Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 November 2013
In early public land privatization, governments in New South Wales and Buenos Aires provided for de jure transfer of public lands. In New South Wales the government lost control; squatters rushed out unlawfully and seized de facto frontier claims. But in Buenos Aires privatization was accomplished by de jure transfers. Why did British settlers reject de jure transfers from a government, most able to secure property rights and rule of law, while settlers of the pampa frontier, where property-rights security was doubtful, complied with de jure transfers? We find that the revenue objective and violence on the frontier explain this puzzle.
The authors thank participants in the 2000 World Congress of Cliometrics, the 2010 Social Science History Association Meetings, the 2010 Economic History Association Meetings, the 2012 International Society for the New Institutional Economics Meetings, and seminars at the University of Hawaii, Rutgers University, and the University of Alberta. We also thank Doug Allen, Lee Alston, Yoram Barzel, Manuel Bautista, Edwyna Harris, María Alejandra Irigoin, James Mak, Noel Maurer, Peter Meyer, Paul Rhode, and two referees for helpful comments. We are responsible for all errors and omissions.