Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1317704
 
 

Citations (1)



 
 

Footnotes (383)



 


 



Compensating Nuclear Damage: A Comparative Economic Analysis of the U.S. and International Liability Schemes


Michael G. Faure


University of Maastricht - Faculty of Law, Metro; Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR) - Erasmus School of Law

Tom Vanden Borre


DG TREN

November 24, 2008

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review, Vol. 33, 2008

Abstract:     
This paper compares the compensation regime under the EU Price-Anderson Act with the regime installed by international conventions for the compensation of damage caused by nuclear accidents. Economic analysis of law is used for a critical comparison. The paper shows some similarities in the regimes, for example that in both regimes the nuclear operator's liability is strict and the operator must provide a financial guarantee for the first layer of strict liability. It is argued that both strict liability, given the unilateral character of nuclear accidents, and compulsory insurance, given the insolvency risk, can be supported by economic analysis. Economics, though, was always critical of both the financial limit on nuclear operator's liability and the legal channelling of the liability to the operator.

The total amounts of compensation in the American regime are substantially higher, equalling the costs of a nuclear accident in a optimistic scenario. Moreover, the costs are financed by the liable operator in combination with the collectivity of operator, thus leading to a better internalisation of the risk. In the international regime, not only is the liability of the operator limited, but the victim compensation is also subsided through public funding. Both may have negative consequences. The low limits, combined with still low compensation in the international regime, may lead to many victims remaining uncompensated and potentially to underdeterrence. We argue that the US example gives an important lesson for the international regime. Through a mutual risk sharing by the nuclear industry, inherent in the US regime, on the one hand higher amounts of compensation for victims can be generated and on the other hand public funding can be eliminated as a result of which a better internalisation of the costs of a nuclear accident will take place.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 70

Keywords: nuclear damage, strict liability, channelling of liability, compulsory insurance, Price-Anderson Act, liability insurance, international liability conventions

JEL Classification: K13, K33, Q28

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: December 18, 2008 ; Last revised: November 4, 2009

Suggested Citation

Faure, Michael G. and Vanden Borre, Tom, Compensating Nuclear Damage: A Comparative Economic Analysis of the U.S. and International Liability Schemes (November 24, 2008). William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review, Vol. 33, 2008. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1317704

Contact Information

Michael G. Faure (Contact Author)
University of Maastricht - Faculty of Law, Metro ( email )
PO Box 616
Maastricht, 6200 MD
Netherlands
+31 - 43 - 388 30 60 (Phone)
+31 - 43 - 325 90 91 (Fax)
HOME PAGE: http://www.personeel.unimaas.nl/michael.faure/
Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR) - Erasmus School of Law
3000 DR Rotterdam
Netherlands
Tom Vanden Borre
DG TREN ( email )
Rue de la Loi 200
Brussels, B-1049
Belgium
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 2,499
Downloads: 543
Download Rank: 26,049
Citations:  1
Footnotes:  383

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.406 seconds