Redistribution Of Property Rights Research Articles

Developing a methodology for assessing the risk of hostile takeover of a motor transport enterprise and measures to prevent it

Problem. Mergers and acquisitions are traditional processes of redistribution of property rights in a market economy. Mergers are often used by companies to gain control over larger market segments and increase performance efficiency. The acquisition process is not always desirable for the target company and is often used to establish control over its assets. Thus, the problems of assessing the risk of hostile takeover of the enterprise and its prevention are extremely relevant at the current stage, especially in the transport sector of Ukraine. Goal. The goal of the work is to develop the methodology for assessing the risk of hostile takeover of a motor transport enterprise and suggest methods for preventing its occurrence. Methodology. During the study, the following research methods have been used: analysis and synthesis, logical analysis. Information resources of the study are electronic information resources and periodic publications. Results. The risk of hostile takeover of an enterprise is the probability that the enterprise will become the takeover target through the legal actions and methods taken by the acquirer, but the acquisition procedure itself is against the wishes of the target’s board. The list of factors that determine the attractiveness of the potential acquisition target includes: the attractiveness of the enterprise in terms of its financial results and performance, the enterprise is not public, it occupies a considerable market segment, the enterprise operates as a joint-stock company, it is attractive in terms of further resale of its assets, the prospects of the industry in which the enterprise operates. According to the results of the studies assessing the risk level of hostile takeover of the group of motor transport enterprises, it has been revealed that 45% of enterprises are in the medium risk group. The following list of measures aimed at defending motor transport enterprises against hostile takeovers has been developed: the formation of optimal share capital structure; share consolidation when the majority shareholder holds the controlling interest; carrying out a sound dividend policy, the continuous monitoring of amounts and maturity dates of accounts payable, preventing the risk of arousing the counterparties’ interest in the resale of debt obligations of the enterprise to others. Originality. The methodology for assessing the risk of hostile takeover of a motor transport enterprise and reasonable measures to prevent its occurrence have been proposed. Practical value. The proposed recommendations can be used by the owners and management of motor transport enterprises to build an effective system for preventing potential hostile takeovers.

Transferring land use rights with transportation infrastructure extensions: Evidence on spatiotemporal price formation in Shanghai

To address the efficiency and sustainability of residential suburbanization under state leasehold systems, this study examines the price formation of long-term land-use rights for general and compensational housing empirically, considering the successive expansions of new metro lines and highway networks during 2004–2016 in Shanghai—one of the world’s fastest growing megacities. The results of our spatial autoregressive models infer that the accessibility benefits of metro extensions are considerably capitalized into both the ask and transaction prices of land-use rights for general housing in the suburbs, whereas those for highway construction are insignificant. A series of spatiotemporal regressions demonstrate that the premiums for proximity to new metro stations bid by private developers are much higher than those asked by local governments during pre-metro years, probably due to local governments’ strategic site arrangements for transit-oriented suburbanization and/or developers’ speculative land acquisitions in Shanghai’s upward suburban housing market. This study further reveals that the prices of land-use rights for compensational housing do not reflect any economic externalities attributable to metro stations and highway interchanges, which might trigger the unfair redistribution of property rights, accessibility, and economic opportunities among relocated farmers around city-fringe areas.

Property Rights, Exchange, and the Production of Economic Development

This chapter argues that economic development originates not from the gains from trade and specialization under a division of labor, but fundamentally from an institutional framework of property rights which permits the gains from trade and innovation emerge on a societal wide scale. It is this framework that enables the transition from small scale trading and capital accumulation to medium scale trading and capital accumulation and finally to large scale trading and capital accumulation. All of humanity was once poor; those societies that have been able to escape from poverty are those that were able to get on this development path by adopting the institutional framework of property, contract, and consent. We argue that well-defined and exchangeable private property rights yield economic growth by operating as a filter on economic behavior – the establishment of property rights embedded in the rule of law weeds out unproductive entrepreneurship and the corresponding politicized redistribution of property rights with rent-seeking and predation as its consequence, and engenders instead productive entrepreneurship, and a more efficient allocation of property rights, and with that a realization of the gains from trade and the gains from innovation. The fundamental cause of economic development, we argue, is the institution of private property, as it is this institutional framework that results in productive specialization and peaceful cooperation among diverse and disparate individuals.

