Search

The United States Constitution implicitly grants governmental entities the power to exercise eminent domain. But importantly, the Constitution also limits this power. One such limitation, and the focus of this Paper, is the implicit requirement that governments can only take what they need. Perhaps surprisingly, this imbedded constitutional principle is commonly violated. Government entities or their proxies regularly condemn more private property rights than are necessary for the completion of a given public project-hoarding those extra rights for future use, and sometimes, never using them at all. This acquisition strategy has serious consequences that have largely gone unexplored. And even more disturbingly, current takings jurisprudence prevents the judiciary from reviewing the vast majority of challenges to this practice. This Article builds on prior scholarship that investigates this phenomenon in takings law to more deeply understand the causes and effects of this acquisition strategy, and it proceeds in three parts. First, the paper describes the current status of the law around hoardings and discusses how the status quo both allows and facilitates this practice. Second, it provides examples of hoardings and discusses how hoardings jeopardize the animating principles of the Fifth Amendment Takings Clause. And third, it identifies tentative solutions to remedy the effects of hoardings. Ultimately, the Paper concludes that hoardings law needs to be revisited and changed. If not, the poor, the old, the less-educated, renters, and those who identify as non-white will continue to disproportionately shoulder the burden of hoardings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Article discusses the federal promise of water, the judicial origins of the federal trust responsibility, and the impact of the Arizona v. Navajo Nation decision on tribal water rights. Most importantly, this Article proposes legal mechanisms for tribes and tribal advocates to use to depict and advance tribal water rights. Ideas from property law and contract law provide opportunities for exploration and hope to tribes seeking certainty in a time of water shortage. Courts provide a forum for the vindication of the federal trust responsibility and the promise of water. Cases like Arizona v. Navajo Nation will continue to appear in courts as water disappears in the West. Courts and legislatures must address the history of tribal water rights, what those rights entail, and the nature of the federal promise made to the tribes if they are to tackle the challenges posed to tribes and other governments by climate change. Private law comparisons to the federal trust doctrine demystify this complex facet of federal Indian law and provide additional frameworks that jurists and advocates can use to understand the nature of tribal water rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Article analyzes the complex relationship between property and placemaking. Our most basic property and land tenure choices--including the design of the fee simple itself--shape people-place relations in powerful ways. By unearthing this important relationship between property and placemaking, this Article also reveals how pervasive--but unorganized--claims about place and place attachment already are across a range of modern land conflicts. Because property theory has not been fully transparent about many of these placemaking effects, our property choices often result in outcomes that are unequal, inconsistent, and opaque, prioritizing some existing place relations while ignoring or rejecting others. By building a more comprehensive placemaking account--with examples from Indigenous pipeline protestors to the absent and now-urban heirs of family farms and the emergence of new build-to-rent suburban housing divisions--this Article introduces a new taxonomy for evaluating the relative protection we afford to various place and place-attachment claims. This new framework separates the individual, collective, and ecological benefits of positive place relations from the risks of either overprotected place attachments (as in the case of hereditary land dynasties and exclusionary wealth) or land ownership without any attachment at all (as in the transformation of land and housing into asset classes for commodification and financialized capture). This clearer focus on placemaking also puts property law--and land tenure--at the center of core social, economic, and climate challenges, including growing institutional and foreign investment in U.S. farmland (as rural landscapes depopulate and agriculture becomes even more industrialized) and private equity's increasing appetite for single-family housing (as the United States' glaring wealth gap continues to expand). It also forces us to confront property's ongoing role in the dispossession of groups, cultures, and communities that are not (or are no longer) recognized as legal owners and our repeated failure to accommodate the access needs of individuals not born into hereditary land or wealth. Weaving together both rural and urban case studies, this Article ultimately offers novel entry points to some of property's perennial problems, including pervasive distributional inequities, while providing new language and a fresh lens for reimagining more just and sustainable property relations for our rapidly changing world. In a final series of property-based personal stories, the article centers new forms of access rights--including some public rights over private properties--as instrumental to reconnecting and collectively reimagining the kinds of places we want to make together. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines a key passage in the Palestinian Talmud (the Yerushalmi), on mGit 4.8, that presents a salient discussion about the halakhic meaning of gentile ownership of lands in the land of Israel. Two theoretical moves are evident within the amoraic effort to define it. The first is an innovative turn, achieved through a creative reading of Leviticus 25, that interprets Jubilee law as a model by which gentile possession of the Land is portrayed as a lamentable yet temporary form of partial ownership, similar to enslaved Jews in gentile hands, until returning to Jewish control.The second is a conceptual deliberation on select legal categories of ownership, most notably the concept of ususfructus , which may be seen in light of their centrality in Roman property law, especially given the key role that such designations hold in Roman construction of hierarchies and space. I suggest viewing the rabbinic use of these categories as a subversive strategy, either as an adaptation to the Roman definition of Italic land or in opposition to Roman perceptions of provincial lands, that is, in dialogue with the very Roman notions of space and control over subordinate populations that the rabbis themselves were confronting in the land of Israel.This sugya thus provides a unique view of how these Palestinian rabbis perceived the Roman presence in their land and their mindset as a conquered community and, in a broader sense, a valuable source for better understanding provincial perspectives under the Roman Empire. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on legal solutions for America's landlocked public lands, examining historical origins, distinctions between types of landlocked parcels, and the economic and social significance of unlocking these lands. Topics include the historical context of landlocked federal lands, the differentiation between "corner-locked" and "isolated" parcels, and the legislative and common law approaches to addressing the issue.

This Article is about one of the most used, least studied spaces in the country: the sidewalk. It is easy to think of sidewalks simply as spaces for pedestrians, and that is exactly how most scholars, policymakers, and laws treat them. But this view is fundamentally mistaken. In big cities and small towns, sidewalks are also where we gather, demonstrate, dine, exercise, rest, and shop. They are host to commerce and infrastructure. They are spaces of public access and sources of private obligation. And in all of these things, sidewalks are sites of underappreciated conflict. The centrality of sidewalks in our day-to-day lives is rooted in the fact that they are open to everyone and to all of these varied uses, every hour of every day, but it is that very vibrancy that risks being their undoing. As competing claims on sidewalks increase in both number and intensity due to cultural shifts, technological advances,climate change, and more, the sidewalks we take for granted may crumble—both literally and figuratively—under the weight of contradictory and self-defeating governing principles and uncoordinated governmental oversight. This Article is the first to systematically examine the incoherence of the property law of sidewalks and of the fragmented regulatory architecture that municipalities have built to manage them. Drawing on insights from both property and local government law, as well as first-person interviews with current and former municipal officials, it demonstrates how both legal regimes have in fact deepened sidewalk conflict and have confused and undermined accountability for the quality and accessibility of sidewalks. With these shortcomings in mind, this Article charts a new course and constructs from the ground up a new municipal agency to administer the sidewalks—one that would be better positioned to protect and foster the utility and vitality of these critical social, economic, and political spaces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reviews two books that examine the impact of neoliberalism on the women's movement in New Zealand. The first book, written by Margaret Wilson, a feminist activist and former government official, provides a personal account of the obstacles faced by feminists in formal institutions. The second book, by Julia Schuster, explores the effects of neoliberalism on the women's movement through interviews and content analysis. Schuster's research highlights the shift from collective identity to diversity within the movement and the challenges faced by women's organizations and state feminism. Both books offer valuable insights into the women's movement in neoliberal times. [Extracted from the article]

Copyright of Social Anthropology / Anthropologie Sociale is the property of Berghahn Books and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Intellectual property is understood to have an economic rationale: supplying incentives for innovation and for the creation and dissemination of knowledge and information. In the modern era, questions of how best to accomplish this have been explored with reference to economic efficiency and other concepts from microeconomics. But why not macroeconomics? In the microeconomic view, the intangibles of innovation, knowledge, and information are ordinary economic goods, albeit ones whose easy reproducibility leads to special problems. In the macroeconomic view, however, innovation, knowledge, and information are extraordinary goods with special virtues. Indeed, modern macroeconomics puts these intangibles at the center of the field because they are understood to be the key to achieving sustained economic growth in an advanced economy. And growth is macroeconomics' principal contemporary concern. This Article makes a general case for putting macroeconomics front and center in discussions about intellectual property law, and it suggests a number of insights that come from doing so. The macroeconomic view can offer policy prescriptions that are distinct from and contrary to those springing from a microeconomic view. In particular, and perhaps counterintuitively, a macroeconomic focus cautions against expanding existing intellectual property rights or introducing new ones. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Property law is having a moment, one that is getting education scholars' attention. Progressive scholars are retooling the concepts of ownership and entitlement to incorporate norms of equality and inclusion. Some argue that property law can even secure access to public education despite the U.S. Supreme Court's longstanding refusal to recognize a right to basic schooling. Others worry that property doctrine is inherently exclusionary. In their view, property-based concepts like residency have produced opportunity hoarding in schools that serve affluent, predominantly white neighborhoods. Many advocates therefore believe that equity will be achieved only by moving beyond property-based claims, for instance, by recognizing education as a public good or human right. The Court has upheld a constitutional right of access to public schools on just one occasion. In Plyler v. Doe, the Justices found that Texas could not bar undocumented students from schools or charge them tuition. The Court did not declare education a fundamental right or alienage a suspect classification. Instead, the opinion relied on several rationales, some property-based and some not. Residency, for instance, featured prominently in the case, but so did a trope of childhood innocence. Recently, there have been calls to revisit Plyler, making this an opportune moment to evaluate how its reasoning will fare. Despite growing interest in property-based entitlements as a strategy for inclusion, Plyler's fate will likely turn on considerations that transcend property: the blamelessness of children, the cruelty of relegating them to a lifetime of illiteracy, and the implications that such deliberate indifference has for our democratic integrity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Municipalities throughout the country enforce broad and barmful crime-free housing and nuisance property ordinances (CFNOs)-local laws tbat encourage landlords to evict or exclude tenants from housing opportunities based on their contact witb tbe criminal legal system or calls for police help. There is little evidence tbat CFNOs are effective at achieving their stated goal of increasing community safety, and there is signifcant evidence tbat tbey harm Black and Latinx communities, survivors of domestic violence, individuals witb disabilities, and low-income tenants and communities more broadly. Despite more than a decade of legal advocacy successfully challenging CFNOs using a range of legal theories under state and federal civil rights laws, these ordinances continue to proliferate. This Article explores the potential for state-level legistative and executive action to combat the civil rights threat posed by CFNOs. It discusses tbe broad autbority states retain to enact preemption laws targeting CFNOs and summarizes tbe range of existing state preemption legislation on tbis issue. Informed by interviews with a network of advocates, it discusses the benefits and challenges of advancing state-level legislation targeting CFNOs. Finally, tbis Article explores tbe expansive regulatory and enforcement powers tbat state governments can deploy to combat or curtail tbe harmful effects of CFNOs, including through state attorneys general, specialized state agencies, and fair housing planning processes. As CFNOs continue to harm tenants and communities, tbis Article argues states should use all available legislative, regulatog, and enforcement tools to respond. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Property law focuses predominantly on spatial conflicts of interest between neighbors but neglects temporal conflicts between generations. This lack of attention to the temporal dimension leads to a troubling mismatch in property law: while property rights last forever, the corresponding duties that require property holders to respect the interests of others are remarkably short lived. The result is that property law currently does not adequately protect the rights of future generations. In this Article, we offer a blueprint for correcting this anomaly. We advocate a change in the current conception of property and propose that property law focus more on intertemporal conflicts of interest. This new conceptualization provides greater consideration to intertemporal externalities and the problems of overconsumption and overuse by current property holders, so that property law can better protect the rights of future generations. This type of protection is needed now more than ever, with the growing recognition that the climate crisis represents a catastrophic failure on our part to respect the interests of those who will come after us. We discuss the implementation of our proposal, demonstrate its benefits, and explain its origins within the existing structure of property law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although constitutional social rights continue to attract much scholarly attention, their role in shaping private law is often overlooked. This neglect has led some scholars to underestimate social rights' transformative potential. This article considers social rights' influence over contract and property law in India, Colombia, and South Africa--three leading jurisdictions of the Global South. It argues that social rights can promote redistributive outcomes and inspire important shifts in private law's values and modes of reasoning. However, it cautions that the depth of this transformation will depend on how judges choose to cross the public-- private divide. One tradition rejects any role for social rights in the private sphere. Another approach is comfortable imposing positive social duties, but only on firms that resemble the state. One notch further along, there are approaches that prefer maximum flexibility and pragmatism, but which fail to invest much effort in elaborating legal doctrine or a theory of relationships. The final method integrates constitutional aspirations into private law. Integration transforms private law's modes of reasoning and offers the clearest language for confronting private domination and inequality. However, it can also threaten wide swaths of private law and risk a legitimacy crisis for the judiciary. This article charts each of these paths of influence. It considers the legal environments that foster each path, as well as their normative dynamics, internal limits, and shortcomings. This effort is meant to mirror developments in the literature on comparative public law, where scholars have mapped diverging strategies for enforcing social rights in litigation against the state. More fundamentally, this article aims to recentre private law in discussions of how social rights participate in transformative constitutionalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the evolution of French scholar, Léon Duguit's concept of the social function of property with the Mexican Constitution of 1917 specifically Article 27. It delves into the development of the social function of property in Mexico, providing insights into its intellectual origins and its unique connection to Mexican property laws. It aims to unravel the historical trajectory that led to the assimilation of Duguit's ideas into the Mexican constitutional discourse on property.

