Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/244230 
Year of Publication: 
2021
Series/Report no.: 
CHOPE Working Paper No. 2021-19
Publisher: 
Duke University, Center for the History of Political Economy (CHOPE), Durham, NC
Abstract: 
One of the more striking features of the debate over the Coase theorem is the wide variety of models and theoretical frameworks used to discuss, evaluate, or otherwise analyze Coase's result - an artifact of an ambiguity in Coase's reasoning. Some framed Coase's result in a bargaining context and others in a competitive markets (both partial and general equilibrium) context. And players on both sides lined up with their demonstrations that the Coase theorem did or did not hold water. The parties involved in these debates, though, were often talking past each other, debating very different environments and models, and on different terms. Stabilization was elusive. Those who, like eight-year-old Virginia O'Hanlon in her famous letter asking if there is a Santa Claus, very much wanted to believe could certainly find reason to do so. For others, however, the theorem smacked more of the shopping mall Santa who reeks of alcohol and cigarettes.
Subjects: 
Coase theorem
Samuelson
Stigler
externalities
bargaining
JEL: 
B2
B4
D62
H23
K00
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size
365.19 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.