Property rights in UK uplands and the implications for policy and management

Rural areas are subject to changing and often competing demands. Where agricultural production was once paramount, it now competes with other ecosystem services such as carbon storage, rural amenity, and wildlife habitat. If rural areas are to be managed to produce this broad range of goods and services, then more diverse and complex management regimes are needed. This paper explores the literature on property rights before using a ‘property rights bundle’ approach in the UK uplands to (1) examine the distribution of property rights between stakeholders in a multi-resource system and (2) evaluate the effect of state intervention on the redistribution of property rights and the resulting management regimes. Private land owners were found to be the dominant type of property rights holder and private property the dominant management regime in the uplands of the UK. Government intervention has also created private-state regimes for some public goods such as biodiversity but common property management is still in its infancy with regards to ecosystem services and few stakeholders have claimant rights over resources. As a result, many stakeholders are unable to influence management to produce the goods that they want. A property rights perspective highlights that single management regimes alone are unlikely to manage land sustainably for both private and public goods. Instead, a complex mix of private, private-state and common property regimes are found to be emerging in this multi-resource system. These mixed management regimes have the potential to produce sustainable outcomes but only if the appropriate management regime is matched to each resource, if links are developed between each regime to deal with conflict and if mixed management is adaptable enough to cope with new and changing demands.

Somewhere in Time: A Response to Zizek, Santner, and Reinhard’s The Neighbor

This paper considers, with respect to property law critique, both synchronic and diachronic causes that emerge from the Lacanian Real. All too often property law reforms (and legal reform in general) are discussed only in the synchronic dimension (e.g., redistribution of property rights, distributive justice more generally) without sufficient awareness of the importance of also (perhaps firstly) thinking law as such as an intergenerational claim that places older and younger generations in distinct conflict. If we provide this critical awareness with the additional insight, refined by Zizek, Santner, and Reinhard, that no intervention into the symbolic (into law and language) can be effective without passing through the dimension of the Real (the painful, sadistic “evil” of the Real, the beyond of the symbolic dimension of justice to which the symbolic dimension is always knotted), then we are prompted to consider the superego, thought in its Real dimension, as both the most significant site of synchronic human relations (a crucial site, an unavoidable swerve, through which horizontal ideas such as “equality” and “justice” must be thought) and the place where law passes vexed between generations.These considerations need to be brought to bear on property law, insofar as private property has become the primary site of political power. The aspect of private property that needs to be looked into is its temporality, its diachronic aspect that aggravates relations between forebears and followers. What needs to be looked into is the long-unexamined presupposition that private property rights must be Eternal to effectively motivate participation in economic production. From a Lacanian perspective, this emphasis on “effectiveness” and “rational economics” not only disavows the theological resonances of the idea of “Eternity.” Just as importantly, such an emphasis ignores the Real relations to which the Symbolic realm of justice is irrevocably knotted.

The Role of Government in The Redistribution of Property Rights: The Case of The Korean Greenbelt

This study addresses Korean Greenbelt revision. This revision may be labeled a puzzle based on the fact that although the Greenbelt had been considered to be one of the most impregnable institutions in Korea it is now faced with a complete reformulation following the previous government reform initiation six years ago. In order to solve the puzzle, this study adopts an approach that focuses the role of the government in the redistribution of property rights. To do so, this study first describes in detailed fashion the process of the Greenbelt revision from 1997 up to the present. Secondly, this study delineates three models on the role of government in the redistribution of property rights: the naive model, the interest group model, and the strong state model. Thirdly, this study attempts to empirically assess the most adequate model to explain the role of the government in the revision of the Korean Greenbelt. Finally, this study draws policy implications using both theoretical and empirical analyses. The major policy recommendation drawn from the analyses is that, as the major impetus behind the revision of the Korean Greenbelt appears to be the realization of the private interests of the ruler at the costs of the general public, a mechanism should be strengthened to restrain the exercise of power by the ruler of the government with regards to the redistribution of property rights.

