互惠原则与土地私有产权:海岸世界既不是新古典主义也不是资本主义

IF 6 1区 社会学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Land Use Policy Pub Date : 2023-11-04 DOI:10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106965
Giorgos Meramveliotakis
{"title":"互惠原则与土地私有产权:海岸世界既不是新古典主义也不是资本主义","authors":"Giorgos Meramveliotakis","doi":"10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106965","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The “Coase theorem” states that in a zero-transaction cost neoclassical world society’s wealth is not affected by the allocation of liabilities rules. The “theorem” rests upon two fundamental premises: the first concerns Coase’s view of mutual causation of harm, namely the reciprocity principle, and the second refers to his understanding of private property as a bundle of use rights. However, when these two premises are specifically applied in cases of trespass to land, not only portray a blur picture of private property, but they also contradict the very nature of rights over property. Specifically, I am arguing that these two premises undermine the centrality of exclusion rights to the institution of land property, hence violate the <em>de jure</em> basis of these rights, as well their private nature. This is turn implies that Coasean world is a world where the prevalent idea of mutual causation of harm creates idiosyncratic and partial rather than standardized <em>de jure</em> private property rights in land. As such, this Coasean version of the world fundamentally breaks from the neoclassical view of the capitalist world, where the security and exercise of private property rights in land is a <em>sine qua non</em> condition for the working of the economic system.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":17933,"journal":{"name":"Land Use Policy","volume":"135 ","pages":"Article 106965"},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reciprocity principle and private property rights in land: Coasean world is neither neoclassical nor capitalist\",\"authors\":\"Giorgos Meramveliotakis\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106965\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The “Coase theorem” states that in a zero-transaction cost neoclassical world society’s wealth is not affected by the allocation of liabilities rules. The “theorem” rests upon two fundamental premises: the first concerns Coase’s view of mutual causation of harm, namely the reciprocity principle, and the second refers to his understanding of private property as a bundle of use rights. However, when these two premises are specifically applied in cases of trespass to land, not only portray a blur picture of private property, but they also contradict the very nature of rights over property. Specifically, I am arguing that these two premises undermine the centrality of exclusion rights to the institution of land property, hence violate the <em>de jure</em> basis of these rights, as well their private nature. This is turn implies that Coasean world is a world where the prevalent idea of mutual causation of harm creates idiosyncratic and partial rather than standardized <em>de jure</em> private property rights in land. As such, this Coasean version of the world fundamentally breaks from the neoclassical view of the capitalist world, where the security and exercise of private property rights in land is a <em>sine qua non</em> condition for the working of the economic system.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17933,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Land Use Policy\",\"volume\":\"135 \",\"pages\":\"Article 106965\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Land Use Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837723004313\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Land Use Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837723004313","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

“科斯定理”指出,在零交易成本的新古典世界中,社会财富不受负债分配规则的影响。“定理”建立在两个基本前提之上:第一个是科斯关于损害的相互因果关系的观点,即互惠原则,第二个是他对私有财产作为一束使用权的理解。然而,当这两个前提具体适用于侵犯土地的案件时,不仅描绘了私人财产的模糊画面,而且也与财产权的本质相矛盾。具体而言,我认为这两个前提破坏了排斥权在土地财产制度中的中心地位,因此侵犯了这些权利的法律基础及其私人性质。这反过来意味着,海岸世界是一个普遍存在的相互伤害因果关系的世界,在这个世界上,土地上的私有产权是特殊的、部分的,而不是标准化的。因此,这种海岸式的世界从根本上打破了资本主义世界的新古典主义观点,在资本主义世界中,土地私有产权的保障和行使是经济体系运作的必要条件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Reciprocity principle and private property rights in land: Coasean world is neither neoclassical nor capitalist

The “Coase theorem” states that in a zero-transaction cost neoclassical world society’s wealth is not affected by the allocation of liabilities rules. The “theorem” rests upon two fundamental premises: the first concerns Coase’s view of mutual causation of harm, namely the reciprocity principle, and the second refers to his understanding of private property as a bundle of use rights. However, when these two premises are specifically applied in cases of trespass to land, not only portray a blur picture of private property, but they also contradict the very nature of rights over property. Specifically, I am arguing that these two premises undermine the centrality of exclusion rights to the institution of land property, hence violate the de jure basis of these rights, as well their private nature. This is turn implies that Coasean world is a world where the prevalent idea of mutual causation of harm creates idiosyncratic and partial rather than standardized de jure private property rights in land. As such, this Coasean version of the world fundamentally breaks from the neoclassical view of the capitalist world, where the security and exercise of private property rights in land is a sine qua non condition for the working of the economic system.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Land Use Policy
Land Use Policy ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
13.70
自引率
8.50%
发文量
553
期刊介绍: Land Use Policy is an international and interdisciplinary journal concerned with the social, economic, political, legal, physical and planning aspects of urban and rural land use. Land Use Policy examines issues in geography, agriculture, forestry, irrigation, environmental conservation, housing, urban development and transport in both developed and developing countries through major refereed articles and shorter viewpoint pieces.
期刊最新文献
The engagement of environmental organizations on land policies: A case study of Pro Natura, Switzerland Multi-scenario simulation of low-carbon land use based on the SD-FLUS model in Changsha, China The smart city competitiveness index (SMCI): Conceptualization, modelling, application – An evidence-based insight Can urban low-carbon transformation affect the prices of its industrial land? An empirical study based on spatial regression discontinuity Quantifying supply and demand of cultural ecosystem services from a dynamic perspective
×
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