As communities increasingly remove Confederate monuments from public spaces, they must decide what to do with these troubled statues. Given the recent wave of monument removal, we consider how property law and other restrictions impact community decisions on the disposition of monuments removed from public spaces on two levels--by location and future owner. In considering the fate of removed monuments, we profile potential destinations including museums, battlefields, cemeteries, and even storage. Alongside these examples, we discuss how laws constrain (or fail to constrain) the options for new owners and the restrictions on where monuments can be relocated. Even where laws do not constrain their removal choices, communities may choose to relinquish ownership to a Confederate heritage organization (or to another governmental entity) to speed removal. While transferring ownership is initially appealing, surrendering ownership may not be the best long-term decision for a community. Communities can lose control over the display of transferred statues, which fails to address the root of the problem. Where possible, communities should retain ownership (and therefore control) of removed statues or consider how other property law tools, such as transfer agreements, can impose discipline on the new owners. Making considered decisions on both the future display and owner is critical to the overall removal movement and to ensure that the legacy of these troubled statutes is properly addressed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (Qld) facilitates termination of a Queensland community titles scheme ('CTS') in two ways -- by resolution of the owners, or a District Court order that it is just and equitable to terminate the CTS. This article investigates the court-ordered terminations of Nobbys Outlook CTS 14822 and Village Square CTS 24175. Through an interpretive research approach informed by a qualitative case study, the authors investigated the Village Square termination and identified three concerns. When compared to Village Square, the approach adopted in the Nobbys Outlook termination raised jurisdictional problems relevant for future terminations. Secondly, the termination process is largely undefined as compared to the statutory trustee for sale process in the Property Law Act 1974 (Qld), despite the arguably greater potential for complexity in CTS terminations. Finally, there is a lack of prescription around administrators' roles, powers, obligations and protections, unlike the equivalent provisions in the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). The authors provide recommendations for statutory reform to protect CTS owners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the discussion on property law rules focusing on the control people over the assets, and the power to alienate, use, and exclude others from the property. Topics include owners of assets with artificial intelligence (AI) capabilities having limited control over the property; and lord having a duty to protect the vassal, and the vassal having to aid the lord in war.