Sustainability in natural resource management

Sustainability is the objective that many disciplines indicate as being essential to the resolution of environmental degradation, although there is no agreement about what this term exactly means. This study defines environmental problems as externalities, most of these occurring between different generations. We analyze the reasons why traditional solutions for externalities do not work in the intergenerational context. Our conclusions are, on the one hand, that traditional methods for evaluating the costs and benefits affecting different generations should be improved. Secondly, an intergenerational redistribution of natural resource property rights is essential to guarantee equality of opportunities for all generations, and therefore to ensure sustainability. Adequate redistribution of property rights will depend on the type of resource, as well as on other factors such as the rate of return on its exploitation and the current generations’ propensity to consume. In all cases, however, sustainability is sufficiently guaranteed by conceding property rights, as a whole, to the future.

Craig Rotherham, Proprietary Remedies in Context: A Study in the Judicial Redistribution of Property Rights

Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2002, xxix + 354 pp, hb £42.00.

Privatisation in Central Europe: Different Legacies, Methods, and Outcomes

Privatisation and the redistribution of property rights are key features of the transformation of the economic and political space of Central Europe. Within this region there have been important national differences in the experiences of privatisation: in terms of the legacies of the state-socialist period, in the methods of privatisation, and in the outcomes in terms of property rights. We explore three major aspects of privatisation. First, we revisit the path-dependent nature of privatisation, as a process which is influenced above all by national economic and political structures, including relationships in and around the state. Second, we argue that with emphasis on path dependency there is a failure to give sufficient attention to the way in which there was a significant shift in course of transformation in the range of strategics available to the main agents in the privatisation process; in particular, a high degree of control over property rights was achieved in the ‘third wave’ of privatisation by a small number of agents in the context of weak reregulation and corporate governance. Third, we investigate the nature of the third wave of privatisation through the functioning of networks of firms in the Czech and the Slovak Republics.

Extending corporate liability in New Zealand

New Zealand’s 1993 Companies Act defines reckless trading as when a director/manager induces a “substantial risk of serious loss to the company’s creditors”. The definition contrasts with international common and statutory law that holds managers personally liable only under circumstances of moral failing. It also allows for managers to be found liable for bad investments during the continued existence of a firm. Replacing the standard of moral failing with a standard of objective risk evaluation and allowing culpability beyond bankruptcy proceedings extends liability in a way that indirectly taxes corporations. This extension of liability stands contrary to the evolutionary development of the corporation as based on an efficient redistribution of property rights. It biases investment towards lower risk, lower yield ventures, and is expected to decrease New Zealand’s innovation‐driven economic growth

Defending coase against false charges: A comment on block

This note suggests that Coase's “The Problem of Social Cost” has been read and interpreted too broadly to apply to all aspects of law. Drawing from Coase's own work, I show that Coase was narrowly focused on the economic analysis of negative externalities. This understanding of the paper precludes it from being used as a justification for the broad redistribution of property rights for the purpose of wealth maximization. This understanding of Coase's paper also defends his work against charges from those who object to making the determination of property rights secondary to the maximization of wealth.

Social Policy through Land Reform: New Jersey's Mount Laurel Controversy

In 1975 and again in 1983 the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled in a suit brought by the local chapter of the NAACP that Mount Laurel Township, located ten miles from Philadelphia at the edge of the metropolitan area, unconstitutionally excluded low-income housing within its borders through its zoning policies that allowed only detached single-family houses and industrial uses. The court not only ruled that there are severe limits on the right of suburban communities to restrict the entry of lower-income households but also set in motion the most fundamental redistribution of property rights ever attempted by a state government in the United States. The court insisted that the state's municipalities have an affirmative obligation to redistribute lowand moderate-income households more evenly across the state.I The rulings have generated heated controversy, for Americans have enormous wealth tied up in land markets. Supporters claim that the Mount Laurel rulings merely extend the well-established regulatory powers of the state regarding the use of land. Furthermore, the geographical redistribution of lower-income households