IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Optimal Public Policies to Minimize Risks of Genotoxic Harms: A Comparison of the Efficiency of Administrative Agency Regulation and Tort Liability

Listed author(s):
  • Johnson, Gary V.
  • Ulen, Thomas S.
  • Alho, Juha M.
Registered author(s):

    Genotoxins, both radiation and chemical, by their nature have great capacity for creating unintended third-party harms (externalities), which are difficult to control from a policy standpoint. The difficulties presented by genotoxins stem from 1) the long latency between exposure and the resulting harm; 2) the potential that the size of the harm might be greater than the capitalized value of its generator (e.g., the Johns-Manville asbestosis cases in the U.S.A.); 3) the inability in many cases to determine the population exposed to the genotoxin and the extent of individual exposures. An additional difficulty that plagues environmental control policies in general, not just those targeted at genotoxins, is the inability to monitor without error. To be effective, policies to control genotoxins must deal with the uncertainty created be these difficulties in order to assure that risk generators (generators, users, and possibly disposers of genotoxins) take the proper level of precaution in their activities. A model of the behavior of risk generators is created to analyze the economic efficiency of alternative policies for controlling external effects of genotoxin use under conditions of the uncertainty. The two broad policy categories examined are ex ante regulation (e.g., taxes, operational competency tests, and safety standards) and potential ex post exposure to financial liability for harms. A stochastic simulation of this behavioral model was then undertaken. This analysis gives rise to several unique findings. First, that due to uncertainty an economically efficient level of precaution in the use of genotoxins will not be taken by risk generators when only ex post policy of strict liability is employed. This finding holds for the case of probabilistic causation as well. Second, that if either ex post strict liability with punitive damages or ex post strict liability with an uncertain ex ante regulation is used the minimum of the firm's costs will occur at the social optimum, but the firm's loss function will have nonconvexities. Third, given simultaneous use of ex post strict liability with the appropriate level of punitive damages and an appropriate uncertain ex ante regulation the global minimum of the firm's costs will occur at the social optimum. Fourth, the use of ex ante regulation with ex post liability results in marked nonconvexities at the low levels of precaution. This finding may point to the desirability of using punitive damages as a corrective to strict liability.

    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.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by University of Connecticut, Food Marketing Policy Center in its series Research Reports with number 25163.

    in new window

    Date of creation: 1989
    Handle: RePEc:ags:uconnr:25163
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    1376 Storrs Road, Unit 4021, Storrs, CT 06269-4021

    Phone: (860) 486-2836
    Fax: (860) 486-1932
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    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.:

    in new window

    1. Gary V. Johnson & Thomas S. Ulen, 1986. "Designing Public Policy toward Hazardous Wastes: The Role of Administrative Regulations and Legal Liability Rules," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 68(5), pages 1266-1271.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:uconnr:25163. 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: (AgEcon Search)

    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.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.