IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/irlaec/v56y2018icp160-169.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Product liability should reward firm transparency

Author

Listed:
  • Artigot, Mireia
  • Ganuza, Juan José
  • Gomez, Fernando
  • Penalva, Jose

Abstract

In this paper we analyze the role played by firms’ transparency decisions on product liability standards. In particular we focus on information provided by firms on their processes and products. We find that even if transparency is not of direct importance to the courts, that is, is not informative as to findings of product defectiveness in a given case, the Law, in order to improve the incentives for the firm to provide the desired level of product quality, should optimally set product liability standards as a function of a firm's transparency level. Courts should be more lenient (in terms of evidence showing that the manufacturer is not liable) with those firms who have been more transparent in terms of product features and manufacturing information. Our result is reinforced when transparency reduces evidentiary uncertainty before the courts. This has implications for the interplay between market forces and product liability.

Suggested Citation

  • Artigot, Mireia & Ganuza, Juan José & Gomez, Fernando & Penalva, Jose, 2018. "Product liability should reward firm transparency," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 160-169.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:irlaec:v:56:y:2018:i:c:p:160-169
    DOI: 10.1016/j.irle.2018.10.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144818818300267
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.irle.2018.10.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Juan José Ganuza & Fernando Gomez & Jose Penalva, 2015. "Minimizing errors, maximizing incentives: Optimal court decisions and the quality of evidence," Economics Working Papers 1500, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    2. Ben-Shahar Omri, 2006. "The (Legal) Pains of Vioxx: Why Product Liability Can Make Products More Dangerous," The Economists' Voice, De Gruyter, vol. 3(6), pages 1-4, June.
    3. Demougin, Dominique & Fluet, Claude, 2006. "Preponderance of evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(4), pages 963-976, May.
    4. Grossman, Sanford J, 1981. "The Informational Role of Warranties and Private Disclosure about Product Quality," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(3), pages 461-483, December.
    5. David I. Levine & Michael W. Toffel, 2010. "Quality Management and Job Quality: How the ISO 9001 Standard for Quality Management Systems Affects Employees and Employers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(6), pages 978-996, June.
    6. Andrew F. Daughety & Jennifer F. Reinganum, 2005. "Secrecy and Safety," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1074-1091, September.
    7. Andrew F. Daughety & Jennifer F. Reinganum, 2008. "Products Liability, Signaling and Disclosure," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 164(1), pages 106-126, March.
    8. Paul R. Milgrom, 1981. "Good News and Bad News: Representation Theorems and Applications," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 12(2), pages 380-391, Autumn.
    9. Juan José Ganuza & Fernando Gomez & Marta Robles, 2016. "Product Liability versus Reputation," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 213-241.
    10. Dominique Demougin & Claude Fluet, 2005. "Deterrence versus Judicial Error: A Comparative View of Standards of Proof," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 161(2), pages 193-206, June.
    11. Yongmin Chen & Xinyu Hua, 2012. "Ex Ante Investment, Ex Post Remedies, And Product Liability," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 53(3), pages 845-866, August.
    12. Mark Bagnoli & Susan G. Watts, 2017. "Voluntary Assurance of Voluntary CSR Disclosure," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(1), pages 205-230, February.
    13. Michael J. Fishman & Kathleen M. Hagerty, 2003. "Mandatory Versus Voluntary Disclosure in Markets with Informed and Uninformed Customers," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 45-63, April.
    14. repec:reg:rpubli:575 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. V. Joseph Hotz & Mo Xiao, 2013. "Strategic Information Disclosure: The Case Of Multiattribute Products With Heterogeneous Consumers," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(1), pages 865-881, January.
    16. Ben-Shahar, Omri, 1998. "Should Products Liability Be Based on Hindsight?," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 325-357, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrew F. Daughety & Jennifer F. Reinganum, 2008. "Communicating quality: a unified model of disclosure and signalling," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(4), pages 973-989, December.
    2. Tianle Song, 2022. "Quality Disclosure and Product Selection," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(2), pages 323-346, June.
    3. Hong, Xianpei & Zhou, Menghuan & Gong, Yeming, 2021. "Dilemma of quality information disclosure in technology licensing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(2), pages 543-557.
    4. Maarten C.W. Janssen & Mariya Teteryatnikova, 2016. "Horizontal Product Differentiation: Disclosure and Competition," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(4), pages 589-620, December.
    5. Schmitt, Stefanie Y. & Bruckner, Dominik, 2023. "Unaware consumers and disclosure of deficiencies," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 1018-1042.
    6. Dmitry Lubensky & Eric Schmidbauer, 2020. "Free Product Trials: Disclosing Quality And Match Value," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 58(4), pages 1565-1576, October.
    7. Andrew F. Daughety & Jennifer F. Reinganum, 2013. "Economic analysis of products liability: Theory," Chapters, in: Jennifer H. Arlen (ed.), Research Handbook on the Economics of Torts, chapter 3, pages 69-96, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Xun Bian & Justin C. Contat & Bennie D. Waller & Scott A. Wentland, 2023. "Why Disclose Less Information? Toward Resolving a Disclosure Puzzle in the Housing Market," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 66(2), pages 443-486, February.
    9. Ennio Bilancini & Leonardo Boncinelli, 2021. "When market unraveling fails and mandatory disclosure backfires: Persuasion games with labeling and costly information acquisition," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 585-599, August.
    10. Stacie A. Bosley & Sarah Greenman & Samantha Snyder, 2020. "Voluntary Disclosure And Earnings Expectations In Multi‐Level Marketing," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 58(4), pages 1643-1662, October.
    11. Liang Guo, 2020. "Upstream Exploitation and Strategic Disclosure," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(5), pages 923-938, September.
    12. Liang Guo, 2021. "Partial Unraveling and Strategic Contract Timing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(12), pages 7719-7736, December.
    13. Janssen, Maarten, 2017. "Regulating False Discloure," VfS Annual Conference 2017 (Vienna): Alternative Structures for Money and Banking 168159, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    14. Andrew F. Daughety & Jennifer F. Reinganum, 2008. "Products Liability, Signaling and Disclosure," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 164(1), pages 106-126, March.
    15. Oliver Board, 2009. "Competition And Disclosure," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 197-213, March.
    16. Zhao, Ming & Dong, Ciwei & Cheng, T.C.E., 2018. "Quality disclosure strategies for small business enterprises in a competitive marketplace," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 270(1), pages 218-229.
    17. A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell, 2012. "Mandatory Versus Voluntary Disclosure of Product Risks," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 360-379.
    18. Ting Liu & Monic Jiayin Sun, 2007. "Informal Payments in Developing Countries' Public Health Sectors¤," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series WP2007-032, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    19. Klaus Friesenbichler & George Clarke & Michael Wong, 2014. "Price competition and market transparency: evidence from a random response technique," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 41(1), pages 5-21, February.
    20. Creane, Anthony & Jeitschko, Thomas D. & Sim, Kyoungbo, 2019. "Welfare effects of certification under latent adverse selection," DICE Discussion Papers 312, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Accidents and liability standards; Transparency; Consumer markets; Evidence; L51; H57; H24; D44; K13; K23; L51;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation
    • H57 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Procurement
    • H24 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Personal Income and Other Nonbusiness Taxes and Subsidies
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • K13 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Tort Law and Product Liability; Forensic Economics
    • K23 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Regulated Industries and Administrative Law
    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation

    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:eee:irlaec:v:56:y:2018:i:c:p:160-169. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/irle .

    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.