ABSTRACT
This chapter examines the question of whether government regulations of private property that limit its use without actually taking title ever rise to the level of a taking for which compensation is due. Such regulations are pervasive; examples include land-use zoning, environmental and safety regulations, historic landmark designations, and rules requiring accommodations for the disabled. The compensation question addressed is where the dividing line is between non-compensable and compensable regulations. The issue poses an interesting challenge for a positive economic theory of law because of the apparent disconnect between the all-or-nothing way that courts have treated full versus partial takings, and the economic view that they represent points on a continuum. The chapter illustrates a brief review of the key legal and scholarly arguments, and proposes the variety of answers to the compensation question, and sets the stage for a resolution of the issue.
