Book contents
- Eminent Domain
- Reviews
- Eminent Domain
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- 1 Taking Law from an Economic Perspective with Reference to German Law
- 2 Eminent Domain in the United States
- 3 Direct Expropriation: Multi-Layered Legal Protection in Europe
- 4 Eminent Domain Law in Taiwan: New Law, Old Practice?
- 5 Compulsory Land Acquisition in Developing Countries: Shifting Paradigm or Entrenched Legacy?
- 6 Public Interest Criteria and Korea’s Scrutiny System
- 7 Who Exercises the Eminent Domain Power in Korea? A Focus on Private Takings
- 8 Just Compensation in Eminent Domain in Korea: From the Perspective of Fairness
- 9 Overall Due Process in Takings in Korea
- 10 Distribution of Development Surplus in Takings*
- 11 Takings, Disputes, and Resolutions in Korea: A Quantitative Review
- Conclusion
- Index
- References
7 - Who Exercises the Eminent Domain Power in Korea? A Focus on Private Takings
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 April 2017
By
Book contents
- Eminent Domain
- Reviews
- Eminent Domain
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- 1 Taking Law from an Economic Perspective with Reference to German Law
- 2 Eminent Domain in the United States
- 3 Direct Expropriation: Multi-Layered Legal Protection in Europe
- 4 Eminent Domain Law in Taiwan: New Law, Old Practice?
- 5 Compulsory Land Acquisition in Developing Countries: Shifting Paradigm or Entrenched Legacy?
- 6 Public Interest Criteria and Korea’s Scrutiny System
- 7 Who Exercises the Eminent Domain Power in Korea? A Focus on Private Takings
- 8 Just Compensation in Eminent Domain in Korea: From the Perspective of Fairness
- 9 Overall Due Process in Takings in Korea
- 10 Distribution of Development Surplus in Takings*
- 11 Takings, Disputes, and Resolutions in Korea: A Quantitative Review
- Conclusion
- Index
- References
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Eminent DomainA Comparative Perspective, pp. 177 - 207Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2017
References
Azuela, Antonio, 2007, Taking Land around the World: International Trends in the Expropriation for Urban and Infrastructure Projects, Working Paper, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.Google Scholar
Bell, Abraham, 2009, “Private Takings,” University of Chicago Law Review, vol. 76, no. 2, pp. 517–85.Google Scholar
Benson, Bruce and Brown, Matthew, 2010, “Eminent Domain for Private Use: Is It Justified Market Failure or an Example of Government Failure,” Benson, Bruce (ed.), Property Rights: Eminent Domain and Regulatory Takings Re-Examined, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 149–72.Google Scholar
Bouckaert, Boudewijn and De Geest, Gerrit, 1995, “Private Takings, Private Taxes, Private Compulsory Services: The Economic Doctrine of Quasi Contracts,” International Review of Law and Economics, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 463–87.Google Scholar
Brooks, Leah and Lutz, Byron, 2011, Do We Need Eminent Domain? An Empirical Investigation of Urban Land Assembly, Working Paper, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Burrows, Paul, 1991, “Compensation for Compulsory Acquisition,” Land Economics, vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 49–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cho, Joonmo and Kim, Iljoong, 2002, “An Economic Analysis of Takings in Korea: Endogenous Probability and Announcement Effects,” International Review of Law and Economics, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 331–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Charles, 2006, “Eminent Domain after Kelo v. City of New London: An Argument for Banning Economic Development Takings,” Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 491–568.Google Scholar
Cohen, Lloyd, 1991, “Holdouts and Free Riders,” Journal of Legal Studies, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 351–62.Google Scholar
Cooney, Kevin, 1996, “A Profit for the Taking: Sale of Condemned Property after Abandonment of the Proposed Public Use,” Washington University Law Quarterly, vol. 74, no. 38, pp. 751–76.Google Scholar
Cypher, Matthew and Forgey, Fred, 2003, “Eminent Domain: An Evaluation Based on Criteria Relating to Equity, Effectiveness, and Efficiency,” Urban Affairs Review, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 254–68.Google Scholar
Eagle, Steven, 2010, “Assembling Land for Urban Redevelopment: The Case for Owner Participation,” Benson, Bruce (ed.), Property Rights: Eminent Domain and Regulatory Takings Re-Examined, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 7–29.Google Scholar
Eagle, Steven, 2011, “Public Use in the Dirigiste Tradition: Private and Public Benefit in an Era of Agglomeration,” Fordham Urban Law Journal, vol. 38, pp. 1023–89.Google Scholar
Ellickson, Robert, 1973, “Alternative to Zoning: Covenants, Nuisance Rules, and Fines as Land Use Controls,” University of Chicago Law Review, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 681–714.Google Scholar
Engel, Eduardo, Fischer, Ronald, and Galetovic, Alexander, 2005, “Highway Franchising and Real Estate Values,” Journal of Urban Economics, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 432–48.Google Scholar
Epstein, Richard, 1985, Takings: Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Finlay, Lorraine, 2010, “The Attack on Property Rights,” Annual Conference of the Samuel Griffith Society.Google Scholar
Fischel, William, 1995, Regulatory Takings: Law, Economics and Politics, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Heller, Michael and Hills, Rick, 2008, “Land Assembly Districts,” Harvard Law Review, vol. 121, no. 6, pp. 1465–1527.Google Scholar
Johnson, Asmara, 2007, “Privatizing Eminent Domain: The Delegation of a Very Public Power to Private, Non-Profit and Charitable Corporations,” American University Law Review, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 455–514.Google Scholar
Kanner, Gideon, 2007, “We Don’t Have to Follow Any Stinkin’ Planning: Sorry about That Justice Stevens,” Urban Lawyer, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 529–62.Google Scholar
