Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-11T18:12:40.560Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Economics without history: objections to the rights hypothesis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 November 2013

ERIC L. JONES
ERIC L. JONES*
Affiliation:
Emeritus Professor, La Trobe University, and former Professorial Fellow, Melbourne Business School.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Reasons are given for doubting the currently fashionable thesis that economic growth and industrialisation in the case of England derived from establishing secure property rights after 1688. Customary and public rights remained at risk. Ancient arrangements often persisted far into Victorian times. Detailed evidence is presented of survivals and of illiquid features in the land market. Evidence is also given of endemic disputes over enclosure and tithes. Unlike some European countries, England failed to establish a land registry. Limited transactions probably reflected unwillingness to risk litigation. That unsatisfactory property rights did not, however, stifle growth is tribute to the underlying power of the market.

Economie sans histoire: objections à l'hypothèse des droits de propriété

Cet article présente de bonnes raisons de mettre en doute la thèse en vogue actuellement que, dans le cas de l'Angleterre, la croissance économique et l'industrialisation furent suscitées par l'institution de droits de propriété sécurisés après 1688. Les droits coutumiers et publics sont restés en vigueur. Des arrangements anciens persistaient encore à l'époque victorienne. L'auteur le prouve en présentant des exemples de comportements qui ont survécu et certaines caractéristiques d'un marché foncier où ce n'est pas toujours l'argent cash qui a le dernier mot. Des cas sont aussi présentés de vieilles querelles restées vivaces qui resurgissent en matière de clôtures ou de dîmes. Contrairement à certains autres pays européens, l'Angleterre n'a pas réussi à établir un cadastre. Le nombre limité des transactions reflète probablement la crainte du litige. Ces droits de propriété imparfaits n'ont cependant pas étouffé la croissance, hommage, s'il en est, à la puissance sous-jacente du marché.

Ökonomie ohne geschichte: einwände gegen die eigentumsrecht-hypothese

Die gegenwärtig beliebte These, dass Wirtschaftswachstum und Industrialisierung in England – für beides das Musterbeispiel – auf die Durchsetzung sicherer Eigentumsrechte nach 1688 zurückzuführen sind, lässt sich aus mehreren Gründen anzweifeln. Gewohnheitsrechte blieben riskant und althergebrachte Regelungen bestanden oft weit bis in die viktorianische Zeit hinein. Detailliertes Material verweist auf altertümliche Überbleibsel und illiquide Strukturen des Grundstücksmarktes sowie auf endemische Dispute über Einhegungen und Zehntrechte. Im Unterschied zu anderen europäischen Ländern gelang es in England nicht, ein Grundstücksregister einzurichten, und die Einschränkungen bei der Grundstücksübertragung deuten wohl auf mangelnde Bereitschaft zur juristischen Auseinadersetzung über riskante Geschäfte hin. Dass die unzulänglichen Eigentumsrechte dennoch das Wachstum nicht bremsten, ist auf die unterschwellige Macht des Marktes zurückzuführen.

Type
Research Article
Information
Continuity and Change , Volume 28 , Issue 3 , December 2013 , pp. 323 - 346
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

ENDNOTES

1 See Heller, Michael G., Capitalism, institutions, and economic development (London, 2009), 19, 103Google Scholar.

2 See, for example, Douglass C. North, John Joseph Wallis, Steven B. Webb and Barry R. Weingast, ‘Limited access orders in the developing world’, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4359 (September 2007); de Soto, Hernando, The mystery of capital (New York, 2007)Google Scholar.

