The article reviews the design principles proposed by Elinor Ostrom in 1990 to manage common-pool resources (CPRs) such as forests and fisheries. These principles, which include well-defined boundaries, congruence between appropriation and provision rules, collective-choice arrangements, monitoring, graduated sanctions, conflict-resolution mechanisms, minimum recognition of rights, and nested enterprises, have been evaluated through 91 studies. The review finds that the principles are well supported empirically, with a mean evaluation score of 3.73 out of 5. Detailed and synthesis studies tend to have higher support, while abstract studies are more critical. The principles show strong empirical evidence for most components, with the exception of Principle 8, which is moderately well supported. The article discusses each principle in detail, addressing theoretical critiques and practical implications. It concludes by discussing three main critiques: the incompleteness of the principles, their applicability to broader scales, and the methodological approach used. Despite these critiques, the principles remain a robust framework for understanding and managing CPRs.The article reviews the design principles proposed by Elinor Ostrom in 1990 to manage common-pool resources (CPRs) such as forests and fisheries. These principles, which include well-defined boundaries, congruence between appropriation and provision rules, collective-choice arrangements, monitoring, graduated sanctions, conflict-resolution mechanisms, minimum recognition of rights, and nested enterprises, have been evaluated through 91 studies. The review finds that the principles are well supported empirically, with a mean evaluation score of 3.73 out of 5. Detailed and synthesis studies tend to have higher support, while abstract studies are more critical. The principles show strong empirical evidence for most components, with the exception of Principle 8, which is moderately well supported. The article discusses each principle in detail, addressing theoretical critiques and practical implications. It concludes by discussing three main critiques: the incompleteness of the principles, their applicability to broader scales, and the methodological approach used. Despite these critiques, the principles remain a robust framework for understanding and managing CPRs.