Ecological land interdependence shifted legal theory toward communal property rights

Evidence

What followed from that insight? Though Sax and Large drew different conclusions, both argued that “the ecological facts of life” rendered traditional conceptions of property untenable. Both also argued that the interconnectedness of seemingly discrete tracts of land strengthened the claim of “public rights” in private property. As Large concluded, the law needed to reflect “a more communal view of land.” Otherwise, “the preservation of ecologically vital yet economically valueless systems” would be impossible, since the idea of land as a commodity failed to recognize the importance of land as a source of life. — Adam Rome, The Bulldozer in the Countryside, 948

Categorization

• QUESTION: Large’s phrase ‘economically valueless yet ecologically vital’ systems — how well has law solved protecting such systems since? Still unresolved tension.
• XREF: connects to: Wisconsin’s high court grounded wetland regulation in ecological interdependence — Adam Rome, The Bulldozer in the Countryside:…, 949; Abuse of land stems from regarding it as owned commodity rather than community — Aldo Leopold, A Sand County Almanac: With Other…, 10; Ecological reasoning led courts to deny landowners absolute rights over land — Richard J. Lazarus, The Making of Environmental Law, 319 (+5 more)

Broader Connections

• Ecological awareness made traditional property boundaries legally untenable #corroborates (0.90) — Adam Rome, The Bulldozer in the Countryside, 946
• Land-use reformers redefined private land as a public resource warranting protection #expands (0.82) — Adam Rome, The Bulldozer in the Countryside, 964
• Entrenched property-ownership ideals defeated the effort to treat land as a social resource #contradicts (0.80) — Adam Rome, The Bulldozer in the Countryside, 1077
• Land-rights law can be redirected to steward rather than possess the land #expands (0.78) — Robin Wall Kimmerer, Braiding Sweetgrass, 1169