Property institutions should ideally provide economic actors with certainty that their local choices about investment will not be unsettled by shifting political economic equilibria. We argue that for this to occur, political autonomy, administrative and enforcement capacity, political constraints, and accessible legal institutions are each necessary. A comparison of the evolution of property rights for settlers and American Indians in the United States shows how political and legal forces shape the evolution of property institutions. American Indians, who had property institutions before Europeans arrived, could not defend their land from Europeans and later Americans due to lacking military capacity. Settlers' property rights were relatively secure because the government had sufficient autonomy and capacity to broadly define and enforce their rights, political institutions constrained the government from expropriating settlers' property, and legal institutions provided a forum for settlers to adjudicate and defend their rights in court. Native Americans, in contrast, had systematically inconsistent and often expropriative policy treatment by the government. Although tribes have technically been sovereign since the 1970s, tribal governments continue to lack sufficient political and legal autonomy and capacity to define and enforce property institutions in response to evolving local conditions.

中文翻译：

---

美洲印第安人产权的长期不确定性

理想情况下，房地产机构应该为经济参与者提供确定性，即他们的当地投资选择不会因政治经济平衡的变化而动摇。我们认为，要实现这一点，政治自治、行政和执法能力、政治约束和可利用的法律制度都是必要的。对美国定居者和美洲印第安人财产权演变的比较表明，政治和法律力量如何塑造财产制度的演变。在欧洲人到来之前拥有财产制度的美洲印第安人由于缺乏军事能力，无法从欧洲人和后来的美国人手中保卫自己的土地。定居者 财产权相对安全，因为政府有足够的自主权和能力来广泛地界定和执行他们的权利，政治机构限制政府征用定居者的财产，法律机构为定居者在法庭上裁决和捍卫他们的权利提供了论坛。相比之下，美洲原住民受到政府系统性的不一致且经常是剥夺性的政策待遇。尽管自 1970 年代以来部落在技术上一直是主权的，但部落政府仍然缺乏足够的政治和法律自主权以及定义和执行财产制度以应对不断变化的当地条件的能力。法律机构为定居者在法庭上裁决和捍卫他们的权利提供了一个论坛。相比之下，美洲原住民受到政府系统性的不一致且经常是剥夺性的政策待遇。尽管自 1970 年代以来部落在技术上一直是主权的，但部落政府仍然缺乏足够的政治和法律自主权以及定义和执行财产制度以应对不断变化的当地条件的能力。法律机构为定居者在法庭上裁决和捍卫他们的权利提供了一个论坛。相比之下，美洲原住民受到政府系统性的不一致且经常是剥夺性的政策待遇。尽管自 1970 年代以来部落在技术上一直是主权的，但部落政府仍然缺乏足够的政治和法律自主权以及定义和执行财产制度以应对不断变化的当地条件的能力。