Contracting the Right to Roam

  • Wallace McNeish
  • Steve Olivier


In recent decades, the emergence of environmental ethics has added extra dimensions of complexity to the leisure political terrain upon which the right to roam is contested. In this chapter, two very different but influential versions of the social contract will be juxtaposed to bring the key arguments into high relief. On the one hand, Hardin’s eco-Hobbesian Tragedy of the Commons (1968/2000) thesis, and on the other, Rawls’ Kant-inspired A Theory of Justice (1971). It will be argued that Hardin’s pessimistic, exclusionary and potentially authoritarian conclusions are incompatible with the allocation of rights and duties in liberal democratic societies. Hardin should therefore be rejected in favour of an interpretative development of Rawls which designates the right to roam as a primary social good that is compatible with a conception of justice as sustainable fairness—an ideal which can be used to inform an inclusive environmentally sensitive leisure citizenship.


Leisure politics Social contract theory Environmental ethics 


  1. Abplanalp, E. (2010). Background environmental justice: An extension of Rawls’s political liberalism. Philosophy Dissertations, Theses and Student Research, Paper 2.Google Scholar
  2. Ashford, N. A., & Hall, R. P. (2011). Technology, globalization and sustainable development. New Haven/London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Campion, R., & Stephenson, J. (2010). The ‘right to roam’: Lessons for New Zealand from Sweden’s Allemansratt. Australian Journal of Environmental Management, 17(1), 18–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Campion, R., & Stephenson, J. (2014). Recreation on private property: Landowner attitudes towards Allemansratt. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events, 6(1), 52–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Curry, P. (2006). Ecological ethics. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  6. Davies-Morgan, C., Wilson, R., & Waterhouse, T. (2015). Use or delight? History of conflicting Hill Land uses in Scotland—A review. Scottish Geographical Journal, 131(2), 98–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dobson, A. (1997). Green political thought. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Dobson, A. (1998). Justice and the environment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Funck, C. (2006). Conflicts over space for Marine leisure: A case study of recreational boating in Japan. Current Issues in Tourism, 9(4–5), 459–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gammon, S., & Elkington, S. (Eds.). (2015). Landscapes of leisure: Space, place and identities. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
  11. Giddens, A. (1989). The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  12. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  13. Habermas, J. (1987). The theory of communicative action (Vol. 2). London: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  14. Habermas, J. (1992). The theory of communicative action (Vol. 1). London: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  15. Hardin, G. (2000). The tragedy of the commons. In J. Benson (Ed.), Environmental ethics (pp. 185–196). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Hobbes, T. (1955). Leviathan. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  17. Inglehart, R. F. (1990). Culture shift in advanced society. Chichester: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Inglehart, R. F. (2008). Changing values among Western publics from 1970 to 2006. West European Politics, 31(1–2), 130–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Maclennan, J., & Moore, R. L. (2011). Conflicts between leisure subworlds: The case of Appalachian trail long distance hikers. The Cyber Journal of Applied Leisure and Recreation Research, 13(1), 1–17.Google Scholar
  20. Olivier, S. (2010). “Your wave bro”: Virtue ethics and surfing. Sport in Society, 13(7/8), 1223–1233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ostrom, M. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Parker, G. (2002). Citizenships, contingency and the countryside. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Postma, D. W. (2006). Why care for nature? In search of a cultural framework for environmental responsibility and education. Didrecht: Springer Press.Google Scholar
  24. Ravenscroft, N. (1995). Recreational access to the countryside of England and Wales: Popular leisure as the legitimation of private property. Journal of Property Research, 12(1), 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rawls, J. (1996). Political liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Rawls, J. (1999). A theory of justice (Rev. ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Rawls, J. (2001). Justice as fairness: A restatement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Riddich, L. (2015). Access, nature and the great outdoors—Norway and Scotland. In J. Bryden, O. Brox, & L. Riddich (Eds.), Northern neighbours—Scotland and Norway since 1800 (pp. 230–249). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Rojek, C. (2001). Leisure and life politics. Leisure Sciences, 23(2), 115–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rojek, C. (2010). The labour of leisure. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  31. Sandell, K., & Fredman, P. (2010). The right of public access: Opportunity or obstacle for nature tourism in Sweden? Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 10(3), 291–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Scannell, Y. (2010). A right of access to nature. Environmental Policy and Law, 40(5), 229.Google Scholar
  33. Schrader-Frachette, K. (2002). Environmental justice: Creating equality, reclaiming democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shoard, M. (2000). A right to roam: Should we increase access to Britain’s countryside. Oxford: Oxford Paperbacks.Google Scholar
  35. Smith, M. (2011). Against ecological sovereignty. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Spracklen, K. (2013). Leisure, sports and society. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Warren, C. (2002). Managing Scotland’s environment. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh Press.Google Scholar
  38. Wightman, A. (1996). Who owns Scotland. Edinburgh: Canongate.Google Scholar
  39. Williams, D. R. (2001). Sustainability and public access to nature: Contesting the right to roam. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 9(5), 361–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wilson, E. O. (2000). The environmental ethic. In J. Benson (Ed.), Environmental ethics (pp. 153–160). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  41. Young, H. C. (2007). Understanding water rights and conflicts. Denver: Burg Young Publishing.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wallace McNeish
    • 1
  • Steve Olivier
    • 1
  1. 1.Abertay UniversityDundeeUK

Personalised recommendations