IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ecinqu/v18y1980i2p233-46.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the Choice between Property Rules and Liability Rules

Author

Listed:
  • Polinsky, A Mitchell

Abstract

When parties can bargain with each other in an externality situation, it is frequently argued that liability rules are preferable to property rules. The case for liability rules is thought to be strongest when the parties behave strategically, when the collective authority responsible for maximizing social welfare has perfect information, and when lump-sum transfers are not available. It is shown here that liability rules are not generally preferable to property rules in these circumstances because of their limited ability to redistribute income between the parties.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Polinsky, A Mitchell, 1980. "On the Choice between Property Rules and Liability Rules," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 18(2), pages 233-246, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ecinqu:v:18:y:1980:i:2:p:233-46
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frech, H E, III, 1979. "The Extended Coase Theorem and Long Run Equilibrium: The Nonequivalence of Liability Rules and Property Rights," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 17(2), pages 254-268, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas Miceli, 2014. "The color of law: an economic theory of legal boundaries," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 185-209, October.
    2. Jongwook Kim & Joseph T. Mahoney, 2002. "Resource-based and property rights perspectives on value creation: the case of oil field unitization," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(4-5), pages 225-245.
    3. Thomas J. Miceli, 2011. "The Use of Economics for Understanding Law: An Economist's View of the Cathedral," Working papers 2011-25, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    4. de Vries, J. Pierre & Sieh, Kaleb A., 2012. "Reception-oriented radio rights: Increasing the value of wireless by explicitly defining and delegating radio operating rights," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 522-530.

    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. Yalcintas, Altug, 2010. "The ‘Coase Theorem’ vs. Coase theorem proper: How an error emerged and why it remained uncorrected so long," MPRA Paper 37936, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Allan C. DeSerpa, 1992. "The Pure Economics of the Coase Theorem," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 18(3), pages 287-304, Summer.
    3. Brito, Dagobert L. & Hamilton, Jonathan H. & Intriligator, Michael D. & Sheshinski, Eytan & Slutsky, Steven M., 2006. "Private information, Coasian bargaining, and the second welfare theorem," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(4-5), pages 871-895, May.
    4. Carlos Hervés-Beloso & Francisco Martínez-Concha, 2023. "Coasian rights in a cap-and-trade mechanism with damage compensations," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 425-441, December.
    5. Steven G. Medema, 2020. "The Coase Theorem at Sixty," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 58(4), pages 1045-1128, December.
    6. Holderness, Clifford G., 2003. "Joint ownership and alienability," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 75-100, March.

    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:oup:ecinqu:v:18:y:1980:i:2:p:233-46. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/weaaaea.html .

    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.