Skip to main content
×
Home

The Coase theorem: coherent, logical, and not disproved

  • DOUGLAS W. ALLEN (a1)
Abstract:
Abstract:

There exists a long line of challengers to the ‘Coase Theorem’. All of these rest on fundamental misconceptions of property rights, transaction costs, and their interaction. Here I examine two attacks that have gone unchallenged: one by Halpin, the other by Usher. I argue that both, in failing to either use or understand an adequate definition of transaction costs, fail to deliver a fatal blow to Coase's famous idea.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      The Coase theorem: coherent, logical, and not disproved
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      The Coase theorem: coherent, logical, and not disproved
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      The Coase theorem: coherent, logical, and not disproved
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
*Email: allen@sfu.ca
References
Hide All
Alchian A. A. (1965), ‘Some Economics of Property Rights’, Il Politico, 30: 816829.
Allen D. W. (1991), ‘What are Transaction Costs?’, Research in Law and Economics, 14: 118.
Allen D. W. (1998), ‘Property Rights, Transaction Costs, and Coase: One More Time’, in Medema S. (ed.), Coasean Economics: Law and Economics and the New Institutional Economics, Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 105118.
Allen D. W. (2000), ‘Transaction Costs’, in Bouckaert B. and De Geest G. (eds.), Encyclopedia of Law and Economics, Cheltenham: Edward Eldgar Press, pp. 893926.
Barzel Y. (1985), ‘Transaction Costs: Are They Just Costs?’, Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 141 (1): 416.
Coase R. H. (1937), ‘The Nature of the Firm’, Economica, 4: 386405.
Coase R. H. (1959), ‘The Federal Communications Commission’, Journal of Law and Economics, 2 (1): 140.
Coase R. H. (1960), ‘The Problem of Social Cost’, Journal of Law and Economics, 3: 144.
Coase R. H. (1988), The Firm, The Market, And The Law, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Cooter R. (1982), ‘The Cost of Coase’, Journal of Legal Studies, 11: 133.
Cymrot D., Dunlevy J., and Even W. (2001), ‘‘Who's on First’: An Empirical Test of the Coase Theorem in Baseball’, Applied Economics, 33: 593603.
Dahlman C. J. (1979), ‘The Problem of Externality’, Journal of Law and Economics, 22 (1): 141162.
De Meza D. (1998), ‘Coase Theorem’, in Newman P. (ed.), The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics and the Law, London: MacMillan Press.
Demsetz H. (1968), ‘The Cost of Transacting’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 82: 3353.
Demsetz H. (1969), ‘Information and Efficiency: Another Viewpoint’, Journal of Law and Economics, 12 (1): 122.
Friedman D. (2000), Law's Order: What Economics Has To Do With Law and Why It Matters, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Halpin A. (2007), ‘Disproving the Coase Theorem?’, Economics and Philosophy, 23 (3): 321341.
Hicks J. R. (1935), ‘A Suggestion for Simplifying the Theory of Money’, Economica, 2: 119.
Klaes M. (2000), ‘The History of the Concept of Transaction Costs: Neglected Aspects’, Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 22 (2): 191216.
Mishan E. J. (1967), ‘Pareto Optimality and the Law’, Oxford Economic Papers, 19: 255287.
Mumey G. A. (1971), ‘The ‘Coase Theorem’: A Reexamination’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 85 (4): 718723.
Niehans J. (1987), ‘Transaction Costs,’ in Eatwell J., Milgate M. and Newman P. (eds.), The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, New York, NY: The Macmillan Press, pp. 676679.
Stigler G. J. (1966), The Theory of Price, 3rd edn., New York, NY: Macmillan Press.
Stigler G. J. (1977), ‘The Conference Handbook’, Journal of Political Economy, 85 (2): 441443.
Usher D. (1998), ‘The Coase Theorem is Tautological, Incoherent or Wrong’, Economics Letters, 61: 311.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Journal of Institutional Economics
  • ISSN: 1744-1374
  • EISSN: 1744-1382
  • URL: /core/journals/journal-of-institutional-economics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 53
Total number of PDF views: 392 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 771 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 21st November 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.