The political economy of insecure property rights: insights from the Kingdom of Sicily

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 233-249 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosolino A. Candela

AbstractHow did the evolution of the rule of law become stunted in Sicily during the 19th century? The work of economist Yoram Barzel, particularly his property-rights approach to understanding the political economy of state formation, is uniquely suited to understanding the failure of Italy's unification process to secure the rule of law in Sicily during the 19th century. This failure can be explained by a lack of a credible commitment to the rule of law in the state formation process. I argue that this lack of credible commitment manifested itself in the abolition of previously existing parliamentary institutions as an independent collective action mechanism, as well as prior constitutional agreements that existed in the Kingdom of Sicily. The resulting uncertainty over the security and legal definition of property rights over land raised the transaction costs of competing for resources through productive specialization and market exchange. In turn, it reduced the relative costs of competition for land ownership and the use of enforcement through other means, such as rent seeking or organized crime.

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. 1001-1009
Author(s):  
Vitaliy Hudyma

The article reveals and researches the basic principles of the formation of the judiciary in Ukraine. It is established that judicial corps should be understood as an appropriate number of civil servants who hold the relevant positions as judges in the judicial bodies of Ukraine. It has been proved that judges make universally binding decisions, which determine, for example, other processes of maintaining law and order in the state. It is determined that the legislation lacks a clear definition of the term “judiciary” and lacks the primary grounds and principles by which the process of formation of the judicial corps in Ukraine should take place. It is established that the principles of formation of the judiciary in Ukraine should be based on the requirements for candidates for the position of judges, which are defined by Article 69, “Requirements for candidates for the position of the judge” of the Law of Ukraine “On Judiciary and the Status of Judges”. It is proved that one of the components of the procedure for the formation of the judiciary in Ukraine is the qualification assessment of candidates for the position of judges. It was found out that the qualification assessment of judges by the criterion of professional competence should be based on the principle of specialization and instance. It is established that the main principles based on which the appointment of judges-candidates for the positions of members of the Supreme Council of Justice are: the principle of the rule of law; the principle of professionalism; the principle of publicity; the principle of political neutrality. It is determined that one of the critical principles of formation of the judiciary in Ukraine should be the principle of non-political influence, namely its essence is revealed in the fact that entities that will participate both directly and indirectly in the formation of the judiciary should not, in any case, have any relation to the political sphere. It is noted that the prospects for further research in this area are the study of the holistic system and features of the formation of the judiciary in Ukraine.


2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-126
Author(s):  
Rosolino A. Candela ◽  
Ennio E. Piano

AbstractThis introduction to the special issue in honor of Professor Yoram Barzel provides an overview of his scholarship and a summary of the contributions to this special issue. Each contribution advances or elaborates upon major themes in Barzel's theoretical and applied work on property rights, transaction costs, and political economy. The contributions fall into three categories: an examination of the foundations and implications of the ‘Barzelian’ method for social scientific analysis; Barzel's economics of property rights and transaction costs to historical case studies; and advances to Barzel's theory of the state, which includes an analysis of the origins of democracy and the rule of law.


2013 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 161-185 ◽  
Author(s):  
NICLAS BERGGREN ◽  
CHRISTIAN BJØRNSKOV

AbstractSocial and cultural determinants of economic institutions and outcomes have come to the forefront of economic research. We introduce religiosity, measured as the share for which religion is important in daily life, to explain institutional quality in the form of property rights and the rule of law. Previous studies have only measured the impact of membership shares of different religions, with mixed results. We find, in a cross-country regression analysis comprising up to 112 countries, that religiosity is negatively related to our institutional outcome variables. This only holds in democracies (not autocracies), which suggests that religiosity affects the way institutions work through the political process. Individual religions are not related to our measures of institutional quality.


1999 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 379-408 ◽  
Author(s):  
David M. Luebke

What did it mean when an teenth-century monarch intervened in a legal struggle between social unequals, and decided on behalf of the weaker party? How do historians interpret such an event? In the example under examination here—the cause célèbre of the millers Christian and Rosine Arnold in Brandenburg-Prussia (1770–1779)—the dominant opinion of two centuries has been that King Frederick II's intervention violated justice and the rule of law. Explaining this remarkable continuity of historical attention is easy, for the affair's effects on state-formation in Prussia were far–reaching. On the very day that Frederick ruled in the millers' favor, the king also sacked his chancellor (Grosskanzler), Carl Joseph von Fürst, as well as three members of Brandenburg's supreme tribunal, the Chamber Court (Kammergericht), all for ruling against the millers. In Fürst's place as chancellor, Frederick installed Johann Heinrich Casimir von Carmer, under whom began the process of legal reforms that resulted in the provisional Corpus Juris Fridericianum (1781) and ultimately the General Prussian Code (Allgemeines Preussisches Landrecht, or ALR) of 1794. To some extent, then, Frederick's intervention was the founding act of codification. But it is more difficult to explain the unanimity: with few exceptions, historians and biographers have pronounced the intervention a “judicial catastrophe” (Justizkatastrophe) and declared the millers mere “troublemakers.” This essay will argue that such conclusions are misguided: by framing their questions within the parameters of legal and administrative history, most historians have focused on the legal merits of the Arnolds' suit. In so doing, they have operated on the assumption that a unitary definition of justice prevailed in eighteenth-century Prussia; as a result, most historical appraisals reflect highly partisan contemporary interpretations of the case. But there were at least three distinct “discourses” on justice at work as the case unfolded, each of them corresponding to one of the principal sets of actors in the drama.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document