"The Bull is Half the Herd": Property Rights and Enclosures in England, 1750-1850
This paper proposes that one function of the open fields was to reduce the transaction costs of cow-keeping by lowering commoners’ costs of bulling. At enclosure, cow-keeping fell among small owners who, unlike large farmers, had difficulty obtaining bulling services and were not substantial enough to own both the bull and the cow; they were therefore worse off with enclosures. The minimum acreage required to restore cow keepers to their pre-enclosure economic position indicates that even commoners who were given some land at settlement lost out with the change in property rights.
|Date of creation:||01 Jun 2002|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: https://www.nuffield.ox.ac.uk/economics/|
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.:
- Boaz Moselle, 1995. "Allotments, enclosure, and proletarianization in early nineteenth-century southern England," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 48(3), pages 482-500, 08.
- Shaw-Taylor, Leigh, 2001. "Parliamentary Enclosure And The Emergence Of An English Agricultural Proletariat," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 61(03), pages 640-662, September.
- 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.
- Clark, Gregory, 1998. "Commons Sense: Common Property Rights, Efficiency, and Institutional Change," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 58(01), pages 73-102, March.
- Klein, Benjamin & Crawford, Robert G & Alchian, Armen A, 1978. "Vertical Integration, Appropriable Rents, and the Competitive Contracting Process," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 21(2), pages 297-326, October.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nuf:esohwp:_046. 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: (Maxine Collett)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.