Table 1
Property rights correlates.
| Alpha | Beta | |
|---|---|---|
| Static correlates | Right | Duty |
| Privilege | No-right | |
| Dynamic correlates | Power | Liability |
| Immunity | No power |
Table 2
Rules of entitlement between pastoralists (Alpha) and outsiders (Beta) before the grazing ban in China.
| Pastoralists (Alpha) | Outsiders (Beta) | |
|---|---|---|
| Static correlates | ||
| In terms of benefit streams | Alpha is protected. | Beta has a duty to respect Alpha’s rights and cannot interfere in the use of grassland by Alpha |
| Alpha has right to access, withdraw, manage grassland and possess property | ||
| In terms of cost streams | Alpha is protected. | Beta has no right to prevent Alpha’s grazing activities and can only stop this if Beta buys Alpha off |
| Alpha is permitted by the state to manage grassland (including grazing livestock on it) as a privilege, without being liable for potential negative environmental impacts that might influence Beta |
[i] Source: Authors.
Table 3
Change in rules of entitlement between pastoralists (Alpha) and outsiders (Beta) after the grazing ban in China.
| Situation | Rules of entitlement | Legal relation |
|---|---|---|
| In terms of benefit stream | No change: Grassland long-term contracts as Rule I (Property Rule) | No change: Alpha (Right) vs Beta (Duty) |
| In terms of cost stream | In situation A | |
| No change: Voluntary contracts between government and households as Rule IV (Liability Rule) | No change: Alpha (Privilege) vs Beta (No right) | |
| Alpha is still free to use grassland and can only be stopped if Beta buys off Alpha (compensation). | ||
| In situation B | ||
| Change: Grazing ban as Rule V (Inalienability Rule) | Change: Alpha (No right) vs Beta (Privilege) | |
| Alpha has no right to graze livestock on grassland, although officially Alpha keeps the right to use it. | ||
| Beta has the privilege of not being disturbed by the potential negative environmental impacts caused by Alpha’s livestock grazing activities. |
[i] Source: Authors.
Table 4
Legal correlates between livestock owners and community herders under old working rules in Kyrgyzstan.
| Herder (Alpha) | Livestock owner (Beta) | |
|---|---|---|
| Static correlates | Herder has right to use accessible pastures without moving to remote summer pastures and rotating them | Livestock owner has duty to pay for herding services but cannot interfere in selection of pastures |
| Herder has privilege to use accessible pastures without migration and rotation | No rights against herder’s privilege | |
| Dynamic correlates | Herder has power to force livestock owner to cooperate on conditions which bring the former a higher distributional advantage – use of accessible pastures | Livestock owner has no power to change the status quo |
| Herder enjoys immunity | Livestock owner has no power to force livestock owner to move to remote summer pastures, bringing the latter greater distributional advantage |
[i] Source: Authors.
Table 5
Property and liability rules that have been changed between the old and new institutions for livestock herding in Kyrgyzstan.
| Under old formal institutions | Under new formal institutions | |
|---|---|---|
| Property rules | Leasing contracts up to 10 years via auction | Annual agreements between PCs and herders. |
| Rule I: | Livestock owners may not interfere in selection of pastures and decisions regarding seasonal migration. Herders who sign formal contacts are protected by the property rule. | Change in property rule allows livestock owners to interfere in choice of pastures and push herders to migrate to remote, but more productive, pastures. |
| Beta (Livestock owner) may not interfere without Alpha’s consent. Alpha (Herder) is protected by a property rule | ||
| Liability rules | The State Institute for Land Use was responsible for monitoring at national level and providing services to municipalities on a paid basis. The rule was rarely implemented and not monitored; pasture-use and management plans were neither developed nor enforced. | PC develops pasture-use and management plans based on monitoring of pasture use from previous years. PCs are responsible for their enforcement. |
| Rule II: | Livestock owners may interfere with herders, but must compensate them. Herders are protected by a liability rule. | Change in liability rule makes herders liable for not migrating to spring, summer and autumn pastures. |
| Beta (Livestock owner) may interfere with Alpha (Herder) but must compensate Alpha. Alpha is protected by a liability rule | ||
| Livestock owners interfere in choice of pastures and push herders to migrate to remote, but more productive, pastures (spring, summer and autumn pastures) without compensation. |
[i] Source: Authors.