An Empirical Evaluation of the Normative Justifications for Cartel Criminalisation

Forthcoming, Legal Studies (2017)

Posted: 24 May 2017  

Andreas Stephan

University of East Anglia (UEA) - Centre for Competition Policy

Date Written: 2017

Abstract

A growing number of jurisdictions treat ‘hardcore’ cartel conduct as crime, in the belief that the threat of incarceration is necessary for deterrence. The significant economic harm caused by cartels is generally undisputed, but there is disagreement over whether cartel conduct is morally offensive enough to justify criminalisation. Critics argue that it is another example of ‘over-criminalisation’, seeking to regulate an activity that is morally ambiguous. Those in favour have sought to formulate normative justifications for why cartel conduct should be crime. Many of these rely on the assumption that members of society expect markets to be competitive and believe cartels are undesirable. This paper makes a significant contribution by testing this question empirically. Public surveys from the UK, Germany, Italy and the US are used to critically analyse the extent to which normative justifications for cartel conduct have empirical backing.

Keywords: Competition Law, Cartels, Criminalization

Suggested Citation

Stephan, Andreas, An Empirical Evaluation of the Normative Justifications for Cartel Criminalisation (2017). Forthcoming, Legal Studies (2017) . Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2972561

Andreas Stephan (Contact Author)

University of East Anglia (UEA) - Centre for Competition Policy ( email )

UEA
Norwich Research Park
Norwich, Norfolk NR4 7TJ
United Kingdom

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
148