Institutionalization of common land property in Portugal: Tragic trends between “Commons” and “Anticommons”

•We analyze common land property institutionalization in Portugal from 1850 to post 1974.•We based our analysis using the matrix proposed by Heller.•The existing legal framework is unable to integrate a title to these territories.•These territories can better be classified as limited-exclusion antic...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Land use policy 2013-11, Vol.35, p.85-94
Hauptverfasser: Lopes, Luis Filipe Gomes, dos Santos Bento, João Manuel R., Cristovão, Artur F. Arede Correia, Baptista, Fernando Oliveira
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 94
container_issue
container_start_page 85
container_title Land use policy
container_volume 35
creator Lopes, Luis Filipe Gomes
dos Santos Bento, João Manuel R.
Cristovão, Artur F. Arede Correia
Baptista, Fernando Oliveira
description •We analyze common land property institutionalization in Portugal from 1850 to post 1974.•We based our analysis using the matrix proposed by Heller.•The existing legal framework is unable to integrate a title to these territories.•These territories can better be classified as limited-exclusion anticommons. The use and exploitation of natural resources is generally structured by institutions, especially by property institutions. The main objective of this paper is to present a diachronic analysis of the institutionalization of common land property in Portugal. The several types of ownership may be largely explained by common land history. We intend to draw an outline of the emergence, evolution and transition of common land from the late nineteenth century to the present day, using the matrix proposed by Heller. The economic problem of the optimal level of appropriation is recurrent in studies that analyze the economic implications of property rights. Thus, it is imperative to analyze whether or not the dimension of common land ownership is relevant to its efficient exploitation. In essence, we infer that common land ownership in the 1st period (1850–1926) may be classified as limited-access commons (limited access to commoners) with a relatively small average size of 50ha. This common land was primarily used for grazing, firewood collecting and shrub extraction. In the second period (1926–1974), the State dictatorship invoked the public interest (forest easements) and took possession of more than 80% of common land, promoting the transition from limited-access commons to state ownership. The units of commons were aggregated in forest perimeters for Silviculture activity, the average size being greater than 3400ha. Finally, we analyzed the institutionalization of common land ownership in the period after the democratic revolution on April 25th 1974. We concluded that the incipient legal and institutional frameworks revealed an inability to integrate an effective title to these territories to give way to a better classification of limited-exclusion anticommons. The Heller matrix approach revealed to be a useful tool, however insufficient to study holistically Portuguese common land institutionalization. In our preliminary conclusions the Heller matrix appears to be an ill-posed problem (no continuum). It allows for the reversibility between different property regimes that involve great simplifications in the epistemology of property rights.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.05.007
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1808674539</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0264837713000896</els_id><sourcerecordid>1534833870</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-3e4bc74f87f29be4dc2ced83620d4d19cd8ea12da556aecc980493136f8ff82b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkU1uFDEQhVsIJIbAGfAGiU03_rebXRgBiRQJJJK15XGXRx71tAfbTRRWOQhcLieJm4nCMiuXSt97Va7XNIjgjmAiP-y60U7DnOEQx45iwjosOozVs2ZFtGKtUII_b1aYSt5qptTL5lXOO4yx7AldNfl8yiWUuYQ42TH8tkuBokcu7ve1WszRIcUDpHKDwoS-x1TmrR0_ostkt8GhkmAaMtpAuQaY0N3tn_U_ab67_YsWde2cTiW4x-7r5oW3Y4Y3D-9Jc_Xl8-X6rL349vV8fXrROs50aRnwjVPca-VpvwE-OOpg0ExSPPCB9G7QYAkdrBDSgnO9xrxnhEmvvdd0w06a90ffuv_PGXIx-5AdjPVPEOdsiMZaKi5Y_zQqGNeMaYUrqo-oSzHnBN4cUtjbdGMINkskZmf-R2KWSAwWpkZSpe8eptjs7OiTnVzIj3qqZK-kXka8PXLeRmO3qTJXP6qRwJgSJXpZiU9HAur9fgVIJrsAU71PSOCKGWJ4ep17wE62tQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1534833870</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Institutionalization of common land property in Portugal: Tragic trends between “Commons” and “Anticommons”</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Lopes, Luis Filipe Gomes ; dos Santos Bento, João Manuel R. ; Cristovão, Artur F. Arede Correia ; Baptista, Fernando Oliveira</creator><creatorcontrib>Lopes, Luis Filipe Gomes ; dos Santos Bento, João Manuel R. ; Cristovão, Artur F. Arede Correia ; Baptista, Fernando Oliveira</creatorcontrib><description>•We analyze common land property institutionalization in Portugal from 1850 to post 1974.