scholarly journals Property Rights and Liability Rules: The Ex Ante View of the Cathedral

2001 ◽  
Vol 100 (3) ◽  
pp. 601 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucian Arye Bebchuk
2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-126
Author(s):  
Antonio Nicita ◽  
Matteo Rizzolli

Abstract In this paper we argue that traditional explanations of the dichotomisation of property rules and liability rules are somehow misleading, since they tend to neglect the evolutionary complementarity between die two rules in a world of incomplete property rights characterised by sizeable ex-ante transaction costs in rights’ definition. When rights are a complete bundle of well-defined uses, the application of a property rule reaffirms and reinforces the correlation between rights and duties. In a world of incomplete rights, externalities over undefined uses call for a court intervention aimed at defining a new property right through either a property rule or a liability rule. Independently of whether new rights are created by property or liability rules, die nature and die extent of future externalities over conflicting undefined uses could generate new processes of rights’ definition. The emergence of an externality always implies an evolutionary complementarity between property rules and liability rules whose boundaries actually depend, in alternative legal systems, on die degree of incompleteness of original rights.


2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 525-551 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jooho Lee

ABSTRACTEntrepreneurs should act as stewards of entrepreneurial rent. Entrepreneurial rent is the difference between the ex post value of a venture and its ex ante costs. It is the result of competition among buyers and sellers within the market process rather than the sole efforts of the entrepreneur. As a result, entrepreneurs should allocate entrepreneurial rent for the benefit of other market participants rather than consuming it for themselves. The moral obligation to steward entrepreneurial rent is consistent with traditional bases of property rights and the norm of social welfare maximization, and it applies to corporations and their shareholders, as well as individual entrepreneurs.


1992 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roy E. Cordato

Ronald Coase's 1960 article, “The Problem of Social Cost,” has been one of the most influential works in the development of welfare economics since A. C. Pigou's The Economics of Welfare. Principally, the article made the definition and distribution of property rights a central issue when discussing the efficiency problems of negative externalities. Coase's approach has given rise to most of the economics of tort law and alternative liability rules. It has also led to the development of the “property rights” approach to environmental economics that has found prominence as an alternative to traditional Pigovian analysis.


2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 692-707 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kojun Hamada

This article theoretically investigates how different ownership structures of patents affect ex ante and ex post incentives for innovation by applying a property rights approach. We explore a model in which two research laboratories invest in R&D to obtain an innovative patent, and after successfully obtaining the patent they determine an ownership structure for the patent. The two parties consider how the determined patent ownership would affect their noncontractible relation-specific investments for commercialisation. We demonstrate that joint ownership of a patent between two parties is optimal. More concretely, if a selfish (altruistic) relation-specific investment is more important than an altruistic (selfish) investment, a joint ownership with no (bilateral) veto is optimal to maximise the joint value. Moreover, when both parties do not commit themselves to joint ownership in advance, they have greater incentive to invest in R&D than committing, even if they understand that joint ownership is desirable ex post.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document