防御技术投资的激励:安全法案的经济分析

IF 0.9 3区 社会学 Q3 ECONOMICS
Mattias K. Polborn
{"title":"防御技术投资的激励:安全法案的经济分析","authors":"Mattias K. Polborn","doi":"10.1016/j.irle.2022.106116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Civilian targets of terrorist or criminal attacks (e.g., sport stadiums, chemical or nuclear industry; infrastructure such as ports or pipelines) are often owned by the private agents who choose how to guard against potential attacks. This creates an important externality problem, as some of the benefits of better protection accrue to other private agents who would suffer from an attack. We analyze a model in which a social planner wants to provide incentives for the deployment of defensive technologies. Our results show that some features of the Safety Act, enacted after the 2001 terror attacks, are probably counterproductive.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47202,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Law and Economics","volume":"73 ","pages":"Article 106116"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Incentives for investments in defensive technology: An economic analysis of the Safety Act\",\"authors\":\"Mattias K. Polborn\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.irle.2022.106116\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Civilian targets of terrorist or criminal attacks (e.g., sport stadiums, chemical or nuclear industry; infrastructure such as ports or pipelines) are often owned by the private agents who choose how to guard against potential attacks. This creates an important externality problem, as some of the benefits of better protection accrue to other private agents who would suffer from an attack. We analyze a model in which a social planner wants to provide incentives for the deployment of defensive technologies. Our results show that some features of the Safety Act, enacted after the 2001 terror attacks, are probably counterproductive.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47202,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Review of Law and Economics\",\"volume\":\"73 \",\"pages\":\"Article 106116\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Review of Law and Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144818822000722\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Law and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144818822000722","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

恐怖分子或犯罪分子攻击的平民目标(如体育场馆、化学或核工业);基础设施(如港口或管道)通常由选择如何防范潜在攻击的私人代理拥有。这就产生了一个重要的外部性问题,因为更好的保护所带来的一些好处会惠及其他可能遭受攻击的私人代理。我们分析了一个模型,在这个模型中,一个社会规划者想要为防御技术的部署提供激励。我们的研究结果表明,2001年恐怖袭击后颁布的《安全法》的某些特征可能适得其反。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Incentives for investments in defensive technology: An economic analysis of the Safety Act

Civilian targets of terrorist or criminal attacks (e.g., sport stadiums, chemical or nuclear industry; infrastructure such as ports or pipelines) are often owned by the private agents who choose how to guard against potential attacks. This creates an important externality problem, as some of the benefits of better protection accrue to other private agents who would suffer from an attack. We analyze a model in which a social planner wants to provide incentives for the deployment of defensive technologies. Our results show that some features of the Safety Act, enacted after the 2001 terror attacks, are probably counterproductive.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
18.20%
发文量
38
审稿时长
48 days
期刊介绍: The International Review of Law and Economics provides a forum for interdisciplinary research at the interface of law and economics. IRLE is international in scope and audience and particularly welcomes both theoretical and empirical papers on comparative law and economics, globalization and legal harmonization, and the endogenous emergence of legal institutions, in addition to more traditional legal topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信