Criminal Law and Economics

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nuno Garoupa
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Law And Economics

scholarly journals Behavioral Criminal Law and Economics

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard H. McAdams ◽  
Thomas S. Ulen
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Law And Economics

Behavioral Analysis of Criminal Law

2014 ◽  
pp. 567-598
Author(s):  
Alon Harel
Keyword(s):  
Optimal Design ◽  
Prospect Theory ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Law And Economics ◽  
Retributive Justice ◽  
Social Goals ◽  
Behavioral Analysis ◽  
Potential Contribution ◽  
Uncertainty Prediction ◽  
Behavioral Studies

After contrasting behavioral criminal law and economics with the retributivist tradition and with traditional criminal law and economics, the chapter illustrates how various behavioral phenomena can be used to predict the effects of criminal law norms and to design criminal law in a way that serves social goals, in particular deterrence. It explores the effects of uncertainty on deterrence; it examines the effects of prospect theory and the differential effects of future uncertainty (prediction) and past uncertainty (postdiction) on the propensity to commit crime. It also investigates the effects of overoptimism on the propensity to commit crime. Last the chapter discusses the literature on happiness and its relevance to the optimal design of criminal law. It establishes that the literature on happiness can be used to promote retributive justice concerns. The chapter concludes by examining critically the potential contribution of behavioral studies to the optimal design of criminal law norms.

scholarly journals BECCARIA TRA DIRITTO PENALE ED ECONOMIA PUBBLICA

2011 ◽  
pp. 295-402
Author(s):  
Gian Paolo Massetto
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Public Economics ◽  
Law And Economics ◽  
Field Work ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Long Time ◽  
Solid Part ◽  
Empirical Investigations

Beccaria between criminal law and public economics. As Mario Romani wrote in 1966: ‘the most mature and solid part of Beccaria’s work as system builder, that is, his lectures on economia pubblica delivered between 1769 and 1772, and the empirical investigations or consulte stemming from inquiries undertaken in his capacity as a member of government bodies, was for a long time wholly or partly overlooked, or entrusted to unreliable editors, who were ready to print manuscripts the Author himself had not deemed worthy of publication’. This discomfort is no longer justified. The Elementi di economia pubblica will soon be published, while the Atti di Governo have recently appeared in print. We now know the details of Beccaria’s activity in the Supremo Consiglio d’Economia, as Head of the First and then of the Second Department, and as a member of the Consiglio di Governo. We can evaluate his contribution to both theory and practice in the fields of criminal law and economics. The aim of this essay is to assess the consistency between Beccaria’s theoretical writings and his field work, with particular reference to freedom of trade (of grains in particular), free bakery, hunting, forest and mines, the Pizzighettone prison, and the Milan house of correction.

The Principle of Subsidiarity

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Federico Fabbrini
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Institutional Design ◽  
Legal Theory ◽  
Law And Economics ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Multiple Perspectives ◽  
Constitutional Principle ◽  
Law And Politics ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Widespread Interest

‘“[T]hree correcting words of the legislator and entire libraries are turned into maculature.” Worse still: three additional words and entire libraries may be filled again with learned commentaries.’ It is in these apt terms that Robert Schütze has described the principle of subsidiarity. Since its introduction into the constitutional fabric of European Union (EU) law in 1992, a flurry of scholarly research has focused on the principle of subsidiarity, approaching the subject from multiple perspectives—be it legal theory, law and politics, or law and economics—and contextualizing its meaning in multiple legal and policy areas—from environmental law, to the internal market, from education, to social policy, and now criminal law. This widespread interest for subsidiarity is not surprising: as a core constitutional principle of the EU legal order, subsidiarity stands at the crossroads of questions about EU federalism and separations of powers, functionalism and institutional design, and the ends and means of European integration through law.

Killing Kaplanism: Flawed methodologies, the standard of proof and modernity

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 229-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Cullerne Bown
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Law And Economics ◽  
Error Reduction ◽  
Error Distribution ◽  
Current Standard ◽  
Standard Of Proof ◽  
Modern Era

Attempts to establish a quantitative framework for policy-making in the criminal justice system in recent decades have coalesced around the problem of the standard of proof and Kaplan’s influential 1968 paper. The central thread of work continues to use an equation he put forward while abandoning some of his foundational assumptions, an approach I call ‘Kaplanism’. Despite a growing awareness of deficiencies, elements of this school of thought, such as the parsing of concerns into the two categories of ‘error reduction’ and ‘error distribution’, have entered the general jurisprudential discourse. Here I launch a methodological attack and claim to kill this approach. This allows me to refute Laudan and other ‘consequentialist’ approaches to the standard identified by Walen, Walen’s own approach and an important part of Stein’s underpinnings. The same tools allow me to also refute Laudan’s earlier m/n meta-epistemology, Lippke’s ‘adage’, Stewart’s formalisation of Dworkin, Dahlman’s Bayesian work and (at least in criminal law) Kaplow’s law and economics approach. I also refute Hamer’s ‘conventional rationale’ for the current standard, Lillquist’s approach to the same and what Epps reports as ‘the Blackstone principle’. The law is left with no epistemic basis for policies, which, I argue, leaves it struggling for public trust in the modern era.

scholarly journals Essays in law and economics

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Kay Eric Winkler
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Moral Hazard ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Detrimental Effect ◽  
Motor Vehicle ◽  
Law And Economics ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Causal Connection ◽  
Motor Vehicle Insurance

<p>The thesis consists of four chapters concerning different topics of Law and Economics.  The first chapter deals with economic issues in competition law. In order to distinguish predatory pricing from competition on the merits, the courts in the United States and in the European Union have established cost-based tests that also include an assessment of the market structure. The tests miss a causal connection between conduct and foreclosure. In contrast, Australia and New Zealand make use of a counterfactual analysis that establishes causality. However, the causal connection there relates to the market power and the conduct, and does not answer whether the conduct has only been done because of the foreclosure effects. A counterfactual test could be useful in predation cases if it establishes a causal link between the profitability of the conduct and the foreclosure effect.  The second chapter explores the effect of excluding tort law for workplace accidents. In countries with workers’ compensation schemes, employees receive compensation for injuries at work regardless of fault, while private law liability of employers is either limited or fully excluded. The degree of liability matters for workplace safety, and different legal arrangements influence incentives of employers and employees to take care. An empirical analysis of several jurisdictions reveals a consistent pattern. The combination of arrangements that increase private law liability and mitigate moral hazard seems to be important for safety at work. No-fault workers’ compensation with the benefit of effective compensation comes with a cost: more injuries of those, which it seeks to protect.  The third chapter assesses the effect of no-fault automobile insurances on safety incentives. In order to examine how no-fault motor vehicle insurance affects accident rates, insurance regimes in various countries are compared. A random effects model on fatality data of 29 countries reveals that some motor vehicle insurance systems increase moral hazard. The incentive to take care seems not to be negatively affected by no-fault rules, but by moral hazard due to limited experience rating. Restrictions on experience rating lower the level of care taken by motorists. A combination of no-fault insurance and flat-rate premiums, as found in New Zealand or the Northern Territory in Australia, has a detrimental effect on the safety of roads.  The fourth chapter primarily builds on the finding of the second chapter that the exclusion of tort law for workplace injuries results in higher accident rates. In this respect, the question arises whether health and safety regulation can counteract the detrimental effect by providing deterrence from criminal sanctions. This is particularly relevant for New Zealand where a tendency of the law towards a reliance on regulation and criminal law can be observed. In practice, however, criminal law cannot fully replace common law in establishing incentives to take care, and is not as effective as private law actions.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document