Access to the countryside of England and Wales: public/private partnership or the privatisation of public rights?

This paper examines the evolution of public rights of access to private land in England and Wales. Since the Eighteenth Century the administration and protection of these rights has been though a form of public/private partnership in which the judiciary, while maintaining the dominance of private property, have safeguarded de facto public access by refusing consistently to punish simple trespass. While this situation has been modified, principally by post-World War II legislation, to allow for some formalisation of access arrangements and consequent compensation to landowners in areas of high recreational pressure and low legal accessibility, recent policy initiatives suggest that the balance of the partnership has now shifted in favour of landowners. In particular, the new access payment schemes, developed by the UK Government in response to the European Commission's Agri-Environment Regulations, locate the landowner as the beneficiary of the partnership, financed by tax revenue and justified on the spurious basis of improved 'access provision'. As such the state, as the former upholder of citizen rights, now assumes the duplicitous position of underwriting private property ownership through the commodification of access, while proclaiming a significant improvement in citizens' access rights.

Social interactions and resource ownership in two private protected areas of Paraguay

This paper describes the results of field research to dissect how social interactions differ between two reserves in Paraguay having very different styles of governance. The two reserves were Mbaracayu Natural Forest Reserve (Reserva Natural del Bosque de Mbaracayti, RNBM) and San Rafael Managed Resource Reserve (Reserva de Recursos Manejados San Rafael, RRMSR). RNBM is a private reserve owned by a non-governmental organisation. while RRNISR is a publicly-managed reserve, albeit with a substantial degree of private land ownership. Both reserves are intended to protect Atlantic Forest, one of the five world biodiversity 'hotspots', and also one of the most highly threatened. Each reserve and its buffer zone comprises a set of stakeholders, including indigenous communities and farmers, and the paper explores the interactions between these and the management regime. Indeed, while the management regimes of the two reserves are different, one being highly top-down (RNBM) and the other more socially inclusive (RRMSR), the issues that they have to deal with are much the same. However, while both management regimes will readily acknowledge the need to address poverty, inequality appears to be a far more sensitive issue. Whereas this may be expected for the privately-owned RNBM it is perhaps more surprising in RRNISR even when allowing for the fact that much of the land in the latter is in private hands. It is argued that the origins of this sensitivity rest within the broader features of Paraguayan society, and the prevalence of private land ownership. Yet ironically, it is the inequality in land ownership that is perhaps the most significant threat to conservation in both reserves. Therefore, while reserve-level analyses can provide some insight into the driving forces at play in the interaction between conservation and sustainable management, larger scales may be necessary to gain a fuller appreciation of the dynamics operating at site level. Even in a society with a history of centralised control these dynamics may be surprising. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Access, equity and the role of rights in health care

Modern health care rhetoric promotes choice and individual patient rights as dominant values. Yet we also accept that in any regime constrained by finite resources, difficult choices between patients are inevitable. How can we balance rights to liberty, on the one hand, with equity in the allocation of scarce resources on the other? For example, the duty of health authorities to allocate resources is a duty owed to the community as a whole, rather than to specific individuals. Macro-duties of this nature are founded on the notion of equity and fairness amongst individuals rather than personal liberty. They presume that if hard choices have to be made, they will be resolved according to fair and consistent principles which treat equal cases equally, and unequal cases unequally. In this paper, we argue for greater clarity and candour in the health care rights debate. With this in mind, we discuss (1) private and public rights, (2) negative and positive rights, (3) procedural and substantive rights, (4) sustainable health care rights and (5) the New Zealand booking system for prioritising access to elective services. This system aims to consider: individual need and ability to benefit alongside the resources made available to elective health services in an attempt to give the principles of equity practical effect. We describe a continuum on which the merits of those, sometimes competing, values-liberty and equity-can be evaluated and assessed.

Strategic use of private standards to enhance international competitiveness: Vegetable exports from Kenya and elsewhere

The paper examines how European retailers are using private standards for food safety and,quality as risk management and competitive tools and the strategic responses of leading Kenyan and other developing country supplier/exporters to such standards. Despite measures to harmonize a 'single market', the European fresh produce market is very diverse in terms of consumer preferences, structural dynamics and attention to and enforcement of food safety and other standards. Leading Kenyan fresh produce suppliers have re-positioned themselves at the high end, including 'high care', segments of the market - precisely those that are most demanding in terms of quality assurance and food safety systems. An array of factors have influenced this strategic positioning, including relatively high international freight costs, the emergence of more effective competition in mainstream product lines, relatively low labor costs for produce preparation, and strong market relationships with selected retail chains. To succeed in this demanding market segment, the industry has had to invest substantially in improved production and procurement systems, upgraded pack house facilities, and quality assurance/food safety management systems. (C) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Plant variety protection in developing countries: A view from the private seed industry in India

Many developing countries are currently engaged in designing and implementing plant variety protection systems. Encouraging private investment in plant breeding is the key rationale for extending intellectual property rights to plant varieties. However, the design of plant variety protection systems in developing countries has been dominated by concerns regarding the inequities of a plant variety protection system, especially the imbalance in the reward structure between plant breeders and farmers. The private seed industry, a key stakeholder in plant variety protection, appears to be playing only a peripheral role in the design of the intellectual property rights regime. This paper explores the potential response of the private seed industry in India to plant variety protection legislation based on a survey of major plant breeding companies. The survey finds that the private seed industry in India is generally unenthusiastic about the legislation and plant variety protection is likely to have only a very limited impact on their research profile and expenditures on plant breeding. Measures designed to curb the 'excessive' profits of breeders, farmers' rights provisions and poor prospects for enforcement of rights are seen to be seriously diluting breeders' rights, leaving few incentives for innovation. If the fundamental objective of plant variety protection is to stimulate private investment in plant breeding, then developing countries need to seriously address the question of improving appropriability of returns from investment.

