A Unilateral Accident Model under Ambiguity
AbstractStandard accident models are based on the expected utility framework and represent agents’ beliefs about accident risk with a probability distribution. Consequently, they do not allow for Knightian uncertainty, or ambiguity, with respect to accident risk and cannot accommodate optimism (ambiguity loving) or pessimism (ambiguity aversion). This paper presents a unilateral accident model under ambiguity. To incorporate ambiguity, I adopt the Choquet expected utility framework and represent the injurer’s beliefs with a neoadditive capacity. I show that neither strict liability nor negligence is generally efficient in the presence of ambiguity. In addition, I generally find that the injurer’s level of care decreases (increases) with ambiguity if he is optimistic (pessimistic) and decreases (increases) with his degree of optimism (pessimism). The results suggest that negligence is more robust to ambiguity and, therefore, may be superior to strict liability in unilateral accident cases. Finally, I design an efficient ambiguity-adjusted liability rule.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by University of Chicago Press in its journal The Journal of Legal Studies.
Volume (Year): 36 (2007)
Issue (Month): 2 (06)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLS/
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Gérard Mondello, 2013.
"Ambiguous Beliefs on Damages and Civil Liability Theories","
- Gérard Mondello, 2013. "Ambiguous Beliefs on Damages and Civil Liability Theories," Working Papers 2013.75, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
- Mondello, Gérard, 2012. "La responsabilité environnementale des prêteurs : difficultés juridiques et ensemble des possibles," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 88(2), pages 257-278, Juin.
- Langlais, Eric, 2010. "Safety and the Allocation of Costs in Large Accidents," MPRA Paper 25710, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Gérard Mondello, 2012.
"The Equivalence of Strict Liability and Negligence Rule: A « Trompe l'œil » Perspective,"
2012.08, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
- Gérard Mondello, 2012. "The Equivalence of Strict Liability and Negligence Rule: A "Trompe l'oeil" Perspective," GREDEG Working Papers 2012-03, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Économie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), University of Nice Sophia Antipolis.
- Gérard Mondello, 2012. "The Equivalence of Strict Liability and Negligence Rule: A " Trompe l'œil " Perspective," Post-Print hal-00727223, HAL.
- Nathalie Chappe & Raphaël Giraud, 2013. "Confidence, Optimism and Litigation: A Litigation Model under Ambiguity," Working Papers 2013-05, CRESE.
- Langlais, Eric, 2009.
"les criminels aiment-ils le risque ?
[Are criminals risk-seeking individulas ?]," MPRA Paper 14892, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Bhole, Bharat & Wagner, Jeffrey, 2010. "Punitive damages and the recklessness requirement with uninformed injurers," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 253-264, September.
- Eichberger, Jürgen & Grant, Simon & Lefort, Jean-Philippe, 2012. "Generalized neo-additive capacities and updating," Economics Papers from University Paris Dauphine 123456789/7332, Paris Dauphine University.
- Eichberger, Jürgen & Grant, Simon & Lefort, Jean-Philippe, 2009.
"Neo-additive capacities and updating,"
0490, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Journals Division).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.