IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v26y2002i4p501-520.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Three problems of social organisation: institutional law and economics meets Habermasian law and democracy

Author

Listed:
  • Kenneth L. Avio

Abstract

This paper attempts to identify certain implications of Habermasian ethics for the economic analysis of law. It does so by demonstrating a complementarity between the Habermas of Between Facts and Norms and the Veblen--Ayres--Commons tradition(s) of economic analysis. Three unresolved problems of social organisation raised by the institutionalists are addressed: the legitimacy of the status quo ante (Buchanan-Schmid), the legitimacy of society's transaction structure (Klevorick) and the problem of social order (Hobbes-Platteau). Discourse ethics demonstrates how these problems may be resolved. The model of human agency adopted in institutional law and economics permits an easier fit with discourse ethics than would be possible with the neoclassical traditions. Copyright 2002, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Kenneth L. Avio, 2002. "Three problems of social organisation: institutional law and economics meets Habermasian law and democracy," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 26(4), pages 501-520, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:26:y:2002:i:4:p:501-520
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Petrick, Martin, 2008. "Theoretical and methodological topics in the institutional economics of European agriculture. With applications to farm organisation and rural credit arrangements," Studies on the Agricultural and Food Sector in Transition Economies, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO), volume 45, number 92318.
    2. Dolfsma, W.A. & McMaster, R. & Finch, J., 2005. "Institutions, Institutional Change, Language, and Searle," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2005-067-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    3. Wilfred Dolfsma, 2013. "Government Failure," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 15372.
    4. Silvia Sacchetti, 2015. "Inclusive and Exclusive Social Preferences: A Deweyan Framework to Explain Governance Heterogeneity," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 126(3), pages 473-485, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:26:y:2002:i:4:p:501-520. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.