots, revolutions, protests, and the founding of social movement organizations. This study ethnographically investigated the relevant factors for collective action and factors influencing individual cooperation in the local community initiative, Food Rescue Gotland, through a four-week participant observation with eight in-depth interviews. The relevant factors identified in this context were a sense of community, passion for sustainability, good atmosphere for work, committed volunteers and trust, availability of resources and goodwill ambassadors, ease of participation, small size, effective communication, and good structure. Significant factors influencing individual cooperation include knowledge about sustainability, a sense of belonging, and a shared sense of community. This study contributes to the broader literature on successful collective action for sustainability in the context of local community initiatives. It contributes further to the replicability of this kind of local community initiative in other communities and awareness of its impact on Gotland Island, Sweden.

This thesis explores women’s writing and its place in the formation of female film culture in the British silent cinema era. The project focuses upon women’s literary engagement with silent cinema as generative of a female film culture, looking at materials such as fan letters, fan magazines, popular novels, short story papers, novelizations, critical journals and newspaper criticism. Exploring this diverse range of women’s cinema writing, the thesis seeks to make an original contribution to feminist film historiography. Focusing upon the mediations between different kinds of women’s cinema writing, the thesis poses key questions about how the feminist film historian weights original sources in the reclamation of silent female film culture, relative to the varying degrees of cultural authority with which different women commentated upon, reflected upon, and creatively responded to film culture. The thesis moves away from conceptualization of cinema audiences and reception practices based upon textual readings. Instead, the thesis focuses upon evidence of women’s original accounts of their cinemagoing practices (fan letters) and their critical (newspaper and journal criticism) and creative (fiction writers) responses to cinema’s place in women’s everyday lives. Balancing original archival research with multiple overarching methodological frameworks—drawing upon fan theory, feminist reception theory, audience studies, social history and cultural studies—the thesis is attentive to the diversity of women’s experiences of cinema culture, and the literary conduits through which they channeled these experiences. Shifting the recent focus in feminist silent film historiography away from the reclamation of lost filmmaking female pioneers and towards lost female audiences, the thesis thus constructs a nationally specific account of British women’s silent era cinema culture.

