Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-br6xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-03T12:46:45.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ethical Foundations of Property: Socialising Property through Trusteeship

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2025

Aloke Narasinga Prabhu Open the ORCID record for Aloke Narasinga Prabhu [Opens in a new window]
Aloke Narasinga Prabhu*
Affiliation:
Jindal Global Law School, OP Jindal Global University, Sonipat, India
*
Email: aloke.prabhu@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The widening inequality and discontent concern every economy irrespective of any measure of economic prosperity. The contest and debate centred around the notion of private property, assumes the premise that property is a legitimised unfettered accumulation with a right-based justification. On the contrary, the Gandhian conception of property, tries to reframe the premise that property is social and needs to be justified over its obligatory commitments. I argue that Gandhi’s engagement with property relations reflects the individual pursuit by socialising property. From problematising the individual property rights within the Anthropocene world, the article mapping a Gandhian theory of property identifies the normative structure of property. The individual as the custodian with normative obligatory commitments can foster pluralistic interest while anchoring the ethical foundations of property rights reflecting social justice.

Keywords

property theoryGandhian philosophytrusteeshipobligationsliberal democracy

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Asian Journal of Law and Society , First View , pp. 1 - 21
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Asian Journal of Law and Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Alexander, G. S. (1989). ‘Dilemmas of group autonomy: Residential associations and community’, Cornell Law Review, 75(1), pp. 1–61.Google Scholar
Alexander, G. S. (2018). Property and human flourishing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780190860745.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aristotle. (1982). Politics. Translated by Barker, E. London: Penguin Classics.Google Scholar
Balganesh, S. (2013). ‘Gandhi and copyright pragmatism’, California Law Review, 101(6), pp. 1705–1762.Google Scholar
Bentham, J. (1962). Anarchical fallacies in works of Jeremy Bentham. Bowring, J. (ed.) New York: Russell and Russell, Vol. II, p. 105.Google Scholar
Bilgrami, A. (2018). ‘Some reflections on the limits of liberalism’, Social Scientist, 46(7–8), pp. 3–20.Google Scholar
Blythe, J. M. (1992). Ideal government and the mixed constitution in the Middle Ages. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400862603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunn, J. (1969). ‘The politics of Locke in England and America in the eighteenth century’, in Yolton, J. W. (ed.) John Locke: Problems and perspectives: A collection of new essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 45–80.Google Scholar
Dorfman, A. (2012). ‘The society of property’, University of Toronto Law Journal, 62(4), pp. 563–607.10.3138/utlj.62.4.02CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dworkin, R. (1978). Taking rights seriously. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Elders, L. (2009). ‘The Aristotlean commentaries of St. Thomas Aquinas’, The Review of Metaphysics, 63(1), pp. 29–53.Google Scholar
Fuller, L. L. (1958). ‘Positivism and fidelity to law: A reply to Professor Hart’, Harvard Law Review, 71(4), pp. 630–672.10.2307/1338226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, S. (1999). John Rawls: Collected papers. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Galisanka, A. (2019). John Rawls: The path to a theory of justice. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.10.4159/9780674239463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gandhi, M. K. (1950). The collected works of Mahatma Gandhi. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House.Google Scholar
Gandhi, M. K. (1956). Ruskin: Unto this last: A paraphrase. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House.Google Scholar
Gandhi, M. K. (1958). Mahatma Gandhi: The last phase, Pyarelal (ed.), Vol. 2, Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House.Google Scholar
Gandhi, M. K. (1960). Trusteeship . Compiled by Kelekar, R. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House.Google Scholar
Gandhi, M. K. (1970). My theory of trusteeship. Hingorani, A. (ed.), Bombay: Bhartiya Vidya Bhavan.Google Scholar
Gray, J. C. (1916). The nature and sources of the law. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Gregory, B. (1923). Karl Polanyi on ethics and economics. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
Green, L. (1985). ‘Authority and convention’, Philosophical Quarterly, 35(141), pp. 329–346.10.2307/2219470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gronow, J. (1986). On the formation of Marxism. Boston: Brill Publishers.Google Scholar
Hacker, P. M. S. (1973). ‘Sanction theory of duty’, in Simpson, A. W. B. (ed.) Oxford essays in jurisprudence (Second Series). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 131–170.Google Scholar
Hart, H. L. A. (1982). Essays on Bentham: Jurisprudence and political theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198254683.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, E. K. (1979). ‘Marx’s theory of property and alienation’, in Parel, A. and Flanagan, T. (eds) Theories of the property: Aristotle to the present. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, pp. 283–318.Google Scholar
Kraut, R. (2002). Aristotle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198782001.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kriplani, K. (1960). All men are brothers: Life and thoughts of Mahatma Gandhi as told in his own words. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House.Google Scholar
