Abstract
The open field system was the arrangement of peasant agriculture in northern Europe before the twentieth century into scattered strips communally regulated but privately owned. The system shares features with much peasant agriculture worldwide, especially in its scattering of strips. Dissolved gradually by ‘enclosure’ (Turner 1984), first in England and Scandinavia and later in France (Grantham 1980), Germany (Mayhew 1973), and the Slavic lands (Blum 1961), it has been seen as an obstacle to agricultural development. The system is most thoroughly documented in England (Gray 1915; Ault 1972; Baker and Butlin 1973; Yelling 1977; and hundreds of local studies). The English case has long been disproportionately important because it has provided a rich set of myths for other cases of traditional agriculture and reform. (The Russian version, the mir, is important for the same reason; but its unique feature – the periodic redistribution of the strips among families – arose in the eighteenth century out of the need to pay taxes, not out of the ancient community of cousins.)
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Bibliography
Ault, W.O. 1972. Open-field farming in medieval England: A study of village by-laws. London/New York: Allen and Unwin/Barnes and Noble.
Baack, B.D., and R.P. Thomas. 1974. The enclosure movement and the supply of labor during the Industrial Revolution. Journal of European Economic History 3(2): 401–423.
Baker, A.H.R., and R.A. Butlin (eds.). 1973. Studies of field systems in the British Isles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Blum, J. 1961. Lord and peasant in Russia: From the ninth to the nineteenth century. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Cohen, J., and M.L. Weitzman. 1975. A Marxian model of enclosures. Journal of Development Economics 1(4): 287–336.
Dahlman, C. 1980. The open field system and beyond: A property rights analysis of an economic institution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dovring, F. 1965. Land and labor in Europe in the 20th century, 3rd ed. The Hague: Nijhoff.
Fenoaltea, S. 1976. Risk, transaction costs, and the organization of medieval agriculture. Explorations in Economic History 13(2): 129–151.
Grantham, G. 1980. The persistence of open field farming in nineteenth-century France. Journal of Economic History 40(3): 515–531.
Gray, H.L. 1915. English field systems. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hardin, G. 1968. The tragedy of the commons. Science 162: 1243–1248.
McCloskey, D.N. 1975. The persistence of common fields. In European peasants and their markets, ed. W.N. Parker and E.L. Jones. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
McCloskey, D.N. 1976. English open fields as behavior towards risk. Research in Economic History 1: 124–170.
McCloskey, D.N., and J. Nash. 1984. Corn at interest: The cost and extent of grain storage in medieval England. American Economic Review 74(1): 174–187.
Macfarlane, A. 1978. The origins of English individualism. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Maitland, F.W. 1897. Domesday book and beyond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mayhew, A. 1973. Rural settlement and farming in Germany. New York: Barnes and Noble.
Popkin, S.L. 1979. The rational peasant: The political economy of rural society in Vietnam. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Seebohm, F. 1883. The English village community. London: Longmans & Co.
Turner, M. 1984. Enclosures in Britain, 1750–1830. London: Macmillan.
Yelling, J.A. 1977. Common field and enclosure in England 1450–1850. London: Macmillan.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Copyright information
© 2018 Macmillan Publishers Ltd.
About this entry
Cite this entry
McCloskey, D.N. (2018). Open Field System. In: The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95189-5_1390
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95189-5_1390
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-95188-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-95189-5
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences