Controlling internalities: between economics and psychology of regulation

Authors

  • Gustavo Rodríguez García Universidad de Lima, Perú

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26439/iusetpraxis2021.n053.4960

Keywords:

regulation, behavioral analysis, rational choice, economics and law

Abstract

A growing interest in psychology applied to regulation has been translated into strategies of regulation by architecture or interventions based on nudges. Thus, the contest of psychology intervenes in the widely developed interaction between economics and law. However, as discussed in the present work, a more in-depth study of the costs and benefits that specific behavioral interventions imply is required. In particular, the judgment of other people's preferences and the transparency of nudge present difficulties that have not yet been definitively resolved by behavioral law & economics enthusiasts.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

  • Gustavo Rodríguez García, Universidad de Lima, Perú

    Abogado por la Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. Magíster en Propiedad Intelectual por la Universidad Austral, Argentina. Profesor de la Universidad de Lima. Socio en Rodríguez García & Encinas. Presidente de la Segunda Comisión Permanente de Ética del Consejo Nacional de Autorregulación Publicitaria.

References

Akerlof, G., y Shiller, R. (2009). Animal Spirits. Cómo influye la psicología humana en la economía. Ediciones Gestión 2000.

Allcott, H., y Sunstein, C. (2015). Regulating internalities. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 34(3), 698-705.

Ashraf, N., Camerer, C., y Loewenstein, G. (2005). Adam Smith, Behavioral Economist. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(3), 131-145.

Ayres, I. (2010). Carrots and Sticks: Unlock the Power of Incentives to Get Things Done. Bantam.

Ayres, I., y Gertner, R. (1989). Filling Gaps in Incomplete Contracts: An Economic Theory of Default Rules. The Yale Law Journal, 99(1), 87-130.

Baldwin, R. (2015). Nudge: Three Degrees of Concern. LSE Law. Policy Briefing Series. file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/SSRN-id2573334.pdf

Baldwin, R., y Cave, M. (2013). Understanding Regulation: Theory, Strategy, and Practice (2. a ed.). Oxford University Press.

Breyer, S. (1979). Analyzing Regulatory Failure: Mismatches, Less Restrictive Alternatives and Reform. Harvard Law Review, 92(3), 547-609.

Camerer, C., Issacharoff, S., Loewestein, G., Donaghue, T., y Rabin, M. (2003). Regulation for Conservatives: Behavioral Economics and the Case for “Asymmetric Paternalism”. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 151(3), 1211-1254.

Coase, R. (1960). The Problem of Social Cost. The Journal of Law & Economics, III. https://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/file/coase-problem.pdf

Epstein, R. (2008). The Neoclassical Economics of Consumer Contracts. Minnesota Law Review, 92(3), 93-110.

Hasnas, J. (2016). Some Noodging about Nudging: Four Questions about Libertarian Paternalism. The Georgetown Journal of Law & Public Policy, 14 (Edición especial), 645-662.

Jolls, C., Sunstein, C., y Thaler, R. (1998). A Behavioral Approach to Law and Economics. Stanford Law Review, 50, 1471-1550.

Kiesling, L. (2015). Knowledge Problem. En P. Boettke y C. Coyne (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Austrian Economics (pp. 45-94). Oxford University Press.

Korobkin, R., y Ulen, T. (2000). Law and Behavioral Science: Removing the Rationality Assumption from Law and Economics. California Law Review, 88(4), 1051-1144.

Levmore, S. (2014). Internality Regulation through Public Choice. Theoretical Inquiries in Law, 15(2), 447-470.

Marron, D. (2015). Should We Tax Internalities Like Externalities? Tax Policy Center, Urban Institute & Brookings Institution. https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdfs/2000508-should-we-tax-internalities-like-externalities.pdf

Posner, R. (1997). Rational Choice, Behavioral Economics, and the Law. Stanford Law Review, 50, 1551-1575.

Rizzo, M., y Whitman, G. (2009). Little Brother Is Watching You: New Paternalism on the Slippery Slopes. Arizona Law Review, 51(3), 685-739.

Rizzo, M., y Whitman, G. (2020). Escaping Paternalism: Rationality, Behavioral Economics and Public Policy. Cambridge University Press.

Sánchez, E. (2015). Aplicaciones de la economía del comportamiento al diseño de políticas públicas. Advocatus, 31, 181-194.

Smith, A., y Zywicki, T. (2016). Nudging in an Evolving Marketplace: How Markets Improve their Own Choice Architecture. George Mason University Law and Economics Research Paper Series 16-21. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2757712

Spulber, D. (1989). Regulation and Markets. The MIT Press.

Sunstein, C. (2013). Simpler: The Future of Government. Simon & Schuster.

Sunstein, C. (2018). Misconceptions about Nudges. Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, 2(1), 61-67.

Sunstein, C., y Thaler, R. (2003). Libertarian Paternalism Is Not an Oxymoron. University of Chicago Law School. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1184&context=public_law_and_legal_theory

Thaler, R. (2018). Nudge, not sludge. Science, 361(6401), 431.

Thaler, R., Sunstein, C., y Balz, J. (2015). Arquitectura de decisions. Advocatus, 31, 47-64.

Tor, A. (2020). The Target Opportunity Costs of Successful Nudges. En K. Mathis y A. Tor (Eds.), Consumer Law and Economics (pp. 9-17). Springer.

Whitman, G. (2006). Against the New Paternalism: Internalities and the Economics of Self-Control. Policy Analysis, 563. https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa563.pdf

Downloads

Published

2021-12-17

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Rodríguez García, G. (2021). Controlling internalities: between economics and psychology of regulation. Ius Et Praxis, 53(053), 281-293. https://doi.org/10.26439/iusetpraxis2021.n053.4960