Titles for me but not for thee: transitional gains trap of property rights extension in Colombia

Abstract

I apply Tullock’s transitional gains trap to the formalization of property titles in Latin America to understand public choice problems in mending institutions. In an area where land is owned by formal and informal institutions, policies to extend property rights will not be supported by voters holding legal title because it will devalue their property. To test this I use data from Colombia where a peace deal to end a 50-year conflict with Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia rebels was reached in 2016 and put to a public referendum. The deal included formalization of property titles across the nation as well as an end to the conflict. Using municipal-level data on voting and property ownership and controlling for conflict history, I find potential losses to formal property holders pushed median voter preferences toward dissension. A 1% increase in legally titled land increases dissenting vote share by 3% points. These results are relevant to institutional reforms anywhere with corrupted property rights.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1

Fitted lines show semi-parametric relationship between the independent variable and no-vote share

Notes

  1. 1.

    This is the case in Colombia where there is a mixture of formal land registration and informal property proprietorship.

  2. 2.

    This requires the reasonable assumption that officials and their constituents are more likely to be formal property holders.

  3. 3.

    Assuming that titling informal land will have no effect on demand for formal land.

  4. 4.

    Ultimately, several terms were renegotiated and the final peace accord was pushed through the Colombian Parliament and did not see a referendum ballot.

  5. 5.

    In Colombia, municipalities are similar to US counties.

  6. 6.

    In particular, many of these zones are designed to represent internally displaced persons, a community in which FARC is very unpopular.

  7. 7.

    Colombia has an intriguing history of minimal punishment for rebellion. The sentence for armed rebellion was 3–6 years in the penal code for much of the twentieth century (Robinson 2016).

  8. 8.

    The slogan for Uribe’s no-vote campaign was “we want peace, but not this peace” stating demands for stiffer punishment of FARC rebels. However, it is important to note that as president, Uribe granted amnesty to 6000 right-wing paramilitaries guilty of many atrocities during the course of the Colombian conflict.

  9. 9.

    See Leech (2011) and Richani (2013) for further discussion of FARC’s growth in the drug trade.

  10. 10.

    This was a frequent reason given by no voters for their lack of support.

  11. 11.

    See Tullock (1975) for further discussion.

  12. 12.

    One may be concerned with co-linearity between informal land estimates and legal ownership. Omitting informal ownership does not affect the legal title variables. State land is not included.

  13. 13.

    This is only a problem if there is something unique about land ownership status that determines political preferences beyond the included demographic controls, particularly income, poverty rate, population, and rural population percentage.

  14. 14.

    Presumably a voter would cast a ballot for Santos in 2014 if they supported the continuation of the peace negotiations, or another candidate if they did not.

  15. 15.

    Uribe continued and intensified the aforementioned Plan Colombia as president.

References

  1. Acemoglu, D. (2006). A simple model of inefficient institutions. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 108(4), 515–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Acemoglu, D., & Johnson, S. (2005). Unbundling institutions. Journal of Political Economy, 113(5), 949–995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Acevedo, K., & Bornacelly, I. (2016). Panel municipal del CEDE. Centro de Estudios sobre Desarrollo Económico.

  4. Albertus, M., & Kaplan, O. (2013). Land reform as a counterinsurgency policy. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 57(2), 198–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Alpert, M. (2016). Politics roils Colombia’s tentative peace deal with the FARC. https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/07/18/politics-roils-colombias-tentative-peace-deal-with-the-farc-eln-santos-uribe/.

  6. Alston, L. J., Libecap, G. D., & Mueller, B. (1999). A model of rural conflict: Violence and land reform policy in Brazil. Environment and Development Economics, 4(2), 135–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Alston, L. J., Libecap, G. D., & Mueller, B. (2000). Land reform policies, the sources of violent conflict, and implications for deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 39(2), 162–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Benson, B. L. (1988). Legal evolution in primitive societies. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 144, 772–788.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Benson, B. L., & Siddiqui, Z. R. (2014). Pashtunwali-law for the lawless, defense for the stateless. International Review of Law and Economics, 37, 108–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Besley, T. (1995). Property rights and investment incentives: Theory and evidence from Ghana. Journal of Political Economy, 103(5), 903–937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Brasselle, A.-S., Gaspart, F., & Platteau, J.-P. (2002). Land tenure security and investment incentives: Puzzling evidence from Burkina Faso. Journal of Development Economics, 67(2), 373–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Brittain, J. J. (2010). Revolutionary social change in Colombia: The origin and direction of the FARC-EP. London: Pluto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Brunner, E., Sonstelie, J., & Thayer, M. (2001). Capitalization and the voucher: An analysis of precinct returns from California’s Proposition 174. Journal of Urban Economics, 50(3), 517–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Chen, C. (2017). Untitled land, occupational choice, and agricultural productivity. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 9(4), 91–121.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Colombian State Department. (2016). Election results.