La gouvernance doit être considérée comme le principal enjeu du développement durable. En effet, un rapport du Programme des Nations Unies pour l’Environnement conclut : « une révision complète de la manière dont la planète est gérée est urgente si nous voulons répondre aux défis que pose le développement durable ». Partant du postulat selon lequel les problèmes environnementaux ont des racines dans la manière dont les humains s’organisent, quiconque cherche à solutionner ces problèmes devrait s’intéresser à la gouvernance. Toutefois, la gouvernance est un concept qui se décline en plusieurs variantes et il importe de préciser de quoi on parle. Dans ce contexte, la gestion en commun et la décentralisation semblent être des concepts incontournables permettant d’aborder adéquatement la gouvernance des ressources naturelles. La gestion d’une ressource naturelle par les usagers au niveau local – la gestion en commun – n’est pas un phénomène nouveau. Les différentes communautés forestières à travers le monde ont depuis plusieurs siècles développées leurs propres systèmes de règles pour encadrer l’accès aux ressources forestières desquelles dépendent directement leurs communautés. Dans plusieurs d’entre elles, l’accès aux différentes ressources forestières demeure à bien des égards encadré par des institutions traditionnelles. À un autre niveau, depuis l’époque coloniale, la quasi-totalité des pays à travers le monde ont, à des degrés divers, dans différents domaines, mis en place une gouvernance centralisée. Le domaine forestier notamment était alors intégré au domaine public, placé sous la tutelle de l’État à qui revenait l’ensemble des décisions le concernant : planification, gestion, exploitation, etc. Depuis quelques décennies toutefois, plusieurs observateurs soulignent le fait que les États semblent avoir échoué, que ce soit par manque de ressources, de capacité ou d’intérêt, à assurer une gestion durable des forêts. On se questionne alors à savoir si les problèmes de développement durable entourant les forêts (déforestation, dégradation des habitats, déclin de la biodiversité, pertes de services écologiques, pauvreté, inégalités, etc.) pourraient être attribuables une prise de décision centralisée. Dans ce contexte, plusieurs postulent qu’une partie de la solution à ces problèmes pourrait passer par une des modes de gouvernance alternatifs, plus précisément par une prise de décision moins centralisée. On défend de plus en plus l’idée selon laquelle il y une réelle plus-value à une implication active des populations locales dans la prise de décision sur les ressources forestières desquelles elles dépendent. À ce titre, l’idée qu’on ne peut plus exploiter les forêts au détriment ou sans considération pour les populations qui y vivent semble faire consensus depuis le Sommet de la Terre de Rio en 1992. Cette idée, loin de se limiter aux cercles académiques, se manifeste un peu partout à travers le monde par des politiques publiques qui reconnaissent des droits, des pouvoirs et des responsabilités aux communautés locales en matière de gestion des ressources forestières. Les observations montrent que le passage d’une gouvernance centralisée à une gouvernance « décentralisée » implique plus qu’une nouvelle législation, qu’il ne faut pas confondre changements législatifs et changements dans les modes de gouvernance. En effet, plusieurs décennies de centralisation ont altéré de manière significative et durable les institutions traditionnelles qui régulaient jusque-là l’accès aux ressources forestières dans les communautés. Dans ce contexte, il ne suffit pas de reconnaître des droits, des pouvoirs et des responsabilités aux communautés locales pour que les communautés reprennent la gestion des forêts là où elles l’avaient laissée. L’intégration d’un registre institutionnel traditionnel à un registre proprement moderne est un processus complexe. La décentralisation peut induire des effets pervers sur les rapports de force qui existent entre les acteurs au niveau local. La décentralisation peut être synonyme d’une prise de décision sur le long terme, respectueuse de l’environnement et des spécificités locales, mais pour ce faire elle doit s’intégrer au paysage institutionnel local et non tenter de s’y substituer. Ultimement, la décentralisation repose sur la capacité des acteurs impliqués à inventer de nouveaux communs, à capitaliser sur le capital social existant, à mettre en place de nouvelles institutions et à s’adapter aux capacités locales. Le Cameroun a entrepris en 1994 la réforme de son secteur forestier sous le thème de la décentralisation. Le pays a notamment offert la possibilité aux communautés de mettre en place des forêts communautaires. Ainsi, les communautés mises à l’écart d’une partie importante des décisions sur l’exploitation des forêts depuis plus d’un siècle se sont vues offrir la possibilité d’obtenir des droits, des pouvoirs et des responsabilités formelles sur le territoire sur lequel elles exercent des droits traditionnels informels. Après 20 ans de mise en œuvre, les observations montrent que l’articulation entre les registres institutionnels moderne et traditionnel cause de nombreuses problématiques de gouvernance dans les forêts communautaires camerounaises. Les institutions mises en place dans le cadre de cette gouvernance décentralisée ne semblent pas être adaptées aux contextes locaux. Le capital social et les institutions locales sur lesquels repose la gestion en commun ne sont pas valorisés. Au final, même si les communautés locales possèdent de réelles capacités en matière de gestion des ressources forestières, le bon fonctionnement des nouvelles institutions implique pour les communautés de mobiliser d’importantes ressources financières, de maîtriser un langage technique proprement moderne et ultimement, elles ne parviennent pas à s’approprier le processus et se retrouvent dépendantes d’acteurs externes. Au final, parce qu’elles ne s’y retrouvent plus dans ces nouvelles manières de fonctionner, elles se désintéressent de la forêt communautaire et c’est tout le processus qui manque sa cible.

In the end of 2015 the Swedish government made a complete turnaround regarding its former generous migration policy. Through examination of previous and recent decisions made by the swedish government, this study aims to contribute to a better understanding of this unique situation. It does so by applying Elinor Ostrom’s theory of sustainable management of common resources onto the swedish universal welfare modell. By classifying whether the policies can be considered as steps in a sustainable direction or not, the essey seeks to find whether Ostrom’s theory, former soleley applied on natural resource pools, is compatible with sheer welfare policies, in this case migration, thus offering a better understanding of the phenomenon. The study finds that even though the theory very well could be applied to the said policy area, it would be done with no regard of the ever so important moral and ideological values which characterizes the universal welfare model.

