IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/juecon/v105y2018icp176-185.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Who's holding out? An experimental study of the benefits and burdens of eminent domain

Author

Listed:
  • Winn, Abel M.
  • McCarter, Matthew W.

Abstract

A substantial literature identifies seller holdout as a serious obstacle to land assembly, implying that eminent domain is an appropriate policy response. We conduct a series of laboratory experiments to test this view. We find that when there is no competition and no eminent domain, land assembly suffers from costly delay and failed assembly: participants lose 18.8% of the available surplus on average. Much of the inefficiency is due to low offers from the buyers (“buyer holdout”) rather than strategic holdout among sellers. When buyers can exercise eminent domain the participants lose 19.4% of the surplus on average. This loss comes from spending money to influence the fair market price and forcing sellers to sell even when the sellers value the property more than the buyer. Introducing weak competition in the form of a less valuable substitute parcel of land reduces delay by 35.7% and virtually eliminates assembly failure, so that only 10.1% of the surplus is lost on average.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:juecon:v:105:y:2018:i:c:p:176-185
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jue.2017.10.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094119017300803
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jue.2017.10.001?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Subhasish Chowdhury & Roman Sheremeta, 2011. "A generalized Tullock contest," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 147(3), pages 413-420, June.
    2. Epstein, Richard A, 1993. "Holdouts, Externalities, and the Single Owner: One More Salute to Ronald Coase," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 36(1), pages 553-586, April.
    3. Buchanan, James M & Yoon, Yong J, 2000. "Symmetric Tragedies: Commons and Anticommons," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 43(1), pages 1-13, April.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Miceli, Thomas J. & Sirmans, C.F., 2007. "The holdout problem, urban sprawl, and eminent domain," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3-4), pages 309-319, November.
    7. Eckart, Wolfgang, 1985. "On the land assembly problem," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 364-378, November.
    8. Sean M. Collins & R. Mark Isaac, 2012. "Holdout: Existence, Information, and Contingent Contracting," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 55(4), pages 793-814.
    9. Chris Cunningham, 2013. "Estimating the holdout problem in land assembly," FRB Atlanta Working Paper 2013-19, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
    10. Swope, Kurtis J. & Cadigan, John & Schmitt, Pamela, 2014. "That's my final offer! Bargaining behavior with costly delay and credible commitment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 44-53.
    11. repec:wly:soecon:v:80:3:y:2014:p:702-727 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Emmanuel Dechenaux & Dan Kovenock & Roman Sheremeta, 2015. "A survey of experimental research on contests, all-pay auctions and tournaments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(4), pages 609-669, December.
    13. Isaac, R. Mark & Kitchens, Carl & Portillo, Javier E., 2016. "Can buyer “mobility” reduce aggregation failures in land-assembly?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 16-30.
    14. Strange William C., 1995. "Information, Holdouts, and Land Assembly," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 317-332, November.
    15. O'Flaherty, Brendan, 1994. "Land assembly and urban renewal," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 287-300, June.
    16. Cohen, Lloyd, 1991. "Holdouts and Free Riders," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(2), pages 351-362, June.
    17. Thomas W. Hazlett, 2008. "Property Rights and Wireless License Values," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 51(3), pages 563-598, August.
    18. Menezes, Flavio & Pitchford, Rohan, 2004. "The land assembly problem revisited," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 155-162, March.
    19. Yun-chien Chang, 2010. "An Empirical Study of Compensation Paid in Eminent Domain Settlements: New York City, 1990-2002," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(1), pages 201-244, January.
    20. Leah Brooks & Byron Lutz, 2016. "From Today's City to Tomorrow's City: An Empirical Investigation of Urban Land Assembly," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 8(3), pages 69-105, August.
    21. Shupp Robert & Cadigan John & Schmitt Pamela M. & Swope Kurtis J., 2013. "Institutions and information in multilateral bargaining experiments," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 13(1), pages 485-524, June.
    22. Steven Shavell, 2010. "Eminent Domain versus Government Purchase of Land Given Imperfect Information about Owners' Valuations," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 53(1), pages 1-27, February.
    23. Parente, Michael D. & Winn, Abel M., 2012. "Bargaining behavior and the tragedy of the anticommons," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 475-490.
    24. Bittlingmayer, George, 1988. "Property Rights, Progress, and the Aircraft Patent Agreement," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(1), pages 227-248, April.
    25. Kitchens, Carl & Roomets, Alex, 2015. "Dealing with eminent domain," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 22-31.
    26. Munch, Patricia, 1976. "An Economic Analysis of Eminent Domain," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 84(3), pages 473-497, June.
    27. John Cadigan & Pamela Schmitt & Robert Shupp & Kurtis Swope1, 2009. "An Experimental Study of the Holdout Problem in a Multilateral Bargaining Game," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 76(2), pages 344-457, October.
    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. Zillante, Artie & Read, Dustin C. & Seiler, Michael J., 2020. "Assembling land for urban revitalization in the presence of linchpin parcels and information asymmetries: An experimental investigation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    2. 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.
    3. Wen, Lan-jiao & Butsic, Van & Stapp, Jared R. & Zhang, An-lu, 2020. "What happens to land price when a rural construction land market legally opens in China? A spatiotemporal analysis of Nanhai district from 2010 to 2015," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).

    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. 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.
    2. Isaac, R. Mark & Kitchens, Carl & Portillo, Javier E., 2016. "Can buyer “mobility” reduce aggregation failures in land-assembly?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 16-30.
    3. Zillante, Artie & Read, Dustin C. & Seiler, Michael J., 2020. "Assembling land for urban revitalization in the presence of linchpin parcels and information asymmetries: An experimental investigation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    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. 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.
    6. Parente, Michael D. & Winn, Abel M., 2012. "Bargaining behavior and the tragedy of the anticommons," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 475-490.
    7. Winn, Abel & McCarter, Matthew & DeSantis, Mark, 2018. "Land Assembly without Eminent Domain: Laboratory Experiments of Two Tax Mechanisms," Working Papers 07001, George Mason University, Mercatus Center.
    8. Carl Kitchens, 2014. "The use of eminent domain in land assembly: The case of the Tennessee Valley Authority," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 160(3), pages 455-466, September.
    9. Sean M. Collins & R. Mark Isaac, 2012. "Holdout: Existence, Information, and Contingent Contracting," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 55(4), pages 793-814.
    10. Hirota, Shinichi & Suzuki-Löffelholz, Kumi & Udagawa, Daisuke, 2020. "Does owners’ purchase price affect rent offered? Experimental evidence," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(C).
    11. Kitchens, Carl & Roomets, Alex, 2015. "Dealing with eminent domain," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 22-31.
    12. 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).
    13. Arthur Zillante & Peter M. Schwarz & Dustin C. Read, 2014. "Land Aggregation Using Contingent and Guaranteed Payments," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 80(3), pages 702-727, January.
    14. 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.
    15. Zakharenko, Roman, 2021. "Optimal compulsion for private assembly of property," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    16. 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.
    17. Hans-Bernd Schäfer & Ram Singh, 2018. "Takings of Land by Self-Interested Governments: Economic Analysis of Eminent Domain," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 61(3), pages 427-459.
    18. Miceli, Thomas J. & Sirmans, C.F., 2007. "The holdout problem, urban sprawl, and eminent domain," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3-4), pages 309-319, November.
    19. 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.
    20. Uyanik, Metin & Yengin, Duygu, 2023. "Expropriation power in private dealings: Quota rule in collective sales," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 548-580.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • M30 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:juecon:v:105:y:2018:i:c:p:176-185. 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/inca/622905 .

    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.