Anti-Monopoly and the Radical Lockean Origins of Western Water Law

M. Blumm
{"title":"Anti-Monopoly and the Radical Lockean Origins of Western Water Law","authors":"M. Blumm","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2302848","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This review of David Schorr's book, The Colorado Doctrine: Water Rights, Corporations, and Distributive Justice on the American Frontier, maintains that the book is a therapeutic corrective to the standard history of the origins of western water law as celebration of economic efficiency and wealth maximization. Schorr's account convincingly contends that the roots of prior appropriation water law -- the \"Colorado Doctrine\" -- lie in distributional justice concerns, not in the supposed efficiency advantages of private property over common property. The goals of the founders of the Colorado doctrine, according to Schorr, were to advance Radical Lockean principles such as widespread distibution of water to current settlers and avoiding monopolization of the resource by large landowners and corporate speculators. The book explains how western water law doctrines like the abolition of riparian rights, beneficial use as the basis and measure of water rights, the sufficiency principle, the no-injury rule limiting the transferability of rights, and public ownership of water all served these Radical Lockean goals. Schorr generally downplays the significance of temporal priority, thought by many to be the hallmark of western water law, and he explains the early Colorado courts surprising and consistent favoring of small-scale farmers over large-scale corporations like ditch companies. Schorr also attempts to draw lessons from his careful and detailed history of the rise of prior appropriation law for contemporary concerns like allocating the burdens of climate-change pollution control. Although he overlooks a few matters -- like the motive underlying the rejection of riparian rights as an anti-federal government doctrine and the failure of the founders of the Colorado doctrine to grant limited terms instead of perpetual rights in water -- and his assumption that public property will inevitably be distributed to the wealthy and the well-organized might be questioned -- this book is law and history at its finest and should be read by all serious natural resources and property law teachers and scholars.","PeriodicalId":340493,"journal":{"name":"Pollution eJournal","volume":"65 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pollution eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2302848","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This review of David Schorr's book, The Colorado Doctrine: Water Rights, Corporations, and Distributive Justice on the American Frontier, maintains that the book is a therapeutic corrective to the standard history of the origins of western water law as celebration of economic efficiency and wealth maximization. Schorr's account convincingly contends that the roots of prior appropriation water law -- the "Colorado Doctrine" -- lie in distributional justice concerns, not in the supposed efficiency advantages of private property over common property. The goals of the founders of the Colorado doctrine, according to Schorr, were to advance Radical Lockean principles such as widespread distibution of water to current settlers and avoiding monopolization of the resource by large landowners and corporate speculators. The book explains how western water law doctrines like the abolition of riparian rights, beneficial use as the basis and measure of water rights, the sufficiency principle, the no-injury rule limiting the transferability of rights, and public ownership of water all served these Radical Lockean goals. Schorr generally downplays the significance of temporal priority, thought by many to be the hallmark of western water law, and he explains the early Colorado courts surprising and consistent favoring of small-scale farmers over large-scale corporations like ditch companies. Schorr also attempts to draw lessons from his careful and detailed history of the rise of prior appropriation law for contemporary concerns like allocating the burdens of climate-change pollution control. Although he overlooks a few matters -- like the motive underlying the rejection of riparian rights as an anti-federal government doctrine and the failure of the founders of the Colorado doctrine to grant limited terms instead of perpetual rights in water -- and his assumption that public property will inevitably be distributed to the wealthy and the well-organized might be questioned -- this book is law and history at its finest and should be read by all serious natural resources and property law teachers and scholars.
反垄断与西方水法的洛克式激进渊源
这篇对David Schorr的书《科罗拉多主义:美国边境的水权、公司和分配正义》的评论认为,这本书是对西方水法起源的标准历史的治疗性纠正,它是对经济效率和财富最大化的庆祝。肖尔的论述令人信服地认为,优先占有水法——“科罗拉多主义”——的根源在于分配正义问题,而不是所谓的私有财产相对于公共财产的效率优势。根据肖尔的说法,科罗拉多主义创始人的目标是推进激进的洛克原则,比如向当前的定居者广泛分配水,避免大土地所有者和企业投机者垄断资源。这本书解释了西方水法理论是如何为这些激进的洛克式目标服务的,比如废除河岸权、将水权的有益使用作为水权的基础和衡量标准、充分性原则、限制权利可转让的不损害规则以及水的公共所有权。Schorr通常淡化了时间优先权的重要性,许多人认为这是西方水法的标志,他解释说,早期科罗拉多州法院出人意料地一贯支持小农,而不是像沟渠公司这样的大型公司。Schorr还试图从他对诸如分配气候变化污染控制负担等当代问题的优先拨款法兴起的仔细而详细的历史中吸取教训。虽然他忽略了几个重要的——就像背后的动机拒绝河岸权作为anti-federal政府主义和科罗拉多学说的创始人的失败给予有限的条款,而不是永久的权利在水中,他假设公共财产不可避免地会分发给富人和组织可能会质疑,这本书是最出色的法律和历史,应该读所有严重的自然资源和财产法律教师和学者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信