The Working Group on Property, Citizenship, and Social Entrepreneurism (PCSE) ( is sponsored by the Syracuse University College of Law and its Program in Law and Market Economy. The Program in Law and Market Economy is an interdisciplinary program focusing on the relationship among law, markets, and culture. Within this context the Working Group on PCSE brings together experts from a variety of institutions to discuss and explore issues related to property law, governance, and globalization. The Group will provide an ongoing forum for the publication of important new works.

Sponsored by Syracuse University, College of Law

"Slicing Spontaneity" Free Download
Iowa Law Review, Forthcoming
University of Chicago Coase-Sandor Institute for Law & Economics Research Paper No. 717
U of Chicago, Public Law Working Paper No. 509

LEE ANNE FENNELL, University of Chicago Law School

In this symposium essay, I consider the role of resource segmentation — the natural or artificial division of resources into appropriable or contributable units — in eliciting and maintaining coordination in the absence of formal private property rights or top-down coercion. I argue that the appropriate segmentation of resources can reduce informal governance burdens and, by constructing choice sets, promote convergence between privately optimal and socially optimal choices. The effects on governance follow from the fact that segmentation, whether given by nature (fish, trees, pieces of fruit) or artificially constructed (boatloads, bushels, pie slices) provides a measuring rod for assessing draws on, or contributions to, common pools. In addition, when contributions to or withdrawals from a common pool take a chunky, discontinuous form, the private and social optimum may more readily converge on a single choice, despite the presence of externalities. This lumpiness in choices influences when externalities will be relevant to efficiency and can amplify the significance of policies and norms that edge decisions in socially desirable directions. Resource segmentation should, therefore, receive independent attention as a design element important to sustaining spontaneous order.

"Shared Spatial Regulating in Sharing-Economy Districts" Free Download
Arizona Summit Law School Research Paper No. 2015-A-1

MICHAEL N. WIDENER, Arizona Summit Law School, Bonnett, Fairbourn, Friedman & Balint PC

Technology, coupled with present economic conditions and the interest of younger Americans in sustainability, is enabling a climate favorable to collaborative consumption. More individuals will be engaged over time in this “sharing economy? because underemployment of the middle class, and a majority of all non- or under-skilled workers, is a chronic condition eluding public sector solution. This new resources “lending? and social networking culture assures ongoing introductions of sharing producers and consumers to each other and into residential neighborhoods. The results will include increased traffic trips, overtaxed curbside parking spaces, additional ambient noise and stress upon electric and other utility grids tapped by sharing enterprises. Since these neighborhood burdens are not addressed in the form of sales taxes or license fees returned directly to host enclaves, many of these burdens are borne largely by dwellers. Local persons not participating in the sharing economy expect their daily routines to continue without interference from unfamiliar persons, noises and odors, or the disadvantages of increased traffic and reduced curbside parking.

Communities now are challenged to regulate sharing uses in this new economic order while accommodating opportunities for such enterprises to generate revenue and taxes that will rebuild a struggling middle class. In one regard, accommodation invites struggles between established neighborhood dwellers and later – arriving sharing producers working outside zoning regulations. Yet outright prohibiting of entrepreneurial models in residential zoning districts counters local governments’ efforts to remake the economic and social landscape of urban communities, especially those precariously mired in joblessness, crime and other evidence of disorder. Many sharing economy voices argue that today’s good land use decisions mandate subordinating neighborhood inconvenience to this new climate’s benefit to the larger community – the “greater good.? This is the first paper in American academic legal literature addressing how communities can respond to this challenge, productively modernizing governmental spatial regulatory prerogatives while incorporating “big data? along with crucial citizen inputs at this land use crossroads.

"Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation & Resettlement Amendment Ordinance No. 9 of 2014 - A Critical Review." Free Download

BINOD MISHRA, Odisha Administrative Service (OAS)

Government of India came up with Gazette Notification on 31st December 2014 amending the large awaited “Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation & Resettlement Act? through an ordinance on the ground that Parliament is not in session and the President is satisfied with circumstances existed, which referred it necessary for him to take immediate action.

It was strongly objected by Congress and its allies. But the fact is that the stalemate that has occurred due to induction of new Act w.e.f 1st January 2014 will now start moving with positive direction. The ordinance will create confidence in the minds of the investors as the consent clauses has been diluted and investment atmosphere crated which will facilitate for industrial growth of the country. Even if the new NDA government in India has made a slogan of “Make in India? and has made several round of meeting with investors to attract them for investment in India the Land Acquisition Act 2013 was one of the biggest bottlenecks for the investors to think investing in large scale in India. Other than this the 2nd tailbacks is mining lease. Uncertainty in mining lease and uncertainty in land acquisition will certainly create doubt in the mind of investors, who will probably think thrice before investing in India. This article is intended to make lucid analysis of various provisions of Ordinance-9, 2014 with an intention to make it understandable to the common man and view of the investor who might be searching and surfing with a good intention to participate in make in India programme of the new government.

"Land Use Exactions, Anti-Evasion, and Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District" Free Download

MICHAEL B. KENT, Campbell University - Norman Adrian Wiggins School of Law

This article considers the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District, which extended the application of the Court’s exactions test (known as Nollan/Dollan). The majority of the Court relied heavily on the unconstitutional conditions doctrine, explaining that this doctrine formed the basis not only for the Nollan/Dolan framework but also for the extension of that framework to Koontz’s new factual setting. Led by Justice Kagan, four members of the Court dissented. Although the dissenting Justices seemingly agreed with several of the majority’s propositions, they vigorously opposed the manner in which the majority applied those propositions.

Although Koontz might be viewed as just another in a long line of cases that make up the messy jurisprudence of regulatory takings and unconstitutional conditions, the primary thesis of my article is that Koontz in fact provides a key to unlocking the Court’s exactions framework. Relying on my prior work with Brannon Denning, this article posits that both regulatory takings and the doctrine of unconstitutional conditions constitute anti-evasion doctrines by which the Court seeks to fill enforcement gaps left open by its prior constitutional decision rules. Inasmuch as land use exactions lie at the intersection of these two doctrinal areas, one would expect to find that anti-evasion notions play a large role in the Court’s exactions decisions. And indeed, both the majority and the dissent in Koontz invoked the anti-evasion characteristics of the Nollan/Dolan test in support of their analytical positions in that case.

Viewing Koontz (and its jurisprudential antecedents) through the prism of anti-evasion helps both to explain the majority’s decision in that case and to bring the differences between the majority and dissent into sharper focus. Additionally, the anti-evasion concept suggests some guidelines for how future exactions issues might be resolved — both at the micro level (dealing with future decision rules that will have to be developed in light of Koontz) and at the macro level (addressing larger questions about the Court’s takings jurisprudence and the place of the exaction cases within it).


About this eJournal

Sponsored by: Syracuse University, College of Law.

The eJournal of Property, Citizenship, and Social Entrepreneurism (PCSE) is an interdisciplinary journal dedicated to exploring the core principle that a just and accessible property law system is the basis for both good citizenship and successful socio-legal development. This eJournal distributes working and accepted paper abstracts primarily concerned with matters of property as they relate to the human process of exchange, the fostering of democratic institutions, the building of sustainable communities, the stewardship of the global environment and its natural resources, the promotion of citizenship, and the development of market institutions that respond to and promote a worthy social mission.

Our goal is to explore the legal infrastructure of property in broad terms: encompassing concerns for real, personal, intangible, and intellectual property, as well as looking at property related financial markets (including real estate mortgages, personal property security interests, licensing, and securitization).

Making reference to specific examples of property (in its various forms) we will address the following types of issues.

1) To what extent do property rights reduce or eliminate the need for government regulation (particularly command and control-regulation) while enhancing the environment for open market approaches to economic development and globalization? This includes consideration of the way in which property rights actually reduce transaction costs, correct for problems raised by the tragedy of the commons, and organize society in a way that fosters efficient economic development.

2) What is the role of privatization of State controlled property in the transformation process? How should privatization be approached and what distinctions need to be made between public, private, and state property? This includes discussion of necessary support infrastructure for successful privatization, and consideration of the need for government control over private companies dealing with public utilities, natural resources, and transportation systems.

3) To what extent do property rights enhance citizenship and advance democratic institutions? What role does private property play in creating political elites and the structures needed for controlled development and social transformation? How can property rights be used to make the rule of law more tangible, and to promote civic participation and inclusion? How are property rights related to citizenship issues respecting matters of race, gender, ethnicity, urban or rural location, and other factors?

4) To what extent do property rights promote entrepreneurism, including social entrepreneurism focusing on values other than mere maximization of economic wealth and efficiency? How can property rights fuel economic development while helping to reduce poverty?

5) In a world of global financial institutions such as the European Development Bank, The World Bank, and the IMF, with the power to influence indirect or quasi-law making, how are global property law systems to develop and become institutionalized? How do these institutions facilitate problems related to globalization and harmonization, and what are the socio-legal implications from such activity?


To submit your research to SSRN, sign in to the SSRN User HeadQuarters, click the My Papers link on left menu and then the Start New Submission button at top of page.

Distribution Services

If your organization is interested in increasing readership for its research by starting a Research Paper Series, or sponsoring a Subject Matter eJournal, please email:

Distributed by

Legal Scholarship Network (LSN), a division of Social Science Electronic Publishing (SSEP) and Social Science Research Network (SSRN)



Northwestern University - School of Law, Northwestern University - Kellogg School of Management, European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI)

Stanford Law School, Columbia Law School, European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI)

Please contact us at the above addresses with your comments, questions or suggestions for LSN-Sub.