Logo of Humboldt-Universität zu BerlinLogo of Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
edoc-Server
Open-Access-Publikationsserver der Humboldt-Universität
de|en
Header image: facade of Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
View Item 
  • edoc-Server Home
  • Artikel und Monographien
  • Zweitveröffentlichungen
  • View Item
  • edoc-Server Home
  • Artikel und Monographien
  • Zweitveröffentlichungen
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
All of edoc-ServerCommunity & CollectionTitleAuthorSubjectThis CollectionTitleAuthorSubject
PublishLoginRegisterHelp
StatisticsView Usage Statistics
All of edoc-ServerCommunity & CollectionTitleAuthorSubjectThis CollectionTitleAuthorSubject
PublishLoginRegisterHelp
StatisticsView Usage Statistics
View Item 
  • edoc-Server Home
  • Artikel und Monographien
  • Zweitveröffentlichungen
  • View Item
  • edoc-Server Home
  • Artikel und Monographien
  • Zweitveröffentlichungen
  • View Item
2015-11-11Zeitschriftenartikel DOI: 10.1515/ercl-2015-0020
The Behavioral Divide
A Critique of the Differential Implementation of Behavioral Law and Economics in the US and the EU
Hacker, Philipp
A behavioral divide cuts across the Atlantic. Despite the recent surge of behavioral analysis in European academia, a scrutiny of decisions by courts and regulatory agencies in the US and the EU reveals striking differences. While in the US rulings by courts and regulatory agencies progressively take insights from behavioral economics into account, EU courts and agencies still, and even increasingly, cling to the rational actor model. These inverse trends can be uncovered in the interpretation of legal concepts of human agency, ie, of those elements in a legal order which refer, implicitly or explicitly, to a model of rationality of human actors. More particularly, this paper reviews the concepts of consumers and of users, in consumer law and product liability respectively, to underscore the claim of the behavioral divide. Importantly, the divergence between EU and US private law practice calls for a normative evaluation. In the face of empirical uncertainty about the existence, direction and intensity of biases, the most attractive legal concept of human agency is a pluralistic one, assuming the simultaneous presence of boundedly and fully rational actors. In concrete applications, this paper shows that a pluralistic perspective urges a revision of the concept of the reasonable consumer, both in US and EU consumer law. Furthermore, such a view leads to the adoption of a more boundedly rational user concept in product liability. The pluralistic, yet more boundedly rational concepts thus have far-reaching consequences both for private law theory and its concomitant case law.
Files in this item
Thumbnail
ercl-2015-0020.pdf — Adobe PDF — 959.2 Kb
MD5: 3fa51e232d36b2862e92e805d7d486d5
ercl-2015-0020.txt — Text file — 135.1 Kb
MD5: 13639268657d7a33a6f69548f6f88656
Thumbnail
ercl-2015-0020.png — PNG image — 89.97 Kb
MD5: 4dd74c039389e12d1155be6d04c977f0
Notes
Dieser Beitrag ist mit Zustimmung des Rechteinhabers aufgrund einer (DFG-geförderten) Allianz- bzw. Nationallizenz frei zugänglich.
Cite
BibTeX
EndNote
RIS
InCopyright
Details
DINI-Zertifikat 2019OpenAIRE validatedORCID Consortium
Imprint Policy Contact Data Privacy Statement
A service of University Library and Computer and Media Service
© Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
 
DOI
10.1515/ercl-2015-0020
Permanent URL
https://doi.org/10.1515/ercl-2015-0020
HTML
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1515/ercl-2015-0020">https://doi.org/10.1515/ercl-2015-0020</a>