Response to Quigley

Authors

  • Ann Brower

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26686/pq.v4i1.4246

Keywords:

tenure review, Crown Pastoral Land Act, conservation, nationalization, privatisation

Abstract

I warmly thank the editor for the opportunity to reply. I shall highlight three technical differences between Professor Quigley’s and my positions, then conclude with the major theoretical difference.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Policy Quarterly volume 4 number 1 2008

Downloads

Published

2008-01-01

Issue

Vol. 4 No. 1 (2008): Policy Quarterly

Section

Articles

License

Permission: In the interest of promoting debate and wider dissemination, the IGPS encourages use of all or part of the articles appearing in PQ, where there is no element of commercial gain. Appropriate acknowledgement of both author and source should be made in all cases. The IGPS retains copyright. Please direct requests for permission to reprint articles from this publication to igps@vuw.ac.nz.