科斯定理、非空核心与法律中立原则

IF 0.4 Q3 LAW
Crettez Bertrand
{"title":"科斯定理、非空核心与法律中立原则","authors":"Crettez Bertrand","doi":"10.1515/RLE-2018-0027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Coase theorem states that where there are externalities and no transaction costs resource allocation is Pareto-optimal and independent of the stakeholders’ legal position. This result has been challenged many times. In the cooperative game approach to resource allocation, the refutation is made by constructing a three-person game which has an empty core under one set of liability rules—which implies that optimal allocations are coalitionally unstable–and a nonempty core under another set. In this example, however, the probability that the core is non-empty is rather high (5/6). Yet, even if coalitionally stable Pareto-optimal arrangements are likely, to establish the plain validity of the Coase theorem it must be shown that the legal neutrality statement also holds. We show that for the three-person cooperative game example mentioned above, the probability that the two assertions of the Coase theorem hold can be as low as 3/8.","PeriodicalId":44795,"journal":{"name":"Review of Law & Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Coase Theorem, the Nonempty Core, and the Legal Neutrality Principle\",\"authors\":\"Crettez Bertrand\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/RLE-2018-0027\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Coase theorem states that where there are externalities and no transaction costs resource allocation is Pareto-optimal and independent of the stakeholders’ legal position. This result has been challenged many times. In the cooperative game approach to resource allocation, the refutation is made by constructing a three-person game which has an empty core under one set of liability rules—which implies that optimal allocations are coalitionally unstable–and a nonempty core under another set. In this example, however, the probability that the core is non-empty is rather high (5/6). Yet, even if coalitionally stable Pareto-optimal arrangements are likely, to establish the plain validity of the Coase theorem it must be shown that the legal neutrality statement also holds. We show that for the three-person cooperative game example mentioned above, the probability that the two assertions of the Coase theorem hold can be as low as 3/8.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44795,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Law & Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Law & Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/RLE-2018-0027\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Law & Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/RLE-2018-0027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

科斯定理指出,当存在外部性且没有交易成本时,资源配置是帕累托最优的,且与利益相关者的法律地位无关。这一结果遭到了多次质疑。在资源分配的合作博弈方法中,构造了一个三人博弈,该博弈在一组责任规则下具有空核,这意味着最优分配是联合不稳定的,而在另一组责任规则下具有非空核。然而,在本例中,核心非空的概率相当高(5/6)。然而,即使联合稳定的帕累托最优安排是可能的,为了建立科斯定理的明显有效性,必须证明法律中立性声明也成立。我们证明,对于上述三人合作博弈的例子,科斯定理的两个断言成立的概率可以低至3/8。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Coase Theorem, the Nonempty Core, and the Legal Neutrality Principle
The Coase theorem states that where there are externalities and no transaction costs resource allocation is Pareto-optimal and independent of the stakeholders’ legal position. This result has been challenged many times. In the cooperative game approach to resource allocation, the refutation is made by constructing a three-person game which has an empty core under one set of liability rules—which implies that optimal allocations are coalitionally unstable–and a nonempty core under another set. In this example, however, the probability that the core is non-empty is rather high (5/6). Yet, even if coalitionally stable Pareto-optimal arrangements are likely, to establish the plain validity of the Coase theorem it must be shown that the legal neutrality statement also holds. We show that for the three-person cooperative game example mentioned above, the probability that the two assertions of the Coase theorem hold can be as low as 3/8.
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
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
×
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