IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/amlawe/v19y2017i1p202-243..html

Optimal Liability when Consumers Mispredict Product Usage

Author

Listed:
  • Andrzej Baniak
  • Peter Grajzl

Abstract

We contrast alternative liability rules for social control of product risks when heterogeneous consumers considering purchasing a durable good due to cognitive errors and biases mispredict future product benefits and, thus, the extent of future product usage. Since the expected consumer harm directly depends on the level of product usage, the consequences of consumers' mispredictions vary with the prevailing liability regime. We first characterize the consumers' purchasing decision and the equilibrium levels of safety and activity from the product's usage under no liability, strict liability, and negligence rule. We then compare the three legal regimes from the social welfare standpoint. We show that social welfare is highest under no liability when consumers substantially underestimate future product benefits; under strict liability when consumers substantially overestimate future product benefits; and under negligence whenever consumers' misprediction is moderate or nonexistent.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrzej Baniak & Peter Grajzl, 2017. "Optimal Liability when Consumers Mispredict Product Usage," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 19(1), pages 202-243.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:amlawe:v:19:y:2017:i:1:p:202-243.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/aler/ahw017
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Tim Friehe & Christoph Rößler & Xiaoge Dong, 2020. "Liability for Third-Party Harm When Harm-Inflicting Consumers Are Present Biased," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 22(1), pages 75-104.
    2. Tsvetanov, Tsvetan & Miceli, Thomas J. & Segerson, Kathleen, 2021. "Products liability with temptation bias," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 76-93.
    3. Gérard Mondello, 2022. "Strict liability, scarce generic input and duopoly competition," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 54(3), pages 369-404, December.
    4. Marie Obidzinski & Yves Oytana, 2025. "Advisory algorithms, automation bias and liability rules," Working Papers 2025-08, CRESE.
    5. Cosnita-Langlais, Andreea & Friehe, Tim & Langlais, Eric, 2025. "Product liability influences incentives for horizontal mergers," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    6. De Chiara, Alessandro & Elizalde, Idoia & Manna, Ester & Segura-Moreiras, Adrian, 2021. "Car accidents in the age of robots," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    7. Florian Baumann & Alexander Rasch, 2024. "Product Liability and Reasonable Product Use," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 53(2), pages 297-338.
    8. Marie Obidzinski & Yves Oytana, 2022. "Advisory algorithms and liability rules," Working Papers hal-04222291, HAL.
    9. Marie Obidzinski & Yves Oytana, 2022. "Prediction, human decision and liability rules, CRED Working paper No 2022-06," Working Papers hal-04034871, HAL.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • K13 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Tort Law and Product Liability; Forensic Economics
    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis

    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:amlawe:v:19:y:2017:i:1:p:202-243.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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://academic.oup.com/aler .

    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.