Propriety through commodity? Why have legal environmentalists embraced market-based solutions?

Private Property in the 21st Century: The Future of an American Ideal

Volumn , Issue , 2003, Pages 75-91

  Alexander, Gregory S ^a  

^a MIT Sloan School of Management   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84896198615     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4337/9781781008461.00013     Document Type: Chapter

References (43)

1. Alexander, G. (1997). Commodity and Propriety: Competing visions of property in American legal thought, 1776-1970. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2. Anderson, E. (1993). Value in Ethics and Economics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
3. Ayres, R.E. (1994). Developing a market in emission credit incrementally: An ‘open market’ paradigm for market-based pollution control. Environmental Reporter, 24(31), 1522-33.
4. Baumol, W.J. and Oates, W.E. (1988). The Theory of Environmental Policy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
5. Daily, G. (1997). Nature’s Services. Washington, DC: Island Press.
6. Daly, H.E. and Cobb Jr, J.B. (1994). For the Common Good. Boston: Beacon Press.
7. Doremus, H. (2000). The rhetoric and reality of nature protection: Toward a new discourse. Washington & Lee Law Review, 57(1), 11-73.
8. Driesen, D.M. (2000). Choosing environmental instruments in a transnational context. Ecology Law Quarterly, 27(1), 1-52.
9. Ellickson, R.C. (1991). Order Without Law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
10. Environmental Protection Agency, US. (1998). Ecological Research Strategy E-1 (EPA/600/R-98/086), Washington, DC.
11. Farber, D. (1999). Eco-pragmatism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12. Foster, V. and Hahn, R.W. (1995). Designing more efficient markets: Lessons from Los Angeles smog control. Journal of Law and Economics, 38, 19-48.
13. Freyfogle, E.T. (1990). The land ethic and pilgrim Leopold. University of Colorado Law Review, 61, 217-56.
14. Freyfogle, E.T. (2002). Community and the market in modern American property law. In J. F. Edwards (ed.), Land, Property, and the Environment. Oakland, CA: Institute for Contemporary Studies.
15. Heinzerling, L. (1995). Selling pollution, forcing democracy. Stanford Environmental Law Journal, 14, 300-344.
16. Heinzerling, L. (2002). Pricing the priceless: Cost-benefit analysis of environmental protection. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 150(5), 1553-84.
17. Hyde, A. (1997). Bodies of Law. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
18. Jansson, A., Hammer, M., Folke, C. and Costanza, R. (1994). Investing in Natural Capital: The ecological economics approach to sustainability. Washington, DC: Island Press.
19. Jolls, C., Sunstein, C.R. and Thaler, R. (1998). A behavioral approach to law and economics. Stanford Law Review, 50, 1471-550.
20. Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-92.
21. Kahneman, D., Slovic P. and Tversky, A. (1982). Judgement under Uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. New York: Cambridge University Press.
22. Kysar, D.A. (2001). Sustainability, distribution, and the macroeconomic analysis of law. Boston College Law Review, 43, 1-71.
23. Landes, E.M. and Posner, R.A. (1978). The economics of the baby shortage. Journal of Legal Studies, 7, 323-48.
24. Leopold, A. (1949). A Sand County Almanac. New York: Oxford University Press.
25. McCusker, C. and Carnevale, P.J. (1995). Framing in resource dilemmas: Loss aversion and the moderating effects of sanctions. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 61, 190-201.
26. Posner, R.A. (1986). Mischaracterized views. Judicature, 69, 321.
27. Putnam, R. (1993). Making Democracy Work. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
28. Radin, M.J. (1996). Contested Commodities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
29. Rose, C.M. (1998). The several futures of property: Of cyberspace and folk tales, emission trades and ecosystems. Minnesota Law Review, 83, 129-82.
30. Rose, C.M. (1999). Property in the global environmental commons: Comparing newfangled tradable allowances to old-fashioned common property regimes. Paper presented at the Duke Environmental Law and Policy Forum, Durham, NC.
31. Rutte, C.G. (1987). The effects of framing social dilemmas as give-some-or-takesome games. British Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 103-8.
32. Salzman, J. and Ruhl, J.B. (2000). Currencies and the commodification of environmental law. Stanford Law Review, 53, 607-94.
33. Salzman, J., Thompson Jr, C.H. and Daily, G. (2001). Protecting ecosystem services: Science, economics, and law. Stanford Environmental Law Journal, 20, 309-32.
34. Samuelson, C.D. (1993). A multiattribute evaluation approach to structural change in resource dilemma. Organizational Behavior & Decision Processes, 55, 298-324.
35. Sax, J.L. (1993). Property rights and the economy of nature: Understanding Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council.. Stanford Law Review, 45, 1433-55.
36. Schumpeter, J. (1954). History of Economic Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
37. Strong, A.L. (1998). Transfer of developmental rights to protect water resources. Land Use Law and Zoning Digest, 50(10), 3-9.
38. Taylor, M. (1987). The Possibility of Cooperation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
39. Thompson Jr, B.H. (2000). Tragically difficult: The obstacle to governing the commons. Environmental Law, 30, 241-78.
40. Wiener, J.B. (1999). Global environmental regulation: Instrument choice in legal context. Yale Law Journal, 108, 677-800.
41. Williams, J. (1998). The rhetoric of property. Iowa Law Review, 83, 277-361.
42. Zelizer, V.A. (1979). Morals & Markets: The development of life insurance in the United States. New York: Columbia University Press.
43. Zelizer, V.A. (1985). Pricing the Priceless Child: The changing social value of children. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.