Regulation with Experimentation: Ex Ante Approval, Ex Post Withdrawal, and Liability

References

• Adda J, Decker C, Ottaviani M (2020) P-hacking in clinical trials and how incentives shape the distribution of results across phases. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 117(24):13386–13392.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ahuja V, Alvarez C, Birge JR, Syverson C (2021) Enhancing regulatory decision-making for postmarket drug safety. Management Sci. Forthcoming.Link, Google Scholar
• Angus DC (2020) Optimizing the trade-off between learning and doing in a pandemic. JAMA. 323(19):1895–1896.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berniker S (2001) Spontaneous reporting systems: Achieving less spontaneity and more reporting. Harvard Law School third year paper, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Berry DA, Fristedt B (1985) Bandit Problems (Chapman and Hall, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bizzotto J, Rudiger J, Vigier A (2020) Testing, disclosure and approval. J. Econom. Theory 187:105002.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bizzotto J, Rudiger J, Vigier A (2021) Dynamic persuasion with outside information. Amer. Econom. J. Microeconomics 13(1):179–194.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bolton P, Harris C (1999) Strategic experimentation. Econometrica 67(2):349–374.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Branco F, Sun M, Villas-Boas JM (2012) Optimal search for product information. Management Sci. 58(11):2037–2056.Link, Google Scholar
• Cabral L (2021) Merger policy in digital industries. Inform. Econom. Policy 54:100866.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carpenter D (2004) Protection without capture: Product approval by a politically responsive, learning regulator. Amer. Political Sci. Rev. 98(4):613–631.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chan J, Lizzeri A, Suen W, Yariv L (2018) Deliberating collective decisions. Rev. Econom. Stud. 85(2):929–963.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Che YK, Mierendorff K (2019) Optimal dynamic allocation of attention. Amer. Econom. Rev. 109(8):2993–3029.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Competition and Markets Authority (2021) The CMA’s digital markets strategy. February 2021 Refresh.Google Scholar
• Daughety AF, Reinganum JF (2013) Economic analysis of products liability: Theory. Arlen J, ed. Research Handbook on the Economics of Torts (Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK), 69–96.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dvoretsky A, Kiefer J, Wolfowitz J (1953) Sequential decision problems for processes with continuous time parameter: Testing hypotheses. Ann. Math. Statist. 24(2):254–264.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Friehe T, Schulte E (2017) Uncertain product risk, information acquisition, and product liability. Econom. Lett. 159(C):92–95.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fudenberg D, Strack P, Strzalecki T (2018) Speed, accuracy, and the optimal timing of choices. Amer. Econom. Rev. 108(12):3651–3684.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Furman J (2019) Unlocking digital competition. Report of the Digital Competition Expert Panel. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/785547/unlocking_digital_competition_furman_review_web.pdf.Google Scholar
• Galasso A, Luo H (2017) Tort reform and innovation. J. Law Econom. 60(3):385–412.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galasso A, Luo H (2018). When does product liability risk chill innovation? Evidence from medical implants. NBER Working Paper No. 25068, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Garber S (2013) Economic Effects of Product Liability and Other Litigation Involving the Safety and Effectiveness of Pharmaceuticals (RAND Corporation Institute for Civil Justice). https://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG1259.html.Google Scholar
• Glaeser E, Shleifer A (2003) The rise of the regulatory state. J. Econom. Literature 41(2):401–425.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Green B, Taylor CR (2016) Breakthroughs, deadlines, and self-reported progress: Contracting for multistage projects. Amer. Econom. Rev. 106(12):3660–3699.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grenadier SR, Malenko A, Malenko N (2016) Timing decisions in organizations: Communication and authority in a dynamic environment. Amer. Econom. Rev. 106(9):2552–2581.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guo Y (2016) Dynamic delegation of experimentation. Amer. Econom. Rev. 106(8):1969–2008.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Halac M, Kartik N, Liu Q (2016) Optimal contracts for experimentation. Rev. Econom. Stud. 83(3):1040–1091.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hall BH, Graham S, Harhoff D, Mowery DC (2004) Prospects for improving U.S. patent quality via postgrant opposition. Innovation Policy Econom. 4:115–143.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hamada K (1976) Liability rules and income distribution in product liability. Amer. Econom. Rev. 66(1):228–234.Google Scholar
• Han L, Ball R, Pamer C, Altman R, Proestel S (2017) Development of an automated assessment tool for MedWatch reports in the FDA adverse event reporting system. J. Amer. Medical Informatics Assoc. 24(5):913–920.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henderson JA, Twerski AD (1998) Achieving consensus on defective product design. Cornell Law Rev. 83(4):867–920.Google Scholar
• Henry E, Ottaviani M (2019) Research and the approval process: The organization of persuasion. Amer. Econom. Rev. 109(3):911–955.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hua X, Spier KE (2020) Product safety, contracts, and liability. RAND J. Econom. 51(1):233–259.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Inderst R, Ottaviani M (2013) Sales talk, cancellation terms and the role of consumer protection. Rev. Econom. Stud. 80(3):1002–1026.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jaffe B, Lerner J (2007) Innovation and Its Discontents: How Our Broken Patent System is Endangering Innovation and Progress, and What to Do About It (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Jakubiak J (1997) Maintaining air safety at less cost: A plan for replacing FAA safety regulations with strict liability. Cornell J. Law Public Policy 6(2):421–440.Google Scholar
