bei Google ScholarTitelangaben
Purnhagen, Kai:
Never the Twain Shall Meet? : A Critical Perspective on Cultural Limits Between Internal Continental Dogmatism and Consequential US-Style Law and Economics Theory.
In: Mathis, Klaus
(Hrsg.):
Law and Economics in Europe. -
Dordrecht
: Springer
,
2014
. - S. 3-21
. - (Economic Analysis of Law in European Legal Scholarship
; 1
)
ISBN 978-94-007-7109-3
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7110-9_1
Abstract
Why could law and economics theory (hereinafter L&E ) develop to become the most prominent theory in US legal scholarship, while still playing only a minor role in Europe? As this article is also meant as a gloss, as “a propagandist tracet”,1 I herein make use of my academic freedom to write freely also on controversial issues. If there is a grain of truth in what I am proposing here, it might help to de-mystify L&E theory and classify it to what it to my mind, really is: one very convincing and influential theory, but only one theory out of many that might explain the law. I will argue that it is not only the persuasiveness of the theory that helped to establish the continental divide in legal thought. But that cultural reasons also contributed to a significant extent. Some of them, such as World War II, are external social factors. Other factors, such as the influence of the Olin foundation, resulted from internal factors. As Grechenig and Gelter convincingly explain, at the beginning of the movement in the nineteenth and the early twentieth century the developments were comparable in Europe and the USA. The Nazi regime and World War II then marked a turning point, which resulted in reservations against L&E thinking. Europe responded with a renaissance of classical legal thought (hereinafter CLT ), while in the USA, the L&E theory developed further unhindered. This development, however, was not autonomous but influenced by man-made culture on both sides. Only recently, arguments from L&E are able to grasp hold in Europe. Interestingly, this development goes hand in hand with the upcoming of a new generation that has not been influenced by World War II. Furthermore, this generation benefited greatly from incentive mechanisms to grapple with American legal thinking through funding and the legal society likewise. The fall of the Berlin wall, I will argue, marks a second point in history, which brings L&E arguments to Europe and classical legal thought to the USA. I will close with a call for a specific EU-based idea of L&E , which starts from the outset as a method freed from the ideological struggles that accompanied the introduction of L&E in the USA. It shall live towards the aim of establishing both, a free and social market economy.
Weitere Angaben
| Publikationsform: | Aufsatz in einem Buch |
|---|---|
| Begutachteter Beitrag: | Ja |
| Institutionen der Universität: | Fakultäten > Fakultät für Lebenswissenschaften: Lebensmittel, Ernährung und Gesundheit > Lehrstuhl Lebensmittelrecht Fakultäten > Fakultät für Lebenswissenschaften: Lebensmittel, Ernährung und Gesundheit > Lehrstuhl Lebensmittelrecht > Lehrstuhl Lebensmittelrecht - Univ.-Prof. Dr. Kai Purnhagen Profilfelder > Emerging Fields > Innovation und Verbraucherschutz Profilfelder > Emerging Fields > Lebensmittel- und Gesundheitswissenschaften Fakultäten Fakultäten > Fakultät für Lebenswissenschaften: Lebensmittel, Ernährung und Gesundheit Profilfelder Profilfelder > Emerging Fields |
| Titel an der UBT entstanden: | Nein |
| Themengebiete aus DDC: | 300 Sozialwissenschaften > 320 Politikwissenschaft 300 Sozialwissenschaften > 340 Recht |
| Eingestellt am: | 01 Mär 2021 14:23 |
| Letzte Änderung: | 01 Mär 2021 14:23 |
| URI: | https://eref.uni-bayreuth.de/id/eprint/55558 |