Kumarappa, J.C. (1948). Economy of permanence. Varanasi: Sarva Seva Sangh.Google Scholar
Legge, D. (2016). ‘Reasonable belief: The contribution of Aquinas and his Dominican followers on the Act of Faith and its reasonableness’, Angelicum, 93(2), The influences of Dominican order in the Middle Ages, pp. 315–330.Google Scholar
Locke, J. (1963). ‘Second treatise’, in Laslett, P. (ed.) Locke: Two treatises of government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 285–446.Google Scholar
Long, D. G. (1979). ‘Bentham on property’, in Parel, A. and Flanagan, T. (eds) Theories of property: Aristotle to the present. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, pp. 221–256.Google Scholar
Macpherson, C. B. (1962). The political theory of possessive individualism: Hobbes to Locke. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Marx, K. (1973). Grundrisse. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Marx, K. and Engels, F. (1932). The German ideology. Available at: http://fs2.american.edu/dfagel/www/Class%20Readings/Marx/The%20German%20Ideology.pdf (Accessed: 21 May 2025).Google Scholar
Marx, K. (1961). Capital. Moscow: Foreign Language Publishing House.Google Scholar
Marx, K. (1968). ‘Introduction to the “critique of political economy”’, in David, H. (ed.) Marx and modern economics. New York: Monthly Review Press, pp. 21–48.Google Scholar
Mignolo, W. D. (2014). ‘From human rights to life rights’, in Douzinas, C. and Grearty, C. (eds) The meanings of rights: The philosophy and social theory of human rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 161–180.10.1017/CBO9781139227124.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, F. D. (1995). Nature, justice and rights in Aristotle’s politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Murray, C. (2022). ‘John Locke’s theory of property, and the dispossession of indigenous peoples in the settler-colony’, American Indian Law Journal, 10(1), Article no. 4.Google Scholar
Newcomb, G. B. (1886). ‘Theories of property’, Political Science Quarterly, 1(4), pp. 595–611.10.2307/2139069CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nieuwenhove, R. V. (2010). ‘Catholic theology in the thirteenth century and the origins of secularism’, Irish Theological Quarterly, 75(4), pp. 339–354.10.1177/0021140010377735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owens, D. (2019). ‘Property and authority’, Journal of Political Philosophy, 27(3), pp. 271–284.10.1111/jopp.12190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parel, A. (1979). ‘Aquinas’ theory of property’, in Parel, A. and Flanagan, T. (eds) Theories of the property: Aristotle to the present. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, pp. 89–114.Google Scholar
Prabhu, A. N. (2018). ‘Cooperatives in a market economy: Democratization of economic process’, National Law School Journal, 14, pp. 95–124.Google Scholar
Prabhu, A. N. (2022). ‘Autonomy and democratization through cooperatives: Change from within’, in Amarjeet Singh, M. (ed.) Autonomy and democratic governance in Northeast India. New York: Routledge, pp. 222–233.10.4324/9781003158417-17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pocock, J. (1979). ‘The mobility of property and the rise of eighteenth-century sociology’, in Parel, A. and Flanagan, T. (eds) Theories of the property: Aristotle to the present. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, pp. 141–166.Google Scholar
Polanyi, K. (1944). The great transformation. New York: Farrar & Rinehart.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.10.4159/9780674042605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, J. (1985). ‘Justice as fairness: Political not metaphysical’, Philosophy & Public Affairs, 14(3), pp. 223–251.Google Scholar
Raz, J. (1977). ‘Promises and obligations’, in Hacker, P. M. S. and Raz, J. (eds) Law and morality and society: Essays in honour of H. L. A. Hart. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 210–228.Google Scholar
Rose, C. M. (1998). ‘Canons of property talk or Blackstone’s anxiety’, The Yale Law Journal, 108(3), pp. 601–632.10.2307/797498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, J. F. (1974). ‘Justice is reasonableness: Aquinas on human law and morality’, The Monist, 68(1), pp. 86–103.10.5840/monist19745818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sibley, M. Q. (1970). ‘Conscience, law and the obligation to obey’, The Monist, 54(4), pp. 556–586.10.5840/monist197054430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strauss, L. (1950). Natural right and history. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Settle, T. (1979). ‘The ground of morals and the propriety of property’, in Parel, A. and Flanagan, T. (eds) Theories of property: Aristotle to the Present. Waterloo: Wilfred Laurier University Press, pp. 319–334.Google Scholar
Terchek, R. J. (1992). Gandhi and Moral Autonomy, Gandhi Marg, 13, p. 454. Google Scholar
Tierney, Brian. (1982). Religion, law and the growth of constitutional thought, 1150–1650. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511558627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tregiarri, S. (1979). ‘Sentiment and property: Some Roman attitudes’, in Parel, A. and Flanagan, T. (eds) Theories of the property: Aristotle to the present. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, pp. 53–88.Google Scholar
Tuck, R. (1979). Natural right theories: Their origin and development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139163569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolin, S. S. (1960). Politics and vision: Continuity and innovation in Western political thought. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Google Scholar