IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ulp/sbbeta/2011-24.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Innovation and diffusion in risky industries under liability law: the case of “double-impact” innovations

Author

Listed:
  • Julien Jacob

Abstract

We suggest a model of innovation and diffusion of a new technology in which two firms, one innovative and one non-innovative, undertake risky activities that are regulated by liability rules. One originality of this study is to consider the presence of a “double-impact” innovation, impacting both the cost of risk prevention and the probability of accident. We compare strict liability and negligence in terms of incentives to innovate, to adopt the new technology and to prevent the risk. We find that the type of innovation and the behavior of the Regulator play key roles: when the Regulator acts as a “leader”, a negligence rule is socially preferable if the innovation mainly impacts the cost of risk prevention. In other cases (Regulator as a “follower” and/or innovation with sufficiently high impact on the probability of accident), strict liability is preferable.

Suggested Citation

  • Julien Jacob, 2011. "Innovation and diffusion in risky industries under liability law: the case of “double-impact” innovations," Working Papers of BETA 2011-24, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
  • Handle: RePEc:ulp:sbbeta:2011-24
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://beta.u-strasbg.fr/WP/2011/2011-24.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert M. Solow, 1956. "A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 70(1), pages 65-94.
    2. Parry, Ian W. H., 1995. "Optimal pollution taxes and endogenous technological progress," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 69-85, May.
    3. Hartwick, John M., 1984. "Optimal R&D levels when firm j benefits from firm i's inventive activity," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 16(1-2), pages 165-170.
    4. Pierre Dehez & Daniela Tellone, 2013. "Data Games: Sharing Public Goods with Exclusion," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 15(4), pages 654-673, August.
    5. LATZER, Hélène & MAYNERIS, Florian, 2012. "Income distribution and vertical comparative advantage. Theory and evidence," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2012034, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    6. Julien Jacob & Sandrine Spaeter, 2016. "Large-Scale Risks and Technological Change: What About Limited Liability?," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 18(1), pages 125-142, February.
    7. Endres, Alfred & Bertram, Regina, 2006. "The development of care technology under liability law," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 503-518, December.
    8. Marc-Hubert Depret & Abdelilah Hamdouch, 2009. "Quelles politiques de l'innovation et de l'environnement pour quelle dynamique d'innovation environnementale ?," Innovations, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(1), pages 127-147.
    9. Maia David & Bernard Sinclair-Desgagné, 2010. "Pollution Abatement Subsidies and the Eco-Industry," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(2), pages 271-282, February.
    10. Maryann Feldman, 1999. "The New Economics Of Innovation, Spillovers And Agglomeration: Areview Of Empirical Studies," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1-2), pages 5-25.
    11. Endres, Alfred & Friehe, Tim, 2011. "Incentives to diffuse advanced abatement technology under environmental liability law," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 30-40, July.
    12. Giuseppe Dari-Mattiacci & Gerrit De Geest, 2005. "Judgment Proofness under Four Different Precaution Technologies," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 161(1), pages 38-56, March.
    13. Alfred Endres & Bianca Rundshagen & Regina Bertram, 2008. "Environmental Liability Law and Induced Technical Change: The Role of Spillovers," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 164(2), pages 254-279, June.
    14. Universities-National Bureau Committee for Economic Research & Committee on Economic Growth of the Social Science Research Council, 1962. "The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number univ62-1, March.
    15. Fluet, Claude, 2010. "Liability rules under evidentiary uncertainty," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 1-9, March.
    16. Baumann, Florian & Friehe, Tim & Grechenig, Kristoffel, 2011. "A note on the optimality of (even more) incomplete strict liability," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 77-82, June.
    17. Pierre Dehez, 2011. "Allocation Of Fixed Costs: Characterization Of The (Dual) Weighted Shapley Value," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(02), pages 141-157.
    18. Xi Chen, 2011. "Increasing Returns to Scale in U.S. manufacturing industries: evidence from direct and reverse regression," Working Papers of BETA 2011-11, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    19. Milliman, Scott R. & Prince, Raymond, 1989. "Firm incentives to promote technological change in pollution control," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 247-265, November.
    20. Thierry Burger-Helmchen & Laurence Frank, 2011. "La création de rentes : une approche par les compétences et capacités dynamiques," Innovations, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(2), pages 89-111.
    21. Julien Jacob, 2011. "Ambiguity and Optimal Technological Choice: Does the Liability Regime Matter?," Working Papers of BETA 2011-06, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    22. Fischer, Carolyn & Parry, Ian W. H. & Pizer, William A., 2003. "Instrument choice for environmental protection when technological innovation is endogenous," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 523-545, May.
