• Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Research from April 2016
    • Applied social sciences
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • Research from April 2016
    • Applied social sciences
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of UOBREPCommunitiesTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsPublisherJournalDepartmentThis CollectionTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsPublisherJournalDepartment

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    About

    AboutLearning ResourcesResearch Graduate SchoolResearch InstitutesUniversity Website

    Statistics

    Display statistics

    ‘Whose land is it anyway?’ deconstructing the nature of property rights and their regulation

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Authors
    Ravenscroft, Neil
    Church, Andrew
    Parker, G.
    Issue Date
    2012-10-18
    Subjects
    land use
    right of ownership
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Other Titles
    The Politics of Space and Place
    Abstract
    Contemporary Western legal theory is posited on a claim that property rights have ‘evolved’ as a response to competition over the use of land and that the distribution and regulation of ownership rights reflect society. Other branches of the social sciences regard regulation and rights distributions as being produced by a more complex and shifting interplay of governmentalities. The governance of land has therefore produced emergent hybrid sets of arrangements that reflect various sources and types of power circulating through social institutions and the wider political economy. Garrett Hardin’s ‘tragedy of the commons’ has been highly influential, in arguing that external or private regulation of land use is all that prevents over-exploitation of common property resources. Many critics have sought to expose weaknesses in Hardin’s arguments, and Hardin himself later limited his thesis to explaining the fate of unmanaged commons. Yet his central thesis, about the deployment of property rights, has largely remained unchallenged. As E.P. Thompson has argued, this has (erroneously, in his belief) included a central notion that land is not only capable of being ‘owned’, but that ownership is discrete, hierarchical and, ultimately, ‘natural’. In agreeing with Thompson, Munton has recently observed that the dynamism of contemporary land use and the interests shaping its regulation increasingly renders obsolete singular ideas of tenure in favour of understanding property as a ‘bundle of rights’ that can be allocated differentially as required. In building upon Thompson and Munton’s arguments, we seek to challenge Hardin’s thesis, by arguing that: (a) far from being natural, property rights are human directed inscriptions on land; (b) the institution of property has a natural (or preferred) form, to the extent that it is allowed to emerge and evolve by common convention; (c) contrary to advanced liberal doctrine, land has a tendency towards common, rather than individual, regulation and use; and (d) liberal theory has been used to justify and shift regulation from the common to the individual. In advancing our arguments, we have borrowed ideas from Marcel Mauss’ description of the socio-economic gift relationship, in which he posits the root of social power being contained in the value of the gift made from one person to another and the indebtedness of the other until the gift is reciprocated with interest. Since reciprocation demands further reciprocation, Mauss shows that only the most powerful can survive a process that, ultimately, serves to underpin the hegemony of tying social practice to the dominant ideology of exchange.
    Citation
    Ravenscroft N, Church A, Parker G (2012) '‘Whose land is it anyway?’ deconstructing the nature of property rights and their regulation ', in Certoma C, Clewer N, Elsey D (ed(s).). The Politics of Space and Place, edn, Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing pp.234-257.
    Publisher
    Cambridge Scholars Publishing
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10547/625192
    Additional Links
    https://www.cambridgescholars.com/product/978-1-4438-4073-6
    Type
    Book chapter
    Language
    en
    ISBN
    9781443840736
    Collections
    Applied social sciences

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2023)  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.