Behavioral Law and Economics: A Complementary Approach to the Standard Perspective
Behavioral Law and Economics: A Complementary Approach to the Standard Perspective
Barra lateral del artículo
PDF (English)
FLIP
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0.
Contenido principal del artículo
Resumen
Existe un debate sobre la relación entre las perspectivas estándar y conductual del Derecho y la Economía. Por un lado, la Economía Conductual podría ampliar la teoría económica al explicar el mundo real del Derecho, como en el caso de las estructuras jurídicas de los bienes de mérito y el altruismo. Por otro lado, es posible que la Economía Conductual no sea necesaria para explicar las estructuras jurídicas que no maximizan la riqueza, ya que la teoría económica estándar es capaz de hacerlo. No obstante, la comparación de dos enfoques científicos no tiene por qué implicar la selección de una teoría sobre la otra, sino que permite el uso de ambas de forma complementaria. Esta investigación conceptualiza el Derecho y la Economía como un programa de investigación de Lakatos y analiza la relación entre la Economía Conductual del Derecho y el enfoque estándar. Los resultados revelan que, en primer lugar, el enfoque conductual explica anomalías que no son detectadas por la perspectiva estándar del Derecho y la Economía. Por tanto, el enfoque conductual no sustituye a la perspectiva estándar, sino que ambos enfoques pueden ser complementarios. En segundo lugar, estas dos teorías del Derecho y la Economía examinan aspectos diferentes, pero complementarios, de la regulación. Este artículo utiliza la regulación de las empresas de redes de transporte para ilustrar esta cuestión.
Palabras clave:
Descargas
Detalles del artículo
Referencias (VER)
Amir, O., & Lobel, O. “Stumble, predict, nudge: How behavioral Economics informs law and policy”. In Columbia Law Review. 2008, 2098-2137.
Ariely, D., & Jones, S. Predictably irrational. New York: HarperCollins, 2008.
Arrow, J. K. Methodological Individualism and Social Knowledge. In The American Economic Review, No. 84, 1994, 1-9.
Bar-Gill, O.; Sunstein, C. R., & Talgam-Cohen, I. “Algorithmic Harm in Consumer Markets”. In Journal of Legal Analysis. Forthcoming, Available from https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4321763 [Accessed 7 April 2023] DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4321763
Becker, G. S. “Crime and punishment: An economic approach”. In The economic dimensions of crime. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1974, 14..
Becker, G. S. The Economic Approach to Human Behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press Economics Books, 1978.
Bix, B.H. “Law and Economics and the role of explanation: A comment of Guido Calabresi, The Future of Law and Economics”. In European Journal of Law and Economics. No. 48, 2019, 113–123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-018-9592-9
Calabresi, G. The cost of accidents: A legal and economic analysis. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961.
Calabresi, G. The future of Law and Economics: Essays in reform and recollection. New Haven: Yale University Press. 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12987/yale/9780300195897.001.0001
Coase, R. H. The problem of social cost. In Classic papers in natural resource economics. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1960. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230523210_6
Cooter, R., & Ulen, T. Law and Economics. Boston: Addison-Wesley, 2016.
Dudley, G., Banister, D., & Schwanen, T. “The rise of Uber and regulating the disruptive innovator”. In The Political Quarterly. No. 88, 2017, 492-499. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923X.12373
Fielbaum, A., & Tirachini, A. “The sharing economy and the job market: the case of ridehailing drivers in Chile”. In Transportation. No. 48, 2021, 2235-2261. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-020-10127-7
Fischer, F. “Beyond empiricism: policy inquiry in post positivist perspective”. In Policy Studies Journal. No. 26, 1998, 129-146. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.1998.tb01929.x
Flores, O., & Rayle, L. “How cities use regulation for innovation: the case of Uber, Lyft and Sidecar in San Francisco”. In Transportation Research Procedia. No. 25, 2017, 3756-3768. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2017.05.232
Fox, N. J. “Post-positivism”. In The Sage Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2008.
García-Tejeda, E. “La regulación de Uber en la Ciudad de México, la ganancia de los consumidores y el problema público de la movilidad”. In The Latin American and Iberian Journal of Law and Economics. No. 2, 2016, 39-63.
García-Tejeda, E. “¿Alguien quiere una rebanada de pizza? Los sesgos cognitivos en la contratación de servicios digitales: el punto ciego de la regulación en México”. In The Latin American Law Review. No. 6, 2021, 175-194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29263/lar06.2021.08
Garoupa, N. “Behavioral economic analysis of crime: A critical review”. In European Journal of Law and Economics. No. 15, 2003, 5-15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021152523137
Goletz, M., & Bahamonde-Birke, F. J. “The ride-sourcing industry: status-quo and outlook”. In Transportation Planning and Technology. No. 44, 2021, 561-576. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03081060.2021.1943128
Halbersberg, Y., & Guttel, E. “Behavioral Economics and tort law”. In The Oxford Handbook of Behavioral Economics and the Law. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199945474.013.0016
Harding, S.; Kandlikar, M., & Gulati, S. “Taxi apps, regulation, and the market for taxi journeys”. In Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. No. 88, 2016, 15-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2016.03.009
Hovenkamp, H, “Positivism in Law and Economics”. In California Law Review. No. 78, 1990, 815. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3480715
Ip, E. C. “Debiasing regulators: the Behavioral Economics of US administrative law”. In Common Law World Review. No. 46, 2017, 171-197. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1473779517725507
Jolls, C.; Sunstein, C. R., & Thaler, R. “A behavioral approach to Law and Economics”. In Stanford Law Review. No. 50, 1997, 1471-1550. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1229304
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. “Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk”. In Handbook of the Fundamentals of Financial Decision Making: Part I. Singapore: World Scientific, 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814417358_0006
Kahneman, D.; Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H “Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coase theorem”. In Journal of Political Economy. No. 98, 1990, 1325-1348. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/261737
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. “Anomalies: The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias”. In Journal of Economic Perspectives, No. 5, 1991, 193-206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.5.1.193
Knetsch, J. L. “The endowment effect and evidence of nonreversible indifference curves”. In American Economic Review. No. 79, 1989, 1277-1284.
