Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:27:35.664Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Economy as instituted process: the case of hard rock mining in the United States

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 June 2017

CHRISTOPHER BROWN
CHRISTOPHER BROWN*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics and Finance, Arkansas State University, USA
*
*Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I examine the origin and development of institutions that assign and enforce rights to hard rock minerals located on federal lands in the United States. Hard rock mining gives a prime example of the ‘artificial selection’ of settled customs or working rules by jurists and legislators. The evolving structure of the industry, conditioned by technological and market factors, produced a parallel shift in the locus and control of sovereignty. In the early days sovereignty vested in the mining clubs. The enlarging scale and complexity of mining catalysed a change in both the uses and location of sovereignty. With the transition from prospecting to large-scale industrial mining, the ‘right to use’ mineral deposits obtained through patents became contingent on the cooperation of labour. At this stage, the capture of the state's monopoly on legitimate violence to protect the right to use became a crucial dimension of property. Mining companies have also enjoyed liberties with respect to the externalization of environmental costs. The emergent structure of rights, duties, capacities and exposures was instrumental in bringing forth a quantum increase in the mining of hard rock minerals necessary for industrial expansion. There is, however, an urgent need for reform of the mineral patent system.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Institutional Economics , Volume 14 , Issue 4 , August 2018 , pp. 579 - 593
Copyright
Copyright © Millennium Economics Ltd 2017 

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

Atkinson, G. and Paschall, S. (2016), Law and Economics from an Evolutionary Perspective, Cheltenham, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Bandzak, R. (1991), ‘A productive systems analysis of the 1983 Phelps Dodge strike’, Journal of Economic Issues 25 (4): 1105–25.Google Scholar
Bromley, D. (1989), ‘Institutional change and economic efficiency’, Journal of Economic Issues 23 (3): 735–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coase, R. (1960), ‘The problem of social cost’, Journal of Law and Economics 3 (1): 1–74.Google Scholar
Commons, J. (1924), The Legal Foundations of Capitalism. Clifton, NJ: Augustus M. Kelley.Google Scholar
Commons, J. (1934), Institutional Economics: Its Place in Political Economy, Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Cronin, T. E. and Loevy, R. D. (2012), Colorado Politics and Policy: Governing a Purple State. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawson, R. (1998), ‘Sovereignty and withholding in John Commons’ Political Economy’, in Samuels, W. J. (ed.) The Founding of Institutional Economics: The Leisure Class and Sovereignty, London: Routledge, 47–75.Google Scholar
Foner, P. S. (1975), History of the Labor Movement in the United States: From the Founding of the A.F. of L. to the Emergence of American Imperialism. 2nd edition. New York: International Publishers.Google Scholar
GAO (2008), Hardrock Mining: Information on Abandoned Mines and Value and Coverage of Financial Assurances on BLM Land, GAO-08-574T, 12 March, Washington, DC: Government Accounting Office.Google Scholar
Gonce, R. A. (1998), ‘Identity and significance of Commons's sociological view of sovereignty’, in Samuels, W. J. (ed.), The Founding of Institutional Economics: The Leisure Class and Sovereignty, London: Routledge, 76–96.Google Scholar
Gonce, R. A. (1971), ‘John R. Commons's legal economic theory’, Journal of Economic Issues 5 (3): 80–95.Google Scholar
Hayek, F. A. (1973), Law, Legislation, and Liberty, Volume 1: Rules and Order. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. (2009), ‘On the institutional foundations of law: the insufficiency of custom and private ordering’, Journal of Economic Issues 43 (1): 143–66.Google Scholar
Hohfeld, W. N. (1917), ‘Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning’, Yale Review 1 (1): 710–70.Google Scholar
Honoré, A. M. (1971), ‘Ownership’, in Guest, A. G. (ed.) Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 107–47.Google Scholar
Jameson, E. (1998), All That Glitters: Class, Conflict, and Community in Cripple Creek, Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Kanazawa, M. (2015), Golden Rules: The Origins of California Water Law in the Gold Rush, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kozura, M. (1996), ‘We stood our ground: anthracite miners and the expropriation of corporate property, 1930–1941’, in Lind, S. (ed.), We Are The Leaders: The Alternative Unionism of the 1930s, Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 199–237.Google Scholar
Libecap, G. D. (1979), ‘Government support of private claims to public minerals: Western mineral rights’, Business History Review 53 (3): 364–86.Google Scholar
Libecap, G. D. (2007), ‘The assignment of property rights on the Western Frontier: lessons for contemporary environmental and resource policy’, Journal of Economic History 67 (2): 257–91.Google Scholar
Lueck, D. (2003), ‘First possession as the basis of property’, in Anderson, T. L. and McChesney, F. S. (eds) Property Rights: Cooperation, Conflict, and Law, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Murtazashvili, I. (2013), The Political Economy of the American Frontier, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Olson, M. (1965), The Logic of Collective Action, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rikard, T. (1932), A History of American Mining, New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Rose, C. M. (1985), ‘Possession as the origin of property’, University of Chicago Law Review 52 (1): 73–88.Google Scholar
Umbeck, J. (1977), ‘The California Gold Rush: a study of emerging property rights’, Explorations in Economic History, 14 (3): 197–226.Google Scholar
Umbeck, J. (1981), ‘Might makes rights: a theory of the foundation and initial distribution of property rights’, Economic inquiry, 19 (1): 38–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veblen, T. ([1919]1932) The Place of Science in Modern Civilization, New York: Viking Press.Google Scholar
Walsh, F. P. and Manly, B. M. (1916), Final Report and Testimony of the Committee on Industrial Relations, Volume 5. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Wilkerson, C. F. (1992), Crossing the Next Meridian: Land, Water, and the Future of the West, Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
Wyman, M. (1979), Hard Rock Epic, Western Miners and the Industrial Revolution, 1860–1910, The Annals of Iowa 45 (5): 426–7 (http://ir.uiowa.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=8722&context=annals-of-iowa, accessed 20 March 2017).Google Scholar
Zinn, H. (1999), A People's History of the United States: 1842–Present, New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar