Market and property rights: how to reconcile environmental management, economic growth and new governance? The European Landowners’ Organization (ELO), the International Centre of Environmental Issues (ICREI) and the SAFAgriculteurs de France came together on the 17th of April 2013 in the Museum for Hunting and Nature in Paris, to launch a new forum entitled “Market and property right : how to conceal environmental management, economic growth and new governance ? “. For the past 20 years, ELO, ICREI and SAF have joined forces to combine both economic performance and environmental protection. All three organizations separately discovered that property rights and markets could play a complementary role, and even represent an alternative to the necessary legislation that protects and manages natural resources at the national and international level. Without ideological bias, the forum aims to discuss the proposals and achievements of a school of thought based on the use of property rights and markets; the tools identified by classic liberal economy to manage scarcity. It was also meant to give back to public authorities their true role of guidance and to limit regulations to better protect the environment, economic prosperity and to safeguard the freedom of imagination and technological advances. During its opening speech, Alain MADELIN, former Minister of Economy explained that economy was reconciling with ecology, as much as economy has been reconciled with social demands. Instead of an ecology based on exclusion of anything other than environmental protection, the goal of ICREI was willing to find the basis for a positive ecology capable of including both ecology and economy. He pointed out that both words had the same etymology, the right management of the house, the worry of saving scarce resources given by human and nature. “The economy is nothing other than the possibility of clarifying choice through economic calculation based on a price that results through exchange”. But for such exchanges to function, one has to have defined property to give and receive. The freedom of exchange is inseparable from a framework of law and responsibility. Thus, the development of property rights leads to civil and civic responsibility. Mr. MADELIN insisted that the techniques of law, exchange and economic calculation are not universally constant, and which makes collective management difficult. Mr. MADELIN concluded in remembering that freedom and responsibility as well as economic evaluation are essential for a inclusive ecology. The most difficult perspective was to reconcile politics and property right. Panel 1: Property right and environmental protection Mr. Raphaël ALOMAR, Senior advisor at SOLVING EFESO was the first speaker introducing the panel on property right and environmental protection. He gave a strong statement on the fact that the way the question of property right in the past 15 years was addressed lost entirely its meaning and rational thinking. The food security crisis of 2008 and the development of land purchases over the period 20082012 helped to overcome the existing barriers between specialists and development experts and helped create a new political sphere. Awareness of the importance of property rights has taken shape and the international organizations done well to increase its visibility. Mr. ALOMAR also raised the question of “land grabbing”, and sale and rent of land. He made a study based on all publications that dealt with transnational buying of land over the period 20072011, and he identified 650 deals of more than 1000ha. He showed surprising numbers such as the fact that of the 13 billion hectares on earth, 1/3rd represents farmland, less than 1/3rd is covered by forestry, and a little less uncultivated soil. Irrigated land stands at over 300 million ha, a figure that is still growing, which raises the issue of water scarcity. Therefore 450 million hectares of “available” land remain. Mr. ALOMAR estimated sale and renting of land represented 82 million hectares between 2007 and 2011, with a trading average of 15 million hectares per year. Of these 82 million, 50 million were acquired in Africa, with a sharp increase in Eastern Europe, the former Soviet Union, but also in Oceania and Australia. Mr. ALOMAR said that we are witnessing an explosion of land acquisition including Africa, where land rights are “nonexistent” but with a strong presence of customary rights and a strong agricultural potential. All continents are affected by land acquisition, though less so in the US, but this movement has begun long ago and the phenomenon of land acquisition as a buffer against food insecurity by governments is less visible. Buyers are mainly China and OECD countries in which investment funds exist. 85% of the actors are private operators. These are normally longterm acquisitions. However, these figures describe trends and orders of magnitude but not statistical tools. Mr. ALOMAR concluded with the question of food security, which he believes is key. The G20 has taken up the theme of food crisis and the massive land purchases under conditions that violate a number of rights, including those of the property. To finish, he noted that the international community was evolving from the concept of property right to the concept of legitimate or nonlegitimate land right. In a second presentation made by Mr. PEIGNOT, Lawyer at the State Council and VicePresident of the SAF, the question was addressed on how to preserve and maintain our environmental resources for the future generations. How could they be better managed through private ownership and the principle of responsibility it entails, rather than regulations that move property and responsibility to the public authorities and collective resources? Does the legislative regime that is supposed to protect the property right allow for both terms of private ownership and protection of (scarce) environmental resources? This question in part defines how property rights can be abrogated through environmental law. Open spaces, resources and natural environments are part of the common national heritage. Mr. PEIGNOT explained that the conditions of enjoyment of property are governed by public authorities, mentioning among other examples the case of the implementation of the Natura 2000 network. Furthermore, he considered how private property could support the environmental public interest; owners could become an actor for environmental protection. He mentioned the role of farmers when it comes to make an effort to preserve the environment from its potential detriment by agriculture activities. Mr. PEIGNOT summarized his presentation in two points: 1. Rural private property is needed as an economic factor, because the accompanying responsibilities. It stands out as the correct form of environmental policy, because this responsibility takes the long term into account. 2. The management of rural property has an obvious ecological context: it is, without a doubt, the ideal method for observing and maintaining the environment. Professor Etienne LEROY from the University PanthéonSorbonne finalized the panel discussions with a simplified synthesis of the development from medieval customs and rights of land ownership to the invention of a single system of property rights; this was created in order to regulate a generalized and capitalist market with universal values. He first mentioned the creation and writing of customs, and the creation of common law based on these customs. He then explained the need to enrich the concept of property to avoid legal rules being imposed on its management. Panel 2 : Territorial governance and environmental protection Continuing some of the thoughts of the first panel, the 2nd panel highlighted the concept of territorial governance from the point of view of international public institutions. To this end, Enrique GARCILAZO Head of Unit at the Rural and Regional Development Unit of the OECD presented a new project to understand the dynamics of rural and urban areas in order to improve land management. This newly started holistic project aims to understand the different criteria that influence the value of the territory between the different world regions. This project comes in the form of a questionnaire available for all member states of the OECD. The questionnaire collects the different methodologies applied by the Member states for identifying access and land use. The goal is to understand on which level administrative policies focus, and which ministries are in charge of their management. The OECD will publish a report at the end of this study to highlight policy recommendations to Member States. Peter NOWICKI, a researcher at the Institute of Agricultural Economics in Wageningen (NL) introduced a management strategy which focuses on the need to manage biodiversity towards the challenge of urbanization. Mr. NOWICKI clearly put into perspective the challenges for the world of tomorrow with the rapid urbanization of natural areas, particularly the challenge of maintaining biodiversity as a social issue. Several key questions were raised: how to maintain natural habitats, especially in the areas where pressure is caused by urbanization? But Mr. NOWICKI also issued the need of controlling urbanization and its direct impact on land value. Finally, how to set priorities for a urban friendly environment? Mr. NOWICKI suggests a better land management, using administrative tools as part of management, but also by creating discussions with the society at large including the owners. During a provocative speech, the second panel finished with Vincent RENARD, Research Director at CNRS and IDDR Counselor, who posed the following question: “how did the overuse of legal tools lead to inefficiency in the implementation of environmental law?” Based on the history of land prices since the 19th Century in France, Vincent RENARD highlighted the great difference of common interpretations of “land as property”. He compared the various interpretations in several European countries, and raised two main understandings: the right of possessing a property as a common good: the property right as a right and duty for each citizen. Mentioning Karl MARX, Friedrich ENGELS and Leon WALRAS, Mr. RENARD first explained the difficulty of defining land value, as well as the need to occasionally nationalize land in order to avoid massive price inflation. And in quoting the American philosopher Henry GEORGE, Mr. RENARD put question of “captation de la rente” – rentier capitalism and the overarching question of who determines the value of land at the heart of problems of the 21st Century. Addressing the problem of property value, he claimed that the value of land is determined by the value of the rights attached to it. This valuation is different between countries. In France, law L160 allows for the prohibition of actual land use by the owner in the name of common environmental protection, without including any compensation. Although it complicates the legal process, as it implies some legal exceptions, the aim of such laws is meant to help implement environmental measures. Furthermore, Mr. RENARD argues that the creation of transferable markets such as those for construction permits does not work. He illustrated his argument with the example of the EU’s decision not to freeze the quotas related to CO2 emissions. As a consequence, of this refusal, the price of CO2 per ton is very low. With his own words but with the idea of Adam Smith, he concluded: “the invisible hand only does its work properly if the strong arm of the State is leading its action”. The rest of the conference summary will appear in the next CountrySide. Some interventions are available on the ELO website/events/ICREI/ or contact [email protected] ��