IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jinsec/v14y2018i04p579-593_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economy as instituted process: the case of hard rock mining in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • BROWN, CHRISTOPHER

Abstract

I examine the origin and development of institutions that assign and enforce rights to hard rock minerals located on federal lands in the United States. Hard rock mining gives a prime example of the ‘artificial selection’ of settled customs or working rules by jurists and legislators. The evolving structure of the industry, conditioned by technological and market factors, produced a parallel shift in the locus and control of sovereignty. In the early days sovereignty vested in the mining clubs. The enlarging scale and complexity of mining catalysed a change in both the uses and location of sovereignty. With the transition from prospecting to large-scale industrial mining, the ‘right to use’ mineral deposits obtained through patents became contingent on the cooperation of labour. At this stage, the capture of the state's monopoly on legitimate violence to protect the right to use became a crucial dimension of property. Mining companies have also enjoyed liberties with respect to the externalization of environmental costs. The emergent structure of rights, duties, capacities and exposures was instrumental in bringing forth a quantum increase in the mining of hard rock minerals necessary for industrial expansion. There is, however, an urgent need for reform of the mineral patent system.

Suggested Citation

  • Brown, Christopher, 2018. "Economy as instituted process: the case of hard rock mining in the United States," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(4), pages 579-593, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jinsec:v:14:y:2018:i:04:p:579-593_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S174413741700025X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:cup:jinsec:v:14:y:2018:i:04:p:579-593_00. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/joi .

    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.