IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nzt/nztwps/02-18.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Protection against Government Takings: Compensation for Regulation?

Author

Abstract

The paper responds to recent debate in New Zealand on the power of the government to take private property, directly or through regulatory constraints. This aspect of regulation has received less attention in New Zealand than it warrants. This paper addresses the issue of which protections against takings are appropriate, and the role of compensation as a protective device. A taking can be broadly defined an act by which a government assumes or assigns control over all or part of a property right held by a private party. Government regulation is typically not treated as a taking. In practice, compensation is normally required only for physical takings, such as the acquisition of land, and is not available for takings through regulation, such as restricting the right to use land in a particular way. New Zealand has three options for improved protection against takings: a tighter regime for scrutinising the quality of regulation, more restricted takings powers, and extended compensation provisions. The desirability and practicality of a greater role for compensation requires, however, more detailed consideration. The paper aims to stimulate further debate in this area as an aspect of the wider debate on regulatory quality.

Suggested Citation

  • Kevin Guerin, 2002. "Protection against Government Takings: Compensation for Regulation?," Treasury Working Paper Series 02/18, New Zealand Treasury.
    • Handle: RePEc:nzt:nztwps:02/18
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://treasury.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2007-09/twp02-18.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kevin Guerin, 2002. "Subsidiarity: Implications for New Zealand," Treasury Working Paper Series 02/03, New Zealand Treasury.
    2. Esposto, Fred G, 1996. "The Political Economy of Taking and Just Compensation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 89(3-4), pages 267-282, December.
    3. Lawrence Blume & Daniel L. Rubinfeld & Perry Shapiro, 1984. "The Taking of Land: When Should Compensation Be Paid?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 99(1), pages 71-92.
    4. Munch, Patricia, 1976. "An Economic Analysis of Eminent Domain," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 84(3), pages 473-497, June.
    5. Hermalin, Benjamin E, 1995. "An Economic Analysis of Takings," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 64-86, April.
    6. Miceli, Thomas J & Segerson, Kathleen, 1994. "Regulatory Takings: When Should Compensation Be Paid?," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 23(2), pages 749-776, June.
    7. Kevin Guerin, 2001. "Regulatory Harmonisation - Issues for New Zealand," Treasury Working Paper Series 01/01, New Zealand Treasury.
    8. Fischel, William A. & Shapiro, Perry, 1989. "A constitutional choice model of compensation for takings," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 115-128, December.
    9. Fischel, William A & Shapiro, Perry, 1988. "Takings, Insurance, and Michelman: Comments on Economic Interpretations of "Just Compensation" Law," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 17(2), pages 269-293, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Lueck, Dean & Miceli, Thomas J., 2007. "Property Law," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 3, pages 183-257, Elsevier.
      • Dean Lueck & Thomas J. Miceli, 2004. "Property Law," Working papers 2004-04, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    2. Nosal, Ed, 2001. "The taking of land: market value compensation should be paid," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 431-443, December.
    3. Brennan, Timothy & Boyd, James, 1996. "Pluralism and Regulatory Failure: When Should Takings Trigger Compensation?," RFF Working Paper Series dp-96-09, Resources for the Future.
    4. 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.
    5. Alfredo Esposto, 1998. "Takings, litigation, and just compensation," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 26(4), pages 397-412, December.
    6. Paul Pecorino, 2013. "Compensation for Regulatory Takings with a Redistributive Government," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 80(2), pages 488-501, October.
    7. Thomas J. Miceli & Kathleen Segerson, 2011. "Regulatory Takings," Working papers 2011-16, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    8. Niemann, Paul & Shapiro, Perry, 2008. "Efficiency and fairness: Compensation for takings," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 157-165, September.
    9. Robert Innes & George Frisvold, 2009. "The Economics of Endangered Species," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 485-512, September.
    10. Miceli, Thomas J., 2008. "Public goods, taxes, and takings," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 287-293, December.
    11. Stephen Polasky & Holly Doremus & Bruce Rettig, 1997. "Endangered Species Conservation On Private Land," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 15(4), pages 66-76, October.
    12. Horn, Henrik & Tangerås, Thomas, 2016. "Economics and Politics of International Investment Agreements," Working Paper Series 1140, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    13. Livia Navone, 2013. "Property versus political holdouts: the case of the TGV rail line Lyon–Budapest in Italy," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 409-426, June.
    14. Frank Stähler, 2023. "An optimal investor-state dispute settlement mechanism," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 138(1), pages 1-16, January.
    15. Emma Aisbett & Larry Karp & Carol Mcausland, 2010. "Police Powers, Regulatory Takings and the Efficient Compensation of Domestic and Foreign Investors," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 86(274), pages 367-383, September.
    16. De Maria, Marcello & Robinson, Elizabeth J.Z. & Zanello, Giacomo, 2023. "Fair compensation in large-scale land acquisitions: Fair or fail?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    17. Yun‐chien Chang, 2009. "Empire Building and Fiscal Illusion? An Empirical Study of Government Official Behaviors in Takings," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(3), pages 541-584, September.
    18. Horn, Henrik & Tangerås, Thomas, 2021. "Economics of international investment agreements," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    19. Turnbull, Geoffrey K., 2010. "Irreversible development and eminent domain: Compensation rules, land use and efficiency," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 243-254, December.
    20. Timothy J. Brennan & James Boyd, 2006. "Political Economy And The Efficiency Of Compensation For Takings," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 24(1), pages 188-202, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Eminent Domain; Compensation; Regulatory Takings; Police Power; Public Works; Land Use;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D23 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Organizational Behavior; Transaction Costs; Property Rights
    • K11 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Property Law
    • K32 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Energy, Environmental, Health, and Safety Law
    • Q24 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Land

    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:nzt:nztwps:02/18. 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: CSS Web and Publishing, The Treasury (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tregvnz.html .

    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.