Elinor Ostrom (2005: 238) assumes that in understanding the make up and behaviour of institutional systems governing natural resources: “Resource users are explicitly thought of as rational egoists who plunder local resources so as to maximise their own short-term benefits. Government officials are implicitly depicted, on the other hand, as seeking, the more general public interest, having the relevant information at hand and the capability of designing optimal policies.” This thesis examines the validity of this assumption through an historical analysis of the deep-level gold mining industry of the Witwatersrand, South Africa. The main focus of the assessment is on the institutions of ownership – that is, the development of mining rights and title legislation between 1886 and 2008. The study looks at the legislations’ transformation and implementation from the perspective of the gold mining industry – made up of the mining finance houses and the Chamber of Mines of South Africa – and that of the state. The transformation of the mining industry’s institutional framework was both a choice by government as well as that of the firms in the mining industry. The theoretical framework is constructed from four areas of economic thought. These include: the neoclassical and Keynesian schools of macroeconomic thought; industrial organisation and its relevance to the relationship between firms and the market; institutional and new institutional economics; and finally property rights. The determinants of policy design and the impact of such design on firms and industry is examined. The development, implementation and use of the aforementioned legislation is examined from two perspectives, namely, that of preserver or exploiter. Throughout the history of this prominent South African industry, the motivation for action from the industry or government has oscillated between the two extremes of preserver or exploiter over the time period examined. The conclusion is drawn on an overall and broad focus of actions – with a strong focus on the most recent developments in mining legislation – post-1992.

This thesis examines whether two sharing economy organisations, Uber and Bilpoolarna, can be characterized by Elinor Ostrom’s principles for cooperation of common goods or not. The idea for the research question came from the global difficulties with the decision-making regarding the climate issue and Elinor Ostroms studies about the possibility to create sustainable cooperations regarding the distribution of common goods. If cooperation is possible, we might be able to together develop the climate actions in the right direction and make sustainable distributions of resources we have despite missing actions on a global level. The current growth of the sharing economy could be a sign of that possibility. The final result is that the association Bilpoolarna fulfills all principles more or less while Uber fails to fulfill principle 3, 5 and 6, and only to a small extent fulfills the remaining principles. The result indicates that Ostrom’s principles of cooperation not only characterizes common, non-excludable goods such as water and land, but also can extend its principles to the distribution of modern resources, such as the cars of Bilpoolarna – as long as the cooperation is voluntary and on a local level.

It is my belief that theatre is the telling of stories, and that playwrighting is the creation of those stories. Regardless of the underlying motives (to make the audience think, to make them feel, to offend them or to draw them in,) the core of the theatre world is the storyline. Some critics write of the importance of audience effect and audience reception; after all, a performance can only be so named if at least one person is there to witness it. So much of audience effect is based the storyline itself - that structure of which is created by the power characters have over others. Theatre generalists learn of Aristotle's well-made play structure. Playwrights quickly learn to distinguish between protagonists and antagonists. Actors are routinely taught physicalizations of creating "status" onstage. A plotline is driven by the power that people, circumstances, and even fate exercise over protagonists. Most audience members naturally sympathize with the underdog or victim in a given storyline, and so the submissive or oppressed character becomes (largely) the most integral. By what process, then, is this sense of oppression created in a play? How can oppression/victimization be analyzed with regard to character development? With emerging criticism suggesting that the concept of character is dying, what portrayals of victim have we seen in the late 20th century? What framework can we use to fully understand this complex concept? What are we to see in the future, and how will the concept evolve? In my attempt to answer these questions, I first analyze the definition of "victim" and what categories of victimization exist - the victim of a crime, for example, or the victim of psychological oppression. "Victim" is a word with an extraordinarily complex definition, and so for the purposes of this study, I focus entirely on social victimization - that is, oppression or harm inflicted on a character by their peers or society. I focus on three major elements of this sort of victimization: harm inflicted on a character by another (not by their own actions), harm inflicted despite struggle or protest, and a power or authority endowed on the victimizer by the victim. After defining these elements, I analyze the literary methods by which playwrights can represent or create victimization - blurred lines of authority, expressive text, and the creation of emotion through visual and auditory means. Once the concept of victim is defined and a framework established for viewing it in the theatre, I analyze the victimization of one of American theatre's most famous sufferers - Eugene O'Neill's Yank in The Hairy Ape. To best contextualize this character, I explore the theories of theatre in this time period - reflections of social struggles, the concept of hierarchy, and clearly drawn class lines. I also position The Hairy Ape in its immediate historical and theoretical time period, to understand if O'Neill created a reflection on or of his contemporaries. Finally, I look at the concept of victim through the nonrealistic and nonlinear plays of the 20th century - how it has changed, evolved, or even (as Eleanor Fuchs may suggest) died. I found that my previously established framework for "making victim" has change dramatically to apply to contemporary nonlinear theatre pieces. Through this study, I have found that the lines of victimization and authority are as blurred today in nonrealistic and nonlinear theatre as they were in the seemingly "black and white" dramas of the 1920s and 30s. In my research, I have found the very beginnings of an extraordinarily complex definition of "victim".

