Valuing Easements: Some Experimental Evidence
Trefzger and Munneke (1998) present a theoretical model, where the surplus that an easement gives rise to will be split equally between the parties. We provide experimental evidence from Sweden indicating that the split of the surplus depends on the context and what is judged to be reasonable principles of a fair distribution. The dominant estates got a significantly higher share of the surplus because they could start the bargaining with a bid that only included compensation for cost, whereas the servient estate could not find any principle that would give them the whole surplus. After these initial asymmetric bids, the parties usually met halfway.
Volume (Year): 18 (1999)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: American Real Estate Society Clemson University School of Business & Behavioral Science Department of Finance 401 Sirrine Hall Clemson, SC 29634-1323|
Web page: http://www.aresnet.org/
|Order Information:|| Postal: Diane Quarles American Real Estate Society Manager of Member Services Clemson University Box 341323 Clemson, SC 29634-1323|
Web: http://pages.jh.edu/jrer/about/get.htm Email:
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.:
- Sefton, Martin & Yavas, Abdullah, 1996.
"Threat to Regulate and Coordination Failures: Experimental Evidence,"
The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics,
Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 97-115, January.
- A. Yavas & M. Sefton, 1995. "Threat to Regulate and Coordination Failures: Experimental Evidence," ERES eres1995-179, European Real Estate Society (ERES).
- Joseph W. Trefzger & Henry J. Munneke, 1998. "Valuing Easements: A Simple Bargaining Framework," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 16(2), pages 127-138.
- Abdullah Yavas & Thomas J. Miceli & C.F. Sirmans, 2001. "An Experimental Analysis of the Impact of Intermediaries on the Outcome of Bargaining Games," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 29(2), pages 251-276.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jre:issued:v:18:n:3:1999:p:491-502. 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: (JRER Graduate Assistant/Webmaster)
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.