The U.S. product liability system — and the role of punitive damages within that system — is very controversial. This article aims to help readers think systematically about the economic effects of product liability and punitive damages. For inferences about effects on business decisions to be reliable and influential, they must rest on an explicit and empirically grounded conceptual foundation. Parts II and III present the conceptual (theoretical) underpinnings for empirical analyses and inferences reported in Parts IV and V. The conceptual framework suggests that the economic effects of product liability and punitive damages will differ substantially across industries and across product areas. Parts IV and V review empirical analyses and conclusions that illustrate these differences. This study suggests that the current product liability system is haphazard as a deterrence mechanism, and both costly and haphazard as a compensation mechanism. When considering potential reforms, however, the goal should be improvement, not perfection.
Originally published in: Wisconsin Law Review, v. 1998, no. 1, 1998, pp. 237-295.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation Reprint series. The Reprint was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1992 to 2011 that represented previously published journal articles, book chapters, and reports with the permission of the publisher. RAND reprints were formally reviewed in accordance with the publisher's editorial policy and compliant with RAND's rigorous quality assurance standards for quality and objectivity. For select current RAND journal articles, see External Publications.
Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/research-integrity.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.