Property as a Common Use

  • Shelly Hiller Marguerat
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Environmental Policy and Regulation book series (PSEPR)


This chapter shows a historical review on property and its sharing communal use from the times of ancient Rome, Middle Ages until today. It will give the historical context of the human rights declarations while demonstrating that property limits have always existed in past legislation. It will further demonstrate the concept of the commons as a social experience at the end of the nineteenth century and at the beginning of the twentieth century with its own rules and theoretical formalization. This, while giving details on the tragedy of the commons and on Aristotle’s arguments for private property rights against Plato’s ideas favouring the system of common property. It will also demonstrate other possible complexities on with the definition of the commons.


  1. Alznauer, Mark. Hegel’s Theory of Responsibility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015.Google Scholar
  2. Aristotle. Aristotle. Politics. Book I and II. Edited and translated by T. J. Saunders. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995.Google Scholar
  3. Aristotle. The Politics and the Constitution of Athens. Translated by S. Everson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  4. Arnaud, André-Jean. Essai d’analyse structurale du Code civil français. Paris (1973): 181.Google Scholar
  5. Bayne, David C. “The Natural Law for Lawyers—A Primer.” De Paul Law Review 5, no. 2 (1956): 159–208.Google Scholar
  6. Bentham, Jeremy. Anarchical Fallacies, Being an Examination of the Declarations of Rights Issued During the French Revolution. The Works of Jeremy Bentham, Vol. 2 of 11. Edinburgh: William Tait, 1843.
  7. Bernard, Nicolas. “Les Limites de la Propriété par les droit de l’homme.” In La propriété et ses limites / Das Eigentum und seine Grenzen. Congres de l’Association Suisse de Philosophie du Droit et de Philosophie Sociale, 26 septembre 2015. Edited by B. Winiger, M. Mahlmann, S. Clément, and A. Kühler. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 2017.Google Scholar
  8. Bernard, Nicolas, and Werner van Mieghem ed. La crise du logement à Bruxelles. Problème d’accès et/ou de pénurie? Brussels: Bruylant, 2005.Google Scholar
  9. Claustre, Julie. Dans les geôles du roi. L’emprisonnement pour dette à Paris à la fin du Moyen Âge. Paris: Publications of Sorbonne, 2007.Google Scholar
  10. Comte. Système de politique positive ou Traité de sociologie instituant la religion de l’humanité. Vol. I. Paris: Anthropos, 1851.Google Scholar
  11. Daston, Lorraine, and Michael Stolleis Daston, eds. Natural Law and Laws of Nature in Early Modern Europe Jurisprudence, Theology, Moral and Natural Philosophy. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing, 2008.Google Scholar
  12. Dienstag, Joshua Foa. “Between History and Nature: Social Contract Theory in Locke and the Founders.” The Journal of Politics 58, no. 4 (1996): 985–1009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Duguit, Léon. Le droit social, le droit individuel et la transformation de l’État. Paris: Félix Alcan, 1911.Google Scholar
  14. Duguit, Léon. Les transformations générales du droit privé depuis le Code Napoléon. Paris: Félix Alcan, 1912.Google Scholar
  15. Duguit, Léon. Traité de droit constitutionnel. T. 1. Paris: E. de Boccard, 1927.Google Scholar
  16. Eicholz, Hans L. “Pufendorf, Grotius, and Locke: Who is the Real Father of America’s Founding Political Ideas?” Independent Review Journal 13, no. 3 (2009): 447–454.
  17. Ewald, Francois. L’État providence. Paris: Grasset, 1986.Google Scholar
  18. Fisher, Elizabeth, Bettina Lange, and Eloise Scotford. Environmental Law, Text, Cases, and Materials. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.Google Scholar
  19. Franklin, Benjamin. The Completed Autobiography. 2006 ed. Edited by Mark Skousen. London: Trubner and Co, 1868.Google Scholar
  20. Garnsey, Peter. Thinking About Property: From Antiquity to the Age of Revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007, 5, 220–221.Google Scholar
  21. Goyard-Fabre, Simone. Essai de critique phénoménologique du droit. Paris: Klincksieck, 1972.Google Scholar
  22. Grotius, Hugo. De jure belli ac pacis libri tres [The Law of War and Peace]. Translated by A. C. Campbell. London: Clarendon Press, 1625.
  23. Hardin, Garrett. “The Tragedy of the Commons.” Science 162, no. 3859 (1968): 1243–1248.Google Scholar
  24. Hiller Marguerat, Shelly. “John Locke’s Concept of Property and His Natural Law Limits Based on Reason.’ Doctorate thesis, Geneva University, Geneva, Archives online, 2014.
  25. Holder, Jane B., and Tatiana Flessas. “Emerging Commons.” Social and Legal Studies 17, no. 3 (2008): 299–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Höpfner, Ludwig Julius Friedrich. Naturrecht des einzelnen Menschen, der Gesellschaften und der Völker. 3rd ed. Gießen: Johann Christian Krieger, 1780.Google Scholar
