首页> 外文OA文献 >Distinguishing Between Consensual and Nonconsensual Advantages of Liability Rules
【2h】

Distinguishing Between Consensual and Nonconsensual Advantages of Liability Rules

机译:区分责任规则的共识和非共识优势

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Louis Kaplow and Steven Shavell\u27s thoughtful reply to our recent article contains powerful insights about the relative efficiency of liability and property rules. While we are in agreement that liability rules can be more efficient than property rules when transaction costs are low, we disagree about the cause of this liability-rule advantage. Kaplow and Shaveli believe that liability rules hold only a nonconsensual advantage over property rules (i.e., liability rules tend to induce efficient nonconsensual takings). While granting this oft-recognized nonconsensual advantage, we contend that liability rules may also have a consensual advantage in low-transaction-cost settings (i.e., liability rules facilitate trade). We use this Comment as a forum to articulate our side of the story.Our answer consists of two parts. In Part I, we locate the current debate within the broader context of entitlement form, transaction costs, and bargaining. In Part II, we provide an example that distinguishes between the consensual and nonconsensual advantages of liability rules.
机译:路易斯·卡普洛(Louis Kaplow)和史蒂文·沙维尔(Steven Shavell)对我们最近的文章的深思熟虑的答复,对责任和财产规则的相对效率具有深刻的见解。虽然我们同意在交易成本较低的情况下责任规则比财产规则更有效,但我们不同意这种责任规则优势的原因。 Kaplow和Shaveli认为,责任规则仅比财产规则具有非共识优势(即,责任规则往往会诱使有效的非共识性获取)。在授予这种公认的非共识优势的同时,我们认为责任规则在低交易成本的情况下也可能具有共识优势(即责任规则促进了贸易)。我们将此评论用作表达我们这一方面的论坛。我们的答案包括两个部分。在第一部分中,我们将当前的辩论放在更广泛的权利形式,交易成本和讨价还价范围内。在第二部分中,我们提供一个示例来区分责任规则的共识性优势和非共识性优势。

著录项

  • 作者

    Ayres, Ian; Talley, Eric;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 1995
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号