Kuhn, T. S. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962.
Lakatos, I. The methodology of scientific research programmes: Philosophical papers. Volume I. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1978. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511621123
Leeson, P. T. “Do we need Behavioral Economics to explain law?” In European Journal of Law and Economics. No. 48, 2019, 1-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-017-9573-4
Lewinsohn-Zamir, D. “Behavioral Law and Economics of property law”. In The Oxford Handbook of Behavioral Economics and the Law. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199945474.001.0001
Marciano, A., & Battista Ramello, G. “Law, Economics and Calabresi on the future of Law and Economics”. In European Journal of Law and Economics, No. 48, 2019, 65-76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-019-09619-4
McCaffery, E. J. “Behavioral Economics and the law: tax”. In The Oxford Handbook of Behavioral Economics and the Law. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199945474.013.0023
Nissioti, E. “It takes three to tango: A behavioral analysis of the benefits of having a mediator in international disputes”. In German Law Journal. No. 23, 2022, 376-394. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2022.21
O’Reilly, T. “Illusory policy implications of behavioral Law & Economics”. In Marquette Law Review. No. 106, 2023, 269.
Parisi, F. “Positive, normative and functional schools in law and economics”. In European Journal of Law and Economics. No. 18, 2004, 259-272. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-004-4273-2
Pelzer, P.; Frenken, K., & Boon, W. “Institutional entrepreneurship in the platform economy: How Uber tried (and failed) to change the Dutch taxi law”. In Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions. No. 33, 2019, 1-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2019.02.003
Popper, K. Conjeturas y refutaciones. Barcelona: Paidós, 1972.
Posner, R. A. Economic analysis of law. Amsterdam: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business, 1986.
Posner, R. A. “The economic approach to law”. In Texas Law Review. No. 53, 1975, 757-782.
Posner, R. A., & Becker, G. “The future of law and economics”. In Review of Law & Economics. No. 10, 2014, 235-240. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/rle-2014-0056
Puche, M. L. “Regulation of TNCs in Latin America: The case of uber regulation in Mexico City and Bogota”. In The governance of smart transportation systems. Cham: Springer, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96526-0_3
Rosenberg, A. Philosophy of science: A contemporary introduction. London: Routledge, 2016.
Samuelson, W., & Zeckhauser, R. “Status quo bias in decision making”. In Journal of risk and Uncertainty, No. 1, 1988, 7-59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00055564
Sampson, R. J., & Laub, J. H. Crime in the making: Pathways and turning points through life. Harvard University Press, 1995.
Stigler, G. J. “The Law and Economics of public policy: A plea to the scholars”. In The Journal of Legal Studies. No. 1, 1972, 1-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/467476
Song, S. “Rise, fall, and implications of the New York city medallion market”. In Advances in Data Mining. Applications and Theoretical Aspects: 18th Industrial Conference. No. 18, 2018, 88-103. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95786-9_7
Stojanović, A., & Silvestri, P. “The road not taken–Reading Calabresi’s “The future of Law and Economics”. In Global Jurist. No. 19, 2019, 1-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/gj-2019-0040
Sunstein, C. R. Behavioral Law and Economics. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
Sunstein, C. R. “Listen, economists!” In The New York Review of Books. 2016. Available from: https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/11/10/listen-economists/ [Accessed 7 April 2023]
Thaler, R. “Toward a positive theory of consumer choice”. In Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization. No. 1, 1980, 39-60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(80)90051-7
Thelen, K. “Regulating Uber: The politics of the platform economy in Europe and the United States”. In Perspectives on Politics. No. 16, 2018, 938-953. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592718001081
Toulmin, S. Regreso a la razón. Barcelona: Ediciones Península, 2003.
Tzur, A. Uber Über regulation? Regulatory change following the emergence of new technologies in the taxi market”. In Regulation & Governance. No. 13, 2019, 340-361. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12170
Van Overtveldt, J. The Chicago School: how the University of Chicago assembled the thinkers who revolutionized Economics and business. Evanston: Agate Publishing, 2007.
Van Winden, F. A., & Ash, E. “On the Behavioral Economics of crime”. In Review of Law & Economics. No. 8, 2012, 181-213. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/1555-5879.1591
Wittgenstein, L. Tractatus logico-philosophicus. London: Humanities Press, 1974.
Zamir, E., & Teichman, D. Behavioral Law and Economics. New York: Oxford University Press, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190901349.001.0001
Citado por
