Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Economics (2)
- Law and Economics (2)
- Law and Society (2)
- Legislation (2)
- Politics (2)
-
- Public Law and Legal Theory (2)
- Administrative Law (1)
- Choice of law (1)
- Cognitive psychology theory of human decisionmaking (1)
- David Cavers (1)
- Governmental policy (1)
- Interdisciplinarity in conflict of laws (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Law (1)
- Legal anthropology (1)
- Legal pluralism (1)
- Private international law (1)
- Public choice theory (1)
- Regulatory policymaking (1)
- Social Welfare (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Public Law and Legal Theory
Taking Distribution Seriously, Robert C. Hockett
Taking Distribution Seriously, Robert C. Hockett
Cornell Law Faculty Working Papers
It is common for legal theorists and policy analysts to think and communicate mainly in maximizing terms. What is less common is for them to notice that each time we speak explicitly of socially maximizing one thing, we speak implicitly of distributing another thing and equalizing yet another thing. We also, moreover, effectively define ourselves and our fellow citizens by reference to that which we equalize; for it is in virtue of the latter that our social welfare formulations treat us as “counting” for purposes of socially aggregating and maximizing.
To attend systematically to the inter-translatability of maximization language on …
Transdisciplinary Conflict Of Laws Foreword: Cavers's Double Legacy, Karen Knop, Ralf Michaels, Annelise Riles
Transdisciplinary Conflict Of Laws Foreword: Cavers's Double Legacy, Karen Knop, Ralf Michaels, Annelise Riles
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
.
Minding The Gaps: Fairness, Welfare, And The Constitutive Structure Of Distributive Assessment, Robert C. Hockett
Minding The Gaps: Fairness, Welfare, And The Constitutive Structure Of Distributive Assessment, Robert C. Hockett
Cornell Law Faculty Working Papers
Despite over a century’s disputation and attendant opportunity for clarification, the field of inquiry now loosely labeled “welfare economics” (WE) remains surprisingly prone to foundational confusions. The same holds of work done by many practitioners of WE’s influential offshoot, normative “law and economics” (LE).
A conspicuous contemporary case of confusion turns up in recent discussion concerning “fairness versus welfare.” The very naming of this putative dispute signals a crude category error. “Welfare” denotes a proposed object of distribution. “Fairness” describes and appropriate pattern of distribution. Welfare itself is distributed fairly or unfairly. “Fairness versus welfare” is analytically on all fours …
Cognitive Psychology And Optimal Government Design, Jeffrey J. Rachlinski, Cynthia R. Farina
Cognitive Psychology And Optimal Government Design, Jeffrey J. Rachlinski, Cynthia R. Farina
Cornell Law Faculty Publications