|
||||
|
||||
Regulating Ambiguous Risks: The Less than Rational Regulation of PharmaceuticalsW. Kip ViscusiVanderbilt University - Law School; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER); Vanderbilt University - Department of Economics; Vanderbilt University - Owen Graduate School of Management; Vanderbilt University - Strategy and Business Economics Richard J. ZeckhauserHarvard University - Harvard Kennedy School (HKS); National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) January 2015 Journal of Legal Studies, Forthcoming HKS Working Paper No. RWP14-005 Vanderbilt Law and Economics Research Paper No. 14-4 Abstract: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) balances risks and benefits before approving pharmaceuticals, as rationality would require. But powerful behavioral biases that lead to the mishandling of uncertainty also influence its approval process. The FDA places inordinate emphasis on errors of commission versus those of omission, a bias that is compounded by the FDA’s desire to avoid blame should risks eventuate. Despite extensive testing, uncertainties inevitably remain. We often learn about the risks of drugs after they are on the market. And there are off-label uses of drugs, which are not part of the initial testing. The FDA shows a strong aversion to ambiguous risks. This is the opposite of what is desirable. For any given initial expected risk level, optimal risk-taking decisions involving uncertainty in a multi-period world should prefer ambiguous risks, and the potential for learning, relative to well-established risks of the same magnitude.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 50 Keywords: pharmaceuticals, drugs, ambiguity, regulation, FDA JEL Classification: I18, K23, D80 Accepted Paper SeriesDate posted: February 8, 2014 ; Last revised: January 16, 2015Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© 2015 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.547 seconds