Disproving the coase theorem?

Economics and Philosophy

Volumn 23, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 321-341

  Halpin, Andrew ^a  

^a SWANSEA UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 35748966984     PISSN: 02662671     EISSN: 14740028     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0266267107001514     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Adler, M. and E. Posner, eds. 2001. Cost-Benefit Analysis: Legal, Economic, and Philosophical Perspectives. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
2. Aslanbeigui, N. and S. Medema. 1998. Beyond the dark clouds: Pigou and Coase on social cost. History of Political Economy 30:601-26.
3. Bouckaert, B. and G. De Geest, eds. 2000. Encyclopedia of Law and Economics, Volume I: The History and Methodology of Law and Economics. Edward Elgar.
4. Calabresi, G. 1991. The pointlessness of Pareto: Carrying Coase further. Yale Law Journal 100:1211-37.
5. Campbell, D. and S. Picciotto. 1998. Exploring the interaction between law and economics: the limits of formalism. Legal Studies 18:249-78.
6. Coase, R. H. 1960. The problem of social cost. Journal of Law and Economics 3:1-44.
7. Coase, R. H. 1988a. The Firm, the Market, and the Law. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
8. Coase, R. H. 1988b. Notes on the problem of social cost. In Coase 1988a.
9. Coase, R. H. 1996. Law and economics and A.W Brian Simpson. Journal of Legal Studies 25:103-19.
10. Coleman, J. 1988. Markets, Morals and the Law. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
11. Cooter, R. 1987. Entry on Coase Theorem. In Eatwell, Milgate and Newman (eds.) 1987.
12. Cooter, R., and T. Ulen. 2004. Law and Economics, 4th edn. Pearson Addison Wesley.
13. de Meza, D. 1998. Entry on Coase theorem. In Newman (ed.) 1998.
14. Demsetz, H. 1998. Entry on Coase. In Newman (ed.) 1998.
15. Eastman, W. 1997. Telling alternative stories: Heterodox versions of the Prisoners' dilemma, the Coase theorem, and supply-demand equilibrium. Connecticut Law Review 29:727-825.
16. Eatwell J., M. Milgate and P. Newman, eds. 1987.1 The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics. Macmillan.
17. Ellickson, R. C. 1991. Order Without Law: How Neighbors Settle Disputes. Harvard, Harvard University Press.
18. Farber, D. 1997. Parody lost/Pragmatism regained: The ironic history of the Coase theorem. Virginia Law Review 83:397-428.
19. Fletcher, G. 1996. Basic Concepts of Legal Thought. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
20. Halpin, A. 2000. Clamshells or Bedsteads? Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 20:353-66.
21. Halpin, A. 2001. Reasoning with Law. Oxford, Hart Publishing.
22. Huigens, K. 2001. Law, economics, and the Skeleton of Value fallacy. California Law Review 89:537-68.
23. Jung, C., K. Krutila, W. K. Viscusi and R. Boyd. 1995. The Coase Theorem in a rent-seeking society. International Review of Law and Economics 15:259-68.
24. Katz, A. 1998. Foundations of the Economic Approach to Law. Foundation Press.
25. Markovits, R. 1993. A constructive critique of the traditional definition and use of the concept of "The effect of a choice on allocative (economic) efficiency": Why the Kaldor-Hicks test, the Coase theorem, and virtually all law-and-economics arguments are wrong. University of Illinois Law Review 1993: 485-533.
26. Markovits, R. 2001. On the relevance of economic efficiency conclusions. Florida State University Law Review 29:1-54.
27. Medema, S. 1994. Ronald H. Coase. Basingstoke, Macmillan.
28. Medema, S. 1997. Comment: The Coase theorem, rent seeking, and the forgotten footnote. International Review of Law and Economics 17:177-8.
29. Medema, S. and R. Zerbe. 2000. Entry on the Coase theorem. In Bouckaert and De Geest (eds.) 2000.
30. Mercuro, N. and S. Medema. 1997. Economics and the Law. Princeton, Princeton University Press.
31. Newman P., ed. 1998. The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics and the Law. Basingstoke, Macmillan.
32. Posin, D. 1999. The error of the Coase theorem: of Judges Hand and Posner and Carrol Towing. Tulane Law Review 74:629-58.
33. Posner, R. 1995. Overcoming Law. Harvard, Harvard University Press.
34. Posner, R. 2001. Cost-benefit analysis: definition, justification, and comment on conference papers. In Adler and Posner (eds.) 2001.
35. Regan, D. 1972. The problem of social cost revisited. Journal of Law and Economics 15:427-37.
36. Samuels, W. 1974. The Coase theorem and the study of law and economics. Natural Resources Journal 14:1-33.
37. Schroeder, J. 1998. The end of the market: A psychoanalysis of law and economics. Harvard Law Review 112:483-558.
38. Schwab, S. 1989. Coase defends Coase: why lawyers listen and economists do not. Michigan Law Review 87:1171-98.
39. Shavell, S. 2004. Foundations of Economic Analysis of Law. Harvard, Belknap Press.
40. Simpson, A. W. B. 1996. Coase v. Pigou reexamined. Journal of Legal Studies 25:53-97.
41. Stigler, G. 1966. The Theory of Price, 3rd. edn. Basingstoke, Macmillan.
42. Stigler, G. 1989. Two notes on the Coase theorem. Yale. Law Journal 99:631-3.
43. Usher, D. 1998. The Coase theorem is tautological, incoherent or wrong. Economics Letters 61:3-11.