•We based our analysis using the matrix proposed by Heller.•The existing legal framework is unable to integrate a title to these territories.•These territories can better be classified as limited-exclusion anticommons. The use and exploitation of natural resources is generally structured by institutions, especially by property institutions. The main objective of this paper is to present a diachronic analysis of the institutionalization of common land property in Portugal. The several types of ownership may be largely explained by common land history. We intend to draw an outline of the emergence, evolution and transition of common land from the late nineteenth century to the present day, using the matrix proposed by Heller. The economic problem of the optimal level of appropriation is recurrent in studies that analyze the economic implications of property rights. Thus, it is imperative to analyze whether or not the dimension of common land ownership is relevant to its efficient exploitation. In essence, we infer that common land ownership in the 1st period (1850–1926) may be classified as limited-access commons (limited access to commoners) with a relatively small average size of 50ha. This common land was primarily used for grazing, firewood collecting and shrub extraction. In the second period (1926–1974), the State dictatorship invoked the public interest (forest easements) and took possession of more than 80% of common land, promoting the transition from limited-access commons to state ownership. The units of commons were aggregated in forest perimeters for Silviculture activity, the average size being greater than 3400ha. Finally, we analyzed the institutionalization of common land ownership in the period after the democratic revolution on April 25th 1974. We concluded that the incipient legal and institutional frameworks revealed an inability to integrate an effective title to these territories to give way to a better classification of limited-exclusion anticommons. The Heller matrix approach revealed to be a useful tool, however insufficient to study holistically Portuguese common land institutionalization. In our preliminary conclusions the Heller matrix appears to be an ill-posed problem (no continuum). It allows for the reversibility between different property regimes that involve great simplifications in the epistemology of property rights.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0264-8377</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-5754</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.05.007</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology ; Anticommons ; Applied ecology ; Biological and medical sciences ; Commons ; Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife ; forests ; fuelwood ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; grazing ; land ownership ; Land tenure ; land use ; Private property ; property rights ; public ownership ; Scale ; shrubs ; silviculture</subject><ispartof>Land use policy, 2013-11, Vol.35, p.85-94</ispartof><rights>2013 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>2014 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-3e4bc74f87f29be4dc2ced83620d4d19cd8ea12da556aecc980493136f8ff82b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-3e4bc74f87f29be4dc2ced83620d4d19cd8ea12da556aecc980493136f8ff82b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837713000896$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=27697680$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lopes, Luis Filipe Gomes</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>dos Santos Bento, João Manuel R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cristovão, Artur F. Arede Correia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baptista, Fernando Oliveira</creatorcontrib><title>Institutionalization of common land property in Portugal: Tragic trends between “Commons” and “Anticommons”</title><title>Land use policy</title><description>•We analyze common land property institutionalization in Portugal from 1850 to post 1974.•We based our analysis using the matrix proposed by Heller.•The existing legal framework is unable to integrate a title to these territories.