IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cem/doctra/856.html

Product Liability: Detecting Potential Risks in New Products

Author

Listed:
  • Andrea Castellano
  • Gustavo Ferro
  • Maximiliano Miranda Zanetti

Abstract

The central hypothesis of this article is that liability regulation can foster firms’ incentives to study the (potential) dangers of their products. We discuss alternative views and develop a formal model to analyze a firm´s incentive structure under the application of hindsight liability. We find a new role for liability regulation: to foster voluntary investment in research aimed at detecting potential risks in new products. The model allows us to analyze the firm´s investment decisions in research under different scenarios, each of which has varying expected costs. We offer some alternatives for institutional design seeking incentive compatibility with the aim proposed.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrea Castellano & Gustavo Ferro & Maximiliano Miranda Zanetti, 2023. "Product Liability: Detecting Potential Risks in New Products," CEMA Working Papers: Serie Documentos de Trabajo. 856, Universidad del CEMA.
    • Handle: RePEc:cem:doctra:856
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ucema.edu.ar/publicaciones/download/documentos/856.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shavell, Steven, 1992. "Liability and the Incentive to Obtain Information about Risk," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 21(2), pages 259-270, June.
    2. Viscusi, W Kip & Moore, Michael J, 1993. "Product Liability, Research and Development, and Innovation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(1), pages 161-184, February.
    3. Miceli, Thomas J., 1997. "Economics of the Law: Torts, Contracts, Property, Litigation," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195103908.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shu Li & Michael Faure, 2025. "The insurability of AI-related risks: implications from the recent legislation in the European Union," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 50(3), pages 524-544, July.
    2. Florian Baumann & Klaus Heine, 2013. "Innovation, Tort Law, and Competition," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 169(4), pages 703-719, December.
    3. Guiseppe Dari Mattiaci & F. Parisi, 2003. "The Economics of Tort Law: A Précis," Working Papers 03-13, Utrecht School of Economics.
    4. Alberto Galasso & Hong Luo, 2018. "Punishing Robots: Issues in the Economics of Tort Liability and Innovation in Artificial Intelligence," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Artificial Intelligence: An Agenda, pages 493-504, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Haitao Yin & Alex Pfaff & Howard Kunreuther, 2011. "Can Environmental Insurance Succeed Where Other Strategies Fail? The Case of Underground Storage Tanks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(1), pages 12-24, January.
    6. Gérard Mondello & Evens Salies, 2016. "Tort law under oligopolistic competition," Sciences Po Economics Publications (main) hal-03459225, HAL.
    7. Julien Jacob & Caroline Orset, 2020. "Innovation, information, lobby and tort law under uncertainty," Working Papers of BETA 2020-25, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    8. Jain, Satish K. & Kundu, Rajendra P., 2006. "Characterization of efficient simple liability rules with multiple tortfeasors," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 410-427, September.
    9. Brandon Roberts & Irving Hoch, 2009. "Malpractice litigation and medical costs in the United States," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(12), pages 1394-1419, December.
    10. Alessandro De Chiara & Juan José Ganuza & Fernando Gómez & Ester Manna & Adrián Segura, 2023. "Platform liability with reputational sanctions," Economics Working Papers 1868, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    11. Suurmond, Guido, 2007. "The effects of the enforcement strategy," MPRA Paper 21142, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Jaivir Singh, 2006. "Separation of powers and the erosion of the ‘right to property’ in India," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 303-324, December.
    13. Friehe Tim & Pham Cat Lam, 2025. "The Direct Incidence of Product Liability on Wages," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 21(1), pages 77-90.
    14. Joshua Schwartzstein & Andrei Shleifer, 2013. "An Activity-Generating Theory of Regulation," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(1), pages 1-38.
    15. Gérard Mondello, 2012. "The Equivalence of Strict Liability and Negligence Rule: A " Trompe l'œil " Perspective," Post-Print hal-00727223, HAL.
    16. Francesco Parisi & Norbert Schulz & Ben Depoorter, 2004. "Simultaneous and Sequential Anticommons," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 175-190, March.
    17. Singh, Ram, 2007. "‘Causation-consistent’ liability, economic efficiency and the law of torts," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 179-203.
    18. Andrzej Baniak & Peter Grajzl, 2016. "Controlling Product Risks when Consumers Are Heterogeneously Overconfident: Producer Liability versus Minimum-Quality-Standard Regulation," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 172(2), pages 274-304, June.
    19. Allan M. Feldman & Ram Singh, 2009. "Comparative Vigilance," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 11(1), pages 134-161.
    20. DeLong, Gayle, 2018. "Can ‘delitigation’ transform an industry?," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 245-254.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • K12 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Contract Law
    • K22 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Business and Securities Law

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cem:doctra:856. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Lucila Solla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cemaaar.html .

    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.