IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/rlecon/v7y2011i3n7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is Law a Parasite? An Evolutionary Explanation of Differences among Legal Traditions

Author

Listed:
  • Smits Jan M.

    (Maastricht University & University of Helsinki)

Abstract

One of the most salient characteristics of law is that it can be seen as a tradition: law is passed on from one generation to another and, even though profound changes in the law may occur over time, its development is usually seen as a continuous one. Thus, in The Common Law, Oliver Wendell Holmes states that “‘the law embodies the story of a nation’s development through many centuries (...).” Alan Watson also emphasizes the extraordinary persistence of rules by noting that similar rules have been transplanted from one society to another. This paper seeks to explain differences among legal traditions by applying a specific evolutionary framework. This framework is based on ‘symbiosism,’ a Darwinian theory developed by linguists to explain the origins and development of language. The basis for this theory is that language is an organism residing in the human brain and therefore a memetic life form. In this respect, interesting parallels can be drawn between language and law. This theory can be used to help explain differences among jurisdictions, in particular why it is that these differences continue to exist over time.

Suggested Citation

  • Smits Jan M., 2011. "Is Law a Parasite? An Evolutionary Explanation of Differences among Legal Traditions," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 7(3), pages 791-804, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:rlecon:v:7:y:2011:i:3:n:7
    DOI: 10.2202/1555-5879.1553
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2202/1555-5879.1553
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2202/1555-5879.1553?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jack Hirshleifer, 1978. "Natural Economy Versus Political Economy," UCLA Economics Working Papers 129, UCLA Department of Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Du Laing Bart & De Coninck Julie, 2011. "Introduction: Symposium on Evolutionary Approaches to (Comparative) Law: Integrating Theoretical Perspectives," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 7(3), pages 653-658, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kanazawa, Satoshi, 2005. "Is "discrimination" necessary to explain the sex gap in earnings?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 269-287, April.
    2. Bergstrom, Theodore C & Stark, Oded, 1993. "How Altruism Can Prevail in an Evolutionary Environment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(2), pages 149-155, May.
    3. Jack Hirshleifer, 1983. "From weakest-link to best-shot: The voluntary provision of public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 371-386, January.
    4. Andrew W. Lo & H. Allen Orr & Ruixun Zhang, 2018. "The growth of relative wealth and the Kelly criterion," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 49-67, April.
    5. Hirshleifer, Jack, 1995. "Theorizing about conflict," Handbook of Defense Economics, in: Keith Hartley & Todd Sandler (ed.), Handbook of Defense Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 7, pages 165-189, Elsevier.
    6. Bergstrom, Theodore C, 1995. "On the Evolution of Altruistic Ethical Rules for Siblings," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(1), pages 58-81, March.
    7. Jack Hirshleifer, 1982. "Alternative Social Composition Fucntions and the Voluntary Provisions of Public Goods," UCLA Economics Working Papers 244R, UCLA Department of Economics.
    8. Alain Marciano, 2007. "Economists on Darwin's theory of social evolution and human behaviour," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 681-700.
    9. Coelho, Philip R. P. & McClure, James E., 1998. "Social context and the utility of wealth: Addressing the Markowitz challenge," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 305-314, November.
    10. John P. Conley & Myrna Wooders, 2005. "Memetics & Voting: How Nature May Make us Public Spirited," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 0514, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
    11. Maloney, Michael T., 2017. "Alchian remembrances," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 561-582.
    12. John Conley & Myrna H. Wooders & Ali Toossi, 2001. "Evolution & Voting: How Nature Makes us Public Spirited," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 28(24), pages 1.
    13. Leonardo Becchetti & Alessandra Pelloni & Fiammetta Rossetti, 2008. "Relational Goods, Sociability, and Happiness," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 343-363, August.
    14. Alvi, Eskander, 1998. "Fairness and self-interest: An assessment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 245-261.
    15. Hirshleifer, Jack, 1995. "Anarchy and Its Breakdown," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(1), pages 26-52, February.
    16. Hannon, Bruce, 1997. "The use of analogy in biology and economics: From biology to economics, and back," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 471-488, October.
    17. Hannon, Bruce, 2001. "Ecological pricing and economic efficiency," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 19-30, January.
    18. Arthur J. Robson, 2001. "Why Would Nature Give Individuals Utility Functions?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 109(4), pages 900-929, August.
    19. Lenzen, Manfred, 2007. "Structural path analysis of ecosystem networks," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 200(3), pages 334-342.
    20. Koye Somefun & Philip Mirowski, 1999. "Towards an Automata Approach of (Institutional) Economics," Computing in Economics and Finance 1999 213, Society for Computational Economics.

    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:bpj:rlecon:v:7:y:2011:i:3:n:7. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    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.