This Article contrasts two views of the relationship between the fields of work law and private law. The "internal" view, propounded by Hanoch Dagan, would bring work law into the domain of private law by recentering the latter, including property law, around liberal values of reciprocal respect for autonomy. The "external" view locates the law of work in an overlapping but distinct domain that we might call "social law," where it operates as a set of externally imposed conditions on the activity of employing others. When workers' rights and interests come into conflict with those of owner-employers, the two views face off on the constitutional terrain of takings. In principle, the internal view might afford a better defense against takings challenges to laws that constrain property owners' entitlements in the interest of those who work there, for it would redefine the former to reflect the latter. The external view relies more on takings law than property law to accommodate others' interests when they conflict with traditional property rights. Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Cedar Point Nurseries v. Hassid deals a heavy blow to both views. Its neo-Blackstonian conception of property rights rejects the notion that property law itself recognizes workers' interests and entrenches that conception of property rights within the constitutional law of takings, sharpening the takings sword against social law's regulation of property rights in the interest of others, including workers. Cedar Point thus underscores and magnifies the challenges that modern U.S. takings law, with its constitutional definition of property rights, poses to the advancement of workers' rights, whether those are understood as internal or external to property law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The occupation of the Abkhazia and Tskhinvali regions by the Russian Federation in 1992-1993 was followed by a complete occupation of 20% of Georgia as a result of the 2008 Russia-Georgia war, when the Russian Federation committed egregious crimes, the genocide of the Georgian people and destruction of their property. By the international community it was recognized as one of the most malicious human rights violations resulting in 300,000 internally displaced persons continuously suffering from material and moral damage due to the ongoing occupation. They are in need of a full and fair restoration of their rights. Therefore, according to international and national law standards, they may be entitled to demand compensation from the Russian Federation for the damages caused by illegal actions in Georgian courts, especially in the conditions when Russia has been expelled from the Council of Europe since March 2022. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) no longer has jurisdiction over new disputes with this country's involvement since September 17, 2022. Therefore, it will not hear such cases as the only means of compensating the IDPs being lodging with national courts. This research uses a comparative analysis method. The judicial topic is scrutinized by examining decisions of international and foreign courts about the identified problem. The study encompasses an in-depth review of articles focused on this subject, including an exploration of divergent opinions provided in each source. Furthermore, the author presents a perspective on resolving the issue, offering a synthesized viewpoint that enriches the ongoing discourse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The 2021 Federal Trade Commission (FTC) investigation into cloud storage app developer Everalbum resulted in a consent decree that required Everalbum to delete not only unlawfully collected data, but also algorithms created using that data. The FTC had imposed this kind of penalty only once before. Questions remain about how the FTC will apply this socalled intellectual property (IP) deletion requirement in the future. This Comment argues that situations where companies develop intellectual property from misappropriated consumer data are analogous to cases where courts seek to apply the property law rule of the wrongful improver, i.e., where one party knowingly improves another's property. The rule requires that courts grant title to the owner of the original property regardless of how much the value of the property has increased. Applying the wrongful improver rule can guide the FTC's future application of the IP deletion requirement in two ways. First, application of the rule suggests that the IP deletion requirement should apply regardless of what type of data (biometric or nonbiometric) has been misappropriated. Second, the rule indicates that a company must forfeit not only rights to their particular copy of their IP, but also all the IP rights that attach to it. Application of this rule will thereby strengthen the FTC's power to punish offenders and more significantly deter companies from unlawfully collecting consumer data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An injunction is typically characterised as the primary remedy to prevent a continuing interference with a claimant's property rights. It can be easier to obtain such a remedy against a cynical defendant who knowingly interfered with those rights, as opposed to a naïve or unwitting party who was unaware of them. It is not obvious, however, why the defendant's state of mind should affect what remedy the claimant is afforded in vindicating their property rights. This paper examines the role played by the defendant's state of mind when considering whether to grant an injunction. It argues that a defendant who knowingly infringes a property right in respect of land for material gain assumes the risk that an injunction will be granted to stop that infringement. As a consequence, the question of whether such an order will create hardship or oppression is either diminished or eliminated as a factor. This approach also vindicates the proprietary nature of such rights, which may be difficult to assess in financial terms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Property law is present in every narrative, language and even in fairy tales as a fundamental right. The contribution, based on the fairy tales Up and The Emperor's New Groove, aims to draw – in fairy tales as well as in reality – the boundaries within which this right can be exercised. The purpose of this paper, using an empirical and qualitative methodology, is to demonstrate how the use of fairy tales can be useful to teach young students of both primary and high school important concepts such as those part of the modern concept of "property" expressed recently by the legal doctrine and the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the concept of essential property and how the current property laws have created a mismatch between resources and expenses needed for a dignified life in the U.S. Topics include state decision-making, blaming the victim, moral suspicion, and minimum standards to guide property law reforms.

