An anatomical review of the common pool resource game

Antoine Malézieux & Eli Spiegelman

Experimental Economics2025https://doi.org/10.1017/eec.2024.6article
AJG 3ABDC A*
Weight
0.44

Abstract

Over the last four decades, a broad stream of experimental literature has been published using the Common Pool Resource (CPR) game to study how people react to congestible resources, and how to keep such resources from socially harmful overexploitation. With the goal of providing guidance to future work on this still-important paradigm, we provide a narrative review of the literature, summarizing the results for several key aspects of the experimental operationalization. We classify these aspects into two broad categories. The first describes ‘environmental’ assumptions on the modeled resource problem itself. This refers to aspects of the experimental environment reflecting factors such as group size, resource size and asymmetry of access, which generally constitute the nature of the dilemma. The second category involves ‘institutional’ issues related to how people might solve the problem, such as user communication between subjects, information about previous subjects’ choices, and regulatory measures.

3 citations

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/eec.2024.6

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{antoine2025,
  title        = {{An anatomical review of the common pool resource game}},
  author       = {Antoine Malézieux & Eli Spiegelman},
  journal      = {Experimental Economics},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/eec.2024.6},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

An anatomical review of the common pool resource game

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.44

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.32 × 0.4 = 0.13
M · momentum0.57 × 0.15 = 0.09
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.