IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cda/wpaper/215.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Distributing the Benefits From the Commons: Square-Root Formula

Author

Listed:
  • Joaquim Silvestre

    (Department of Economics, University of California Davis)

Abstract

How should the benefits of the commons, say a publicly owned fishing resource, be distributed? A first possibility is equal division among the population. A second option is to distribute them among the people who actually exploit the resource in proportion to their activity level: this is the ""land to the tiller"" view. A third approach is the nusufruct"" view, by which a consumer of the fruits of the commons ends up contributing the average cost, whithout generating incomes for nonconsumers. The usufruct and ""land to the tiller"" views are polar opposites. One could consider intermediate positions where a fraction 0 of the benefits is distributed among consumers in proportion to their consumption, and the fraction 1-0 is distributed among fishers in proportion to their fishing effort. The paper singles out a particular value for 0 based on equalizing the ""rate of return,"" defined as follows. Consumers are the direct users of the fruits of the resource: they contribute numeraire (transferred to the fishers) and obtain fish in return. A fisher contributes time and obtains numeraire in return. It turns out that, if the ""return ratios"" are equalized across persons, fishers and consumers alike, then a particular value of 0 results, namely:

Suggested Citation

  • Joaquim Silvestre, 2004. "Distributing the Benefits From the Commons: Square-Root Formula," Working Papers 215, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:cda:wpaper:215
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repec.dss.ucdavis.edu/files/toMHWfJmb6d2UHbC7ULXgMQS/95-6.pdf
    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:cda:wpaper:215. 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: Letters and Science IT Services Unit (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/educdus.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.