“Full Circle”: Theories of Property Rights as Indicated by Two Case Summaries Concerning the Individualization of Collective Indigenous Lands Interests
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The "Rule of Law" and "Individual Property Rights" are often regarded as necessary conditions for economic growth and development. Recently, the common ownership of First Nation reserve lands in Canada was identified as "Dead capital." Apparently, the problems of delayed development can be traced to a dysfunctional property system. A serious critique of collective ownership with its concomitant high transactions costs suggests a stronger on-reserve role for market relations. Only by individualizing land ownership and coming out from under the Indian Act can the commercial potential of reserve lands be realized. Clearly, a closer look at the property rights paradigm is required. To assist with a discussion of such proposals for development, this paper will employ a critical economic history approach, by (i) explaining the foundations of the property rights paradigm; (ii) employing two case summaries to demonstrate how US and Canadian authorities directed the conversion of collective Indigenous land holdings to individual transferable titles; and (iii) identifying some outcomes associated with the creation of transferable individual rights in property. Two case summaries demonstrate how economic history can illustrate the private property rights experiences of Indigenous peoples. Coercion by the United States government resulted in the breakup (allotment) and sale of large Indian territorial reservation lands. In the Canadian prairie west, Métis entitlements took the form of grants of millions of acres of scrip and the assignment or conveyance of their interests left them without a land base. In these cases, lands and entitlements ostensibly reserved for Indigenous peoples were diverted to emerging settler land markets. Evidence suggests that the weaker property rights of speculators/settlers triumphed over the legally recognized rights of Indigenous peoples. In other words, the Rule of Law in respect of property was somewhat different for settlers/speculators and Indigenous peoples. In these historical cases, the individualization of collective ownership into transferable assets had similar outcomes that do not seem to accord with predictions that economic growth will ensue from the promotion of private property rights and the reduced transaction costs.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».