Abstract
The evolution of the field of study called "law and economics" presupposes a complementary relationship between the disciplines. While economics may complement law by useful descriptions, it is of very limited use in assessing the explanations for choices and the quality of agreements. The conventional economic observations that choices reveal preferences and that agreements stemming from these choices achieve Pareto Superior outcomes fall well short of providing a useful standard for legal theory. A more meaningful theory is one that goes behind choice and preference to their social and psychological determinants.
How to Cite
39 Ariz. L. Rev. 1 (1997)
20
Views
8
Downloads
