Ex ante liability rules in New Zealand's health and safety in employment act: A law and economics analysis
New Zealand's health and safety legislation imposes penalties for breaches of duty even where accidents have not occurred. We argue that ex post liability as implemented provides inadequate incentives for safety precautions due to weak penalties and significant uncertainty surrounding courts' required standard of care. Merely adding ex ante liability with even weaker penalties and low inspection probabilities is unlikely to fully compensate for these deficiencies, but may be a worthwhile complement. More strict ex ante standards than socially optimal precaution levels may even be desirable, providing some justification for observed relatively stringent safety regulations and required standards of precaution.
If 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 41 (2007)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/RNZP20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RNZP20|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:nzecpp:v:41:y:2007:i:1:p:91-108. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.