What/Whose Property Rights? The Selective Enforcement of Land Rights Under Mexican Liberalism

María Paula Saffon, Juan F González Bertomeu
{"title":"What/Whose Property Rights? The Selective Enforcement of Land Rights Under Mexican Liberalism","authors":"María Paula Saffon, Juan F González Bertomeu","doi":"10.1017/9781108776608.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We examine the way in which social resistance and elites’ interests shaped the politics of compliance of liberal land laws under Mexico’s liberal era (1855-1910). During that period, liberal governments in power recognized the enclosure of public lands and the disentailment of collective lands as key endeavors. However, the content and enforcement of liberal land laws varied significantly across governments. Before 1876, such laws were almost entirely left unenforced by state authorities vis-à-vis indigenous groups. In contrast, the 1876-1910 government of Porfirio Díaz enacted complementary regulation that tightened the grip of liberal land laws regarding indigenous lands, and eagerly promoted their enforcement across the territory. At first sight, this difference could be explained as the outcome of divergent levels of state capacity. Nevertheless, we argue that variation in the enforcement of Mexican liberal land laws was also the result of political will. We study judicial decisions as a strategy to capture how state authorities at different levels contributed to the strong or weak enforcement of land rights of different actors, as well as to tell apart the potentially different motivations at play. We theorize that both interest-based motivations and liberal ideological motivations can lead to the enforcement or over-enforcement of individual private property rights to the detriment of collective and public land property rights. But only interest-based motivations—not ideologically liberal ones—can lead to the weak enforcement of the individual property rights of indigenous or poor persons. We substantiate the theory using a novel dataset of judicial cases related to land issues that the Mexican Supreme Court published between 1871 and 1910.","PeriodicalId":324969,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Latin America & the Caribbean (Development) (Topic)","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Latin America & the Caribbean (Development) (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108776608.009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

We examine the way in which social resistance and elites’ interests shaped the politics of compliance of liberal land laws under Mexico’s liberal era (1855-1910). During that period, liberal governments in power recognized the enclosure of public lands and the disentailment of collective lands as key endeavors. However, the content and enforcement of liberal land laws varied significantly across governments. Before 1876, such laws were almost entirely left unenforced by state authorities vis-à-vis indigenous groups. In contrast, the 1876-1910 government of Porfirio Díaz enacted complementary regulation that tightened the grip of liberal land laws regarding indigenous lands, and eagerly promoted their enforcement across the territory. At first sight, this difference could be explained as the outcome of divergent levels of state capacity. Nevertheless, we argue that variation in the enforcement of Mexican liberal land laws was also the result of political will. We study judicial decisions as a strategy to capture how state authorities at different levels contributed to the strong or weak enforcement of land rights of different actors, as well as to tell apart the potentially different motivations at play. We theorize that both interest-based motivations and liberal ideological motivations can lead to the enforcement or over-enforcement of individual private property rights to the detriment of collective and public land property rights. But only interest-based motivations—not ideologically liberal ones—can lead to the weak enforcement of the individual property rights of indigenous or poor persons. We substantiate the theory using a novel dataset of judicial cases related to land issues that the Mexican Supreme Court published between 1871 and 1910.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
什么/谁的产权?墨西哥自由主义下土地权利的选择性执行
我们考察了在墨西哥的自由主义时代(1855-1910),社会抵抗和精英的利益如何塑造了遵守自由土地法的政治。在这一时期,执政的自由派政府将公共土地的圈地和集体土地的剥夺视为关键的努力。然而,自由土地法的内容和执行在各国政府之间差别很大。在1876年以前,州当局对-à-vis土著群体几乎完全不执行这些法律。相比之下,1876-1910年波菲里奥Díaz政府制定了补充法规,加强了对土著土地的自由土地法的控制,并热切地促进了它们在整个领土上的执行。乍一看,这种差异可以解释为国家能力水平不同的结果。然而,我们认为,墨西哥自由土地法执行的变化也是政治意愿的结果。我们将司法决定作为一种策略来研究,以捕捉不同级别的国家当局如何促成不同行为者对土地权利的强或弱执行,并区分潜在的不同动机。我们的理论认为,基于利益的动机和自由主义的意识形态动机都可能导致个人私有产权的强制执行或过度执行,从而损害集体和公共土地产权。但是,只有基于利益的动机——而不是意识形态自由主义的动机——才能导致土著居民或穷人的个人财产权执行不力。我们使用墨西哥最高法院在1871年至1910年间出版的与土地问题有关的司法案件的新数据集来证实这一理论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Forced Labor in Colonial Spanish America Gaining Inclusive Growth through Financial Methodologies Arbitraging Covered Interest Rate Parity Deviations and Bank Lending Deep Trade Agreements and Domestic Institutions in the Americas The Profitability-Growth Nexus in the Mexican Manufacturing Industry
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1