Commons as insurance and the welfare impact of privatization
It is shown here that despite the efficiency gains from privatization, when markets are incomplete, all individuals may be made worse off by privatization, even when the resource is equitably privatized. Such market incompleteness is common in the developing world and can explain the often encountered resistance to efficiency enhancing privatizing reforms, especially in the case of village level landholdings and forests. The advantage of commonly held property arises because of its superior insurance properties (which tend to provide income maintenance in low states). Sufficient conditions are established under which any feasible insurance scheme under private property cannot ex ante Pareto dominate allocations under the commons.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Brito, Dagobert L. & Intriligator, Michael D. & Sheshinski, Eytan, 1997. "Privatization and the distribution of income in the commons," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 181-205, May.
- Wilson, Paul N & Thompson, Gary D, 1993. "Common Property and Uncertainty: Compensating Coalitions by Mexico's Patoral Ejidatarios," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(2), pages 299-318, January.
- Wunder, Sven, 2001. "Poverty Alleviation and Tropical Forests--What Scope for Synergies?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(11), pages 1817-1833, November.
- Cohen, Jon S. & Weitzman, Martin L., 1975. "A Marxian model of enclosures," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(4), pages 287-336, November.
- Bromley, Daniel W & Chavas, Jean-Paul, 1989. "On Risk, Transactions, and Economic Development in the Semiarid Tropics," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 37(4), pages 719-36, July.
- Humphries, Jane, 1990. "Enclosures, Common Rights, and Women: The Proletarianization of Families in the Late Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 50(01), pages 17-42, March.
- De Meza, David & Gould, J R, 1987. "Free Access versus Private Property in a Resource: Income Distributions Compared," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 95(6), pages 1317-25, December.
- Subhrendu K. Pattanayak & Erin O. Sills, 2001. "Do Tropical Forests Provide Natural Insurance? The Microeconomics of Non-Timber Forest Product Collection in the Brazilian Amazon," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(4), pages 595-612.
- Baland, Jean-Marie & Platteau, Jean-Philippe, 2000. "Halting Degradation of Natural Resources: Is There a Role for Rural Communities?," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198290612, March.
- Reddy, S. R. C. & Chakravarty, S. P., 1999. "Forest Dependence and Income Distribution in a Subsistence Economy: Evidence from India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(7), pages 1141-1149, July.
- de Meza, David & Gould, J. R., 1985. "Free access vs private ownership: A comparison," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 387-391, August.
- Das Gupta, Monica, 1987. "Informal Security Mechanisms and Population Retention in Rural India," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 36(1), pages 101-20, October.
- Weitzman, Martin L., 1974. "Free access vs private ownership as alternative systems for managing common property," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 225-234, June.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:pubeco:v:89:y:2005:i:2-3:p:211-231. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
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.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.