IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jleorg/v14y1998i1p44-60.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trust, Treason, and Trials: An Example of How the Evolution of Preferences Can Be Driven by Legal Institutions

Author

Listed:
  • Huck, Steffen

Abstract

This study tries to enlarge the scope of law and economics by providing an example that legal institutions do not only have short-run effects on present behavior by changing the cost-benefit relation of different actions but can also drive the evolution of preferences. Therefore legal design has long-run effects on behavior which should not by neglected by legislators. The study presents a simple model of cooperation where only one party has the option to observe the outcome of joint efforts. While this party can pretend a failure of cooperation, the other party has the option to monitor its partner. The model considers resource variables and a psychological variable reflecting remorse in case of betrayal. Players are assumed to behave rationally according to given preferences, but preferences may change in the course of evolution. The results show that a "good" design of legal institutions can crowd out "bad" preferences. Copyright 1998 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Huck, Steffen, 1998. "Trust, Treason, and Trials: An Example of How the Evolution of Preferences Can Be Driven by Legal Institutions," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 44-60, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:14:y:1998:i:1:p:44-60
    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. Roberto Galbiati & Emeric Henry & Nicolas Jacquemet & Max Lobeck, 2021. "How laws affect the perception of norms: Empirical evidence from the lockdown," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-14, September.
    2. Mengel, Friederike, 2008. "Matching structure and the cultural transmission of social norms," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 67(3-4), pages 608-623, September.
    3. Francisco Herreros, 2008. "The State and the Creation of an Environment for the Growing of Trust," Rationality and Society, , vol. 20(4), pages 497-521, November.
    4. Riedel, Nadine & Schildberg-Hörisch, Hannah, 2013. "Asymmetric obligations," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 67-80.
    5. Adriani, Fabrizio & Sonderegger, Silvia, 2015. "Trust, trustworthiness and the consensus effect: An evolutionary approach," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 102-116.
    6. Poulsen, A., 2001. "Reciprocity, Materialism and Welfare: An Evolutionary Model," Papers 01-3, Aarhus School of Business - Department of Economics.
    7. Jon C. Thompson & Jiabin Wu, 2018. "Legal institution and the evolution of moral conduct," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 20(5), pages 725-741, October.
    8. Roberto Galbiati & Emeric Henry & Nicolas Jacquemet & Max Lobeck, 2021. "How laws affect the perception of norms: Empirical evidence from the lockdown," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-14, September.
    9. Bonatti, Luigi, 2008. "Cultural relativism and ideological policy makers in a general equilibrium model with for-profit and non-profit enterprises," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 1-15, March.
    10. Jean‐Robert Tyran & Lars P. Feld, 2006. "Achieving Compliance when Legal Sanctions are Non‐deterrent," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 108(1), pages 135-156, March.
    11. O'Hara, Sabine U. & Stagl, Sigrid, 2002. "Endogenous preferences and sustainable development," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 511-527.
    12. Harvey S. James Jr., 2002. "On the Reliability of Trusting," Rationality and Society, , vol. 14(2), pages 229-256, May.
    13. Lusk, Jayson L. & Rozan, Anne, 2008. "Public Policy and Endogenous Beliefs: The Case of Genetically Modified Food," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(2), pages 1-20.
    14. Crettez, Bertrand & Deffains, Bruno & Musy, Olivier, 2014. "Legal convergence and endogenous preferences," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 20-27.
    15. James Jr., Harvey S., 2002. "The trust paradox: a survey of economic inquiries into the nature of trust and trustworthiness," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 291-307, March.
    16. Kubler, Dorothea, 2001. "On the Regulation of Social Norms," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 449-476, October.
    17. van der Weele Joël, 2012. "Beyond the State of Nature: Introducing Social Interactions in the Economic Model of Crime," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 8(2), pages 401-432, October.
    18. Friederike Mengel, 2006. "A Model Of Immigration, Integration And Cultural Transmission Of Social Norms," Working Papers. Serie AD 2006-08, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    19. Harvey James, 2002. "The Trust Paradox: A Survey of Economic Inquiries Into the Nature of Trust and Trustworthiness," Microeconomics 0202001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Roberto Galbiati & Emeric Henry & Nicolas Jacquemet & Max Lobeck, 2021. "How laws affect the perception of norms: Empirical evidence from the lockdown," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-14, September.

    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:jleorg:v:14:y:1998:i:1:p:44-60. 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/jleo .

    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.