Civil liability, Knight's UnCertainty and non-diCtatorial regUlator Documents de travail GREDEG GREDEG Working Papers Series (original) (raw)

Civil Liability, Knight’s Uncertainty and Non-Dictatorial Regulator

Research Papers in Economics, 2015

This paper reviews the foundations of the unilateral standard accident model under Knightian uncertainty. It extends the Teitelbaum (2007)'s seminal article (who introduces radical uncertainty) by expanding it from producers to victims and from the probability distribution of accidents to the scale of damage. Mainly, it also considers a regulator who aggregates the agents' preferences (Neghisi (1960) type). Under the condition that the troublemakers' resources are sufficient to cover the damage, the article shows that uncertainty does not preclude, first, the determination of a socially optimal level of care, and second, whatever the civil liability regime (strict liability or negligence) it shows that they determine the same level of socially first-best care. The solution is inefficient only when the polluter's wealth is insufficient to repair the victim's losses.

The Negligence Rule Specificity under Radical Uncertainty

2016

This article is an attempt to reassess the relationships between the strict liability regime and the negligence rule under radical uncertainty (ambiguity theory). In an accident model two representative agents (potential injurer and victim) form divergent beliefs about the probability distribution of an accident and the potential damage scale. It issues on the following results: 1) When the injurer's wealth cover the damage cost, then the socially first-best level of care is established by the injurer under strict liability only. When, the injurer's wealth is insufficient, this level is not reach (capped strict liability regime for instance). 2) Under negligence, the authorities (Regulator or Court) can choose as first best level of care either the level that favors the injurer's interests or the victim ones of. No rational rule can justify a choice rather than the other. 3) The efficiency of both regimes cannot be compared because they obey to different logics.

Hazardous Activities and Civil Strict Liability: The Regulator’s Dilemma

2011

This paper addresses the conditions for setting up strict civil liability schemes. For that it compares the social efficiency of two main civil liability regimes usually enforced to protect the environment: the strict liability regime and the "capped strict liability scheme". First, it shows that the regulator faces an effective dilemma when he has to enforce one of these schemes. This because the social cost of a severe harm (and the associated optimum care effort) is determined independently of any liability regime. This independency has economic consequences. First, victims and polluters pit one against another about the liability regime that the government should enforce. Hence, financially constrained polluters prefer the ceiling of responsibilities while victims wish to extend the amount of redress under a "standard" strict liability. Economic criteria for enforcing a regime rather than another one are lacking. Second, the paper shows that implementing civil strict liability rules may be done by setting up care standards as for instance in the nuclear or the maritime sectors and demanding to the injurers to comply with them. We show that this goal can be achieved by resorting to some friendly monitoring corresponding to frequent random controls with low fines rather than few controls that should involve heavy fines.

Modeling the Choice Between Regulation and Liability in Terms of Social Welfare

SSRN Electronic Journal, 2000

Le CIRANO est un organisme sans but lucratif constitué en vertu de la Loi des compagnies du Québec. Le financement de son infrastructure et de ses activités de recherche provient des cotisations de ses organisationsmembres, d'une subvention d'infrastructure du ministère de la Recherche, de la Science et de la Technologie, de même que des subventions et mandats obtenus par ses équipes de recherche.

The Regulator and the Judge : The Optimal Mix in The Control of Environmental Risk

Revue d'économie politique, 2008

Nous considérons une firme qui génère un risque pour l'environnment via son activité industrielle et qui a une information privée à la fois sur son effort de précaution et sur le montant de ses actifs. Nous étudions l'interaction entre l'audit ex ante de l'effort de précaution par un régulateur et la vérification ex post de la capacité financière par un juge en cas d'accident. Du point de vue des incitations, les deux instruments sont utiles. Le policy-mix optimal dépend de la règle gouvernant l'intervention ex post et de l'efficience de l'intervention ex ante.

Liability for Environmental Harm in Europe: Towards a Harmonised Regime?

Hitotsubashi journal of law and politics, 2016

During the 1980s, the question of liability for environmental harm emerged as a critical question in various legal systems, as well as at supranational level. A trend emerged aimed at the re-evaluation of civil liability as an instrument for the prevention of damage arising from pollution activities potentially dangerous to mankind and the environment. In particular, it is important to remember that since the beginning of the ʼ80s attention paid to environmental Hitotsubashi Journal of Law and Politics 44 (2016), pp.43-65. C Hitotsubashi University

Modelling the choice between regulation and liability in terms of social welfare

Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue Canadienne d`Economique, 2004

Using a formal political economy model with asymmetric information, we illustrate the conditions under which an environmental protection system based on extending liability to private financiers is welfare superior, inferior, or equivalent to a system based on an incentive regulatory scheme subject to capture by the regulatees. We explicitly consider the following factors: the cost of care and its efficiency in reducing the probability of an environmental accident, the social cost of public funds, the net profitability of the risky activities, the level of damages, and the regulatory capture bias. We characterize in such a parameter space the regions where one system dominates the other. JEL classification: D82, K32