LAND PLOT AS AN OBJECT OF PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vyacheslav Vovk
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Land Management ◽  
Land Reform ◽  
Essential Role ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Rich Country ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Land Plot ◽  
Government Supervision

Russia is a resource-rich country, and great changes are being made today in order that land and its resources are used for the benefit of any citizen of our state. Under the circumstances government supervision (control) over the optimal use of territories gets the essential role. The rights that are contained in land reform give owners, landowners, land users, and employers extensive powers concerning independent land management.

The Politics of Property Rights

1995 ◽  
Vol 89 (4) ◽  
pp. 867-881 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn Firmin-Sellers
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Land Tenure ◽  
Political Institutions ◽  
Land Reform ◽  
Local Community ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Fundamental Problem ◽  
Theoretical Argument ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Customary Land

The study of land tenure polarizes the field of development. Neoclassical scholars lobby for a move toward private property rights, while other economists and historians defend the maintenance of customary land tenure. I argue that the development scholars' focus on the structure of property rights obscures a more fundamental problem of land reform—that of enforcement. Property rights will not inspire individual investment and economic growth unless political institutions give the ruler of a local community or nation-state sufficient coercive authority to silence those who advocate an alternative, more distributionally favorable property rights system. At the same time, political institutions must force the ruler to establish a credible commitment to that property rights system. I illustrate this theoretical argument through an analysis of property rights institutions in Akyem Abuakwa, a traditional state in colonial Ghana.

The Market Economy

2020 ◽  
pp. 119-138
Author(s):  
Kevin Vallier
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Market Economy ◽  
Real World ◽  
Essential Role ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Political Trust ◽  
Central Feature ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
The Right

The market economy can create trust for the right reasons. Markets and property rights promote social and political trust in the real world by creating social cohesion through exchange and generating economic growth. Markets also arise from private property rights, which are publicly justified based on the essential role private property rights play in protecting individual rights and the rights of associations. This includes private property rights in capital, that is, productive property, which means that a broadly market-based economy will be a central feature in any society that maintains high levels of social and political trust in the right ways.

Konsep Distribusi Pendapatan Dalam Islam

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-97
Author(s):  
Moh. Ah. Subhan ZA
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Social Life ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Wealth Distribution ◽  
The State ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Job Opportunities ◽  
The Rich ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Distribution Of Income

The main problem of social life in the community is about how to make the allocation and distribution of income well. Inequality and poverty basically arise not because of the difference of anyone’s strength and weakness in getting livelihood, but because of inappropriate distribution mechanism. With the result that wealth treasure just turns on the rich wealthy, which is in turn, results in the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.Therefore, a discussion on distribution becomes main focus of theory of Islamic economics. Moreover, the discussion of the distribution is not only related to economic issues, but also social and political aspects. On the other side, the economic vision of Islam gives priority to the guarantee of the fulfillment of a better life. Islam emphasizes distributive justice and encloses, in its system, a program for the redistribution of wealth and prosperity, so that each individual is guaranteed with a respectable and friendly standard of living. Islam recognizes private property rights, but the private property rights must be properly distributed. The personal property is used for self and family livelihood, for investment of the working capital, so that it can provide job opportunities for others, for help of the others through zakat, infaq, and shodaqoh. In this way, the wealth not only rotates on the rich, bringing on gap in social life.The problem of wealth distribution is closely related to the welfare of society. Therefore, the state has a duty to regulate the distribution of income in order that the distribution can be fair and reaches appropriate target. The state could at least attempt it by optimizing the role of BAZ (Badan Amil Zakat) and LAZ (Lembaga Amil Zakat) which has all this time been slack. If BAZ and LAZ can be optimized, author believes that inequality and poverty over time will vanish. This is because the majority of Indonesia's population is Muslim.

Libertarianisms

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Halliday
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Classical Liberal ◽  
Inherited Wealth ◽  
Left And Right ◽  
The Common

This chapter considers various arguments both for and against taxing inherited wealth, each of these being associated with some or other type of libertarian outlook. Libertarianism in the Lockean guises (‘left’ and ‘right’ varieties) is distinguished from its classical liberal alternative, which downplays the Lockean emphasis on private property rights in favour of a more defeasible case for small government and low taxation. These different perspectives generate a variety of quite different arguments about inheritance, some more persuasive than others. Some attention is paid to the common claim that inheritance taxes ‘punish’ virtue and generosity. It is then argued that a Rignano scheme may be particularly attractive in light of certain left-libertarian commitments and as a way of accommodating a classical liberal concern about perpetual savings.

Incommensurable preferences in contingent valuation: the case of Natura 2000 Network in Finland

2000 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 260-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. REKOLA ◽  
E. POUTA ◽  
J. KUULUVAINEN ◽  
O. TAHVONEN ◽  
C.-Z. LI
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Contingent Valuation ◽  
Environmental Ethics ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Natura 2000 ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Lexicographic Preferences ◽  
Preference Construction ◽  
Policy Decision Making

In the literature of contingent valuation, a rights-based system of environmental ethics claiming that natural objects have absolute rights, has frequently been regarded as the main reason for incommensurability, i.e. for citizens’ inability to find a common measure according to which all values could be ranked. In a study of 2400 Finns aged between 18 and 70, we tested whether a respondent's commitment to guaranteeing private property rights could be a reason for incommensurability beyond the respondent's possible commitment to absolute nature rights. It was found that incommensurability, modelled with lexicographic preferences, was attributable more often to private property rights than to nature rights. However, Finnish respondents who had lexicographic preferences for nature rights based their choice more often on an ethical judgement, whereas lexicographic preferences for property rights could rather be explained with an ambivalent preference construction. Lexicographic preferences for nature rights increased the willingness to pay for conservation, while lexicographic preferences for property rights decreased it. The result, which was predicted by the theory, supported the validity of incommensurability measurement. The study therefore indicates that several reasons for incommensurable preferences may exist and that it is possible to measure these reasons in contingent valuation surveys in order to judge the validity of the welfare measures in environmental policy decision-making.

Review of Article 27.3(b) and the Patenting of Life Forms: Hitting a BRIC Wall in the WTO?

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 289-318
Author(s):  
Jagjit Plahe ◽  
Nitesh Kukreja ◽  
Sunil Ponnamperuma
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Life Forms ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Ethical Concerns ◽  
The World ◽  
Over Time

Abstract Under Article 27.3(b) of the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement of the World Trade Organization (WTO), all members are required to extend private property rights to life forms. Using official WTO documents, this article analyzes the negotiating positions of WTO members on life patents during a review of Article 27.3(b) which commenced in 1999 and is currently ongoing. Initially, developing countries raised serious ethical concerns regarding life patents, creating a clear North-South divide. However, over time the position of Brazil and India moved away from the ethics of life patents to the prevention of bio-piracy, a position supported by China. Russia too is supportive of life patents. A group of small developing countries have, however, continued to question the morality of life patents despite this “BRIC wall,” changing the dynamics of the negotiations from a North-South divide to one which now includes a South-South divide.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document