  27. Hulliung, Mark. The Social Contract in America: From the Revolution to the Present Age. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2007.Google Scholar
  28. Ihering, Rudolf von. L’esprit du droit romain dans les diverses phases de son développement, Tome III. Bologne: Forni, 1880.Google Scholar
  29. Josserand, Louis. De l’esprit des droits et de leur relativité. Théorie dite de l’abus des droits. 2nd ed. Paris: Dalloz, 1939.Google Scholar
  30. Katz, Claudio J. “Thomas Jefferson’s Liberal Anticapitalism.” American Journal of Political Science 47, no. 1 (2003): 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Laerhoven, Frank van, and Elinor Ostrom. ‘Traditions and Trends in the Study of the Commons.’ International Journal of the Commons 1, no. 1 (2007): 3–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Laslett, Peter. ‘Introduction’ to John Locke, Two Treatises of Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963.Google Scholar
  33. Lecocoq, P. Manuel de droit des biens, t. 1: Biens et propriété. Bruxelles: Larcier, 2012, p. 92.Google Scholar
  34. Lewalle, Paul. “L’expropriation pour cause d’utilité publique.” In Contrainte, limitation et atteinte à la propriété, edited by Pascale Lecocq and Paul Lewalle. Brussels: Larcier, 2005.Google Scholar
  35. Locke, John. First Treatise. Edited by P. Laslett. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963 (1690).Google Scholar
  36. Locke, John, Two treatises of government. 1764 ed. London Printed MDCLXXXVIIII, 1690. or
  37. McGillivray, Donald, and Jane Holder. “Locality, Environment and Law: The Case of Town and Village Greens.” International Journal of Law in Context 3, no. 1 (2007): 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. McCartney, Kelly. “How to Share Land.” 27 June 2011.
  39. Mill, J. S. “Remarks on Bentham’s Philosophy. Essays on Ethics, Religion and Society.” In The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill. Vol. 10. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1833.
  40. Ostrom, Elinor. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.Google Scholar
  41. Pierson, Christopher. Just Property, A History in the Latin West Volume One: Wealth, Virtue, and the Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.Google Scholar
  42. Plato (380 BC). “The Republic.” In Plato: The Collected Dialogues, edited by Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1961.Google Scholar
  43. Post, David M. “Jeffersonian Revisions of Locke.” Journal of the History of Ideas, University of Pennsylvania Press 47, no. 1 (1986): 147–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Powell, Jim. “John Locke: Natural Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property.’ The Freeman 46, no. 8 (1996): 45–52.
  45. Pufendorf, Samuel. The Law of Nature and of Nations. 5th ed. Edited by J. Barbeyrac. Translated by B. Kennett. London, 1749.Google Scholar
  46. Ricoeur, Paul. “Langage politique et rhétorique.” In Lectures 1. Autour du politique. Paris: Seuil, 1991.Google Scholar
  47. Rivero, Jean. Les libertés publiques. Paris: PUF, 1973.Google Scholar
  48. Rodgers, Christopher. “Reversing the ‘Tragedy’ of the Commons? Sustainable Management and the Common Act 2006.” Modern Law Review 73, no. 3 (2010): 461–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Rousseau, Jean Jacques. What is the Origin of Inequality Among Men, and It Is Authorized by Natural Law. Translated by G. D. H. Cole. 1754.
  50. Sandefur, Tim. Cornerstone of Liberty: Property Rights in 21st Century America. 2nd improved ed. Edited by Christine Sandefur. Washington, DC: Cato Institute, 2016.Google Scholar
  51. Stanford Law Review, ‘Natural Law for Today’s Lawyer.’ Stanford Law Review 9, no. 3: 455–514, 1957 (Cited as S.L.R. (1957), followed by page number).Google Scholar
  52. Vanbrabant, Bernard. “À propos de l’image des biens.” In Zakenrecht/Droit des biens, edited by Pascale Lecocq et al. Brussels: La Charte, 2005.Google Scholar
  53. Vattel, Emeric. Le loisir philosophique ou pièces diverses de philosophie, de morale et d’amusement. Geneva: G. C. Walther Press, 1747.Google Scholar

Legal References

  1. Case of Marckx v Belgium (1979), 6833/74, (1979) 2 EHRR 330, [1979] ECHR 2.Google Scholar
  2. Case of Tyrer v The United Kingdom (1978), 5856/72, (1978) 2 EHRR 1, [1978] ECHR 2, Strasbourg.Google Scholar
  3. Case of Mellacher And Others v Austria (ECtHR) (1989), ECHR 10522/83, [1993] ECR I-637, 11011/84, (1989) 12 EHRR 391, [1989] ECHR 25, 11070/84, Judgment 19 December 1989, Series A no. 169.Google Scholar
  4. Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. 1999. C.A. Report No. 44/99. 20 April 1999.Google Scholar
  5. Oxfordshire County Council v Oxford City Council (2006), UKHL 15.Google Scholar
  6. United States Declaration of Independence. 4 July 1776, adopted by the Second Continental Congress.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shelly Hiller Marguerat
    • 1
  1. 1.Forel (Lavaux)Switzerland

Personalised recommendations