Coase v. Pigou Reexamined

A W Brian Simpson

The Journal of Legal Studies, 1996, vol. 25, issue 1, 53-97

Abstract: Coase's thesis in "The Problem of Social Cost" is reexamined, with particular reference to criticisms of Pigou as an enthusiast for state intervention and to Coase's understanding of the history of English tort law; the litigation in STURGES V. BRIDGMAN illustrates the analysis. Pigou is defended, and his function as a straw man in a rhetorical form of argument described. An analysis of Coase's thesis--that Pigou perpetrated a fundamental error in analysis--when related to the realities of land use disputes between neighbors suggests that the logic of the Coasean theory as to the correct analysis in terms of efficiency is incapable of generating any general rule as to what should be the legal response to the problem of social cost. Unless certain problems can be solved, it cannot provide guidance for the law. Copyright 1996 by the University of Chicago.

Date: 1996
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/467971 (application/pdf)
Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ucp:jlstud:v:25:y:1996:i:1:p:53-97

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in The Journal of Legal Studies from University of Chicago Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Journals Division ().