IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/now/fntmic/0700000025.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Economics of Eminent Domain: Private Property, Public Use, and Just Compensation

Author

Listed:
  • Miceli, Thomas J.
  • Segerson, Kathleen

Abstract

The eminent domain clause of the U.S. Constitution concerns the limits of the government's right to take private property for public use. The economic literature on this issue has examined (1) the proper scope of this power as embodied by the "public use" requirement, (2) the appropriate definition, and implications, of "just compensation," and (3) the impact of eminent domain on land use incentives of owners whose land is subject to a taking risk. This essay reviews this literature and draws implications for our understanding of eminent domain law.

Suggested Citation

  • Miceli, Thomas J. & Segerson, Kathleen, 2007. "The Economics of Eminent Domain: Private Property, Public Use, and Just Compensation," Foundations and Trends(R) in Microeconomics, now publishers, vol. 3(4), pages 275-329, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:now:fntmic:0700000025
    DOI: 10.1561/0700000025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/0700000025
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1561/0700000025?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Fleck, Robert K. & Hanssen, F. Andrew, 2024. "Courts, legislatures, and evolving property rules: Lessons from eminent domain," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    4. Yun-chien Chang, 2015. "An economic and comparative analysis of specificatio (the accession doctrine)," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 225-243, April.
    5. Steven G. Medema, 2020. "The Coase Theorem at Sixty," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 58(4), pages 1045-1128, December.
    6. Pham Huu Ty & A. C. M. Van Westen & Annelies Zoomers, 2013. "Compensation and Resettlement Policies after Compulsory Land Acquisition for Hydropower Development in Vietnam: Policy and Practice," Land, MDPI, vol. 2(4), pages 1-27, November.
    7. 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.
    8. Eric Cardella & Carl Kitchens, 2017. "The impact of award uncertainty on settlement negotiations," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(2), pages 333-367, June.
    9. Thomas J. Miceli & Kathleen Segerson, 2014. "Takings," Working papers 2014-17, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    10. Thomas J. Miceli & Kathleen Segerson, 2011. "Regulatory Takings," Working papers 2011-16, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    11. Brett Christophers, 2010. "Geographical Knowledges and Neoliberal Tensions: Compulsory Land Purchase in the Context of Contemporary Urban Redevelopment," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 42(4), pages 856-873, April.
    12. Casey B. Mulligan, 2015. "In-Kind Taxes, Behavior, and Comparative Advantage," NBER Working Papers 21586, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    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:now:fntmic:0700000025. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Lucy Wiseman (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nowpublishers.com/ .

    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.