Indigenous property rights and river management

2001 ◽  
Vol 43 (9) ◽  
pp. 235-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Sheehan
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Marine Species ◽  
Resource Utilisation ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Native Title ◽  
Indigenous Property Rights

The presence of indigenous property rights and interests arising from the survival of native title in Australia presents unique issues in the management of rivers and riverine lands. Existing common law and statutory tidal and non-tidal rights are a complex overlay of public and private property rights which are themselves undergoing significant change through the commodification of many natural resources by Commonwealth and State governments, such as marine species stock and non-tidal water. The melding of indigenous values and management practices with existing management regimes for rivers and riverine lands offers considerable potential for both sustainability of resource utilisation, and respect and recognition of native title with resultant predicted benefits in the vexed area of compensation.

Property Systems and Environmental Regulation

2019 ◽  
pp. 702-718
Author(s):  
Christopher P. Rodgers
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Environmental Regulation ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Property Holding ◽  
The Impact

This chapter examines the impact of property rights on environmental regulation. It first considers a range of property paradigms and how they relate to environmental law, including entitlements-based models of property and resource allocation models of property, before turning to ‘public’ and ‘private’ conceptions of property. It takes note of the fact that environmental protection is a ‘public’ or communal interest, but assimilating public interest objectives into systems of property law based on notions of private right has been problematic, especially for Western systems. The chapter also analyses the interactions between ‘public’ interest and ‘private’ property rights; the role of customary law and cultural norms in the organization of property holding and resource use, using the Maori case as example; and how property structures foster environmental stewardship.

scholarly journals In the Mainstream: Environmental Attitudes of Mid-South Forest Owners

1997 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
John C. Bliss ◽  
Sunil K. Nepal ◽  
Robert T. Brooks ◽  
Max D. Larsen
Keyword(s):  
Economic Development ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
General Public ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Forest Practices ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Nipf Owners

Abstract A 1992 telephone survey of households in seven mid-South states provided data for comparing the opinions of NIPF owners with those of the general public. Topics explored included traditional forest management practices, governmental regulation of tree cutting to protect environmental values, and trade-offs between environmental protection, private property rights, and economic development. In each of these areas the views of NIPF owners were found not to differ significantly from those of the general public. A widespread desire for environmental protection tempers views toward forest practices, forest-based economic development, and private property rights. The relationships between NIPF owners' demographic characteristics, ownership activities, and opinions were explored. Study results challenged common assumptions about NIPF owners, questioned the effectiveness of existing forestry education efforts, and argue for a stronger, more explicitly environmental orientation in all forestry activities. South. J. Appl. For. 21(1):37-43.

The Modern Constitutional Mode of Government

2020 ◽  
pp. 87-106
Author(s):  
Jean-Philippe Robé
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Private Property ◽  
The State ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
Definition Of

The notions of State and of the « Organs of the State » are explained in some details to distinguish their prerogatives from private prerogatives. Private property, in this respect, grants autonomy from the « Organs of the State ». It is part of the constitutional prerogatives protecting private persons against excessive public governmental encroachments. It is part of a constitutional order which combines both democracy and distrust for democracy, by limiting the prerogatives of the Organs of the State. The approach developed proposes a unitary view of the Constitution as providing for both public and private prerogatives, the first ones being exercised by Organs of the State and the second ones by legal persons which are not Organs of the State. Public and private prerogatives operate via fundamentally different rules, private property rights entitling their holders to exercise their prerogatives in a despotic manner, i.e. they can do what they want with what they have without the need to take anybody’s advice or authorization - which is the definition of despotism.

LAND PLOT AS AN OBJECT OF PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vyacheslav Vovk
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Land Management ◽  
Land Reform ◽  
Essential Role ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Rich Country ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Land Plot ◽  
Government Supervision

Russia is a resource-rich country, and great changes are being made today in order that land and its resources are used for the benefit of any citizen of our state. Under the circumstances government supervision (control) over the optimal use of territories gets the essential role. The rights that are contained in land reform give owners, landowners, land users, and employers extensive powers concerning independent land management.

Konsep Distribusi Pendapatan Dalam Islam

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-97
Author(s):  
Moh. Ah. Subhan ZA
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Social Life ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Wealth Distribution ◽  
The State ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Job Opportunities ◽  
The Rich ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Distribution Of Income

The main problem of social life in the community is about how to make the allocation and distribution of income well. Inequality and poverty basically arise not because of the difference of anyone’s strength and weakness in getting livelihood, but because of inappropriate distribution mechanism. With the result that wealth treasure just turns on the rich wealthy, which is in turn, results in the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.Therefore, a discussion on distribution becomes main focus of theory of Islamic economics. Moreover, the discussion of the distribution is not only related to economic issues, but also social and political aspects. On the other side, the economic vision of Islam gives priority to the guarantee of the fulfillment of a better life. Islam emphasizes distributive justice and encloses, in its system, a program for the redistribution of wealth and prosperity, so that each individual is guaranteed with a respectable and friendly standard of living. Islam recognizes private property rights, but the private property rights must be properly distributed. The personal property is used for self and family livelihood, for investment of the working capital, so that it can provide job opportunities for others, for help of the others through zakat, infaq, and shodaqoh. In this way, the wealth not only rotates on the rich, bringing on gap in social life.The problem of wealth distribution is closely related to the welfare of society. Therefore, the state has a duty to regulate the distribution of income in order that the distribution can be fair and reaches appropriate target. The state could at least attempt it by optimizing the role of BAZ (Badan Amil Zakat) and LAZ (Lembaga Amil Zakat) which has all this time been slack. If BAZ and LAZ can be optimized, author believes that inequality and poverty over time will vanish. This is because the majority of Indonesia's population is Muslim.

Libertarianisms

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Halliday
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Classical Liberal ◽  
Inherited Wealth ◽  
Left And Right ◽  
The Common

This chapter considers various arguments both for and against taxing inherited wealth, each of these being associated with some or other type of libertarian outlook. Libertarianism in the Lockean guises (‘left’ and ‘right’ varieties) is distinguished from its classical liberal alternative, which downplays the Lockean emphasis on private property rights in favour of a more defeasible case for small government and low taxation. These different perspectives generate a variety of quite different arguments about inheritance, some more persuasive than others. Some attention is paid to the common claim that inheritance taxes ‘punish’ virtue and generosity. It is then argued that a Rignano scheme may be particularly attractive in light of certain left-libertarian commitments and as a way of accommodating a classical liberal concern about perpetual savings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document