The Concept of Private Property and the Limits of the Environmental Imagination

Abstract

An absolutist concept of property has the power to shape and constrain the public imagination. Libertarian theorists normatively embrace this concept. Yet its influence extends far beyond these proponents, shaping the views of an otherwise diverse array of theorists and activists. This limits the ability of environmentalists, among others, to respond coherently to challenges from property rights advocates in the U.S. I sketch an alternative concept—rooted in practice—that understands private property as necessarily embedded in social and ecological relations, rather than constrained by these relations. I argue that this concept can prefigure a more robust environmentalism.

Environmental Ethics, Economics, and Property Law

“…Environmental restrictions which restrict the use of property in some way, then, generally will limit one or more of these property rights. Some argue that these restrictions constitute a "taking" of value by the government, requiring compensation and justification (Epstein, 1993;Meyer, 2009).…”

“…As Meyer (2009) has already argued, a conception of property that, legally and ethically, places the environment under the absolute control of individual property owners will not be able to adequately preserve the environment. It is possible for the government to protect the environment under such a property regime, but only by repeatedly violating owners' property rights or compensating owners for any lost exchange value.…”

Value and growth: Rethinking basic concepts in Lockean liberalism

“…While the extent to which Locke's writings directly influenced the US "founding fathers" is debated (see the extensive discussion in Simmons 1993: 101, fn 3 and Dunn 1969: 6-8, especially fn 3), Liebell (2011: 211) notes that modern US libertarians often use Locke's writings "to protect private property from environmental regulations and from government intervention through eminent domain"; Haddad (2003) points to the use of Locke, especially by rural US movements that seek to restrict the power of government with respect to environmental regulation (see also Meyer 2009). Jacques (2009) shows the importance of US conservative think tanks in arguing against the reality of climate change; these are often champions of what they suppose to be a Lockean version of liberalism.…”

“…Jacques (2009) shows the importance of US conservative think tanks in arguing against the reality of climate change; these are often champions of what they suppose to be a Lockean version of liberalism. Robert Nozick (1974) is often cited as a key theorist supporting a strong view of private property in this context (Varden 2012), as are Milton Friedman, Leo Strauss and Richard Epstein (Vaughn 1980;Meyer 2009).…”

Lines, barred lines. Movement, territory and the law

“…For instance, when Jeremy Waldron (1988) proposes to distinguish the concept of private property from the many different conceptions of it, one finds that in fact the 'concept' is -and, in a sense cannot but be -modelled upon ownership. Notably, the dominant concept of private property as ownership, which has also been called 'absolutist' (Meyer 2009), assumes property in its most commodified form. While this critique of commodification was first undertaken by Karl Marx (1990Marx ( /1867, recent scholarship also sheds light on the concrete dynamics of conflicting conceptions of property.…”