IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v75y1981i04p975-987_18.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patterns of Adoption of Tort Law Innovations: An Application of Diffusion Theory to Judicial Doctrines

Author

Listed:
  • Canon, Bradley C.
  • Baum, Lawrence

Abstract

Social scientists have given increasing attention to the diffusion of policy innovations among the American states, focusing on the legislative and administrative sectors. This study is an effort to expand our understanding of policy diffusion by analyzing the diffusion of 23 innovative tort doctrines among state court systems between 1876 and 1975. This analysis examines the innovativeness of state judicial systems, the correlates of innovativeness, and the pattern of diffusion. The findings suggest that the diffusion of judicial doctrines is a very different process from the diffusion of legislation. A major reason for the difference appears to be the courts' dependence on litigants to provide opportunities for innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Canon, Bradley C. & Baum, Lawrence, 1981. "Patterns of Adoption of Tort Law Innovations: An Application of Diffusion Theory to Judicial Doctrines," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 75(4), pages 975-987, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:75:y:1981:i:04:p:975-987_18
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055400181237/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Herbert M. Kritzer & Darryn C. Beckstrom, 2007. "Daubert in the States: Diffusion of a New Approach to Expert Evidence in the Courts," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(4), pages 983-1006, December.
    2. Hassan Danaeefard & Fatemeh Mahdizadeh, 2022. "Public Policy Diffusion: A Scoping Review," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 455-477, June.
    3. Feler Bose, 2021. "Policy Innovativeness and Sexual Freedom," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(4), pages 1496-1510, July.
    4. Marlene Kammerer & Chandreyee Namhata, 2018. "What drives the adoption of climate change mitigation policy? A dynamic network approach to policy diffusion," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(4), pages 477-513, December.
    5. Kaveh Rashidi & Anthony Patt, 2018. "Subsistence over symbolism: the role of transnational municipal networks on cities’ climate policy innovation and adoption," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 507-523, April.
    6. J D Smith & H R Glick, 1995. "The Right to Die: A Cross-National Analysis of Agenda Setting and Innovation," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 13(4), pages 479-501, December.
    7. Chen Benjamin Minhao & Li Zhiyu, 2018. "The Foundations of Judicial Diffusion in China: Evidence from an Experiment," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(3), pages 1-27, November.
    8. Evan M. Mistur & John Wagner Givens & Daniel C. Matisoff, 2023. "Contagious COVID‐19 policies: Policy diffusion during times of crisis," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(1), pages 36-62, January.
    9. Lars P. Feld, 2006. "Regulatory Competition and Federalism in Switzerland: Diffusion by Horizontal and Vertical Interaction," CREMA Working Paper Series 2006-22, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    10. Suk Joon Hwang & Frances Berry, 2019. "Deterring Drunk Driving: Why Some States Go Further Than Others in Policy Innovation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-18, May.
    11. Wiener, Joshua G. & Koontz, Tomas M., 2012. "Extent and types of small-scale wind policies in the U.S. states: Adoption and effectiveness," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 15-24.
    12. Daniel Berkowitz & Karen Clay, 2006. "The Effect of Judicial Independence on Courts: Evidence from the American States," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(2), pages 399-440, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:75:y:1981:i:04:p:975-987_18. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.