Comparative Perspectives on Property Rights: The Right to Exclude

Jerry L. Anderson, Drake Law School

Abstract

A comparative perspective can help students understand that the bundle of rights we call "property" can be allocated in a variety of ways, in order to serve societal interests. This article examines two variations on the right to exclude, which the American Supreme Court has declared to be "essential" to property ownership. Laotian hunting rights allow public access to private lands, clearly violating the right to exclude but providing important public benefits. Likewise, the right to roam in Britain qualifies the right to exclude to allow public hiking on private land. These examples help students realize that property rights represent a balance between private and societal interests.