Abstract
The analyses in this book hopefully have demonstrated that by modifying the quality and structure of property rights, governments can improve the potential for environmental stewardship. In other words, by adjusting the institutional framework governments can induce state and non-state actors to improve environmental quality at a given level of development and for natural resources under any ‘property regime.’ Most importantly, the findings highlight the environmental impact of politics and thereby complement previous studies on the role of per capita income levels, but also on other political, social, and cognitive factors. Questions of governmental assurance of property rights, governmental intervention in the structure of property rights, and governmental capacity and commitment are shown to be important determinants of environmental stewardship at any given level of development.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Reference
Wendt (1999) has attempted to move towards an integration of tools and insights from different approaches for the area of international politics.
Alternatively, it might be appropriate to argue that `property rights’ of Native Americans existed, but they were not recognized and respected by the colonists, although Native Americans would argue that the concept of `property’ was imposed on them.
The negative impact of property rights on open-access resources would result from the positive impact of property rights on economic growth with the corresponding increased use of resources. While the assurance of property rights can also benefit the potential for environmental stewardship of open-access, this positive effect might not balance the negative effect of economic growth.
This worldview has continued into the 20th century and can, for instance, be seen as the source of Pinchot’s “unwavering optimism about the possibility of correcting this problem [the reckless waste and destruction of natural resources] and, in fact, managing natural resources so as to allow for an almost endlessly increasing American prosperity” (Taylor, B., 1992: 18.)
The reasons for this regulation may be ethical, cultural, or environmental, as much as economic (Sagoff, 1988 ). Moreover, I am not advocating the free market. In terms of externalities and other problems such as imbalances, the necessary internalization, for instance, can only be achieved by a collective process (Ekins et al., 1992 ) Finally, I am well aware that the assurance of property rights cannot overcome the damage done by other misguided government policies, such as those of the Brazilian government encouraging the destruction of the ra in forest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fuchs, D.A. (2003). Conclusions. In: An Institutional Basis for Environmental Stewardship. Environment & Policy, vol 35. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0709-1_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0709-1_6
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-6166-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-0709-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive