Research Programs
More
What are you looking for?
Showing Latest Publications
TOTM In a series of posts (Part I, Part II and Part III), I’ve sketched out how the trend toward increasing detachment in L&E scholarship might . . .
In a series of posts (Part I, Part II and Part III), I’ve sketched out how the trend toward increasing detachment in L&E scholarship might reduce the influence of the L&E movement at the retail level and become its ultimate undoing. I must say, writing this series has been a lot of fun but has also been a bit depressing as somebody with more than a theoretical stake in the future of L&E in law schools, and more importantly, somebody who views the “retail” success of L&E as critical to its growth.
Read the full piece here.
TOTM In previous posts (Part I and Part II) I discussed the increasing trend towards formal mathematics in L&E scholarship and some of the potential issues . . .
In previous posts (Part I and Part II) I discussed the increasing trend towards formal mathematics in L&E scholarship and some of the potential issues this raises for the L&E movement as it becomes more detached from the legal academy. This post focuses on another question: What will L&E scholarship in law schools look like in the future?
TOTM I’ve been waiting for my old con law prof to take a political stand I could really get behind, and he finally has. Barack Obama . . .
I’ve been waiting for my old con law prof to take a political stand I could really get behind, and he finally has. Barack Obama is the only one of the presidential candidates to take a firm stand against this shamefully populist gas tax holiday. Good for you, Prof!
TOTM Harvard’s Einer Elhauge answers the titular question in the newest issue of Competition Policy International, in response to a review of his new textbook Global . . .
Harvard’s Einer Elhauge answers the titular question in the newest issue of Competition Policy International, in response to a review of his new textbook Global Antitrust Law and Economics (with Damien Geradin) at the newly revamped Global Competition Policy website. The response essay is less about the particulars of the book than it is about what the fundamental goals of modern competition law courses are and should be. The debate takes the form of teaching doctrine and procedure vs. economic analysis with Elhauge defending the latter. Here’s an excerpt from Elhauge driving home the point…
TOTM In my previous post, I sketched out some trends in the Law & Economics movement in recent years. Specifically, I’ve focused on the trends towards . . .
In my previous post, I sketched out some trends in the Law & Economics movement in recent years. Specifically, I’ve focused on the trends towards increasing mathematical formality and specialization within economics as a stand alone discipline. The post triggered some thoughtful responses from Larry Solum and Larry Ribstein for which I am grateful. I also received a number of responses in private which asked, rather bluntly, “So what?” The point was that even if everything I claimed about trends in economics and L&E were true, perhaps the result would be L&E scholars being more detached from the legal academy and migrating to economics departments. Again, so what? L&E work would be getting done by somebody somewhere. More than one of these private responses included the observation that maybe L&E types should be in economics departments anyway where there are tougher tenure standards, peer review, and less pay.
TOTM The D.C. Circuit’s opinion is available here. Here is one of the key passages explaining the D.C. Circuit’s logic… Read the full piece here.
The D.C. Circuit’s opinion is available here. Here is one of the key passages explaining the D.C. Circuit’s logic…
TOTM Sunstein and Thaler have a series of posts over at Volokh Consipiracy on their new book Nudge, which expands on their notion of libertarian paternalism . . .
Sunstein and Thaler have a series of posts over at Volokh Consipiracy on their new book Nudge, which expands on their notion of libertarian paternalism (see here, here , here and here). Something in the most recent post caught my eye. In preparing to respond to various objections to libertarian paternalism, Sunstein argues that this sort of paternalism offers the “best of both worlds”…
TOTM The new issue of the Journal of Law & Economics is available online. This is an exciting development for me because the issue includes my . . .
The new issue of the Journal of Law & Economics is available online. This is an exciting development for me because the issue includes my paper with Ben Klein on The Economics of Slotting Contracts (SSRN version available here), and because it has been a very long wait to see the paper in final form (note the new release is of the August 2007 issue of JLE).
TOTM Amit Gandhi, Luke Froeb, Steven Tschantz and Gregory Werden have published “Post-Merger Product Repositioning” in the Journal of Industrial Economics. (HT: Luke). Read the full . . .
Amit Gandhi, Luke Froeb, Steven Tschantz and Gregory Werden have published “Post-Merger Product Repositioning” in the Journal of Industrial Economics. (HT: Luke).
