When someone outside of economics (a political scientist) wins the Nobel and much of her work is dedicated to showing how government intervention is sometimes unnecessary or counter-productive in addressing natural resource and common property resource issues, I guess it's inevitable that people will come out with drivel like this in the Guardian, which in a few short paragraphs manages to:
1. Mischaracterize the state of the economics profession
2. Mischaracterize Hardin's main theses
3. Mischaracterize Ostrom's work
4. Fail to recognize that Ostrom's findings are ultimately very limiting when dealing with huge open access problems like climate change and (most) international fisheries
Sigh......
