References

Ayres, I. and Klemperer, P. (1999) The perverse benefits of uncer tainty and non-injunctive remedies. Michigan Law Review 97, 985-1033.

Bebchuck, L.A. (2001) Property rights and liability rules: the ex-ante view of the cathedral. Michigan Law Review 100, 610-639.

Brookes, G. (2003) Co-existence of GM and non-GM crops: economics and market perspective. Available at: http://www. bioportfolio.com/pgeconomics

Calabresi, G. and Melamed, D. (1972) Property rules, liability rules and inalienability: one view of the cathedral. Harvard Law Review 85, 1089-1128.

Coase, R.H. (1960) The problem of social cost. Journal of Law and Economics 3, 1-44.

Demsetz, H. (2003) Ownership and the externality problem. In: Anderson, T.L. and McChesney, F.S. (eds) Property Rights: Cooperation, Conflict, and Law. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, pp. 283-300.

Grossman, M.R. (2002) Biotechnology property rights and the environment. American Journal of Comparative Law 50, 215-248.

Grossman, S.J. and Hart, O.D. (1986) The costs and benefits of ownership: a theory of vertical and lateral integration. Journal of Political Economy 94, 691-719.

Hohfeld, W.N. (1913) Some fundamental legal conceptions as applied in judicial reasoning. Yale Law Journal 23, 16-59.

Was this article helpful?

0 0

Post a comment