India’s disappearing common lands: fuzzy boundaries, encroachment, and evolving property rights

Opportunistic land encroachment occurs in many low-income countries, gradually yet pervasively, until discrete areas of common land disappear. This paper, motivated by field observations in Karnataka, India, demonstrates that such an evolution of property rights from common to private may be efficient when the boundaries between common and private land are poorly defined, or ‘‘fuzzy.’’ Using a multi-period optimization model, and introducing the concept of stock and flow enforcement, I show how effectiveness of enforcement effort, whether encroachment is reversible, and punitive fines, influence whether an area of common land is fully defined and protected or gradually or rapidly encroached.

Partnership in the provision of recreational access: the reconstruction of the public interest in private land in England and Wales

This paper examines the evolution of public rights of access to private land in England and Wales. Since the Eighteenth Century the administration and protection of these rights has been though a form of public/private partnership in which the judiciary, while maintaining the dominance of private property, have safeguarded de facto public access by refusing consistently to punish simple trespass. While this situation has been modified, principally by post-World War II legislation, to allow for some formalisation of access arrangements and consequent compensation to landowners in areas of high recreational pressure and low legal accessibility, recent policy initiatives suggest that the balance of the partnership has now shifted in favour of landowners. In particular, the new access payment schemes, developed by the UK Government in response to the European Commission's Agri-Environment Regulations, identify the landowner as the beneficiary of the partnership, financed by tax revenue and justified on the spurious basis of improved 'access provision'. As such the State, as the former upholder of citizen rights, now assumes the duplicitous position of underwriting private property ownership through the commodification of access, while proclaiming a significant improvement in citizens' access rights.

Recreational access to private land in England and Wales: public good; private interest

Since the Eighteenth Century the protection of public recreational access to private land has been maintained by the state through a mixture of legal rights of passage and the safeguarding of certain de facto access rights. While this situation has been modified in the last fifty years to facilitate some formalisation of access arrangements and landowner compensation in areas of high recreational pressure and low legal accessibility, recent policies indicate that a shift from public to private rights is underway. At the core of this paradigm shift are the new access payment schemes introduced as part of the restructuring of the European Common Agricultural Policy. Under these schemes landowners are now paid for 'supplying' recreational access, with the state, as the former upholder of citizen rights, now assuming the duplicitous position of further underwriting private property ownership through the effective commodification of access, while simultaneously proclaiming significant improvements in citizens' access rights.

Institutional capacity and implementation issues in farmers' rights

Armed with the ‘equity’ and ‘conservation’ arguments that have a deep resonance with farming communities, developing countries are crafting a range of measures designed to protect farmers’ access to innovations, reward their contributions to the conservation and enhancement of plant genetic resources and provide incentives for sustained on-farm conservation. These measures range from the commericialization of farmers’ varieties to the conferment of a set of legally enforceable rights on farming communities – the exercise of which is expected to provide economic rewards to those responsible for on-farm conservation and innovation. The rights-based approach has been the cornerstone of legislative provision for implementing farmers’ rights in most developing countries. In drawing up these measures, developing countries do not appear to have systematically examined or provided for the substantial institutional capacity required for the effective implementation of farmers’ rights provisions. The lack of institutional capacity threatens to undermine any prospect of serious implementation of these provisions. More importantly, the expectation that significant incentives for on-farm conservation and innovation will flow from these ‘rights’ may be based on a flawed understanding of the economics of intellectual property rights. While farmers’ rights may provide only limited rewards for conservation, they may still have the effect of diluting the incentives for innovative institutional breeding programs – with the private sector increasingly relying on non-IPR instruments to profit from innovation. The focus on a rights-based approach may also draw attention away from alternative stewardship-based approaches to the realization of farmers’ rights objectives.

Health care rights and NHS rationing: turning theory into practice

How should we understand the nature of patients’ right in public health care systems? Are health care rights different to rights under a private contract for car insurance? This article distinguishes between public and private rights and the relevance of community interests and notions of social solidarity. It discusses the distinction between political and civil rights, and social and economic rights and the inherently political and redistributive nature of the latter. Nevertheless, social and economic rights certainly give rise to “rights” enforceable by the courts. In the UK (as in many other jurisdictions), the courts have favoured a “procedural” approach to the question, in which the courts closely scrutinise decisions and demand high standards of rationality from decision-makers. However, although this is the general rule, the article also discusses a number of exceptional cases where “substantive” remedies are available which guarantee patients access to the care they need.

Defining children's rights to work and care in Sub-Saharan Africa: tensions and challenges in policy and practice

This chapter explores the spatialities of children's rights through a focus on how children's paid and unpaid work in Sub-Saharan Africa intersects with wider debates about child labor, child domestic work and young caregiving. Several tensions surround the universalist and individualistic nature of the rights discourse in the context of Sub-Saharan Africa and policymakers, practitioners, children and community members have emphasized children's responsibilities to their families and communities, as well as their rights. The limitations of ILO definitions of child labor and child domestic work and UNCRC concerns about 'hazardous' and 'harmful' work are highlighted through examining the situation of children providing unpaid domestic and care support to family members in the private space of their own or a relative's home. Differing perspectives towards young caregiving have been adopted to date by policymakers and practitioners in East Africa, ranging from a child labor/ child protection/ abolitionist approach, to a 'young carers'/ child-centered rights perspective. These differing perspectives influence the level and nature of support and resources that children involved in care work may be able to access. A contextual, multi-sectorial approach to young caregiving is needed that seeks to understand children's, family members' and community members' perceptions of what constitutes inappropriate caring responsibilities within particular cultural contexts and how these should best be alleviated.