3 Examples include Merrill, Thomas W. and Smith, Henry E., ‘What happened to property in law and economics?’, Yale Law Journal, 16 October 2001, 357–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Boettke, Peter J. and Fink, Alexander, ‘Institutions first’, Journal of Institutional Economics 7, 4 (2011), 499–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Raghuran G. Rajan and Luigi Zingales, ‘The emergence of strong property rights: speculations from history’, NBER working paper no. 9478 (Cambridge, MA, 2003), available at http://www.nber.org/papers/w9478; Raghuran G. Rajan and Luigi Zingales, Saving capitalism from the capitalists (New York, 2003); Libecap, Gary D. and Lueck, Dean, ‘The demarcation of land and the role of coordinating property institutions’, Journal of Political Economy 119, 3 (2011), 426–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Steven C. A. Pincus and James A. Robinson, ‘What really happened during the glorious revolution?’, NBER working paper no. 17206 (Cambridge, MA, 2011), available at http://www.nber.org/papers/w17206; Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson and James Robinson, ‘Institutions as the fundamental cause of long-run growth’, NBER working paper no. 10481 (Cambridge, MA, 2004), available at http://www.nber.org/papers/w10481; and Gary Richardson and Dan Bogart, ‘Institutional adaptability and economic development: the property rights revolution in Britain, 1700–1830’, NBER working paper no. 13757 (Cambridge, MA, 2008), available at http://www.nber.org/papers/w13757.

4 Niall Ferguson, The great degeneration: how institutions decay and economies die (London, 2012); Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson, Why nations fail (New York, 2012).

5 Vries, Peer, ‘Challenges, (non-) responses, and politics: a review of Prasannan Parthasarathi, Why Europe grew rich and Asia did not: global economic divergence, 1600–1850’, Journal of World History 23, 3 (2012), 639–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar, here 643, 643 and n. 14.

6 Acemoglu and Robinson, Why nations fail, 4.

7 Daron Acemoglu, Defining Ideas: A Hoover Institution Journal, 5 January 2012.

8 For a review of Ferguson, see Mishra, Pankaj, London Review of Books 33, 21 (3 November 2011), 10–12Google Scholar.

9 Sir John Boddington, Bledisloe Lecture, Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, 20 January 2012. The reference to enforced sales is to the English case, where the (supposed) process is almost always attributed to the eighteenth century.

10 See for example J. R. T. Hughes, Social control in the colonial economy (Charlottesville, 1976); and E. L. Jones, ‘The European background’, in Stanley L. Engerman and Robert E. Gallman eds., The Cambridge economic history of the United States, vol. 1 (Cambridge, 1996), 95–133.

11 Eric Pawson, Transport and economy: the turnpike roads of eighteenth-century Britain (London, 1971), vii.

12 For example, Rajan and Zingales, ‘The emergence of strong property rights’, 4, 18.

13 Jones, Eric L., ‘Gentry culture and the stifling of industry’, Journal of Socioeconomics (2012), published online 26 06 2012, available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2012.05.021Google Scholar

14 Papers by Bogart and Richardson are most easily read on Dan Bogart's website, University of California at Irvine, School of Social Science. With respect to the landed sector, the most valuable compendium, summing up their interpretation and supplying data for others to use, is Dan Bogart and Gary Richardson, ‘Parliament and property rights: a database’ (2006), University of California at Irvine, School of Social Science, Working Papers on British Institutions, Property Rights and Infrastructure. Available at http://www.socsci.uci.edu/∼dbogart/actsdataaug112009.pdf.

15 Jones, E. L. and Falkus, M. E., ‘Urban improvement and the English economy in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries’, Research in Economic History 4 (1979), 193–233Google Scholar.

16 An earlier quantitative study by Julian Hoppit presaged the transformation in the legislative output of parliament, though somewhat less ambitiously. See Hoppit, Julian, ‘Patterns of parliamentary legislation, 1660–1800’, The Historical Journal 39, 1 (1996), 109–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

17 Robert Dixon-Gough and Glyn Hunt, ‘The real property and general boundary system of England and Wales’, in Jaap Zevenbergen, Andrew Frank and Erik Stubkjaer, Real property transactions: procedures, transaction costs and models (Amsterdam, 2007), 253.

