Law & Economics: Public Law (Topic)最新文献

{"title":"Statistical Treatment of 'Build-Own-Operate-Transfer' Schemes","authors":"Brian T Donaghue","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.880199","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.880199","url":null,"abstract":"The paper argues that assets produced under build-own-operate-transfer (BOOT) schemes under which public infrastructure assets are legally owned and operated for a defined period by the private corporation that constructs them, before being transferred to the government - should be treated in macroeconomic statistics as owned by the government from the outset. The paper considers three approaches to the treatment of the economic stocks and flows entailed in these arrangements. While the preferred approach conceptually is to impute the creation and extinguishment of financial assets and liabilities, this approach is not consistent with the System of National Accounts 1993, and therefore an operating lease approach to BOOT schemes is recommended.","PeriodicalId":374378,"journal":{"name":"Law & Economics: Public Law (Topic)","volume":"106 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124960224","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Optimal Probability and Magnitude of Fines for Acts that Definitely are Undesirable","authors":"L. Kaplow","doi":"10.1016/0144-8188(92)90002-9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/0144-8188(92)90002-9","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":374378,"journal":{"name":"Law & Economics: Public Law (Topic)","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1989-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"120044867","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A Model of the Socially Optimal Use of Liability and Regulation","authors":"S. Shavell","doi":"10.3386/W1220","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3386/W1220","url":null,"abstract":"Liability and safety regulation are examined as means of controlling risks in a theoretical model of the occurrence of accidents. According to the model, regulation does not result in appropriate reduction of risk -- due to the regulator's lack of knowledge about risk -- nor does liability result in that outcome -- because the incentives it creates are diluted by the chance that parties would not be sued for harm done or would not be able to pay fully for it. Thus, either liability could turn out to be superior to regulation or the reverse could be true. But as is stressed, joint use of the two means of controlling risk is generally socially advantageous, and the characteristics of their optimal joint use are determined.","PeriodicalId":374378,"journal":{"name":"Law & Economics: Public Law (Topic)","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1983-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133219764","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Reframing the Debate Over Eminent Domain Reform","authors":"David A. Dana","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.951552","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.951552","url":null,"abstract":"As a purely theoretical matter, we can predict that a flat ban on all exercises of eminent domain will result in some less development in urban areas (poor or not poor) and some more development in exurban or rural areas. We can also predict that a ban on only economic development condemnations (which allows so-called blight or blight removal condemnations to continue as before) will result in some more development in poor urban areas (but not necessarily in urban areas as a whole) and in exurban or rural ones, and less development in suburban areas (at least non-poor suburbs). We can say almost nothing about how much less or how much more. Moreover, even these minimal predictions must be qualified because restrictions on eminent domain may lead localities in fragmented land markets to rely more heavily on alternative means to reduce the costs of land assembly for developers, such as cash and infrastructure subsidies or zoning exceptions, particularly in markets where the status quo ante was imperfect competition among the localities for new development. The qualitative claims about the nature of the development that will be encouraged or discouraged as a result of eminent domain \"reforms\" lack both theoretical and empirical support. Stated simply, there is no defensible way to categorize as good or bad, economically viable or non-viable, efficient or inefficient, socially beneficial or socially harmful, the development in urban areas that will be lost as a result of a flat ban on eminent domain or (in poor urban areas at least) that will be gained as a result of a ban on economic development condemnations coupled with continued allowance of blight condemnations. One reason this is so is that the two legal tests for the kinds of \"public use\" that are sufficient for the exercise of eminent domain - the economic development as public use test and blight removal as public use test - do not necessarily select for \"good\" new development according to any intelligible criteria of goodness. In sum, we are left with a rather unsatisfying situation: a lack of any assurance as to whether there will be any net benefits, in terms of more \"good\" development and less \"bad\" development, as a result of either of the two eminent domain reform alternatives currently on the political agenda, namely, a flat ban (the Florida approach) or a ban on only economic development condemnations coupled with continued allowance of blight condemnations (the approach in most reforming states). Given this unsatisfying situation, and assuming we do care about poorer urban areas, we need to ask, we should ask: is there a different kind of eminent domain reform for which we would have more, at least some more, assurance that it will produce more good development and less bad development in those areas? The debate over eminent domain reform needs to be re-framed.","PeriodicalId":374378,"journal":{"name":"Law & Economics: Public Law (Topic)","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121122717","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Pareto-Improving International Labor Standards Agreements: A Simple Model","authors":"S. Reddy","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.930113","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.930113","url":null,"abstract":"It has been widely argued that international agreements over labor standards are undesirable because they are bound to \"hurt those that they are meant to help.\" We develop a model in which an appropriately designed international labor standards agreement improves welfare for all persons in all countries.","PeriodicalId":374378,"journal":{"name":"Law & Economics: Public Law (Topic)","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126967021","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}