• Kamenica E, Gentzkow M (2011) Bayesian persuasion. Amer. Econom. Rev. 101(6):2590–2615.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kartik N, Ottaviani M, Squintani F (2007) Credulity, lies, and costly talk. J. Econom. Theory 134(1):93–116.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kolstad CD, Ulen TS, Johnson GV (1990) Ex post liability for harm vs. ex ante safety regulation: Substitutes or complements? Amer. Econom. Rev. 80(4):888–901.Google Scholar
• Konert A (2019) Aviation accidents involving Boeing 737 MAX: Legal consequences. Ius Novum 13(3):119–133.Google Scholar
• Lybecker KM, Watkins L (2015) Liability risk in the pharmaceutical industry: Tort law in the US and UK. Soc. Sci. J. 52(4):433–448.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Madiega T (2020) Regulating digital gatekeepers: Background on the future digital markets act. European Parliamentary Research Service, PE. 659:397. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2020/659397/EPRS_BRI(2020)659397_EN.pdf.Google Scholar
• Marino AM (1997) A model of product recalls with asymmetric information. J. Regulatory Econom. 12(3):245–265.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McClellan A (2017) Experimentation and approval mechanisms. Working paper, New York University.Google Scholar
• Morris S, Strack P (2017) The Wald problem and the equivalence of sequential sampling and static information costs. Working paper, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Moscarini G, Smith L (2001) The optimal level of experimentation. Econometrica 69(6):1629–1644.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Office of Inspector General (2015) Audit report: FAA lacks an effective staffing model and risk-based oversight process for organization designation authorization. Federal Aviation Administration, Report No. AV-2016-001, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
• Oi WY (1973) The economics of product safety. Bell J. Econom. Management Sci. 4(1):3–28.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Orlov D, Skrzypacz A, Zryumov P (2020) Persuading the principal to wait. J. Political Econom. 128(7):2542–2578.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ottaviani M, Wickelgren AL (2009) Approval regulation and learning, with application to timing of merger control. Working paper, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.Google Scholar
• Ottaviani M, Wickelgren AL (2011) Ex ante or ex post competition policy? A progress report. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. 29(2):356–359.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Polinsky M, Shavell S (2010) The uneasy case for product liability. Harvard Law Rev. 123(6):1437–1493.Google Scholar
• Pomatto L, Strack P, Tamuz O (2019) The cost of information. Working paper, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA.Google Scholar
• Rey P (2003) Toward a theory of competition policy. Dewatripont M, Hansen LP, Turnovsky SJ, eds. Adv. Econom. Econometrics Theory Applications Eighth World Congress (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Google Scholar
• Rupp NG, Taylor CR (2002) Who initiates recalls and who cares? Evidence from the automobile industry. J. Indust. Econom. 50(2):123–149.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schmitz PW (2000) On the joint use of liability and safety regulation. Internat. Rev. Law Econom. 20(3):371–382.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schwartzstein J, Shleifer A (2013) An activity-generating theory of regulation. J. Law Econom. 56(1):1–38.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Scott-Morton F, Bouvier P, Ezrachi A, Jullien B, Katz R, Kimmelman G, Melamed D, Morgenstern J (2019) Committee for the study of digital platforms. Report, Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State, University of Chicago Booth School of Business, Chicago.Google Scholar
• Sharkey CM (2008) Products liability preemption: An institutional approach. George Washington Law Rev. 76(3):449–521.Google Scholar
• Shavell S (1984) Liability for harm vs. regulation of safety. J. Legal Stud. 13(2):357–374.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Spier KE (2011) Product safety, buybacks, and the post-sale duty to warn. J. Law Econom. Organ. 27(3):515–539.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stigler GJ (1971) The theory of economic regulation. Bell J. Econom. Management Sci. 2(1):3–21.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stokey N (2009) The Economics of Inaction (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Strulovici B (2010) Learning while voting: Determinants of collective experimentation. Econometrica 78(3):933–971.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Norman GA (2016) Drugs, devices, and the FDA: Part 1: An overview of approval processes for drugs. J. Amer. College Cardiology Basic Translational Sci. 1(3):170–179.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Viscusi W, Moore M (1993) Product liability, research and development, and innovation. J. Political Econom. 101(1):161–184.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Viscusi WK, Vernon JM, Harrington JE (1995) Economics of Regulation and Antitrust (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Wald A (1945) Sequential tests of statistical hypotheses. Ann. Math. Statist. 16(2):117–186.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Welling L (1991) A theory of voluntary recalls and product liability. Southern Econom. J. 57(4):1092–1111.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhong W (2019) Optimal dynamic information acquisition. Working paper, Columbia University, NY.Google Scholar
• Zuckerman DM, Brown P, Nissen SE (2011) Medical device recalls and the FDA approval process. Arch. Internal Medicine 171(11):1006–1011.Crossref, Google Scholar