IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/agrerw/v32y2003i01p9-17_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Land-Use Policy as Volitional Pragmatism

Author

Listed:
  • Bromley, Daniel W.

Abstract

Land-use conflicts highlight several myths about property rights. The central myth is that property rights are linked to natural rights, that property rights are durable and unchanging, and that any interference with these property rights requires public compensation. However, particular settings and circumstances lead to conflicting rights claims which the courts must sort through to determine where the more compelling rights claim resides. Situations are not protected because they have property rights. Rather, those situations found worthy of protection by the courts acquire the status of a property right. Property rights are not discovered, but are created by the courts. Applied economists must build models of property rights conflicts predicated upon an epistemology of volitional pragmatism.

Suggested Citation

  • Bromley, Daniel W., 2003. "Land-Use Policy as Volitional Pragmatism," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(1), pages 9-17, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:agrerw:v:32:y:2003:i:01:p:9-17_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S106828050000246X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney & Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney, 2004. "Tightening Environmental Standards: The Benefit-Cost or the No-Cost Paradigm?," Chapters, in: Environmental Policy and Fiscal Federalism, chapter 3, pages 53-66, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Arrow, Kenneth J. & Cropper, Maureen L. & Eads, George C. & Hahn, Robert W. & Lave, Lester B. & Noll, Roger G. & Portney, Paul R. & Russell, Milson & Schmalensee, Richard & Smith, V. Kerry & Stavins, , 1997. "Is there a role for benefit-cost analysis in environmental, health, and safety regulation?," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 195-221, May.
    3. Robert W. Hahn & Richard L. Schmalensee & Roger Noll & Robert Stavins & Lester B. Lave & George C. Eads & Milton Russell & V. Kerry Smith & Maureen L. Cropper & Paul R. Portney & Kenneth J. Arrow, 1996. "Benefit-Cost Analysis in Environmental, Health, and Safety Regulation: A Statement of Principles," Books, American Enterprise Institute, number 51790, September.
    4. Bromley, Daniel W., 1990. "The ideology of efficiency: Searching for a theory of policy analysis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 86-107, July.
    5. Sen, Amartya, 1993. "Markets and Freedoms: Achievements and Limitations of the Market Mechanism in Promoting Individual Freedoms," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 519-541, October.
    6. Saraydar, Edward, 1989. "The Conflation of Productivity and Efficiency in Economics and Economic History," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(1), pages 55-67, April.
    7. repec:reg:rpubli:98 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Field, Alexander James, 1981. "The problem with neoclassical institutional economics: A critique with special reference to the North/Thomas model of pre-1500 Europe," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 174-198, April.
    9. Daniel W. Bromley, 1997. "Constitutional Political Economy: Property Claims In A Dynamic World," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 15(4), pages 43-54, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paul M. Jakus & Sherzod B. Akhundjanov, 2018. "Neither Boon nor Bane: The Economic Effects of a Landscape-Scale National Monument," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 94(3), pages 323-339.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Daniel Bromley, 2004. "Reconsidering Environmental Policy: Prescriptive Consequentialism and Volitional Pragmatism," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 28(1), pages 73-99, May.
    2. Castle, Emery N., 2003. "Land, Economic Change, and Agricultural Economics," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 32(1), pages 1-15, April.
    3. Bromley, Daniel W., 2007. "Environmental regulations and the problem of sustainability: Moving beyond "market failure"," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 676-683, September.
    4. Stavins, Robert, 2000. "Economic Analysis of Global Climate Change Policy: A Primer," Working Paper Series rwp00-003, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    5. Stavins, Robert & Hahn, Robert & Cavanagh, Sheila, 2001. "National Environmental Policy During the Clinton Years," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-38, Resources for the Future.
    6. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Economics," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-54, Resources for the Future.
    7. Fullerton, Don & Stavins, Robert N., 1998. "How Do Economists Really Think About the Environment?," Discussion Papers 10910, Resources for the Future.
    8. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Introduction to the Political Economy of Environmental Regulations," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-12, Resources for the Future.
    9. Scott Farrow, 2008. "Improving the Regulatory Analysis of the Cooling Water Intake Structure Rule: What Does an Economist Want?," UMBC Economics Department Working Papers 09-102, UMBC Department of Economics.
    10. Bartzokas, Anthony & Yarime, Masaru, 1997. "Technology Trends in Pollution-Intensive Industries: A Review of Sectoral Trends," UNU-INTECH Discussion Paper Series 1997-06, United Nations University - INTECH.
    11. James Hammitt, 2000. "Are The Costs of Proposed Environmental Regulations Overestimated? Evidence from the CFC Phaseout," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 16(3), pages 281-302, July.
    12. Bromley, Daniel W., 1998. "Searching for sustainability: The poverty of spontaneous order," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2-3), pages 231-240, February.
    13. R. Turner, 2007. "Limits to CBA in UK and European environmental policy: retrospects and future prospects," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 253-269, May.
    14. Stavins, Robert N., 2003. "Environmental Protection and Economic Well-Being: How Does (and How Should) Government Balance These Two Important Values?," Discussion Papers 10565, Resources for the Future.
    15. Kutschukian, Jean-Marc, 2008. "A Framework For The Economic Evaluation Of Environmental Science," 2008 Conference (52nd), February 5-8, 2008, Canberra, Australia 6026, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    16. Crespi, John M. & Marette, Stephan, 2003. "Some Economic Implications Of Public Labeling," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 34(3), pages 1-12, November.
    17. Runge, C. Ford, 1999. "Beyond The Green Box: A Conceptual Framework For Agricultural Trade And The Environment," Working Papers 14417, University of Minnesota, Center for International Food and Agricultural Policy.
    18. Robert W. Hahn & Paul C. Tetlock, 2008. "Has Economic Analysis Improved Regulatory Decisions?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 67-84, Winter.
    19. Scott Farrow, "undated". "Random Error and Simulation Models With an Unobserved Dependent Variable as applied to the Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act," UMBC Economics Department Working Papers 09-103, UMBC Department of Economics, revised 26 Jan 2008.
    20. Lele, Sharachchandra & Srinivasan, Veena, 2013. "Disaggregated economic impact analysis incorporating ecological and social trade-offs and techno-institutional context: A case from the Western Ghats of India," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 98-112.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:agrerw:v:32:y:2003:i:01:p:9-17_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/age .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.