Property institutions for rural land conservation: Towards a post-neoliberal agenda

Journal of Rural Studies

Volumn 36, Issue , 2014, Pages 453-462

  Hodge, Ian D ^a   Adams, William M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Biodiversity conservation; Environmental governance; Forest management; Post neoliberalism; Property institutions; Rural land management

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; FOREST MANAGEMENT; GOVERNANCE APPROACH; LAND MANAGEMENT; NEOLIBERALISM; PROPERTY RIGHTS; RURAL LANDSCAPE;

ENGLAND; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 84915794841     PISSN: 07430167     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2014.05.004     Document Type: Article

References (78)

1. Adams W.M. Private and networked: large conservation areas in Scotland. Ecos 2012, 33(3/4):124-133.
2. Adams W.M., Hodge I.D., Sandbrook L. New spaces for nature: the re-territorialisation of biodiversity conservation under neoliberalism in the UK. Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. 2013, (published on line Dec. 2013).
3. Araiza W. The Public Trust Doctrine as an Interpretive Cannon 2011-12, vol. 45:693-740. University of California Davis Law Review.
4. Blumm M. The public trust doctrine and private property: the accommodation principle. Pace Environ. Law Rev. 2010, 27(3):649-667.
5. Blumm M. The public trust doctrine - a twenty-first century concept. Hastings West Northwest J. Environ. Law Policy 2010, 16(1):105-110.
6. Büscher B., Sullivan S., Neves K., Igoe J., Brockington D. Towards a synthesized critique of neoliberal conservation. Capital. Nat. Social. 2012, 23(2):4-30.
7. Castree N. Neoliberalising nature: the logics of deregulation and reregulation. Environ. Plan. A 2008, 40:131-152.
8. Cole D.H. Pollution and Property 2002, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
9. Cumbers A. Reclaiming Public Ownership: Making Space for Economic Diversity 2012, Zed Books, London and New York.
10. Defra The Natural Choice: Securing the Value of Nature Natural Environment White Paper 2011, http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/natural/whitepaper/.
11. Defra Government Forestry and Woodlands Policy Statement Incorporating the Government's Response to the Independent Panel on Forestry's Final Report 2013, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London.
12. Dempsey J., Robertson M. Ecosystems services: tensions, impurities, and points of engagement within neoliberalism. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2012, 36(6):758-779.
13. Demsetz H. Toward a theory of property rights. Am. Econ. Rev. 1967, 57(2):347-359.
14. Department of Communities and Local Government National Planning Policy Framework 2012, CLG, London.
15. Elliott L., Adams W.M., Hodge I.D. Survey of Large Scale Conservation Areas 2011, Unpublished report, Department of Geography, University of Cambridge.
16. Ellis S., Wainwright D., Berney F., Bulman C., Bourn N. Landscape-scale conservation in practice: lessons from northern England, UK. J. Insect Conserv. 2011, 15:69-81.
17. Ellis S., Bourn N.A.D., Bulman C. Landscape-scale Conservation for Butterflies and Moths: Lessons from the UK, Butterfly Conservation 2012, Wareham, Dorset.
18. Enjolras B. Agovernance-structure approach to voluntary organizations. Nonprofit Volunt. Sect. Q. 2009, 38(5):761-783.
19. Everard M. Common Ground. The Sharing of Land and Landscapes for Sustainability 2011, Zed Books, London and New York.
20. Fama E., Jensen M. Separation of ownership and control. J.Law Econ. 1983, 26(2):301-325.
21. Fama E., Jensen M. Agency problems and residual claims. J.Law Econ. 1983, 26(2):327-349.
22. Fisher B., Turner R.K. Ecosystem services: classification for valuation. Biol. Conserv. 2008, 141:1167-1169.
23. Fletcher R. Neoliberal environmentality: towards a poststructuralist political ecology of the conservation debate. Conserv. Soc. 2010, 8(3):171-181.
24. Freyfogle E. Property and liberty. Harv. Environ. Law Rev. 2010, 31:75-118.
25. Franks J., Emery S. Incentivising collaborative conservation: lessons from existing environmental stewardship scheme options. Land Use Policy 2013, 30:847-862.
26. Gray K. Pedestrian democracy and the geography of hope. J.Hum. Rights Environ. 2010, 1(1):45-65.
27. Harvey D. ABrief History of Neoliberalism 2005, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
28. Hodge Ian Beyond agri-environmental policy: towards an alternative model of rural environmental governance. Land Use Policy 2001, 18:99-111.
29. Hodge Ian European agri-environmental policy: the conservation and re-creation of cultural landscapes. The Handbook of Land Economics 2014, 583-611. Oxford University Press, New York. J.M. Duke, J. Wu (Eds.).
30. Hodge I.D., Adams W.M. Neoliberalisation, rural land trusts and institutional blending. Geoforum 2012, 43(3):472-482.
31. Hodge I.D., Adams W.M. The future of public forests: an institutional blending approach to forest governance in England. J.Rural Stud. 2013, 31:23-35.
32. Hodge I., Adams W. The Role of Agri-environment Measures in Promoting Co-ordinated Land Management in Large Conservation Areas 2013, Paper for the 14th Global conference of the International Association for the Study of Commons, Kita-Fuji, Japan.
33. Hoffman M. Why community ownership? Understanding land reform in Scotland. Land Use Policy 2013, 31:289-297.
34. Independent Panel on Forestry Final Report 2012, http://www.defra.gov.ul/forestrypanel.
35. Kay J., Thompson D. Privatisation: a policy in search of a rationale. Econ. J. 1986, 96:19-32.
36. Keith M. Judicial protection for beaches and parks: the public trust above the high water mark. Hastings West-Northwest J. Environ. Law Policy 2010, 16(1):165-191.
