Bar-Ilan University - Faculty of Law; Harvard University - Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics
University of San Diego School of Law; Harvard Law School
May 20, 2014
San Diego Legal Studies Paper No. 14-158
The purpose of this chapter is to illuminate the breadth and potential of behaviorally informed legal policy. We argue that currently policy approaches that encompass behavioral insights often overlook a fuller picture of psychology. A narrow approach limits the successful integration of behavioural insights into the legal system. This chapter suggests ways to move toward harmonization between the various law and psychology schools of thought. The need for such harmonization stems not only from the independent development of each strand, absent, for the most part, coherent integration and exchange, but also because this lack of awareness of the insights developed in related areas of law and psychology may lead to very limited and sometimes inadvertent policy recommendations. To meet this challenge, the paper suggests the need to balance some of the tensions which emerge from different aspects of psychology into a proposed framework of behavioural trade-offs. In particular we will focus in this chapter on taxonomy with four main trade-offs. Outcome vs. Process; Invisible vs. Expressive Law; Trusting vs. Monitoring; and Universal vs. Targeted Nudging. By demonstrating how actual policy concerns could be better understood by accounting for these trade-offs, the chapter will contribute to a more informed and nuanced path of EU behavioural-based legal policy.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 29
Keywords: nudge, regulation, behavioral analysis of law, EU, expressive law, behavioral economics, psychology and law
JEL Classification: K42working papers series
Date posted: May 22, 2014 ; Last revised: June 5, 2014
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.406 seconds