18 Brunt, Liam, ‘Nature or nurture? Explaining English wheat yields in the industrial revolution, c. 1770’, Journal of Economic History 64, 1 (2004), 193–225, here 193CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19 Wrigley, E. A., ‘The transition to an advanced organic economy: half a millennium of English agriculture’, Economic History Review 59, 3 (2006), 435–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

20 Ron Harris, ‘Government and the economy’, in Roderick Floud and Paul Johnson eds., The Cambridge economic history of modern Britain, vol. 1: Industrialisation, 1700–1860 (2004), 229.

21 Innes, Joanna, ‘The local acts of a national parliament: parliament's role in sanctioning local action in eighteenth-century Britain’, Parliamentary History 17, 1 (1998), 23–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar, here 23.

22 La Porta, Rafael, Lopez-De-Silanes, Florencio and Shleifer, Andrei, ‘The economic consequences of legal origins’, Journal of Economic Literature 46, 2 (2008), 285–332, here 303CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23 Eric Jones, The European miracle, 3rd edn (Cambridge, 2003), xxxv; Leonard, D. K. and Samantar, M. S., ‘What does the Somali experience teach us about the social contract and the state?’, Development and Change 42, 2 (2011), 559–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 Abhijit V. Banerjee and Esther Dufol, Poor economics (London, 2012), especially 243.

25 But see Monika Vozarikova, Land registration in England and Slovakia – comparative study (University of Birmingham Research Archive e-thesis repository, 2010).

26 La Porta, Lopez-De-Silanes and Shleifer, ‘Economic consequence’, 303.

27 Harris, ‘Government and the economy’, 206, 211.

28 Getzler, Joshua, ‘Theories of property and economic development’, Journal of Interdisciplinary History 26, 4 (1996), 639–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar, here 665–6.

29 Harris, ‘Government and the economy’, 206.

30 J. H. Baker, An introduction to English legal history (London, 1971), 159–60.

31 Harris, ‘Government and the economy’, 229.

32 Bogart and Richardson, ‘Parliament and property rights’, 10.

33 H. C. Prince, Parks in England (Shalfleet, 1967), 7.9; see also the map of parks in southern Buckinghamshire in 1824 in H. C. Darby ed., A new historical geography of England (Cambridge, 1973), fig. 75; and Hill, Rosemary, London Review of Books 34, 1 (5 January 2012), 18–20Google Scholar.

34 Ex inform Charles Foster. See Charles F. Foster, Seven households: life in Cheshire and Lancashire 1582 to 1774 (Northwich, 2002), 219.

35 Harris, ‘Government and the economy’, 211.

36 Hoppit, ‘Patterns’, 129–31.

37 Gillian Tindall, The fields beneath: the history of one London village (London, 1981), 46.

38 This could occur in Acts of Parliament, e.g. a road from Faringdon, Berkshire (now Oxfordshire) was referred to inter alia as ‘forming part of the old road at a certain tree’. 3 Will.IV.-Sess.1833, AN ACT For Repairing the Road from… Faringdon…to Burford.

39 Maurice Beresford, ‘A journey along boundaries’, History on the ground, 1971 edn (London, 1971), chapter 1; George Ewart Evans, The pattern under the plough, 1971 edn (London, 1971); and Anthea Jones, Cheltenham: a new history (Lancaster, 2010), 27–31. Beating the bounds mattered, e.g. in 1720 when the cross was taken to the wrong place at Brightwalton, Berkshire, the tithe of one area was lost for the year. Jane Osment et al., Brightwalton: a downland village (Brightwalton, 2002), 29.

40 Even the language returned to obscurity. Under the Commonwealth, court records were ordered to be written in English but afterwards they were rendered in Latin again, which persisted into the eighteenth century. Gillian Tindall, Three houses, many lives (London, 2012), 130.

