Institutionalism is a widely debated term across various disciplines. It is rooted in the traditional old American economists and the new institutionalism, involving individual choices and transaction costs in economic settings. However, institutionalism has been used in many other disciplines, evolving from economic studies to studies on institutions for governing natural resources. This paper aims to review the theoretical concepts of institutions as argued by Douglas North regarding economic performance, and the contrasting sociological point of view linked with the approaches elaborated by Elinor Ostrom in governing the commons. While North points out that formal and informal constraints constitute the instances of institutions, Ostrom contends that institutions are the set of rules that humans use to organize repetitive activities within a community. Although there are some differences in their postures, the similarity of their approaches on institutions as drivers to solve problems leads to the assumption that informal rules, transmitted through generations, can help sustain communities’ organizations for governing natural resources overtime.

制度主义是各个学科之间广泛争议的术语。它植根于传统的美国传统经济学家和新制度主义，涉及经济环境中的个人选择和交易成本。但是，制度主义已在许多其他学科中使用，从经济学研究发展到对自然资源管理机构的研究。本文旨在回顾道格拉斯·诺斯（Douglas North）关于经济绩效的机构理论概念，以及与埃琳诺·奥斯特罗姆（Elinor Ostrom）提出的治理公地的方法相联系的社会学观点的对比。诺斯指出，正式和非正式的约束是制度的实例，奥斯特罗姆认为，制度是人类用来在社区内组织重复性活动的一套规则。尽管他们的态度有所不同，但它们作为解决问题的推动者在机构上采取的方法相似，因此得出这样的假设，即世代相传的非正式规则可以帮助维持社区组织对自然资源的超时管理。