Kelly, Daniel, 2006, “The ‘Public Use’ Requirement in Eminent Domain Law: A Rationale Based on Secret Purchases and Private Influence,” Cornell Law Review, vol. 92, no. 1, pp. 1–65.Google Scholar
Kelly, Daniel, 2009, “Pretextual Takings: of Private Developers, Local Governments, and Impermissible Favoritism,” Supreme Court Economic Review, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 173–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, Daniel, 2011, “Acquiring Land through Eminent Domain: Justifications, Limitations, and Alternatives,” Ayotte, Kenneth and Smith, Henry (eds.), Research Handbook on the Economic Analysis of Property Law, Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar, pp. 344–71.Google Scholar
Kerekes, Carrie, 2011, “Government Takings: Determinants of Eminent Domain,” American Law and Economics Review, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 201–19.Google Scholar
Kim, Iljoong, Cho, Byung Koo, Kim, Duol, Park, Sungkyu, Lee, Hojun, and Jung, Kisang, 2013, A Law-and-Economics Study on Takings Law in Korea, Korea Development Institute.Google Scholar
Kim, Iljoong, Lee, Hojun, and Park, Sungkyu, 2016, “Sharing Development Surplus with Landowners,” Presented at the 2016 Western Economic Association International Meetings.Google Scholar
Kim, Iljoong and Park, Sungkyu, 2010, “Eminent Domain Power and Afterwards: Leviathan’s Post-Taking Opportunism,” Public Choice, vol. 143, no. 1–2, pp. 209–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Iljoong and Park, Sungkyu, 2012, “Private Takings as a Means of Supplying Public Goods: An Economic Analysis,” Korean Journal of Public Finance, no. 75, pp. 63–103.Google Scholar
Kim, Iljoong and Park, Sungkyu, 2015, “Are Private Takings Efficient?: An Empirical Investigation,” Dept. of Economics Working Paper, Sungkyunkwan University.Google Scholar
Kotaka, Tsuyoshi and Callies, David, 2002, Taking Land: Compulsory Purchase and Regulation in Asian-Pacific Countries, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Kulick, Peter, 2000, “Rolling the Dice: Determining Public Use in Order to Effectuate a Public–Private Taking: A Proposal to Redefine Public Use,” Law Review of Michigan State University-Detroit College of Law, vol. 3, pp. 639–91.Google Scholar
Lanza, Steven, Thomas Miceli, C. F. Sirmans, , and Diop, Moussa, 2013, “The Use of Eminent Domain for Economic Development in the Era of Kelo,” Economic Development Quarterly, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 352–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehavi, Amnon and Licht, Amir, 2007, “Eminent Domain, Inc.,” Columbia Law Review, vol. 107, no. 7, pp. 1704–48.Google Scholar
Lum, Marissa, 2007, “A Comparative Analysis: Legal and Cultural Aspects of Land Condemnation in the Practice of Eminent Domain in Japan and America,” Asian-Pacific Law and Policy Journal, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 456–84.Google Scholar
Mangioni, Vince, 2009, “Privatizing the ‘Public Purpose Rule’ in Compulsory Acquisition,” State of Australian Cities National Conference, University of Western Australia.Google Scholar
Merrill, Thomas, 1986, “The Economics of Public Use,” Cornell Law Review, vol. 72, pp. 61–116.Google Scholar
Miceli, Thomas, 2011, The Economic Theory of Eminent Domain: Private Property, Public Use, New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mihaly, Marc, 2007, “Living in the Past: The Kelo Court and Public–Private Economic Redevelopment,” Ecology Law Quarterly, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 1–60.Google Scholar
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (UK), 2004, Compulsory Purchase and Compensation: Compulsory Purchase Procedure, London: Office of the Deputy Prime MinisterGoogle Scholar
Scheiber, Harry, 1973, “Property Law, Expropriation, and Resource Allocation by Government: The United States, 1789–1910,” Journal of Economic History, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 232–51.Google Scholar
Schill, Michael, 1997, “Assessing the Role of Community Development Corporations in Inner City Economic Development,” New York University Review of Law and Social Change, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 753–81.Google Scholar
Scott, Jeffery, 2003, “Public Use and Private Profit: When Should Heightened Scrutiny Be Applied to ‘Public-Private’ Takings?” Journal of Affordable Housing and Community Development Law, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 466–90.Google Scholar
Shavell, Steven, 2010, “Eminent Domain versus Government Purchase of Land Given Imperfect Information about Owners,” Journal of Law and Economics, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 1–27.Google Scholar
Somin, Ilya, 2007, “Controlling the Grasping Hand: Economic Development Takings after Kelo,” Supreme Court Economic Review, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 183–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Somin, Ilya, 2011, “The Judicial Reaction to Kelo,” Albany Government Law Review, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1–37.Google Scholar
Somin, Ilya, 2015, The Grasping Hand: ‘Kelo v. City of London’ and the Limits of Eminent Domain, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Staley, Samuel, 2010, “The Proper Uses of Eminent Domain for Urban Redevelopment is Eminent Domain Necessary?” Benson, Bruce (ed.), Property Rights: Eminent Domain and Regulatory Takings Re-Examined, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 27–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turnbull, Geoffrey, 2012, “Delegating Eminent Domain Powers to Private Firms: Land Use and Efficiency Implications,” Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 305–25.Google Scholar
Voss, Winrich, 2010, “Compulsory Purchase in Poland, Norway and Germany: Part Germany,” FIG International Congress, Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
Wyman, Katrina, 2007, “The Measure of Just Compensation,” University of California Davis Law Review, vol. 41, no. 110, pp. 239–88.Google Scholar