37. Kikeri S., Nellis J. An assessment of privatization. World Bank. Res. Observ. 2004, 19(1):87-118.
38. Kosoy N., Corbera E. Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism. Ecol. Econ. 2010, 69(6):1222-1236.
39. Law Commission Conservation Covenants. A Consultation Paper 2013, Consultation Paper No. 211, Law Commission, London.
40. Lawton J.H., Brotherton P.N.M., Brown V.K., Elphick C., Fitter A.H., Forshaw J., Haddow R.W., Hilborne S., Leafe R.N., Mace G.M., Southgate M.P., Sutherland W.J., Tew T.E., Varley J., Wynne G.R. Making Space for Nature: a Review of England's Wildlife Sites and Ecological Network 2010, Report to Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
41. Letza S., Smallman C., Sun X. Reframing privatisation: deconstructing the myth of efficiency. Policy Sci. 2004, 37:159-183.
42. Lockie S. Market instruments, ecosystem services, and property rights: assumptions and conditions for sustained social and ecological benefits. Land Use Policy 2013, 31:90-98.
43. Lovett J.A. Progressive property in action: the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003. Neb. Law Rev. 2011, 89:739-818.
44. Lucy W., Mitchell C. Replacing private property: the case for stewardship. Camb. Law J. 1996, 55(3):566-600.
45. McCarthy J. Devolution in the woods: community forestry as hybrid neoliberalism. Environ. Plan. A 2005, 37. 995-910.
46. McCarthy J., Prudham S. Neoliberal nature and the nature of neoliberalism. Geoforum 2004, 35:275-283.
47. Macgregor N.A., Adams W.M., Hill C.T., Eigenbrod F., Osborne P.E. Large-scale conservation in Great Britain: taking stock. Ecos 2012, 33(3/4):13-23.
48. MA Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Current State and Trends 2005, Island Press, Washington, DC.
49. Mace G.M., Norris K., Fitter A.H. Biodiversity and ecosystem services: a multilayered relationship. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2011, 27:19-26.
50. Norgaard R. Ecosystem services: from eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder. Ecol. Econ. 2010, 69(6):1219-1227.
51. Pascoe S. Social obligation norm and the erosion of landownership?. Convey. Prop. Lawyer 2012, 6:489-497.
52. Peck J., Tickell A. Neoliberalizing space. Antipode 2002, 34:380-404.
53. Peck J., Theodore N., Brenner N. Postneoliberalism and its malcontents. Antipode 2010, 41(s1):94-116.
54. Peloso M., Caldwell M. Dynamic property rights. The public trust doctrine and takings in a changing climate. Stanf. Environ. Law J. 2011, 30(1):51-120.
55. Rowan-Robinson J. Reform of the law relating to access to the countryside: realising expectations?. J.Plan. Environ. Law Nov 2003, 1394-1400.
56. RSPB Futurescapes: Space for Nature, Land for Life 2010, [online] Available at:. http://www.rspb.org.uk/images/futurescapesuk_tcm9-253866.pdf.
57. Rutherford S. Green governmentality: insights and opportunities in the study of nature's rule. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2007, 31:291-307.
58. Sagarin R., Turnipseed M. The public trust doctrine: where ecology meets natural resources management. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2012, 37:473-496.
59. Sagoff M. The Economy of the Earth 1988, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
60. Samuels A. Sustainable development: what is it?. J.Plan. Environ. Law 2013, 11:1374-1380.
61. Sand P. Sovereignty bounded: public trusteeship for common pool resources?. Glob. Environ. Polit. 2004, 4(1):47-71.
62. Sandberg L.A., Wekerle G.R. Reaping nature's dividends: the neoliberalization and gentrification of nature on the Oak Ridges Moraine. J.Environ. Policy Plan. 2010, 12(1):41-57.
63. Sax J. The public trust doctrine in natural resource law: effective judicial intervention. Mich. Law Rev. 1970, 68(3):471-566.
64. Sen A. Rational fools. J.Philos. Public Aff. 1977, 6(4):317-344.
65. Smith A. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations 1776, vol. II. W. Strahan and Cadell, London.
66. Spash C., Hanley N. Preferences, information and biodiversity preservation. Ecol. Econ. 1995, 12:191-208.
67. Speckbacher G. Nonprofit versus corporate governance: an economic approach. Nonprofit Manag. Leadersh. 2008, 18(3):295-320.
68. Takacs D. The Public Trust Doctrine, Environmental Human Rights, and the Future of Private Property 2008, 711-765. New York University Environmental Law Journal 16.
69. The Woodland Trust Space for Nature: Landscape-scale Action for Woodland Biodiversity 2002, Woodland Trust, Grantham.
70. Thompson F.M.L. English Landed Society in the Nineteenth Century 1963, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.
71. Turnipseed M., et al. Reinvigorating the public trust doctrine. Environment 2010, 52(5):6-14.
72. Uthes S., Matzdorf B. Studies on agri-environmental measures: a survey. Environ. Manag. 2013, 51:251-266.
73. UK NEA The UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report 2011, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge.
74. Vatn A. Multifunctional agriculture: some consequences for international trade regimes. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 2002, 29:309-327.
75. Vatn A. Rationality, institutions and environmental policy. Ecol. Econ. 2005, 55:203-217.
76. Vickers J., Yarrow G. Economic perspectives on privatization. J.Econ. Perspect. 1991, 5(2):111-132.
77. Warren C., McKee A. The Scottish revolution? Evaluating the impacts of post-devolution land reform. Scott. Geogr. J. 2011, 127(1):17-39.
78. Wildlife Trusts The Wildlife Trusts: a Living Landscape 2011, [online] Available at:. http://www.wildlifetrusts.org/alivinglandscape.