This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

How to determine fining behaviour in court? Game theoretical and empirical analysis

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Rousseau Sandra () (K.U.Leuven-Center for Economic Studies)
Billiet Carole () (Center for environmental law - University of Ghent)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

We build a structural model to understand the fine set in court, which is described as the outcome of a two-stage game between defendant, public prosecutor and judge. The equilibrium fine depends on the harm caused, the costs to society and the probalility that the quilty party is punished. This fine influences the severity of prosecution and the defence expenditures. Next we empirically analyse the fines pronounced by the Court of Appeal in Ghent (Belgium) for water related criminal offences. We investigate whether the seriousness of the violation and past convictions, as well as some other characteristics, increase the penalty.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. 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.

File URL: http://www.econ.kuleuven.ac.be/ew/academic/energmil/downloads/ete-wp-2005-10.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centrum voor Economische Studiën, Energy, Transport and Environment in its series Energy, Transport and Environment Working Papers Series with number ete0510.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length: 39 pages
Date of creation: Dec 2005
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ete:etewps:ete0510

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.econ.kuleuven.be/ew/academic/energmil
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Isabelle).

Related research
Keywords:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Cohen, Mark A, 1987. "Optimal Enforcement Strategy to Prevent Oil Spills: An Application of a Principal-Agent Model with Moral Hazard," Journal of Law & Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 30(1), pages 23-51, April.
  2. Helland, Eric, 2001. "Prosecutorial Discretion at the EPA: Some Evidence on Litigation Strategy," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 271-94, July. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Steven Shavell, 2004. "The Appeals Process and Adjudicator Incentives," NBER Working Papers 10754, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Deily, Mary E. & Gray, Wayne B., 1991. "Enforcement of pollution regulations in a declining industry," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 260-274, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? IDEAS also indexes books.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-8.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.