ABSTRACT This study focuses on twenty-one particular texts published in 1925 as contemporaries of The Great Gatsby. The manuscript is divided into four categories—The Impressionists, The Experimentalists, The Realists, and The Independents. Among The Impressionists are F. Scott Fitzgerald himself, Willa Cather (The Professor’s House), Sherwood Anderson (Dark Laughter), William Carlos Williams (In the American Grain), Elinor Wylie (The Venetian Glass Nephew), John Dos Passos (Manhattan Transfer), and William Faulkner (New Orleans Sketches). The Experimentalists are Gertrude Stein (The Making of Americans), E. E. Cummings (& aka “Poems 48-96”), Ezra Pound (A Draft of XVI Cantos), T. S. Eliot (“The Hollow Men”), Laura Riding (“Summary for Alastor”), and John Erskine (The Private Life of Helen of Troy). The Realists are Theodore Dreiser (An American Tragedy), Edith Wharton (The Mother’s Recompense), Upton Sinclair (Mammonart), Ellen Glasgow (Barren Ground), Sinclair Lewis (Arrowsmith), James Boyd (Drums), and Ernest Hemingway (In Our Time). The Independents are Archibald MacLeish (The Pot of Earth) and Robert Penn Warren (“To a Face in a Crowd”). Although these twenty-two texts may in some cases represent literary fragmentations, each in its own way also represents a coherent response to the spirit of the times that is in one way or another cognate to The Great Gatsby. The fact that all these works appeared the same year is special because the authors, if not already famous, would become famous, and their works were or would come to represent classic American literature around the world. The twenty-two authors either knew each other personally or knew each other’s works. Naturally, they were also influenced by writings of international authors and philosophers. The greatest common elements among the poets and fiction writers are their uninhibited interest in sex, an absorbing cynicism about life, and the frequent portrayal of disintegration of the family, a trope for what had happened to the countries and to the “family of nations” that experienced the Great War. In 1925, it would seem, Fitzgerald and many of his writing peers—some even considered his betters—channeled a major spirit of the times, and Fitzgerald did it more successfully than almost anyone.

The dissertation concerns F. A. Hayek’s (1899–1992) critique of legislation. The purpose of the investigation is to clarify and assess that critique. I argue that there is in Hayek’s work a critique of legislation that is distinct from his well-known critique of social planning. Further that the main claim of this critique is what I refer to as Hayek’s legislation tenet, namely that legislation that aims to achieve specific aggregate results in complex orders of society will decrease the welfare level.           The legislation tenet gains support; (i) from the welfare claim – according to which there is a positive correlation between the utilization of knowledge and the welfare level in society; (ii) from the dispersal of knowledge thesis – according to which the total knowledge of society is dispersed and not available to any one agency; and (iii) from the cultural evolution thesis – according to which evolutionary rules are more favorable to the utilization of knowledge in social cooperation than are legislative rules. More specifically, I argue that these form two lines of argument in support of the legislation tenet. One line of argument is based on the conjunction of the welfare claim and the dispersal of knowledge thesis. I argue that this line of argument is true. The other line of argument is based on the conjunction of the welfare claim and the cultural evolution thesis. I argue that this line of argument is false, mainly because the empirical work of political scientist Elinor Ostrom refutes it. Because the two lines of argument support the legislation tenet independently of each other, I argue that Hayek’s critique of legislation is true. In this dissertation, I further develop a legislative policy tool as based on the welfare claim and Hayek’s conception of coercion. I also consider Hayek’s idea that rules and law are instrumental in forging rational individual action and rational social orders, and turn to review this idea in light of the work of experimental economist Vernon Smith and economic historian Avner Greif. I find that Smith and Greif support this idea of Hayek’s, and I conjecture that it contributes to our understanding of Adam Smith’s notion of the invisible hand: It is rules – not an invisible hand – that prompt subjects to align individual and aggregate rationality in social interaction. Finally, I argue that Hayek’s critique is essentially utilitarian, as it is concerned with the negative welfare consequences of certain forms of legislation. And although it may appear that the dispersal of knowledge thesis will undermine the possibility of carrying out the utilitarian calculus, due to the lack of knowledge of the consequences of one’s actions – and therefore undermine the legislation tenet itself – I argue that the distinction between utilitarianism conceived as a method of deliberation and utilitarianism conceived as a criterion of correctness may be used to save Hayek’s critique from this objection.