    23. Downing, Paul B. & White, Lawrence J., 1986. "Innovation in pollution control," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 18-29, March.
    24. David, Maia & Nimubona, Alain-Désiré & Sinclair-Desgagné, Bernard, 2011. "Emission taxes and the market for abatement goods and services," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 179-191, January.
    25. Richard Nelson, 1962. "Introduction to "The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors"," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 1-16, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    26. Shavell, S., 1986. "The judgment proof problem," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 45-58, June.
    27. 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.
    28. Hélène Latzer & Florian Mayneris, 2011. "Trade in quality and income distribution: an analysis of the enlarged EU market," Working Papers of BETA 2011-21, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    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. Julien Jacob & Sandrine Spaeter, 2016. "Large-Scale Risks and Technological Change: What About Limited Liability?," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 18(1), pages 125-142, February.
    2. Meixing Dai, 2011. "Motivations and strategies for a real revaluation of the Yuan," Working Papers of BETA 2011-23, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    3. Serge Garcia & Julien Jacob & Eve-Angéline Lambert, 2017. "Comparison of liability sharing rules for environmental damage: An experiment with different levels of solvency," Working Papers of BETA 2017-12, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    4. Julien Jacob, 2015. "Innovation in Risky Industries under Liability Law: The Case of Double-Impact Innovations," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 171(3), pages 385-404, September.
    5. Hattori, Keisuke, 2011. "Optimal Environmental Policy under Monopolistic Provision of Clean Technologies," MPRA Paper 28837, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Hattori, Keisuke, 2017. "Optimal combination of innovation and environmental policies under technology licensing," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 601-609.
    7. Houda Ghaya, 2011. "Board of Directors’ Involvement in Strategic Decision Making Process: Definition and Literature Review," Working Papers of BETA 2011-22, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    8. Jenny Monheim-Helstroffer & Marie Obidzinski, 2011. "The EU legislation game: the case of asylum law," Working Papers of BETA 2011-16, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    9. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    10. Parry, Ian W H & Pizer, William A & Fischer, Carolyn, 2003. "How Large Are the Welfare Gains from Technological Innovation Induced by Environmental Policies?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 237-255, May.
    11. Dagmar Nelissen & Till Requate, 2007. "Pollution-reducing and resource-saving technological progress," International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 6(1), pages 5-44.
    12. Parry, Ian W.H., 2003. "On the implications of technological innovation for environmental policy," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 57-76, February.
    13. Requate, Till, 2005. "Dynamic incentives by environmental policy instruments--a survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 175-195, August.
    14. Endres, Alfred & Friehe, Tim, 2011. "Incentives to diffuse advanced abatement technology under environmental liability law," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 30-40, July.
    15. Alfred Endres & Bianca Rundshagen, 2010. "Standard Oriented Environmental Policy: Cost-Effectiveness and Incentives for 'Green Technology'," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 11, pages 86-107, February.
    16. Idrissa Sibailly, 2013. "On licensing and diffusion of clean technologies in oligopoly," Working Papers hal-00911453, HAL.
    17. Alfred Endres & Bianca Rundshagen, 2010. "Standard Oriented Environmental Policy: Cost‐Effectiveness and Incentives for ‘Green Technology’," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 11(1), pages 86-107, February.
    18. Sterner, Thomas & Turnheim, Bruno, 2009. "Innovation and diffusion of environmental technology: Industrial NOx abatement in Sweden under refunded emission payments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2996-3006, October.
    19. Alfred Endres & Tim Friehe, 2014. "The reasonable person standard: trading off static and dynamic efficiency," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 249-267, April.
    20. Krysiak, Frank C., 2011. "Environmental regulation, technological diversity, and the dynamics of technological change," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 528-544, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Innovation; technological risk; strict liability; negligence.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • E2 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment
    • E5 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Monetary Policy, Central Banking, and the Supply of Money and Credit
    • E6 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook
    • F3 - International Economics - - International Finance

    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:ulp:sbbeta:2011-24. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/bestrfr.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.