•These territories can better be classified as limited-exclusion anticommons. The use and exploitation of natural resources is generally structured by institutions, especially by property institutions. The main objective of this paper is to present a diachronic analysis of the institutionalization of common land property in Portugal. The several types of ownership may be largely explained by common land history. We intend to draw an outline of the emergence, evolution and transition of common land from the late nineteenth century to the present day, using the matrix proposed by Heller. The economic problem of the optimal level of appropriation is recurrent in studies that analyze the economic implications of property rights. Thus, it is imperative to analyze whether or not the dimension of common land ownership is relevant to its efficient exploitation. In essence, we infer that common land ownership in the 1st period (1850–1926) may be classified as limited-access commons (limited access to commoners) with a relatively small average size of 50ha. This common land was primarily used for grazing, firewood collecting and shrub extraction. In the second period (1926–1974), the State dictatorship invoked the public interest (forest easements) and took possession of more than 80% of common land, promoting the transition from limited-access commons to state ownership. The units of commons were aggregated in forest perimeters for Silviculture activity, the average size being greater than 3400ha. Finally, we analyzed the institutionalization of common land ownership in the period after the democratic revolution on April 25th 1974. We concluded that the incipient legal and institutional frameworks revealed an inability to integrate an effective title to these territories to give way to a better classification of limited-exclusion anticommons. The Heller matrix approach revealed to be a useful tool, however insufficient to study holistically Portuguese common land institutionalization. In our preliminary conclusions the Heller matrix appears to be an ill-posed problem (no continuum). It allows for the reversibility between different property regimes that involve great simplifications in the epistemology of property rights.</description><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</subject><subject>Anticommons</subject><subject>Applied ecology</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Commons</subject><subject>Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife</subject><subject>forests</subject><subject>fuelwood</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>grazing</subject><subject>land ownership</subject><subject>Land tenure</subject><subject>land use</subject><subject>Private property</subject><subject>property rights</subject><subject>public ownership</subject><subject>Scale</subject><subject>shrubs</subject><subject>silviculture</subject><issn>0264-8377</issn><issn>1873-5754</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkU1uFDEQhVsIJIbAGfAGiU03_rebXRgBiRQJJJK15XGXRx71tAfbTRRWOQhcLieJm4nCMiuXSt97Va7XNIjgjmAiP-y60U7DnOEQx45iwjosOozVs2ZFtGKtUII_b1aYSt5qptTL5lXOO4yx7AldNfl8yiWUuYQ42TH8tkuBokcu7ve1WszRIcUDpHKDwoS-x1TmrR0_ostkt8GhkmAaMtpAuQaY0N3tn_U_ab67_YsWde2cTiW4x-7r5oW3Y4Y3D-9Jc_Xl8-X6rL349vV8fXrROs50aRnwjVPca-VpvwE-OOpg0ExSPPCB9G7QYAkdrBDSgnO9xrxnhEmvvdd0w06a90ffuv_PGXIx-5AdjPVPEOdsiMZaKi5Y_zQqGNeMaYUrqo-oSzHnBN4cUtjbdGMINkskZmf-R2KWSAwWpkZSpe8eptjs7OiTnVzIj3qqZK-kXka8PXLeRmO3qTJXP6qRwJgSJXpZiU9HAur9fgVIJrsAU71PSOCKGWJ4ep17wE62tQ</recordid><startdate>20131101</startdate><enddate>20131101</enddate><creator>Lopes, Luis Filipe Gomes</creator><creator>dos Santos Bento, João Manuel R.</creator><creator>Cristovão, Artur F. Arede Correia</creator><creator>Baptista, Fernando Oliveira</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>C1K</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20131101</creationdate><title>Institutionalization of common land property in Portugal: Tragic trends between “Commons” and “Anticommons”</title><author>Lopes, Luis Filipe Gomes ; dos Santos Bento, João Manuel R. ; Cristovão, Artur F. Arede Correia ; Baptista, Fernando Oliveira</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-3e4bc74f87f29be4dc2ced83620d4d19cd8ea12da556aecc980493136f8ff82b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</topic><topic>Anticommons</topic><topic>Applied ecology</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Commons</topic><topic>Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife</topic><topic>forests</topic><topic>fuelwood</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>grazing</topic><topic>land ownership</topic><topic>Land tenure</topic><topic>land use</topic><topic>Private property</topic><topic>property rights</topic><topic>public ownership</topic><topic>Scale</topic><topic>shrubs</topic><topic>silviculture</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lopes, Luis Filipe Gomes</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>dos Santos Bento, João Manuel R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cristovão, Artur F. Arede Correia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baptista, Fernando Oliveira</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><jtitle>Land use policy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lopes, Luis Filipe Gomes</au><au>dos Santos Bento, João Manuel R.