Author:
Campbell David,Picciotto Sol
Abstract
As lawyers concerned with the regulation of economic activity, we applaud the recognition in Professor Charles Goodhart's recent Chorley lecture that much of the ‘law and economics’ of the past quarter-century has involved ‘too much one-way traffic’. If the field of law and economics has indeed largely, as Professor Goodhart suggests, consisted of a process of intellectual imperialism, specifically of the colonisation of law by economics, we consider it important to reflect on the reasons for this, and to make some suggestions to improve the collaboration between the two disciplines. In brief, we suggest that this interaction has been bedevilled by its tendency to reproduce the worst aspects of formalism in each discipline.Professor Goodhart shows that the bulk of law and economics has consisted of a fairly unthinking application of standard neo-classical economic assumptions to legal phenomena which have themselves typically been conceived in conventional doctrinal terms.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Reference43 articles.
1. A great deal of Posner's later work is an attempt doggedly to defend, against criticism to which he has always been ready to reply but always loathe to take on board, various positions it would have been wise not to have staked out so brazenly in the first place. We give but one example in this paper. Cf D Campbell ‘Ayres versus Coase: an Attempt to Recover the Issue of Equality in Law and Economics’;B J Law and Society,1994
2. Twelve Contemporary Economists
3. The State of Economics
Cited by
12 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献