“科斯损害”及其法理歪曲——科斯《社会成本问题》批判之二  

R.H.Coase's "harm"and his distorted law theory: The second criticism of R.H.Coase's The Problem of Social cost

作　　者：谢永侠 谢茜茜[2] 

机构地区：[1]山东省鄄城县人民医院,山东鄄城274600 [2]西北政法大学民商法学院,陕西西安710063

出　　处：《现代物业（中旬刊）》2013年第6期4-9,共6页Modern Property Management

摘　　要：科斯所谓的"损害具有相互性"是不存在的。得出该结论的关键在于科斯误读了人们行为的权利,把人们行为的权利等同于损害的权利,把权利的相互性等同于损害的相互性,把权利的实然存在当成应然存在。同时在其局限的效率观指导下,明显歪曲了法学理念。R.H.Coase＇s saying that ＂the reciprocal nature of the harm＂ is not existent. The key of getting this conclusion is that R.H.Coase misunderstands people＇s behavior rights, he puts the rights of people＇s behaviors as important as rights of harm, and puts the reciprocal nature of rights as same as the reciprocal nature of harm, and regards the actual existence as the deserved existence. At the same time, under the guidance of limited efficiency view, he distorts the law theory obviously.

关 键 词：权利 损害相互性 最优产权安排 

分 类 号：F091.349[经济管理—政治经济学]