000			01998nam a22002417a 4500
003			ZW-GwMSU
005			20241016104811.0
008			241016b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
022			_a0739456X
040			_aMSU _bEnglish _cMSU _erda
050	0	0	_aNA9000 JOU
100	1		_aMohamed, Rayman _eauthor
245	1	4	_aThe psychology of residential developers : _blessons from behavioral economics and additional explanations for satisficing/ _ccreated by Rayman Mohamed
264	1		_aThousand Oaks : _bACSP, _c2006.
336			_2rdacontent _atext _btxt
337			_2rdamedia _aunmediated _bn
338			_2rdacarrier _avolume _bnc
440			_aJournal of planning education and research _vVolume 26, number 1
520	3		_aResearchers have repeatedly observed satisficing by residential developers. The phenomenon has been attributed to their bounded rationality. In response, policy makers have designed policies that reduce risks to assist developers in overcoming bounds on their rationality. However, after decades of such policies, there is little evidence that developers have stopped satisficing. This article argues that bounded rationality is an insufficient explanation for satisficing by small developers. Lessons from behavioral economics suggest additional reasons for satisficing by developers. Satisficing is common because developers bracket projects one at a time, bracket each investment decision in isolation of others, create nonfungible investment accounts, establish self-imposed liquidity constraints, and temporally space projects. Policies that group risks to developers are likely to be the most effective. However, additional land-market-specific research is required to design policies that address these psychological traits. Academicians also need to design better survey instruments to investigate developer decision making.
650			_aDevelopers _vBehavioral economics _xNarrow bracketing
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X05282352
942			_2lcc _cJA
999			_c167836 _d167836