IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceps/v69y2020ics0038012118301939.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A game theoretic approach to optimize multi-stakeholder utilities for land acquisition negotiations with informality

Author

Listed:
  • Jana, Arnab
  • Basu, Rounaq
  • Mukherjee, Conan

Abstract

To combat the critical stresses of rising urbanization, the government acquires land from private owners using the power of eminent domain. This land assembly causes negative externalities such as increasing social tension and injustice that may impose a long-term threat to stability and sustainable development. Therefore, there is a need to make the land acquisition process more transparent and just. Considering the unique Indian context where informality has a strong presence, we propose an approach based on game theory that models the bargain through a three-stage Nash equilibrium game. Four agents – the government, the private developer, the landowner, and the free rider – are considered. We provide conditional solutions for the generalizable Case and proceed to model different stakeholder behavior patterns through two utility functional forms – linear and exponential. In the linear case, we find that the free rider obtains half of the revenue of the project, whereas the landowner gains between one-fourth and one-half of the revenue. Thus, we highlight the undeniably crucial role free riders play in land acquisition negotiations. However, closed form solutions cannot be obtained for the exponential form, due to which we use simulations to demonstrate a solution procedure. We conclude by stating that the proposed model can be useful in formulating future land policies in a sustainable and inclusive manner, with optimal utility derivations for all concerned stakeholders. Our model can also be extended to other spatial contexts where informality features heavily in the land market, especially in the Global South.

