Advertisement

Economic Consequences of Third-Party Actions for Workplace Injuries

  • Joan T. Schmit
Part of the Huebner International Series on Risk, Insurance and Economic Security book series (HSRI, volume 16)

Abstract

Safety has been an issue of importance to business since long before the industrial revolution. The advent of industry, however, brought with it both a concentration of exposure to loss (many people injured simultaneously) and a complexity of loss potential through such environmental factors as use of synthetic materials. Demand for safety rose significantly as a result. Most attention to safety, however, was focused on workplace hazards. Not until after the 1965 Restatement of Torts (Second) did product safety become a prominent issue. Since then, and especially following the Report of the National Commission on Product Safety (NCPS), the economics of (product) safety has been a topic given substantial treatment in economic, legal, and insurance literature. Much of the existing literature analyzes the impact on efficient resource allocation of regulated safety standards, mandated compensation awards, and various liability schemes. In this article, the question of what effect third-party actions in work-related accidents have on safety is considered.

Keywords

Imperfect Information Strict Liability Product Liability Safety Precaution Liability Rule 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Brown, John Prather. (1973) “Toward an Economic Theory of Liability.” Journal of Legal Studies 2:323–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chelius, R. James. (1982). “The Influence ofr Workers’ Compensation on Safety Incentives.” Industrial and Labor Relations 35:235–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Danzon, M. Patricia (1987). “Compensation for Occupational Disease: Evaluating the Options.” Journal of Risk and Insurance 54:263–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. —. (1984). “Tort Reform and the Role of Government in Private Insurance Markets.” Journal of Legal Studies 13:517–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Diamond, Peter. (1974). “Single Activity Accidents.” Journal of Legal Studies 3:107–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dickens, T. William (1985). “Occupational Safety and Health and “Irrational” Behavior: A Preliminary Analysis.” Workers’ Compensation Benefits: Adequacy, Equity and Efficiency, In D. John Worrall and David Appel (eds.) Ithaca, NY: ILR Press, 19–40.Google Scholar
  7. Larson, Arthur. (1988). Workmen’s Compensation Laws, §71.21. New York: Mathew Bender.Google Scholar
  8. Oi, Y. Walter (1973). “The Economics of Product Safety.” The Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science 4:3–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Rea, A. Samuel, Jr. (1981). “Workmen’s Compensation and Occupational Safety Under Imperfect Information.” American Economic Review 71:80–93.Google Scholar
  10. Schlesinger, Harris. (1985). “Product Safety for a Monopolist Under Strict Liability.” Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 4:253–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Shavell, Steven. (1982) “On Liability and Insurance.” The Bell Journal of Economics 13:120–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Simon, Marilyn. (1981). “Imperfect Information, Costly Litigation, and Product Liability.” The Bell Journal of Economics 12:171–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Spence, Michael. (1977) “Consumer Misperception, Product Failure and Producer Liability.” Review of Economic Studies 64:561–572.Google Scholar
  14. Viscusi, W.K. and W. Evans. (1990). “Utility Functions that Depend on Health Status: Estimates and Economic Implications.” American Economic Review 80:353–374.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joan T. Schmit

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations