Who's holding out? An experimental study of the benefits and burdens of eminent domain
Abel Winn and
Matthew W. McCarter
Journal of Urban Economics, 2018, vol. 105, issue C, 176-185
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.
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
Working Paper: Who’s Holding Out? An Experimental Study of the Benefits and Burdens of Eminent Domain (2016)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:juecon:v:105:y:2018:i:c:p:176-185
Access Statistics for this article
Journal of Urban Economics is currently edited by S.S. Rosenthal and W.C. Strange
More articles in Journal of Urban Economics from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Dana Niculescu ().