IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/econjl/v131y2021i640p3073-3102..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Property Right Acquisition and Path Dependence: Nineteenth-Century Land Policy and Modern Economic Outcomes
[The colonial origins of comparative development: an empirical investigation]

Author

Listed:
  • Douglas W Allen
  • Bryan Leonard

Abstract

In this paper we compare lands settled between 1862–1940 under the Homestead Act to lands that sold for cash during the same time. We combine recently digitised individual land patents with modern satellite data and find a negative effect of homesteading on modern land use that cannot be explained by land quality, title characteristics or unobserved differences in settlers. We test the hypothesis that early homestead settlement put homesteaders ‘in the way’ of future development, creating a path dependence in land use decisions for homesteads, despite the fact that their legal rights were identical to purchased lands.

Suggested Citation

  • Douglas W Allen & Bryan Leonard, 2021. "Property Right Acquisition and Path Dependence: Nineteenth-Century Land Policy and Modern Economic Outcomes [The colonial origins of comparative development: an empirical investigation]," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(640), pages 3073-3102.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:econjl:v:131:y:2021:i:640:p:3073-3102.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ej/ueab030
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Brian Kogelmann, 2021. "Lockeans against labor mixing," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 20(3), pages 251-272, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:econjl:v:131:y:2021:i:640:p:3073-3102.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/resssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.