IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jinsec/v3y2007i02p147-164_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the optimal specificity of legal rules

Author

Listed:
  • FON, VINCY
  • PARISI, FRANCESCO

Abstract

Lawmakers can choose to craft laws with different levels of detail to guide judges in their decision-making process, incorporating rules or standards into the laws they write. The optimal degree of specificity of legal rules under different environmental conditions and the functionality of these rules or standards are the subjects of the present study. A basic model of optimal specificity of laws is presented, clarifying the relevance of legal obsolescence and volume of litigation in the optimal choice. We then consider the important influence of codification style, judges’ specialization, and complexity of reality on the optimal choice of legislative instrument. The implications of our results are then reexamined in light of the more complex institutional reality that characterizes contemporary legislative processes in various areas of the law.

Suggested Citation

  • Fon, Vincy & Parisi, Francesco, 2007. "On the optimal specificity of legal rules," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 147-164, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jinsec:v:3:y:2007:i:02:p:147-164_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1744137407000653/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Goodhue, Rachael E. & McCarthy, Nancy, 2011. "Liability Rules, Collective Organizations and the Provision of Food Safety," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114620, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Zdybel, Karol B., 2024. "Norms among heterogeneous agents: a rational-choice model," ILE Working Paper Series 78, University of Hamburg, Institute of Law and Economics.
    3. Garoupa, Nuno & Obidzinski, Marie, 2006. "The Scope of Punishment: An Economic Theory of Harm-Based vs. Act-Based Sanctions," CEPR Discussion Papers 5899, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Mario J. Rizzo, 2021. "Abstract rules for complex systems," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 209-227, December.
    5. Douglas Whitman, 2009. "The rules of abstraction," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 22(1), pages 21-41, March.
    6. Castañeda Dower, Paul & Pfutze, Tobias, 2013. "Specificity of control: The case of Mexico's ejido reform," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 13-33.
    7. Shay Lavie & Tal Ganor & Yuval Feldman, 2020. "Adjusting legal standards," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 33-53, February.
    8. Yoshinobu Zasu & Ikumi Sato, 2012. "Providing credibility around the world: effective devices of the Cape Town Convention," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 577-601, June.
    9. Bertrand Crettez & Bruno Deffains & Régis Deloche, 2009. "On the optimal complexity of law and legal rules harmonization," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 129-142, April.
    10. John Zhuang Liu & Xueyao Li, 2019. "Legal Techniques for Rationalizing Biased Judicial Decisions: Evidence from Experiments with Real Judges," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(3), pages 630-670, September.
    11. Giovanni Maggi & Robert W. Staiger, 2008. "On the Role and Design of Dispute Settlement Procedures in International Trade Agreements," NBER Working Papers 14067, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Franziska Weber, 2013. "European integration assessed in the light of the ‘rules vs. standards debate’," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 187-210, April.
    13. Peter Grajzl, 2011. "A property rights approach to legislative delegation," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 177-200, June.

    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:cup:jinsec:v:3:y:2007:i:02:p:147-164_00. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/joi .

    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.