41 K. J. Allison, East Riding water-mills (East Yorkshire Local History Society, 1970).

42 Adam Smith, The wealth of nations, 1910 edn (London, 1910), I, 370.

43 Eric L. Jones, Locating the industrial revolution: inducement and response (Singapore, 2010), 134.

44 In C. W. Chalklin and M. A. Havinden eds., Rural change and urban growth 1500–1800 (London, 1974), 128.

45 Dominic Hobson, The national wealth (London, 1999), 75.

46 George Ewart Evans, Where beards wag all: the relevance of the oral tradition, 1977 edn (London, 1977), 76.

47 Libecap and Lueck, ‘The demarcation of land’, 426–67.

48 Bogart and Richardson, ‘Parliament and property rights’, 20.

49 Forty-three per cent of parliamentary enclosures occurred as late as the Napoleonic wars. Roger J. P. Kain and Elizabeth Baigent, The cadastral map in the service of the state: a history of property mapping (Chicago, 1992), 237.

50 For example, Tindall, Fields beneath, plate 9 for Kentish Town; H. J. Dyos, Victorian suburb: a study of the growth of Camberwell (Leicester, 1961), 101; Alan Pilbeam, Gloucestershire 300 years ago (Stroud, 2011), fig. 10.

51 W. G. Hoskins, The making of the English landscape (London, 1955), 217ff; Malcolm I. Thomis, Old Nottingham (Newton Abbot, 1968), 44–9, 68.

52 Coventry: British History Online.

53 Quoted by Maurice Beresford, ‘The making of a townscape: Richard Paley in the east end of Leeds, 1771–1803’, in Chalklin and Havinden eds., Rural change and urban growth, 287.

54 Seeking a small farm whose title was beyond question in the mid-eighteenth century, the advisers to the Bishop of Gloucester could apparently suggest only Welsh farms; one in Radnorshire was accordingly bought to provide income for the Vicars of Bledington, Gloucestershire. M. K. Ashby, The changing English village: a history of Bledington, Gloucestershire in its setting 1066–1914 (Kineton, 1974), 188–9.

55 W. E. Tate, The English village community and the enclosure movements (London, 1967), 128–9.

56 W. E. Tate, The parish chest (Cambridge, 1969), 51–3.

57 Tate, Village community, 208.

58 Lord Ernle, English farming past and present, 6th edn (London, 1961), 249–51.

59 For examples see Jones, Locating, 221–2 and n. 16; D. C. McCloskey, ‘The economics of enclosure: a market analysis’, in William N. Parker and Eric L. Jones eds., European peasants and their markets (Princeton, 1975), 131.

60 M. Heller, The gridlock economy (New York, 2008), 16–22.

61 Margaret Blundell ed., Blundell's diary and letter book 1702–1728 (Liverpool, 1952), 188.

62 Quoted in Jones, Locating, 234 n. 16.

63 Chapman, John and Seeliger, Sylvia, ‘Formal and informal enclosures in Hampshire 1700–1900’, Hampshire Papers 12 (1997), 7Google Scholar.

64 Tate, Parish chest, 138.

65 Tate, Parish chest, 136–40.

66 Hockey, O. S. B., ‘The pattern of the tithe in the Isle of Wight’, Proceedings of the Hampshire Archaeological Society XXI/III (1960), 153–4Google Scholar.

67 Stevenson, Janet H., Wiltshire Archaeological Magazine 72/73 (1980), 149Google Scholar.

68 Clark, Greg and Jamelske, Eric, ‘The efficiency gains from site value taxes: The Tithe Commutation Act of 1836’, Explorations in Economic History 42, 2 (2005), 282–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

69 Mrs Bryan Stapleton, Three Oxfordshire parishes (Oxford, 1893), 338.

70 Jones, Cheltenham, 106.

71 Peter Mayer and Alan Pemberton, A short history of land registration in England and Wales (HM Land Registry, 2000), 4; see also Vozarikova, Land registration in England and Slovakia, 2010.

72 Smith, Wealth of nations, 316.

73 For the successive expansion of ownership records in Sweden, see Ekback, Peter, ‘Private, common, and open access property rights in land – an investigation of economic principles and legislation’, Nordic Journal of Surveying and Real Estate Research 6, 2 (2009), 57–74Google Scholar, here 64n.

