Rational Choice, Behavioral Economics, and the Law
نویسنده
چکیده
Jolls, Sunstein, and Thaler wish to use the insights of behavioral economics to improve economic analysis of law, which they believe to be handicapped by its commitment to the assumption that people are rational.1 The editors of the Review have asked me to comment on JST's paper, no doubt because of my identification with rational-choice economics. Since JST complain with some justice that economists and economically minded lawyers do not always make clear what they mean by "rationality," let me make clear at the outset what I mean by the word: choosing the best means to the chooser's ends. For example, a rational person who wants to keep warm will compare the alternative means known to him of keeping warm in terms of cost, comfort, and other dimensions of utility and disutility, and will choose from this array the means that achieves warmth with the greatest margin of benefit over cost, broadly defined. Rational choice need not be conscious choice. Rats are at least as rational as human beings when rationality is defined as achieving one's ends (survival and reproduction, in the case of rats) at least cost. No doubt my definition lacks precision and rigor. But it is good enough to indicate the difference in approach between rational-choice economics and behavioral economics.
منابع مشابه
On Behavioral-Environmental Economics
Traditional environmental and resource economics uses rational choice theory to guide theevaluation of alternative policy options to correct market failure. Behavioral economics,however, has challenged this conventional mindset by showing how people frequently makechoices and state values that deviate from the presumption of rationality, i.e., behavioralfailures. This article ex...
متن کاملBehavioral economics and the positive - normative distinction : Sunstein ’ s Choosing Not
This paper examines behavioral economics’ use of the positive-normative distinction in its critique of standard rational choice theory as normative, and argues that it departs from Robbins’ understanding of that distinction in ways that suggest behavioral economists themselves do not observe that distinction. One implication of this is that behavioral economists generally do not recognize Putna...
متن کاملThe use of knowledge in comparative economics
For most of the twentieth century, comparative economics asked one question: capitalism or socialism? The particulars of the question took many forms, both: positive and normative, from stark contrasts to shaded nuances (e.g., 'the mixed economy'), but the central theme was always planning versus markets. By contrast, the 'new comparative economics' (e.g., Djankov, et al. 2003) draws on diverse...
متن کاملLaw and Behavioral Economics
Although the impact of economics on the analysis and practice of law is beyond any reasonable doubt, such impact and influence has been decreasing over time. This may be partly due to the fact that many economists seem to have forgotten the practical goals with which the field of law and economics was endowed. But it may also be due to the fact that researchers in behavioral economics found an ...
متن کاملCharacterizing Behavioral Decisions with Choice Data∗
A number of different models with behavioral economics have a reduced form representation where potentially boundedly rational decision-makers do not necessarily internalize all the consequences of their actions on payoff relevant features (which we label as psychological states) of the choice environment. This paper studies the restrictions that such behavioral models impose on choice data and...
متن کامل