IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

What motivates voters’ support for eminent domain reform: Ownership, vulnerability, or ideology?

  • Hoehn, John P.
  • Adanu, Kwami

The analysis evaluates factors that motivate voter support for eminent domain reform. Economic models emphasize property ownership as a motivation for eminent domain restrictions (Fleck & Hanssen, 2010; Lamoreaux, 2011). Other research and court opinions point to ideology and vulnerability to takings as motivations for eminent domain reform. The empirical analysis tests these hypotheses using data from state-level referenda that responded to the Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. New London. Property ownership, income, economic vulnerability and ideology have significant impacts on the odds of voting in favor of reform. Ethnic and educational factors do not have significant effects on reform outcomes.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal International Review of Law and Economics.

Volume (Year): 37 (2014)
Issue (Month): C ()
Pages: 90-99

in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:irlaec:v:37:y:2014:i:c:p:90-99
Contact details of provider: Web page:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Carter, Steven, 2011. "Housing tenure choice and the dual income household," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 159-170, September.
  2. Fleck, Robert K. & Hanssen, F. Andrew, 2010. "Repeated adjustment of delegated powers and the history of eminent domain," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 99-112, June.
  3. Lopez Edward J. & Jewell R. Todd & Campbell Noel D., 2009. "Pass a Law, Any Law, Fast! State Legislative Responses to the Kelo Backlash," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 101-135, April.
  4. Deacon, Robert T & Shapiro, Perry, 1975. "Private Preference for Collective Goods Revealed Through Voting on Referenda," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(5), pages 943-55, December.
  5. Elaine B. Sharp & Donald Haider-Markel, 2008. "At the Invitation of the Court: Eminent Domain Reform in State Legislatures in the Wake of the Kelo Decision," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, Oxford University Press, vol. 38(3), pages 556-575, Summer.
  6. Dietz, Robert D. & Haurin, Donald R., 2003. "The social and private micro-level consequences of homeownership," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 401-450, November.
  7. Carrie B. Kerekes, 2011. "Government Takings: Determinants of Eminent Domain," American Law and Economics Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(1), pages 201-219.
  8. Lamoreaux, Naomi R., 2011. "The Mystery of Property Rights: A U.S. Perspective," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 71(02), pages 275-306, June.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:irlaec:v:37:y:2014:i:c:p:90-99. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.