And do property owners own society fair compensation for the costs their
development incurs? Many, if not most, land use regulations have the
intent of protecting neighbors, and society in general, from harmful
actions by owners. That certainly is true for the prototypical land use
regulations - zoning. In also is true of various pollution controls. It
is all too tempted for a land owner to make decisions only on the basis
of his own costs and benefits. But our actions usually affect those
around us. If I dump untreated waste in a stream on my property, it
affects my neighbors downstream. If I fill in my wetlands, I may
increase the risk of flooding elsewhere. Should upstream property owners
compensate downstream owners for their flood damage?
Endangered Species regulations have much the same intent, though it is
harder to put monetary value on the benefits of protecting wildlife.
Should society compensate a landowner because he couldn't build a
shopping mall on his swamp, or should the landowner compensate society
for destroying wildlife habitat?
Paul Jacobson 'The falsification of fact made by intent is
hpj3@u.washington.edu most serious crime a scientist can commit'
[Lord Peter Wimsey]