Abstract
Skeptics of rational choice theory have long predicted that behavioral economics would radically transform the legislation, adjudication, and analysis of law. Using tort law as an exemplar, this Article maps out the narrow set of conditions where substantive law can be modified to accommodate irrational decision-makers. Specifically, this Article demonstrates that if injurers are systematically biased, and the due care standard can be expressed quantitatively, and victims are unable to take meaningful precautions, then imposing punitive damages can induce irrational injurers to exercise efficient precautionary care. In all other cases, it is better that the law adopt a presumption of rationality, regardless whether individuals behave rationally in fact.
References
Allais, M. (1953). Le comportement de l’homme rationnel devant le risqué: critique des postulats et axioms de l’école Américaine. Econometrica 21: 503–546. https://doi.org/10.2307/1907921.Suche in Google Scholar
Becker, G.S. (1962). Irrational behavior and economic theory. J. Polit. Econ. 70: 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1086/258584.Suche in Google Scholar
Brown, J. (1973). Toward an economic theory of liability. J. Leg. Stud. 2: 323–349. https://doi.org/10.1086/467501.Suche in Google Scholar
Camerer, C.F. and Loewenstein, G. (2004). Behavioral economics: past, present, future. In: Camerer, C.F., Loewenstein, G., and Rabin, M. (Eds.), Advances in behavioral economics. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.10.2307/j.ctvcm4j8j.6Suche in Google Scholar
Cohen, L.R. (2001). The lure of the lottery. Wake For. Law Rev. 36: 705–745.Suche in Google Scholar
Cooter, R. (1985). Unity in tort, contract, and property: the model of precaution. Calif. Law Rev. 73: 1–51.10.2307/3480463Suche in Google Scholar
Cooter, R. and Ulen, T.S. (2012). Law and economics, 6th ed. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.Suche in Google Scholar
Dari-Mattiacci, G. and Mangan, B.M. (2008). Disappearing defendants versus judgment-proof injurers. Econometrica 75: 749–765. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0335.2007.00663.x.Suche in Google Scholar
Dari-Mattiacci, G. and Parisi, F. (2013). Liability rules: an economic taxonomy. In: Bussani, M. and Sebok, A.J. (Eds.), Comparative tort law: global perspectives. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.Suche in Google Scholar
Ellsberg, D. (1961). Risk ambiguity and the savage axioms. Q. J. Econ. 75: 643–669. https://doi.org/10.2307/1884324.Suche in Google Scholar
Glazier, A. and Mone, T. (2019). Success of opt-in organ donation policy in the United States. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 322: 719–720. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.9187.Suche in Google Scholar
Hicks, J.R. (1956). A Revision of demand theory. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Hill, C.A. (2011). A positive agenda for behavioral law and economics. Cognitive Critique 3: 85–92.Suche in Google Scholar
Jolls, C. (2007). Behavioral law and economics. In: Diamond, P. and Vartiainen, H. (Eds.), Behavioral economics and its applications. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.10.3386/w12879Suche in Google Scholar
Jolls, C., Sunstein, C.R., and Thaler, R. (1998). A behavioral approach to law and economics. Stanford Law Rev. 50: 1471–1550. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229304.Suche in Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking fast and slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Suche in Google Scholar
Korobkin, R. (2011). What comes after victory for behavioral law and economics? Univ. Ill. Law Rev. 2011: 1653–1674.Suche in Google Scholar
Korobkin, R. and Ulen, T. (2000). Law and behavioral science: removing the rationality assumption from law and economics. Calif. Law Rev. 88: 1051–1144. https://doi.org/10.2307/3481255.Suche in Google Scholar
Kuhn, T.S. (2012). The structure of scientific revolutions, 4th ed. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226458144.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Little, I.M.D. (1949). A reformulation of the theory of consumer’s behaviour. Oxf. Econ. Pap. 1: 90–99. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.oep.a041063.Suche in Google Scholar
Luppi, B. and Parisi, F. (2016). Optimal liability for optimistic tortfeasors. Eur. J. Law Econ. 41: 559–574. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-016-9523-6.Suche in Google Scholar
Luppi, B. and Parisi, F. (2018). Behavioral models in tort law. In: Teitelbaum, J.C. and Zeiler, K. (Eds.), Research handbook on behavioral law and economics. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.10.4337/9781849805681.00017Suche in Google Scholar
Markham, F. and Young, M. (2015). ‘Big gambling’: the rise of the global industry-state gambling complex. Addiction Res. Theor. 23: 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3109/16066359.2014.929118.Suche in Google Scholar
Pi, D. (2019). Meta-rational choice. In: Essays in law and economics, Doctoral dissertation, Available at: http://amsdottorato.unibo.it/8753/1/Pi_Daniel_tesi.pdf.Suche in Google Scholar
Polinsky, M.A. (1980). Strict liability vs. negligence in a market setting. Am. Econ. Rev. 70: 363–367.10.4324/9781315188133-6Suche in Google Scholar
Posner, R.A. (1997). Rational choice, behavioral economics, and the law. Stanford Law Rev. 50: 1551–1575.10.2307/1229305Suche in Google Scholar
Samuelson, P.A. (1938). A note on the pure theory of consumer’s behavior. Econometrica 5: 61–71. https://doi.org/10.2307/2548836.Suche in Google Scholar
Schmitz, D. (2009). Reasons for altruism. Soc. Philos. Pol. 10: 52–68.10.1017/S0265052500004015Suche in Google Scholar
Shavell, S. (1980). Strict liability versus negligence. J. Leg. Stud. 9: 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1086/467626.Suche in Google Scholar
Smith, V.L. (2007). Rationality in economics: constructivist and ecological forms. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Sugden, R. (1991). Rational choice: a survey of contributions from economics and philosophy. Econ. J. 101: 751–785. https://doi.org/10.2307/2233854.Suche in Google Scholar
Thaler, R.H. (2015). Misbehaving: the making of behavioral economics. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.Suche in Google Scholar
Thaler, R.H. (2016). Behavioral economics: past, present, and future. Am. Econ. Rev. 106: 1577–1600. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.106.7.1577.Suche in Google Scholar
Thaler, R.H. and Sunstein, C.R. (2008). Nudge: improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Ulen, T.S. (1998). The growing pains of behavioral law and economics. Vanderbilt Law Rev. 51: 1747–1763.Suche in Google Scholar
Ulen, T.S. (2014). The importance of behavioral law. In: Zamir, E. and Teichman, D. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of behavioral economics and the law. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199945474.013.0004Suche in Google Scholar
Wilson, T. (2019). The promise of behavioral economics for understanding decision-making in court. Criminol. Publ. Pol. 18: 785–805. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12461.Suche in Google Scholar
Zamir, E. (2020). Refounding law and economics: behavioral support for the predictions of standard economic analysis. Rev. Law Econ. 16: 1–35.10.1515/rle-2019-0023Suche in Google Scholar
© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Article
- The Impact of Behavioral Economics on the Law: Introduction
- Special Issue Articles
- The Paternalistic Turn in Behavioral Law and Economics: A Critique
- Behavioral Contract Law
- The Limits of Behavioral Economics in Tort Law
- Behavioral Economics in Plea-Bargain Decision-Making: Beyond the Shadow-of-Trial Model
- Behavioral Economics and Court Decision-Making
- The Role of Bias in Economic Models of Law
- Behavioral Biases and the Law
- The Evolutionary Force of Behavioral Economics in Law
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Article
- The Impact of Behavioral Economics on the Law: Introduction
- Special Issue Articles
- The Paternalistic Turn in Behavioral Law and Economics: A Critique
- Behavioral Contract Law
- The Limits of Behavioral Economics in Tort Law
- Behavioral Economics in Plea-Bargain Decision-Making: Beyond the Shadow-of-Trial Model
- Behavioral Economics and Court Decision-Making
- The Role of Bias in Economic Models of Law
- Behavioral Biases and the Law
- The Evolutionary Force of Behavioral Economics in Law