Search

The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) is mandated to lead in the sustainable management of the country's natural resources. The continuous migration in forest and forest lands (FFL) and succeeding forest cover loss resulted in tenure reforms, with bundles of rights devolved to communities. Bundle of rights refers to a specific set of privilege granted to an individual or group of people, to do certain things with land or property. It includes access, use, management, exclusion and alienation rights. This study documented the migration trend and mode of land acquisition, extent of individual/collective rights, impact of secure tenure on livelihood and forest conservation, and how property rights in Community-Based Forest Management (CBFM) areas improved. Migration happened in three important periods, with migrants wanting to secure better livelihood. The issuance of tenure instruments legitimized claims, allowed tenure holders to use, manage, and exclude others from accessing and using resources. While the 'bundle of rights' is within the terms and conditions of the DENR, the tenure reform is still a better option than any other programs implemented in the past. Lessons learned may be used as basis in further improving the provisions of the CBFM program in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article invokes a concept of 'community-based individual property rights' as individual property rights recognized in a communal property system by virtue of community membership. It employs mixed methods, including a comparative analysis that reviews and develops the 'bundle of rights' perspective in the Chinese context and an analysis of a large dataset of judgments recently made publicly accessible. It sets out an analytical framework which appears more advantageous in helping researchers arrive at a better explanation of the current rights structure in rural China. The article concludes that the concept of 'community-based individual property rights' has greater analytical and explanatory force than existing concepts based on continental civil law. The conclusion also challenges the common assumption that common law property theories never work in non-common law jurisdictions and that the Chinese property system is irrelevant to developing common law property theories. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This is a work in progress, dealing with property rights regarding the human body. This paper tackles conceptions of property, and approaches the possibility of considering the human body or its parts as such. If this is indeed the case, as is suggested by some decisions of the jurisprudence of a number of different countries, we have to ask about the rights of individuals whose bodies were the origin of these properties. What exact entitlements should these people have, and what are the possible consequences of these entitlements becoming legally recognized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]