Fans pick 100 books like The Limits of Organization

This is one of the best books I have read that helps to understand the reasons behind the fascinating and unpredictable rise of Western liberal civilization.

Humans lived in abysmal conditions for tens of thousands of years, poor, wretched, exposed to violence, war, illness, and untimely death for most of our evolutionary history. The emergence of Western liberal civilization is truly an amazing break with our miserable past. How did this happen?

The authors argue that there is a very precarious path to be followed between totalitarian and imposed order, and chaotic individualism, and Western civilization happened to find almost by chance that delicate balance as a result of a combination of historical, ideological, and other circumstances. 

This eye-opening book was a revelation to me as a young student of architecture. It provided the keys to how cities really work. Its observations are as relevant and fresh today as they were when it was published in 1961. For me and many in my generation, it helped us to see and appreciate the organic, human-centered dynamics of neighborhoods, introducing the powerful concept of “organized complexity,” which made sense of things we saw but failed to understand.

I met Jane in Toronto in 1968 where she became a lifelong friend and mentor until her death in 2006. It remains a foundational text for me in understanding urban life and my life’s work. 

This book challenges the notion that we should rely on the ideal as a guidepost. Set aside whether we could decide on an ideal; Gaus, a philosopher, makes a four-part argument against pursuing it. First, how could we contemplate the incomprehensible number of possible institutional, legal, and organizational configurations? We couldn’t. Second, the components of those configurations interact, resulting in a rugged landscape: the path to the ideal would not be entirely uphill, that is, it would require sacrifices. Hence, the book’s title. Third, owing to the interactions among choices, we cannot evaluate collective well-being in alternative configurations with any accuracy. What hubris to assume that we could. And finally, the landscape responds to our positioning, as we adapt our physical, organizational, and institutional (both formal and invisible) environments, we alter what we can achieve and what we desire.

The first three books on my list concentrate on building form and space, with little about function.

The ‘pattern language’ is different, mapping human activities onto appropriate built forms, and advocating repeated patterns that have been found to work.

Christopher Alexander wants us to use the patterns in designing responses to situations, but they also help to judge how well-built spaces fit their contexts in analysing architecture.

Although Alexander maps activities onto his own preferred design style, the patterns are not inherently specific to any style or period of architecture.

Despite being written 50 years ago, this one-of-a-kind book is still fresh and relevant.

Private property or the commons? Free enterprise or public ownership?

Arguably the most substantive contribution to such debates in the past 50 years has come from Elinor Ostrom for her decades of study of common-pool resource management.

From case studies around the world and from centuries past, she proves that collective ownership need not end in a “tragedy of the commons,” but can succeed.

In work that won her the Nobel Prize in Economics (she is a political scientist) studying community-managed fisheries, forests, grazing lands, and watersheds, Ostrom describes and evaluates successes and failures in great detail and with attention to the role of rules, monitoring, and enforcement, and leadership, in determining the kinds of governance that are most likely to succeed.  

Read this book if you say, “Let’s find a win-win solution.”

Sadly, most aspiring leaders misuse and abuse the term “win-win.” Instead of considering it a strategic option that should be thoughtfully applied, they treat it as a moral virtue. They then espouse win-win while striving for what I call “win-no-lose”—the hope that “we” win but “they” don’t realize they lost.

This makes building coalitions and collaborating terribly difficult precisely at the time in history when we desperately need to do these well. The book is full of surprising insights (like why turning the other cheek—advocated by most religions—doesn’t work).

It also teaches (aspiring) leaders how a critical mass of people who believe in cooperation can transform their organizations even if their peers don’t agree with them.

The aims of economic development are often said to be higher incomes, industrialization, efficient investment, and poverty alleviation.

Amartya Sen argues for a broader goal: increasing the capability of all human beings to achieve those things that they most value.

Such an agenda implies more ambitious goals for empowering people, especially in poor countries, to begin a process of expanding the real freedoms that people enjoy: education, health care, longevity, and the ability to influence political decisions.

Sen, a Nobel laureate in economics, draws on a lifetime of thought about human predicaments, famines, and poverty, how to define one’s capabilities, and the meaning of one’s ‘standard of living.’

Rather than offering specific recipes, this book provides a provocative framework for thought. 

“Institutions are the rules of the game,” according to Douglas North, economic historian and Nobel Laureate.

Once created, institutions may be changed, but their legacy can be powerful. Economic history is a consequence of a dynamic, sometimes disruptive, process of institutional change, one for which a path to better institutions is not assured.

Exchange involves risks and uncertainty. In centuries past, kinship ties helped reduce uncertainty for exchange in insular communities. As exchange across larger distances expanded to engage with more distant communities, alternatives institutions were needed, such as contracts, laws, courts.

Whether one’s interest is promoting welfare, equity, sustainability, or economic growth (emphasized by North), this conceptual framework of institutional change offers powerful insights about how the world works and why it is organized the way that it is.

Joseph Femia has chosen 21 outstanding essays about Vilfredo Pareto, which are divided into three sections: Methodology, Social Theory, and Politics and Political Theory.

All 21 are important historical investigations of Pareto’s thinking. The best are two by Norberto Bobbio and those by James Lane and by A.J. Baker. Most importantly, Femia’s collection also contains S.E. Finer’s “Pareto and Pluto-democracy.”

As a philosopher who crosses several disciplines (sociology, economics, and theology), I really appreciated the way in which Pareto was shown in this book to transcend the boundaries between economics and sociology. There was no one except for Max Weber, who could move among disciplines as easily as Vilfredo Pareto. 

This book provides a thorough treatment of all the basic economic tools that everyone needs to survive and thrive in today’s world. 

Stock is a natural teacher who uses her gift for taking the complex and making it simple. The topics are wide-ranging and the analysis is clear and convincing. Even those who think they are not interested in economics will find something to take with them after pursuing this well-written volume.