Academic literature on the topic 'Ciriacy-Wantrup'

The issue of the relationship between private property and common property has engaged both legal and economic scholars in a long series of controversies over the meaning, the sequence of development, and the superiority of private vs. common property. The issues debated relate to the efficiency, equity and sustainability of private property as contrasted to common property. Many scholars think of contemporary examples of common property as remnants of the past, likely to disappear during the twenty-first century. Recent research, however, has challenged the presumption that private property is necessarily superior to common property. Keywords: Private property, common property, open access regimes. References: [1] Grossi, Paolo (1981), An Alternative to Private Property; Collective Property in the Juridical Consciousness of the Nineteenth Century, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.[2] Maine, Henry Sumner (1963), Ancient Law: Its Connection with the Early History of Society and its Relation to Modern Ideas; With Introduction and Notes by Frederick Pollack, Boston: Beacon Press (reprint of 1861 ed.), p. 252.[3] North, Douglass C. and Robert Paul Thomas (1976), The Rise of the Western World: A New Economic History, London: Cambridge University Press.[4] North, C. Douglass, L. Terry Anderson, and J. Peter Hill (1983), Growth and Welfare in the American Past: A New Economic History, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.[5] W.P. Welch, “The political feasibility of full ownership property rights: The cases of pollution and fisheries”, Policy Sciences, (1983), 16, 165-80.[6] Ostrom, Vincent, The Intellectual Crisis in American Public Administration, 3rd ed., Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press (2008).[7] North, C. Douglass, Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance, New York: Cambridge University Press (1990).[8] Elinor Ostrom and Charlotte Hess, Private and Common Property Rights, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University, 29/11/2007, https://surface.syr.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1024&context=sul (truy cập lần cuối: 31/03/2019).[9] Ciriacy-Wantrup, V. Siegfried and C. Richard. Bishop (1975), “Common property” as a concept in natural resource policy, Natural Resources Journal, 15, 713-727.[10] Báo Pháp luật (điện tử): https://plo.vn/thoi-su/dai-bieu-lo-dan-het-duoc-tu-do-tam-bien-o-phu-quoc-774398.html (truy cập lần cuối: 05/04/2019).[11] Báo Tuổi Trẻ (điện tử): https://tuoitre.vn/khong-the-chap-nhan-tinh-trang-lay-bien-lam-cua-rieng-2018110711421466.htm (truy cập lần cuối: 05/04/2019.[12] Dales, H. John (1968), Pollution, Property, and Prices: An Essay in Policy-Making and Economics, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.[13] Higgs, Robert (1996), “Legally induced technical regress in the Washington salmon fishery”, in L. J. Alston, Thráinn Eggertsson, and Douglass North (eds), Empirical Studies in Institutional Change, New York: Cambridge University Press.[14] Johnson, N. Ronald and D. Gary Libecap (1982), “Contracting problems and regulation: The case of the fishery”, American Economic Review, 72, 1005-1022.[15] Wiersma, L. Lindsey (2005), “Indigenous lands as cultural property: A new approach to indigenous land claims”, Duke Law Journal, 54, 1061-1088.[16] Ostrom, Vincent and Elinor Ostrom (1977), “A theory for institutional analysis of common pool problems”, in Garrett Hardin and John Baden (eds), Managing the Commons, San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman, pp. 157-172.[17] Ostrom, Elinor, Roy Gardner, and James M. Walker (1994), Rules, Games, and Common-Pool Resources, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.[18] Feeny, David, Fikret Berkes, Bonnie J. McCay, and James M. Acheson (1990), “The tragedy of the commons: Twenty-two years later”, Human Ecology, 18, 1-19.[19] Bromley, Daniel W. (1992), “The commons, common property, and environmental policy”, 2 Environmental and Resource Economics, 1-17.[20] Singh, Katar (1994), Managing Common Pool Resources: Principles and Case Studies, New Delhi: Oxford University Press. [21] Singh, Katar and Vishwa Ballabh (1996), Cooperative Management of Natural Resources, New Delhi: Sage.[22] Blomquist, William and Elinor Ostrom (1985), “Institutional capacity and the resolution of a commons dilemma”, Policy Studies Review, 5, 383-393.[23] Lueck, Dean (1995), “The rule of first possession and the design of the law”, Journal of Law and Economics, 38, 393-436.[24] Ghoshal, Sumantra and Peter Moran (1996), “Bad for practice: A critique of the transaction cost theory”, Academy of Management Review, 21, 13-47.[25] Putterman, Louis (1995), Markets, hierarchies, and information: On a paradox in the economics of organization”, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 26, 373-390.[26] Seabright, Paul (1993), “Managing local commons: Theoretical issues in incentive design”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 7, 113-134.

