Law and neoclassical economics theory: A critical history of the distribution/efficiency debate

Journal of Socio-Economics

Volumn 32, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 361-390

  Hackney Jr , James R ^a  

^a NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Distribution; Intellectual history; Law and economics

Indexed keywords

EID: 0041340896     PISSN: 10535357     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1053-5357(03)00047-7     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Arlen J. Should defendants' wealth matter? Journal of Legal Studies XXI 1992 413-429
2. Baker E. Utility and rights: two justifications for state action increasing equality The Yale Law Journal 84 1974 39-59
3. Baker E. The ideology of the economic analysis of law Philosophy & Public Affairs 5 1975 3-48
4. Baker E. Starting points in economic analysis of law Hofstra Law Review 8 1980 939-972
5. Bebchuck L. The pursuit of a bigger pie: can everyone expect a bigger slice? Hofstra Law Review 8 1980 671-709
6. Blaug, M., 1992. The Methodology of Economics, 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
7. Brown J. Toward an economic theory of liability Journal of Legal Studies 2 1973 323-349
8. Calabresi, G., 1970. The Cost of Accidents: A Legal and Economic Analysis. Yale University Press, New Haven.
9. Calabresi G. About law and economics: a letter to Ronald Dworkin Hofstra Law Review 8 1980 553-562
10. Calabresi, G., 1982. In: Proceedings of the British Academy on the The New Economic Analysis of Law: Scholarship, Sophistry, or Self-Indulgence, vol. LXVIII, pp. 85-108 (publication of 1981 speech).
11. Calabresi G. First party, third party, and product liability systems: can economic analysis of law tell us anything about them? Iowa Law Review 69 1984 833-851
12. Calabresi G. The most-cited articles from The Yale Law Journal: commentary by Guido Calabresi Yale Law Journal 100 1991 1501-1503
13. Calabresi G. Hirshcoff J. Toward a test for strict liability in torts Yale Law Journal 81 1972 1055-1085
14. Calabresi G. Melamed D. Property rule, liability rules, and inalienability: one view of the cathedral Harvard Law Review 85 1972 1089-1128
15. Coleman J. Efficiency, utility, and wealth maximization Hofstra Law Review 8 1980 509-551
16. Cooter R. The best right laws: value foundations of the economic analysis of law Notre Dame Law Review 64 1989 817-837
17. Duxbury N. Law and economics, science and politics Law and History Review 15 1997 323-326
18. Dworkin R. Is wealth a value? Journal of Legal Studies 9 1980a 191-226
19. Dworkin R. Why efficiency? A response to professors Calabresi and Posner Hofstra Law Review 8 1980b 563-590
20. Dworkin R. Equality of welfare Philosophy & Public Affairs 10 1981a 185-246
21. Dworkin R. Equality of resources Philosophy & Public Affairs 10 1981b 283-344
22. Epstein R. The temporal dimension in tort law University of Chicago Law Review 53 1986 1175-1218
23. Hackney, J., in press. Under Cover of Science: American Legal-Economic Theory and the Quest for Objectivity. Duke University Press, Durham.
24. Hackney J. Law and neoclassical economics: a response to commentaries Law and History Review 16 1997a 163-171
25. Hackney J. Law and neoclassical economics: science, politics, and the reconfiguration of American tort law theory Law and History Review 15 1997b 275-322
26. Hackney J. The intellectual origins of American strict products liability: a case study in American pragmatic instrumentalism The American Journal of Legal History XXXIX 1995 443-509
27. Hamminga, B., 1983. Neoclassical Theory Structure and Theory Development. Springer-Verlag, New York.
28. Hayek, F.A., 1944. The Road to Serfdom. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
29. Kaplow L. Shavell S. Why the legal system is less efficient than the income tax in redistributing income Journal of Legal Studies XXIII 1994 667-681
30. Kaplow L. Shavell S. Should legal rules favor the poor? Clarifying the role of legal rules and the income tax in redistributing income Journal of Legal Studies XXIX 2000 821-835
31. Kaplow, L., Shavell, S., 2002. Fairness Versus Welfare. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
32. Kennedy D. Michelman F.Are property and contract efficient? Hofstra Law Review 8 1980 711-770
33. Kronman A. Contract law and distributive justice The Yale Law Journal 89 1978 472-511
34. Lakatos, I., 1978. The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
35. Markovits R. A basic structure for microeconomic policy analysis in our worse-than-second-best world: a proposal and related critique of the Chicago approach to the study of law and economics Wisconsin Law Review 1975 1975 950-1080
36. Miceli T. Segerson K. Defining efficient care: the role of income distribution Journal of Legal Studies XXIV 1995 189-208
37. Posner, R., 1972a. Economic Analysis of Law. Little, Brown and Company, Boston.
38. Posner R. A theory of negligence Journal of Legal Studies 1 1972 28-96
39. Posner R. Strict liability: a comment Journal of Legal Studies 2 1973 205-221
40. Posner R. Utilitarianism, economics, and legal theory Journal of Legal Studies 8 1979 103-140
41. Posner R. The ethical and political basis of the efficiency norm in common law adjudication Hofstra Law Review 8 1980 487-507
42. Posner R. Wealth maximization revisited Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy 2 1985 85-105
43. Posner, R., 1990. The Problems of Jurisprudence. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
44. Posner, R., 1995. Overcoming Law. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
45. Rorty, R., 1979. Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
46. Sanchirico C. Taxes versus legal rules as instruments for equity: a more equitable view Journal of Legal Studies XXIX 2000 797-820
47. Schwartz A. Products liability and judicial wealth redistributions Indiana Law Journal 51 1976 558-589
48. Shavell S. A note on efficiency vs. distributional equity in legal rulemaking: should distributional equity matter given optimal income taxation American Economics Association Papers & Proceedings 71 1981 414-418
49. Weintraub, R., 1985. General Equilibrium Analysis: Studies in Appraisal. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.