Abstract
This paper compares the way the state allocates property rights to land and marine squatters in Colonial Hong Kong, where property rights were clearly defined and the state resourceful and effective. It explains with reference to the Coase Theorem the consequences of the state conferring property rights to squatters - notably why the granting of tradable rehousing entitlements to Crown Land squatters had the effect of restraining the extent of in-situ upgrades and why non-tradable, but formal, licenses were allocated to marine squatters. The implications of each form of rights granted to squatters are discussed in relation to innovation-oriented public policies.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 247-257 |
Number of pages | 11 |
Journal | Habitat International |
Volume | 44 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 1 Oct 2014 |
Externally published | Yes |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2014 Elsevier Ltd.
Funding
The authors are grateful to the useful comments of two anonymous Referees. All faults are the authors'. They also thank the Government Logistics Department for permitting them to reproduce Photos Nos. 25818-005 and 25185-150 as Fig. 1, Fig. 2, respectively, in this paper.
Keywords
- Aquaculture
- Coase Theorem
- Innovations
- Market transactions
- Property rights
- Squatting