  16. De Janvry, A., Emerick, K., Gonzalez-Navarro, M., & Sadoulet, E. (2015). Delinking land rights from land use: Certification and migration in Mexico. The American Economic Review, 105(10), 3125–3149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. De Soto, H. (1989). The other path: The economic answer to terrorism. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  18. De Soto, H. (2000). The mystery of capital: Why capitalism triumphs in the West and fails everywhere else. New York: Basic Civitas Books.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Dehring, C. A., Depken, C. A., & Ward, M. R. (2008). A direct test of the homevoter hypothesis. Journal of Urban Economics, 64(1), 155–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Di Tella, R., Galiant, S., & Schargrodsky, E. (2007). The formation of beliefs: Evidence from the allocation of land titles to squatters. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122(1), 209–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Fajardo, D. (2002). La tierra y el poder político; la reforma agraria y la reforma rural en Colombia. Revista Reforma Agraria Colonización y Cooperativas, 1, 4–20.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Field, E. (2007). Entitled to work: Urban property rights and labor supply in Peru. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122(4), 1561–1602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Fischel, W. A. (2001). The homevoter hypothesis: How home values influence local government taxation, school finance, and land-use policies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Galiani, S., & Schargrodsky, E. (2010). Property rights for the poor: Effects of land titling. Journal of Public Economics, 94(9), 700–729.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Glaeser, E., Scheinkman, J., & Shleifer, A. (2003). The injustice of inequality. Journal of Monetary Economics, 50(1), 199–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Goldstein, M., & Udry, C. (2008). The profits of power: Land rights and agricultural investment in Ghana. Journal of Political Economy, 116(6), 981–1022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Grusczynski, D. M., & Jaramillo, C. F. (2002). Integrating land issues into the broader development agenda. Bogotá: Case Study.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Ibanez, A. M. (2009). Forced displacement in Colombia: Magnitude and causes. The Economics of Peace and Security Journal, 4(1), 48–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Janvry, A. D., Gonzalez-Navarro, M., & Sadoulet, E. (2014). Are land reforms granting complete property rights politically risky? Electoral outcomes of Mexico’s certification program. Journal of Development Economics, 110, 216–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kerekes, C. B., & Williamson, C. R. (2010). Propertyless in Peru, even with a government land title. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 69(3), 1011–1033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Leech, G. M. (2011). The FARC: The longest insurgency. Rebels: Fernwood.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Leeson, P. T. (2007). Trading with bandits. The Journal of Law and Economics, 50(2), 303–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Leeson, P. T. (2009). The laws of lawlessness. The Journal of Legal Studies, 38(2), 471–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Leeson, P. T. (2012). God Damn: The law and economics of monastic malediction. The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 30(1), 193–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Leeson, P. T. (2013). Gypsy law. Public Choice, 155(3–4), 273–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Leeson, P. T., & Harris, C. (2018). Wealth-destroying private property rights. World Development, 107, 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Levy-Carciente, S. (2017). International property rights index. Property Rights Alliance.

  38. Murtazashvili, I., & Murtazashvili, J. (2015). Anarchy, self-governance, and legal titling. Public Choice, 162(3), 287–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Olson, M. (2008). The rise and decline of nations: Economic growth, stagflation, and social rigidities. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Otis, J. (2014). The FARC and Colombia’s illegal drug trade. Woodrow Wilson Center: Encyclopedia of U.S.-Latin American Relations.

  41. Palacios, P. (2012). Forced displacement: Legal versus illegal crops. Defence and Peace Economics, 23(2), 133–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Registro Único de Víctimas. (2016). Colombian register of victims report.

  43. Richani, N. (2013). Systems of violence: The political economy of war and peace in Colombia. New York: Suny Press.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Robinson, J. A. (2016). La miseria en Colombia. Revista Desarrollo y Sociedad, 76, 9–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Santos Calderón, J. M., & Jiménez, T. (2016). Acuerdo Final Para la Terminación del Conflicti y la Construcción de una Paz Estable y Duradera. Oficina del Alto Comisionado para la Paz.

  46. Skaperdas, S. (1992). Cooperation, conflict, and power in the absence of property rights. The American Economic Review, 82(4), 720–739.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Sonin, K. (2003). Why the rich may favor poor protection of property rights. Journal of Comparative Economics, 31(4), 715–731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Stringham, E. (2015). Private governance: Creating order in economic and social life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Tullock, G. (1975). The transitional gains trap. The Bell Journal of Economics, 6, 671–678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Williamson, C. R., & Mathers, R. L. (2011). Economic freedom, culture, and growth. Public Choice, 148(3), 313–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. World Values Survey Association. (2010–2014). World value survey wave 6. World Value Survey.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Josh Hall, Bryan McCannon, Lynne Kiesling, Bonnie Wilson, Michael Munger, two anonymous referees, and many helpful insights from commenters at Public Choice Society, Southern Economic Association, and American Institute of Economic Research meetings and the Universidad de Los Andes CEDE for data assistance.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Perry Ferrell.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 56, and 7.

Table 5 Summary Statistics for FARC Violence, annual averages (N=914)
Table 6 Voting models controlling for FARC violence
Table 7 Demographic and Violence Controls for Voting controlling for overall violence (Table 3)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ferrell, P. Titles for me but not for thee: transitional gains trap of property rights extension in Colombia. Public Choice 178, 95–114 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-018-0617-2

Download citation

Keywords

  • Referendum
  • Property rights
  • Violence
  • Transitional gains trap

JEL Classification

  • D72
  • D74