{"title":"从捕鱼到土地掠夺——兼论两种传统下产权研究中“共同财产”概念的转换","authors":"L. Lai","doi":"10.1177/14730952221121072","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This essay begins with a trialogue on the definitions of “common property” and introduces two “traditions” of interpreting property rights. The older, traced to Gordon (1954) and propagated by Cheung (1970), distinguishes common from communal property; the younger, to Ciriacy-Wantrup & Bishop (1975) and made popular by Ostrom (2000), calls “commons” (communal in the sense of the older tradition) “common property. With the help of three matrices, the essay summarises the two traditions and explains that property rights and access are two distinct dimensions, respectively de jure and de facto, of resource enjoyment.","PeriodicalId":47713,"journal":{"name":"Planning Theory","volume":"22 1","pages":"338 - 348"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From fish to land grabbing - a note on the transition of the concept of “common property” in property rights research under two traditions\",\"authors\":\"L. Lai\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14730952221121072\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This essay begins with a trialogue on the definitions of “common property” and introduces two “traditions” of interpreting property rights. The older, traced to Gordon (1954) and propagated by Cheung (1970), distinguishes common from communal property; the younger, to Ciriacy-Wantrup & Bishop (1975) and made popular by Ostrom (2000), calls “commons” (communal in the sense of the older tradition) “common property. With the help of three matrices, the essay summarises the two traditions and explains that property rights and access are two distinct dimensions, respectively de jure and de facto, of resource enjoyment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47713,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Planning Theory\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"338 - 348\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Planning Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14730952221121072\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Planning Theory","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14730952221121072","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING","Score":null,"Total":0}
From fish to land grabbing - a note on the transition of the concept of “common property” in property rights research under two traditions
This essay begins with a trialogue on the definitions of “common property” and introduces two “traditions” of interpreting property rights. The older, traced to Gordon (1954) and propagated by Cheung (1970), distinguishes common from communal property; the younger, to Ciriacy-Wantrup & Bishop (1975) and made popular by Ostrom (2000), calls “commons” (communal in the sense of the older tradition) “common property. With the help of three matrices, the essay summarises the two traditions and explains that property rights and access are two distinct dimensions, respectively de jure and de facto, of resource enjoyment.
期刊介绍:
Planning Theory is an international peer-reviewed forum for the critical exploration of planning theory. The journal publishes the very best research covering the latest debates and developments within the field. A core publication for planning theorists, the journal will also be of considerable interest to scholars of human geography, public administration, administrative science, sociology and anthropology.