Reimagining takings law

Hanoch Dagan*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterpeer-review


Takings law attracts the attention of lawyers, judges, property theorists, and political philosophers. This literature tends to fall into two camps. Libertarian authors maintain that compensation is required each time the taking's impact on the owner is disproportionate. Their liberal opponents seek to restrict the range of takings law as much as possible. This chapter reimagines a truly liberal takings doctrine, which deviates from the positions of both camps. Unlike the former, it disputes both the notion that ownership should only promote individual liberty and the strict takings doctrine said to follow this libertarian utopia. Unlike the latter, it insists that takings law should not become a doctrine of virtually no compensation. To successfully integrate social responsibility and distributive justice into takings doctrine, along with autonomy, personhood and utility, we need a regime of partial and differential compensation, distinguishing between types of properties and types of benefited groups.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProperty and Community
PublisherOxford University Press
ISBN (Electronic)9780199775804
ISBN (Print)9780195391572
StatePublished - 1 May 2010


  • Communitarianism
  • Just compensation
  • Liberalism
  • Property
  • Reciprocity
  • Regulatory takings


Dive into the research topics of 'Reimagining takings law'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this