scholarly journals Establishing Property Rights and Private Ownership: The Solution to Malinvestment in the Energy Sector in Developing Countries

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tam Kemabonta
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Energy Sector ◽  
Value Theory ◽  
New Paradigm ◽  
Energy Poverty ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Exchange Value ◽  
Subjective Value

There are over 800 million people in the world without access to modern forms of energy services, like electricity, cooking gas, and LPG. This has been called energy poverty. Most studies in the field of energy poverty address the issue from an absence of technological or financial resources perspective. They address the problem as energy in itself having an objective inherent value, more or less addressing the symptoms of the problem and not the problem itself. In this chapter, a new paradigm that addresses the problem of energy poverty and malinvestment is introduced. This paradigm, utilizing the theory of economic calculation and the use and exchange value embodied in the subjective value theory, makes a case for the importance of private property rights in the factors or means of production for modern forms or energy such as electricity. The Nigerian energy sector is used as a case study for this.

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.

Incommensurable preferences in contingent valuation: the case of Natura 2000 Network in Finland

2000 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 260-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. REKOLA ◽  
E. POUTA ◽  
J. KUULUVAINEN ◽  
O. TAHVONEN ◽  
C.-Z. LI
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Contingent Valuation ◽  
Environmental Ethics ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Natura 2000 ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Lexicographic Preferences ◽  
Preference Construction ◽  
Policy Decision Making

In the literature of contingent valuation, a rights-based system of environmental ethics claiming that natural objects have absolute rights, has frequently been regarded as the main reason for incommensurability, i.e. for citizens’ inability to find a common measure according to which all values could be ranked. In a study of 2400 Finns aged between 18 and 70, we tested whether a respondent's commitment to guaranteeing private property rights could be a reason for incommensurability beyond the respondent's possible commitment to absolute nature rights. It was found that incommensurability, modelled with lexicographic preferences, was attributable more often to private property rights than to nature rights. However, Finnish respondents who had lexicographic preferences for nature rights based their choice more often on an ethical judgement, whereas lexicographic preferences for property rights could rather be explained with an ambivalent preference construction. Lexicographic preferences for nature rights increased the willingness to pay for conservation, while lexicographic preferences for property rights decreased it. The result, which was predicted by the theory, supported the validity of incommensurability measurement. The study therefore indicates that several reasons for incommensurable preferences may exist and that it is possible to measure these reasons in contingent valuation surveys in order to judge the validity of the welfare measures in environmental policy decision-making.

scholarly journals The influence of common property rights on forest management policy: a case study in Sardinia region, Italy

2012 ◽  
Vol 56 (1) ◽  
pp. 16-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Paletto ◽  
Isabella De Meo ◽  
Fabrizio Ferretti
Keyword(s):  
Forest Management ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Common Property ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Local Development ◽  
Management Policy ◽  
Private Forests ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Common

Abstract The property rights and the type of ownership (private owners, public domain and commons) are two fundamental concepts in relationship to the local development and to the social and environmental sustainability. Common forests were established in Europe since the Middle Ages, but over the centuries the importance of commons changed in parallel with economic and social changes. In recent decades, the scientific debate focused on the forest management efficiency and sustainability of this type of ownership in comparison to the public and private property. In Italy common forests have a long tradition with substantial differences in the result of historical evolution in various regions. In Sardinia region the private forests are 377.297 ha, the public forests are 201.324 ha, while around 120.000 ha are commons. The respect of the common rights changed in the different historical periods. Today, the common lands are managed directly by municipalities or indirectly through third parties, in both cases the involvement of members of community is very low. The main objective of the paper is to analyse forest management differences in public institutions with and without common property rights. To achieve the objective of the research the forest management preferences of community members and managers were evaluated and compared. The analysis was realized through the use of the principal-agent model and it has been tested in a case study in Sardinia region (Arci-Grighine district). The analysis of the results showed that the categories of actors considered (members of community, municipalities and managers) have a marked productive profile, but municipalities manage forests perceiving a moderate multifunctionality. Moreover, the representatives of the municipalities pay more attention to the interests of the collectivity in comparison to the external managers. They also attribute high importance to environmental and social forest functions.

Review of Article 27.3(b) and the Patenting of Life Forms: Hitting a BRIC Wall in the WTO?

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 289-318
Author(s):  
Jagjit Plahe ◽  
Nitesh Kukreja ◽  
Sunil Ponnamperuma
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Life Forms ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Ethical Concerns ◽  
The World ◽  
Over Time

Abstract Under Article 27.3(b) of the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement of the World Trade Organization (WTO), all members are required to extend private property rights to life forms. Using official WTO documents, this article analyzes the negotiating positions of WTO members on life patents during a review of Article 27.3(b) which commenced in 1999 and is currently ongoing. Initially, developing countries raised serious ethical concerns regarding life patents, creating a clear North-South divide. However, over time the position of Brazil and India moved away from the ethics of life patents to the prevention of bio-piracy, a position supported by China. Russia too is supportive of life patents. A group of small developing countries have, however, continued to question the morality of life patents despite this “BRIC wall,” changing the dynamics of the negotiations from a North-South divide to one which now includes a South-South divide.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document