Commons and social-ecological systems research examines institutional arrangements for governing natural resources to improve social and ecological outcomes. However, no universal definition of success exists. We examine the CPR and SES synthesis literature to identify trends, gaps and challenges for examining success. We address: (1) gaps in the literature, (2) multidimensionality and tradeoffs, and (3) and the link between problem orientation and definitions of success. To do this we conduct a comprehensive review of Large-N studies, meta-analyses and systematic reviews of CPR and SES governance (n = 45). We found seven dimensions of success, corresponding to collective choice, constitutional and operational levels, temporal dimensions, and socio-economic outcomes. Most studies did not address power and tradeoffs, or specify the social groups to whom success would apply. The majority of studies defined success in one dimension, most often demand-side provisioning (e.g., productivity or biodiversity). A regression analysis suggests that studies on rangelands or grasslands, correlative studies, and/or studies of state property systems (i.e., protected areas) were more likely to use fewer dimensions of success. Problem orientations often did not correlate with dimensions of success considered in a study, suggesting that measures of success often cannot adequately address the full suite of problems recognized in synthesis research. This presents a significant challenge for collective action among scholars who aim to develop general knowledge on SES and CPR governance. We discuss exemplary studies that measure success as multidimensional, address power and tradeoffs, and conclude with four recommendations for advancing the analysis of success.

中文翻译：

---

定义公地的成功：解决问题的取向，多维性，规范和权衡问题

公地和社会生态系统研究考察了管理自然资源以改善社会和生态成果的体制安排。但是，不存在成功的通用定义。我们检查了CPR和SES综合文献，以确定趋势，差距和挑战，以检验成功。我们解决：（1）文献中的空白，（2）多维性和折衷，以及（3）问题导向与成功定义之间的联系。为此，我们对N大研究进行了全面回顾，对CPR和SES治理进行了荟萃分析并进行了系统回顾（n = 45）。我们发现了成功的七个维度，分别与集体选择，宪法和运作水平，时间维度以及社会经济成果相对应。大多数研究都没有解决权力和权衡问题，或指定成功适用的社会群体。大多数研究将成功定义为一个方面，最常见的是需求方配置（例如，生产力或生物多样性）。回归分析表明，对牧场或草地的研究，相关研究和/或对国家财产制度的研究（即保护区），使用成功的可能性较小。问题取向往往与研究中所考虑的成功维度不相关，这表明成功的衡量标准通常无法充分解决综合研究中公认的全部问题。这为旨在发展有关SES和CPR治理的常识的学者之间的集体行动提出了重大挑战。我们讨论了以多维方式衡量成功的示例研究，