Abstract Because human beings live on the surface of the earth, systems of law and custom which regulate property in land, and so establish the foundation of virtually all human activity, have sparked often fierce and monolithic ideological commentary. Professor Ellickson explores various fundamental issues of land ownership regimes and concludes that a more flexible understanding is needed. The Article's efficiency thesis is that close-knit groups tend to create, through law and custom, a cost-minimizing land regime that adaptively responds to changes in risk, technology, demand, and other economic conditions. In so doing, the group mixes private, group, and open access lands. According to the private property thesis, a close-knit group commonly employs a system of parcelized ownership for sites suitable for dwelling, agriculture, or other intensive uses. Drawing upon both the rational-actor model employed by many social scientists and a diverse body of historical evidence on the evolution of land institutions, Professor Ellickson demonstrates that land rules are not a shapeless jumble, but instead form an unauthored strategy which allocates a resource with extremely complex attributes. Show Journal Information The Yale Law Journal publishes original scholarly work in all fields of law and legal study. The journal contains articles, essays, and book reviews written by professors and legal practitioners throughout the world, and slightly shorter notes and comments written by individual journal staff members. The journal is published monthly from October through June with the exception of February. Publisher Information For over a century, the Yale Law Journal has been at the forefront of legal scholarship, sparking conversation and encouraging reflection among scholars and students, as well as practicing lawyers and sitting judges and Justices. The Journal strives to shape discussion of the most important and relevant legal issues through a rigorous scholarship selection and editing process. Rights & Usage This item is part of a JSTOR Collection. Recommended textbook solutions U.S. History1st EditionJohn Lund, Paul S. Vickery, P. Scott Corbett, Todd Pfannestiel, Volker Janssen 567 solutions Ways of the World: A Global History3rd EditionRobert W. Strayer 232 solutions America's History for the AP Course8th EditionEric Hinderaker, James A. Henretta, Rebecca Edwards, Robert O. Self 470 solutions
America's History for the AP Course9th EditionEric Hinderaker, James A. Henretta, Rebecca Edwards, Robert O. Self 961 solutions What disadvantages did American Indians experience in their trading with Europeans?What disadvantages did American Indians experience in their trading with Europeans? American Indians became reliant on European technology. How did the introduction of the horse to North America change the native people's way of life? They could explore and exploit the land more quickly and efficiently.
Why did Southern planters switch from using indentured servants to using slaves quizlet?Why did planters switch from indentured to slave labor in the Chesapeake? - Former indentures were a source of social unrest. - The flow of indentures into America declined with improved economic conditions in England. - African slaves were a more dependable and controllable form of labor.
Who abolished Jamestown's common store system?Captain John Smith abolished common store in 1608 with a famous new policy, "He who does not work shall not eat." This policy provided an incentive to work by placing responsibility on the individual.
Which accomplishment is Olaudah Equiano known for quizlet?Which accomplishment is Olaudah Equiano known for? He wrote and worked to influence England to abolish the slave trade.
|
Which accurately compares a benefit of Jamestowns environment with a disadvantage
zusammenhängende Posts
Urheberrechte © © 2024 de.ketajaman Inc.
