IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/pubeco/v175y2019icp1-16.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Second-best mechanisms for land assembly and hold-out problems

Author

Listed:
  • Grossman, Zachary
  • Pincus, Jonathan
  • Shapiro, Perry
  • Yengin, Duygu

Abstract

Land can be inefficiently allocated when attempts to assemble separately-owned parcels are frustrated by holdouts. Eminent domain can be used neither to gauge efficiency nor to determine adequate compensation. We characterize the least-inefficient class of direct mechanisms that are incentive compatible, self-financing, and protect the property-rights of participants. The second-best mechanisms, which we call Strong Pareto (SP), utilize a second-price auction among interested buyers, with a reserve sufficient to compensate fully all potential sellers, who are paid according to fixed and exhaustive shares of the winning buyer's offer. These mechanisms are strategy-proof (dominant-strategy incentive compatible), individually rational and self-financing. They generate higher social welfare in each problem compared to any other type of mechanism satisfying these properties.

Suggested Citation

  • Grossman, Zachary & Pincus, Jonathan & Shapiro, Perry & Yengin, Duygu, 2019. "Second-best mechanisms for land assembly and hold-out problems," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 1-16.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:pubeco:v:175:y:2019:i:c:p:1-16
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2019.03.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272719300234
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2019.03.002?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 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. Marcus Miller & Dania Thomas, 2007. "Sovereign Debt Restructuring: The Judge, the Vultures and Creditor Rights," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(10), pages 1491-1509, October.
    2. 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.
    3. Thomas J. Miceli & Kathleen Segerson, 2007. "A Bargaining Model of Holdouts and Takings," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 9(1), pages 160-174.
    4. Flavio Menezes & Rohan Pitchford, 2004. "A model of seller holdout," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 24(2), pages 231-253, August.
    5. 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.
    6. van Ours, Jan C., 1999. "The cyclical behavior of holdout durations," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 365-370, March.
    7. Duygu Yengin, 2013. "Identical Preferences Lower Bound for Allocation of Heterogenous Tasks and NIMBY Problems," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 15(4), pages 580-601, August.
    8. George J. Mailath & Andrew Postlewaite, 1990. "Asymmetric Information Bargaining Problems with Many Agents," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 57(3), pages 351-367.
    9. Hege, Ulrich, 2003. "Workouts, court-supervised reorganization and the choice between private and public debt," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 233-269, March.
    10. Myerson, Roger B. & Satterthwaite, Mark A., 1983. "Efficient mechanisms for bilateral trading," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 265-281, April.
    11. Yengin Duygu, 2012. "Characterizing Welfare-egalitarian Mechanisms with Solidarity When Valuations are Private Information," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-35, April.
    12. Steven R. Williams, 1999. "A characterization of efficient, bayesian incentive compatible mechanisms," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 14(1), pages 155-180.
    13. Jonathan Pincus & Perry Shapiro, 2008. "Between Forced Resumption And Voluntary Sale: A Mechanism For The Collective Sale Or Transfer Of Irrigation Water," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 27(4), pages 303-314, December.
    14. Alessandro Marchesiani & Ed Nosal, 2017. "Private takings," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 19(3), pages 639-657, June.
    15. Sudip Datta & Mai E. Iskandar‐Datta, 1995. "Reorganization And Financial Distress: An Empirical Investigation," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 18(1), pages 15-32, March.
    16. Gu, Wulong & Kuhn, Peter, 1998. "A Theory of Holdouts in Wage Bargaining," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(3), pages 428-449, June.
    17. Andre Sorensen, 1999. "Land Readjustment, Urban Planning and Urban Sprawl in the Tokyo Metropolitan Area," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 36(13), pages 2333-2360, December.
    18. Parisi, Francesco & Schulz, Norbert & Depoorter, Ben, 2005. "Duality in Property: Commons and Anticommons," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 578-591, December.
    19. Hugo Sonnenschein, 1968. "The Dual of Duopoly Is Complementary Monopoly: or, Two of Cournot's Theories Are One," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 76(2), pages 316-316.
    20. Cramton, Peter C & Tracy, Joseph S, 1992. "Strikes and Holdouts in Wage Bargaining: Theory and Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(1), pages 100-121, March.
    21. Duygu Yengin, 2017. "No-envy and egalitarian-equivalence under multi-object-demand for heterogeneous objects," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(1), pages 81-108, January.
    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. Houba, Harold & Bolt, Wilko, 2000. "Holdouts, backdating and wage negotiations," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(9), pages 1783-1800, October.
    24. Brown, David T, 1989. "Claimholder Incentive Conflicts in Reorganization: The Role of Bankruptcy Law," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 2(1), pages 109-123.
    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. Chaturvedi, Rakesh, 2023. "Cost of efficiency in trading perfect complements," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    3. Tsai, I-Chun & Wang, Wen-Kai, 2022. "The value of land redevelopment in different types of properties: Considering the effect of hold-out problems on the development probability," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    4. Soumendu Sarkar & Dhritiman Gupta, 2023. "Bargaining for assembly," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 95(2), pages 229-254, August.
    5. Soumendu Sarkar, 2022. "Strategyproof and Budget Balanced Mechanisms for Assembly," Working papers 320, Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics.
    6. Soumendu Sarkar, 2022. "Optimal mechanism for land acquisition," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 26(1), pages 87-116, March.
    7. Hagen, Martin, 2023. "Collusion-proof mechanisms for multi-unit procurement," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 281-298.
    8. 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.

    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. 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.
    3. Chaturvedi, Rakesh, 2020. "Fairness and partial coercion in land assembly," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 325-335.
    4. Zakharenko, Roman, 2021. "Optimal compulsion for private assembly of property," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Danziger, Leif, 2008. "Extension of labor contracts and optimal backpay," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 18-36, February.
    9. Chaturvedi, Rakesh, 2023. "Cost of efficiency in trading perfect complements," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    10. Sarkar, Soumendu, 2018. "Convergence of VCG mechanism to ex-post budget balance in a model of land acquisition," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 37-46.
    11. 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.
    12. Usha Sridhar & Sridhar Mandyam, 2013. "A Group Utility Maximizer Mechanism for Land Assembly," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 466-488, October.
    13. Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Martimort, David, 2005. "The design of transnational public good mechanisms for developing countries," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(2-3), pages 159-196, February.
    14. Chun, Youngsub & Yengin, Duygu, 2017. "Welfare lower bounds and strategy-proofness in the queueing problem," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 462-476.
    15. Matt Van Essen, 2013. "Regulating the Anticommons: Insights from Public‐Expenditure Theory," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 80(2), pages 523-539, October.
    16. Philippe Jehiel & Laurent Lamy, 2018. "A Mechanism Design Approach to the Tiebout Hypothesis," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(2), pages 735-760.
    17. Thomas Miceli, 2011. "Free riders, holdouts, and public use: a tale of two externalities," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 148(1), pages 105-117, July.
    18. Kosenok, Grigory & Severinov, Sergei, 2008. "Individually rational, budget-balanced mechanisms and allocation of surplus," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 140(1), pages 126-161, May.
    19. Daske, Thomas, 2019. "Efficient Incentives in Social Networks: "Gamification" and the Coase Theorem," EconStor Preprints 193148, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    20. 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.

    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:pubeco:v:175:y:2019:i:c:p:1-16. 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/505578 .

    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.