</au><au>Cristovão, Artur F. Arede Correia</au><au>Baptista, Fernando Oliveira</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Institutionalization of common land property in Portugal: Tragic trends between “Commons” and “Anticommons”</atitle><jtitle>Land use policy</jtitle><date>2013-11-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>35</volume><spage>85</spage><epage>94</epage><pages>85-94</pages><issn>0264-8377</issn><eissn>1873-5754</eissn><abstract>•We analyze common land property institutionalization in Portugal from 1850 to post 1974.•We based our analysis using the matrix proposed by Heller.•The existing legal framework is unable to integrate a title to these territories.•These territories can better be classified as limited-exclusion anticommons. The use and exploitation of natural resources is generally structured by institutions, especially by property institutions. The main objective of this paper is to present a diachronic analysis of the institutionalization of common land property in Portugal. The several types of ownership may be largely explained by common land history. We intend to draw an outline of the emergence, evolution and transition of common land from the late nineteenth century to the present day, using the matrix proposed by Heller. The economic problem of the optimal level of appropriation is recurrent in studies that analyze the economic implications of property rights. Thus, it is imperative to analyze whether or not the dimension of common land ownership is relevant to its efficient exploitation. In essence, we infer that common land ownership in the 1st period (1850–1926) may be classified as limited-access commons (limited access to commoners) with a relatively small average size of 50ha. This common land was primarily used for grazing, firewood collecting and shrub extraction. In the second period (1926–1974), the State dictatorship invoked the public interest (forest easements) and took possession of more than 80% of common land, promoting the transition from limited-access commons to state ownership. The units of commons were aggregated in forest perimeters for Silviculture activity, the average size being greater than 3400ha. Finally, we analyzed the institutionalization of common land ownership in the period after the democratic revolution on April 25th 1974. We concluded that the incipient legal and institutional frameworks revealed an inability to integrate an effective title to these territories to give way to a better classification of limited-exclusion anticommons. The Heller matrix approach revealed to be a useful tool, however insufficient to study holistically Portuguese common land institutionalization. In our preliminary conclusions the Heller matrix appears to be an ill-posed problem (no continuum). It allows for the reversibility between different property regimes that involve great simplifications in the epistemology of property rights.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.05.007</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0264-8377
ispartof Land use policy, 2013-11, Vol.35, p.85-94
issn 0264-8377
1873-5754
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1808674539
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Animal, plant and microbial ecology
Anticommons
Applied ecology
Biological and medical sciences
Commons
Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife
forests
fuelwood
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
grazing
land ownership
Land tenure
land use
Private property
property rights
public ownership
Scale
shrubs
silviculture
title Institutionalization of common land property in Portugal: Tragic trends between “Commons” and “Anticommons”
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-03T19%3A59%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Institutionalization%20of%20common%20land%20property%20in%20Portugal:%20Tragic%20trends%20between%20%E2%80%9CCommons%E2%80%9D%20and%20%E2%80%9CAnticommons%E2%80%9D&rft.jtitle=Land%20use%20policy&rft.au=Lopes,%20Luis%20Filipe%20Gomes&rft.date=2013-11-01&rft.volume=35&rft.spage=85&rft.epage=94&rft.pages=85-94&rft.issn=0264-8377&rft.eissn=1873-5754&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.05.007&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1534833870%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1534833870&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0264837713000896&rfr_iscdi=true