This essay provides a brief response to a New York Times guest opinion essay entitled “What Makes a Fetus a Person?,” which cites John Locke in the argument to support the overturning of Roe v. Wade. The NYT piece infers the Lockean theory of property as a means of undermining the argument for a person’s right to an abortion. Locke did write about procreation and politics, but only to support his critique of patriarchal autocracy that elides the mother’s personhood in relation to children. The eighteenth century should not be used to bolster twenty-first-century anti-abortion arguments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a symposium held in honor of professor, Bruce Ziff. Topics discussed include Professor Ziff's legal history, his property pedagogy, his contributions to property law theory, and the application of his concepts to analyze recent property law decisions. The symposium featured various speakers including professors, Douglas C. Harris, Jim Phillips and Eran Kaplinsky.

The article focuses on the real covenants which occupy a doctrinal abyss within property law. Topics include examines the subject perpetually frustrates first-year law students and legal scholars alike, as they confront concepts that appear esoteric and even anachronistic and considered the criticism has been sharp, with commentators quipping that the field is an unspeakable quagmire.

The article discusses the Land Title and Property Law Amendment Act, 2024 in British Columbia, which allows all First Nations to hold land under their own names, aligning with UN declarations and provincial reconciliation efforts. Topics include jurisdictional issues, governance frameworks, and economic impacts for First Nations.

This essay contends that Ellen Wood's East Lynne reveals a surprising spatial relationship that a woman can have with a property outside the legal restrictions outlined by mid-nineteenth-century married women's property law. Isabel Vane, the main character, cultivates a sense of perversity in orienting herself in the object world as a response to the fundamental deprivation of the property in question, East Lynne. Isabel's misunderstanding of the ownership of her paraphernalia, sentimental overvaluation of East Lynne, and intentional propagation of disfigurement all constitute her perverse relation with the object world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses the topics in the issue including the role of credit and liquidity in shaping American property law, leading to implications for property theory in general.p.

The article discusses the legal issues related to digital coins and tokens under property laws worldwide. Other topics include the legal classification of converted physical and financial assets into digital entries under property law, the need for law reform to adopt and support social and technological innovations, and the developments of new core terminologies and digital asset classification systems covering digital assets.

The article discusses the common law in respect of its practical workings with Scots property law's status as Civilian is relevance in the context of Mixed Legal System. Topics include legal systems recognize the advantages of a form of non-possessory security over a changing class of property akin to a floating charge; and Scots law is offering a cautionary tale regarding the problems of integrating a novel security right into existing laws of property, debt and insolvency.

Innovating science- and technology-based firms often endure a sustained period of uncertain intellectual property rights (IPR) protection before patents could be granted to their valuable knowledge assets. This problem is exacerbated, as firms increasingly develop their innovations or operate in countries with weak IPR institutional environments. But how does IPR uncertainty affect firms' strategy toward knowledge appropriation--capturing of economic value from their knowledge assets--and toward providing access to these knowledge assets? Drawing on research from the economics of science and intellectual property strategy, we examine this question using a novel panel data covering 362 firms and organizations in the knowledge-intensive genomics industry based on all genomics patents and matching papers from 1988 to 2005. We find that under uncertain IPR conditions, firms reveal and accumulate more knowledge through open science (follow-on publishing) but shift to knowledge appropriation through commercial science (follow-on patenting) when IPR uncertainty is narrowed. This effect is most salient when firms develop their knowledge assets or operate under strong IPR institutional regime. For highly science-based knowledge assets, firms continue tapping into open science for access and reciprocity in knowledge acquisition from the scientific community. These findings highlight the role of patent grant as a potential lever to shape firms' knowledge processes and long-term innovative capacity, and the emergence of a concerted "science strategy" employed by firms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]