Dissertação (mestrado)—Universidade de Brasília, Faculdade de Economia, Administração e Contabilidade, Departamento de Economia, 2017.
Submitted by Raquel Almeida (raquel.df13@gmail.com) on 2017-06-06T16:56:24Z No. of bitstreams: 1 2017_LeonardoHasencleverdeLimaBorges.pdf: 1853510 bytes, checksum: 136cf6fe99ee5a880a04f55fd08a8404 (MD5)
Approved for entry into archive by Raquel Viana (raquelviana@bce.unb.br) on 2017-08-18T22:25:04Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 2017_LeonardoHasencleverdeLimaBorges.pdf: 1853510 bytes, checksum: 136cf6fe99ee5a880a04f55fd08a8404 (MD5)
Made available in DSpace on 2017-08-18T22:25:04Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 2017_LeonardoHasencleverdeLimaBorges.pdf: 1853510 bytes, checksum: 136cf6fe99ee5a880a04f55fd08a8404 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-08-18
Esta dissertação é um tributo à Siegfried Von Ciriacy-Wantrup (1906-1980). Seu objetivo foi analisar a obra do autor e ressaltar alguns aspectos que, de fato, impactaram, e ainda impactam o desenvolvimento da economia ambiental neoclássica. Para realizar esta tarefa iniciei por levantar sua história de vida e toda sua produção acadêmica científica. Depois selecionei três aspectos que (i) considero fundamentais no campo de conhecimento em tela e (ii) que ele se aprofundou no estudo, análise e formulação, deixando contribuições contundentes para a evolução da matéria. Esses aspectos são: os conceitos de conservação e recurso; o conceito e instrumentalidade de instituições sociais, no que toca seu papel decisivo para a economia da conservação; e a epistemologia e instrumentalidade da sua formulação do Padrão Mínimo de Segurança. Utilizei para isto, como principal fonte, seu livro “Resource Conservation: Economics and Policy” em sua segunda edição datada de 1963. Não obstante, ao acessar toda sua produção acadêmica e científica, me apoiei, para a elaboração do texto aqui apresentado, em vários de seus artigos, em maior ou menor grau. O que resultou deste esforço foi um compilado analítico que ressalta a força e a solidez da formulação e da análise do autor. Ficaram evidentes, também, as influências de sua obra na evolução da economia da conservação de recursos. Por fim, concluo que sua produção, tomada como um todo, influenciou e ainda influencia, com notável intensidade, o desenvolvimento da economia ambiental neoclássica. Para mim, sua obra é obra de arte.
This is a tribute to Siegfried Von Ciriacy-Wantrup (1906-1980). My objective was to analyze the author’s production and point out some aspects that, in fact, have and still are influencing the development of neoclassical environmental economics. To accomplish that I started up by learning about his life history and entire scientific and academic production. Then I selected three aspects that I consider (i) fundamentals in the field of knowledge on screen and (ii) that he had deepen in the study, analysis and formulations, leaving decisive collaborations for the development of the matter. These aspects were: the concepts of conservation and resources; the concept and usages of social institutions, and their bruising relevance to the economics of resource conservation; and the epistemology and usages of his original formulation of the Safe Minimum Standard. I used, as the main source of information, his book “Resource Conservation: Economics and Policies”, in its 3rd edition dated 1963. Nevertheless, by accessing all his scientific production I also used several of his articles, in grater or smaller extension. The result of all this is an analytical compiling that brings about the strength and robustness of Wantrup’s analysis and formulations. It also became evident the influences of his works to the evolution of resource economics and conservation. Finally I concluded that his production, taken as a big picture, has impacted and still impacts, notably, the development of neoclassical environmental economics. To me, his work is pure art.