Home Business & Economics Of Coase, Cattle, and Crime: Why the Becker Model is Compatible with a Moral Theory of Criminal Law
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Of Coase, Cattle, and Crime: Why the Becker Model is Compatible with a Moral Theory of Criminal Law

  • Thomas J. Miceli EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: June 8, 2022
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

The economic model of crime is often portrayed (and criticized) as being contrary to a moral theory of criminal law. This paper advances the opposing view that the two theories are in fact potentially compatible with one another. The basis for this claim is that, whereas the Becker (1968. Crime and punishment: an economic approach. J. Polit. Econ. 76: 169–217) model is useful in prescribing a theory of optimal enforcement of the law, it does not, and indeed cannot, provide a definitive prescription for its content. The reason is the reciprocal nature of harm in situations involving incompatible rights, a principle first identified by Coase (1960. The problem of social cost. J. Law Econ. 3: 1–44) in the general context of externalities. The paper develops this argument, offers a formal demonstration of it, and draws out some of its implications.

JEL Classification: K14; K42

Corresponding author: Thomas J. Miceli, Professor, Department of Economics, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA, E-mail:

Acknowledgement

I acknowledge the very insightful comments of Richard Adelstein and an anonymous reviewer, both of which improved the focus of this paper.

References

Adelstein, R. (2017). The exchange order: property and liability as an economic system. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.10.1093/oso/9780190694272.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Beccaria, C. (1764 [1986]). On Crimes and punishments. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Co.Search in Google Scholar

Becker, G. (1968). Crime and punishment: an economic approach. J. Polit. Econ. 76: 169–217. https://doi.org/10.1086/259394.Search in Google Scholar

Bentham, J. (1780 [1970]). An Introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.Search in Google Scholar

Brown, J. (1973). Toward an economic theory of liability. J. Leg. Stud. 2: 323–349. https://doi.org/10.1086/467501.Search in Google Scholar

Calabresi, G. and Melamed, A. (1972). Property rules, liability rules, and inalienability: one view of the cathedral. Harv. Law Rev. 85: 1089–1128. https://doi.org/10.2307/1340059.Search in Google Scholar

Carbonara, E., Parisi, F., and von Wangenheim, G. (2012). Unjust laws and illegal norms. Int. Rev. Law Econ. 32: 285–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irle.2012.03.001.Search in Google Scholar

Coase, R. (1960). The problem of social cost. J. Law Econ. 3: 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1086/466560.Search in Google Scholar

Coleman, J. (1988). Markets, morals and the law. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.Search in Google Scholar

Cooter, R. (1982). The cost of Coase. J. Leg. Stud. 11: 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1086/467690.Search in Google Scholar

Cooter, R. and Ulen, T. (1988). Law and economics. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Co.Search in Google Scholar

Cosgel, M. and Miceli, T. (2019). Toward a theory of religious belief and the emergence of law. J. Inst. Theor. Econ. JITE 175: 692–713.10.1628/jite-2019-0035Search in Google Scholar

Curry, P. and Doyle, M. (2016). Integrating market alternatives to the economic theory of optimal deterrence. Econ. Inq. 54: 1873–1883. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecin.12344.Search in Google Scholar

Friedman, D. (1996). Beyond the tort/crime distinction. Boston Univ. Law Rev. 76: 103–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-1299-4_5.Search in Google Scholar

Friedman, D. (2000). Law’s order: what economics has to do with the law and why it matters. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press.10.1515/9781400823475Search in Google Scholar

Garoupa, N. and Obidzinski, M. (2011). The scope of punishment: an economic theory. Eur. J. Law Econ. 31: 237–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-010-9172-0.Search in Google Scholar

Harris, J. (1970). On the economics of law and order. J. Polit. Econ. 78: 165–174. https://doi.org/10.1086/259616.Search in Google Scholar

Hart, H.L.A. (1961). The concept of law. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.Search in Google Scholar