74 I am indebted to Professor Minoru Yasumoto of Komazawa University for examples from the State Papers Domestic.

75 Mayer and Pemberton, Land registration, 3.

76 Lee Frank Solt, Saints in arms: puritanism and democracy in Cromwell's army (New York, 1971), 96.

77 Helen Castor, Blood and roses (London, 2004).

78 See the example cited in Jones, Locating, 131.

79 Harris, ‘Government and the economy’, 229.

80 Dicey, A. V., ‘Paradox of the land law’, Law Quarterly Review (1905)Google Scholar, Abstract.

81 I am grateful to the clerk of the court, Sue Poole, for permission to attend the court of the Old Corporation at Malmesbury.

82 Robert Tennyson, ‘A cheap bill for deviant enclosures: legal change and the eighteenth-century enclosure movement’, http://works.bepress.com/robert-tenyson/4 (Berkeley, 2009).

83 J. M. Neeson, Commoners: common right, enclosure and social change in England, 1700–1820 (Cambridge, 1996); Shaw-Taylor, Leigh, ‘Parliamentary enclosure and the emergence of an English agricultural proletariat’, Journal of Economic History 61, 3 (2002), 640–62Google Scholar.

84 Ekkehart Schlicht, On custom in the economy (Oxford, 1998), 181 n. 1. The optimality position was rejected in early work on the new institutional economics. See Basu, Kaushik, Jones, Eric and Schlicht, Ekkehart, ‘The growth and decay of custom: the role of the new institutional economics in economic history’, Explorations in Economic History 24, 1 (1987), 1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar, here 8–12.

85 For Ampney, see Tate, W. E., ‘Gloucestershire enclosure acts and awards’, Transactions of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society for 1943 64 (1944), 24Google Scholar; for Farmington, see British History Online.

86 A representative paper at this point is Dan Bogart and Gary Richardson, ‘Property rights and parliament in industrializing Britain’, available at www.socsci.uci.edu/∼dbogartparliamentacts11aug2009.pdf.

87 Tate, Village community, 94.

88 Robert W. Malcolmson, Popular recreations in English society 1700–1850, 1979 edn (Cambridge, 1979), 110–17.

89 Jones, Locating, 153–5.

90 S. R. Epstein, Freedom and growth: the rise of states and markets in Europe, 1300–1750 (London, 2000), 49 n. 29.

91 Raymond Moody, The Burford year (Burford, 1998), 24.

92 W. G. Hoskins, Local history in England, 2nd edn (London, 1972), 54.

93 Woodward, David, ‘Straw, bracken and the Wicklow whale: the exploitation of natural resources in England since 1500’, Past and Present 159 (May 1998), 43–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also Ashby, Changing village, 167, 315 and Jones, Locating, 80–1. Tindall refers to the rights extinguished when the manor courts at Limpsfield, Surrey, were ended by Act of Parliament in 1922 as ‘only’ those relating to gravel, bushes, bee-keeping, etc., but this underplays their value (Tindall, Three houses, 131).

94 Finn, Margot, ‘Women, consumption and coverture in England, c. 1760–1860’, The Historical Journal 39, 3 (1996), 703–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar; letter from C. Coghlan, London Review of Books (1 December 2011); and ex inform Charles Foster.

95 Getzler, ‘Theories of property’, 644–5.

96 Harris, ‘Government and the economy’, 236.

97 Quoted in Ruth Moore, Niels Bohr, the man and the scientist (London, 1967), 140.

98 Jones, Locating, 134.

99 Maurice Beresford, ‘Habitation versus improvement: the debate on enclosure by agreement’, in F. J. Fisher ed., Essays in the economic and social history of Tudor and Stuart England (Cambridge, 1961), 40–69.

100 Charles F. Foster and Eric L. Jones, The fabric of society and how it creates wealth (Northwich, Cheshire, 2013).

101 Quoted by Kain and Baigent, Cadastral map, 254–5.

102 John Kay, ‘Property rights alone will not bring about prosperity’, Financial Times, 10 April 2013.