IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/amposc/v62y2018i3p682-694.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Enough and as Good: A Formal Model of Lockean First Appropriation

Author

Listed:
  • Brian Kogelmann
  • Benjamin G. Ogden

Abstract

In developing a theory of the first appropriation of natural resources from the state of nature, John Locke tells us that persons must leave “enough and as good” for others. Detailing exactly what this restriction requires divides right and left libertarians. Briefly, right libertarians interpret “enough and as good” as requiring no or very minimal restrictions on the first appropriation of natural resources, whereas left libertarians interpret “enough and as good” as requiring everyone to be entitled to an equal share of unappropriated resources, able to claim no more beyond this equal share. This article approaches the right versus left libertarian debate by developing a formal model that examines the welfare properties of different interpretations of the Lockean proviso. The model shows that underlying philosophical justifications for left libertarianism, when plausible assumptions hold, will actually be better served by a right libertarian proviso rather than a left libertarian one.

Suggested Citation

  • Brian Kogelmann & Benjamin G. Ogden, 2018. "Enough and as Good: A Formal Model of Lockean First Appropriation," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 62(3), pages 682-694, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:62:y:2018:i:3:p:682-694
    DOI: 10.1111/ajps.12369
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12369
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ajps.12369?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Brian Kogelmann, 2020. "The future of political philosophy: Non-ideal and west of babel," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 33(1), pages 237-252, March.
    2. Brian Kogelmann, 2021. "Lockeans against labor mixing," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 20(3), pages 251-272, August.

    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:wly:amposc:v:62:y:2018:i:3:p:682-694. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5907 .

    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.