Holmes, O. (1881 [1963]). The common law. Boston: Little Brown & Co.Search in Google Scholar

Holmes, O. (1897). The path of the law. Harv. Law Rev. 10: 457–478.10.2307/1322028Search in Google Scholar

Hylton, K. (2005). The theory of penalties and the economics of criminal law. Rev. Law Econ. 1: 175–201. https://doi.org/10.2202/1555-5879.1024.Search in Google Scholar

Kaplow, L. and Shavell, S. (2002). Fairness and welfare. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.10.4159/9780674039315Search in Google Scholar

Klevorick, A. (1985). On the economic theory of crime. In: Pennock, J. and Chapman, J. (Eds.), Nomos XXVII: criminal justice. New York: New York University Press.10.18574/nyu/9780814768877.003.0016Search in Google Scholar

Lewin, J. and Trumbull, W. (1990). The social value of crime? Int. Rev. Law Econ. 10: 271–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/0144-8188(90)90014-.Search in Google Scholar

Miceli, T. (1991). Optimal criminal procedure: fairness and deterrence. Int. Rev. Law Econ. 11: 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/0144-8188(91)90022-6.Search in Google Scholar

Miceli, T. (2019). The paradox of punishment: reflections on the economics of criminal justice. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave-Macmillan.10.1007/978-3-030-31695-2Search in Google Scholar

Miceli, T. and Segerson, K. (2005). Do exposure suits produce a race to file? An economic analysis of a tort for risk. Rand J. Econ. 36: 613–627.10.2139/ssrn.288581Search in Google Scholar

Michelman, F. (1967). Property, utility, and fairness: comments on the ethical foundations of ‘just compensation’ law. Harv. Law Rev. 80: 1165–1258. https://doi.org/10.2307/1339276.Search in Google Scholar

Montesquieu, J.L. (1748 [1977]). The spirit of law. Berkeley: Univ of California Press.Search in Google Scholar

Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, state, and utopia. New York: Basic Books.Search in Google Scholar

Polinsky, A.M. and Shavell, S. (2000). The fairness of sanctions: some implications for optimal enforcement policy. Am. Law Econ. Rev. 2: 223–237. https://doi.org/10.1093/aler/2.2.223.Search in Google Scholar

Polinsky, A.M. and Shavell, S. (2007). The theory of public law enforcement. In: Polinsky, A.M. and Shavell, S. (Eds.), Handbook of law and economics, Vol. 1. North Holland, Amsterdam: Elsevier.10.3386/w11780Search in Google Scholar

Posner, R. (1985). An economic theory of the criminal law. Columbia Law Rev. 85: 1193–1231. https://doi.org/10.2307/1122392.Search in Google Scholar

Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.10.4159/9780674042605Search in Google Scholar

Shavell, S. (1985). Criminal law and the optimal use of non-monetary sanctions as a deterrent. Columbia Law Rev. 85: 1232–1262. https://doi.org/10.2307/1122393.Search in Google Scholar

Shavell, S. (1991). Specific versus general enforcement of law. J. Polit. Econ. 99: 1088–1108. https://doi.org/10.1086/261790.Search in Google Scholar

Shavell, S. (2002). Law versus morality as regulators of conduct. Am. Law Econ. Rev. 4: 227–257.10.1093/aler/4.2.227Search in Google Scholar

Shavell, S. (2004). Foundations of economic analysis of law. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.10.4159/9780674043497Search in Google Scholar

Stigler, G. (1970). The optimum enforcement of laws. J. Polit. Econ. 78: 526–536. https://doi.org/10.1086/259646.Search in Google Scholar

Thoreau, H. (1846 [1965]). Civil disobedience. In: Atkinson, B. (Ed.), Walden and other writings of Henry David Thoreau. New York: Doubleday.10.4324/9780203003657_chapter_2Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2022-02-02
Revised: 2022-03-28
Accepted: 2022-03-28
Published Online: 2022-06-08

© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 30.12.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/rle-2022-0010/pdf
Scroll to top button