Suggested Citation

  • Jana, Arnab & Basu, Rounaq & Mukherjee, Conan, 2020. "A game theoretic approach to optimize multi-stakeholder utilities for land acquisition negotiations with informality," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceps:v:69:y:2020:i:c:s0038012118301939
    DOI: 10.1016/j.seps.2019.06.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0038012118301939
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.seps.2019.06.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eckart, Wolfgang, 1985. "On the land assembly problem," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 364-378, November.
    2. Abhijit Banerjee & Lakshmi Iyer, 2005. "History, Institutions, and Economic Performance: The Legacy of Colonial Land Tenure Systems in India," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1190-1213, September.
    3. Ghatak, Maitreesh & Mookherjee, Dilip, 2014. "Land acquisition for industrialization and compensation of displaced farmers," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 303-312.
    4. Sud, Nikita, 2014. "Governing India’s Land," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 43-56.
    5. Strange William C., 1995. "Information, Holdouts, and Land Assembly," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 317-332, November.
    6. O'Flaherty, Brendan, 1994. "Land assembly and urban renewal," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 287-300, June.
    7. Asami, Yasushi, 1985. "A game-theoretic approach to the division of profits from economic land development," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 233-246, May.
    8. Menezes, Flavio & Pitchford, Rohan, 2004. "The land assembly problem revisited," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 155-162, March.
    9. Rao, Nitya, 2006. "Land rights, gender equality and household food security: Exploring the conceptual links in the case of India," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 180-193, April.
    10. Deininger, Klaus & Feder, Gershon, 2001. "Land institutions and land markets," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 6, pages 288-331, Elsevier.
    11. Maitreesh Ghatak & Parikshit Ghosh, 2011. "The Land Acquisition Bill-- A Critique and a Proposal," Working papers 204, Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics.
    12. Chigurupati Ramachandraiah & Ramasamy Srinivasan, 2011. "Special Economic Zones as New Forms of Corporate Land Grab: Experiences from India," Development, Palgrave Macmillan;Society for International Deveopment, vol. 54(1), pages 59-63, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Samaneh Zahedi & Amir Hedayati Aghmashhadi & Christine Fürst, 2021. "Optimal Politics of Conflict over Physical-Industrial Development Using a Technique of Cooperative Game Theory in Iran," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-20, November.
    2. Zhifa Jiang & Qiang Li & Wei Gao & Huiyue Su & Yuansuo Zhang, 2023. "Interest Equilibrium and Path Choice in the Development of Construction Land Decrement: A Theoretical Analysis Based on the Multi-Agent Game Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    3. Shafi, Ahsan & Wang, Zhanqi & Ehsan, Muhsan & Riaz, Faizan Ahmed & Ali, Muhammad Rashid & Xu, Feng, 2023. "A game theory approach to land acquisition conflicts in Pakistan," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    4. Amir H. Aghmashhadi & Samaneh Zahedi & Azadeh Kazemi & Christine Fürst & Giuseppe T. Cirella, 2022. "Conflict Analysis of Physical Industrial Land Development Policy Using Game Theory and Graph Model for Conflict Resolution in Markazi Province," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, March.
    5. Cheng Zhou & Zaijian Qian & Zhenyan Han, 2023. "Evolutionary Game Analysis of Post-relocation Support Projects for Reservoir Resettlement: Evidence from China," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 167(1), pages 135-152, June.
    6. Simeng Li & Zhimin Liu & Chao Ye, 2022. "Community Renewal under Multi-Stakeholder Co-Governance: A Case Study of Shanghai’s Inner City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-18, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cadigan, John & Schmitt, Pamela & Shupp, Robert & Swope, Kurtis, 2011. "The holdout problem and urban sprawl: Experimental evidence," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 72-81, January.
    2. Winn, Abel M. & McCarter, Matthew W., 2018. "Who's holding out? An experimental study of the benefits and burdens of eminent domain," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 176-185.
    3. Florenz Plassmann & T. Nicolaus Tideman, 2007. "Efficient Urban Renewal Without Takings: Two Solutions to the Land Assembly Problem," Working Papers e07-8, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Department of Economics.
    4. Kurtis Swope & Ryan Wielgus & Pamela Schmitt & John Cadigan, 2011. "Contracts, Behavior, and the Land-assembly Problem: An Experimental Study," Research in Experimental Economics, in: Experiments on Energy, the Environment, and Sustainability, pages 151-180, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    5. Sreeparna Saha & Prabal Roy Chowdhury & Jaideep Roy & Prasad Bhattarcharya, 2016. "Political Economy of Land Acquisition and Holdout," Discussion Papers 16-07, Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi.
    6. Shafi, Ahsan & Wang, Zhanqi & Ehsan, Muhsan & Riaz, Faizan Ahmed & Ali, Muhammad Rashid & Xu, Feng, 2023. "A game theory approach to land acquisition conflicts in Pakistan," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    7. Chowdhury, Prabal Roy, 2013. "Land acquisition: Political intervention, fragmentation and voice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 63-78.
    8. Flavio Menzies & Rohan Pitchford, 2002. "Chasing Patents," International and Development Economics Working Papers idec02-3, International and Development Economics.
    9. Menezes, Flavio & Pitchford, Rohan, 2004. "The land assembly problem revisited," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 155-162, March.
    10. Lindenthal, Thies & Eichholtz, Piet & Geltner, David, 2017. "Land assembly in Amsterdam, 1832–2015," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 57-67.
    11. Asaf Friedman Arch, 2014. "Sustainable Urban Renewal: The Tel Aviv Dilemma," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(5), pages 1-11, April.
    12. In Park, 2013. "Modeling the externalities and redevelopment of a run-down area," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 51(3), pages 893-915, December.
    13. Portillo, Javier E., 2019. "Land-assembly and externalities: How do positive post-development externalities affect land aggregation outcomes?," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 104-124.
    14. Menezes, Flavio Marques & Pitchford, Rohan, 2001. "Chasing patents," FGV EPGE Economics Working Papers (Ensaios Economicos da EPGE) 411, EPGE Brazilian School of Economics and Finance - FGV EPGE (Brazil).
    15. Rabah Arezki & Klaus Deininger & Harris Selod, 2015. "What Drives the Global "Land Rush"?," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 29(2), pages 207-233.
    16. At, Christian & Béal, Sylvain & Morand, Pierre-Henri, 2015. "Freezeout, compensation rules, and voting equilibria," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 91-102.
    17. Deman, S., 2000. "The real estate takeover: Application of Grossman and Hart theory," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 175-195.
    18. Marijn A. Bolhuis & Swapnika R. Rachapalli & Diego Restuccia, 2021. "Misallocation in Indian Agriculture," NBER Working Papers 29363, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Dinda, Soumyananda, 2015. "Land Acquisition and Compensation Policy for Development Activity," MPRA Paper 72849, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 18 Sep 2015.
    20. John Cadigan & Pamela Schmitt & Robert Shupp & Kurtis Swope, 2009. "An Experimental Study of the Holdout Problem in a Multilateral Bargaining Game," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 76(2), pages 444-457, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:soceps:v:69:y:2020:i:c:s0038012118301939. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/seps .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.