European Journal of Law and Economics

, Volume 24, Issue 2, pp 93–107 | Cite as

On the economics of plagiarism



Cheating and plagiarism can involve the transgression of intellectual property rights across many areas of life. When a direct financial benefit from such practices is identifiable, the opportunity to seek legal redress is available via civil court action. When it is undertaken by a public official it may constitute malfeasance. Yet in the case of breaches of university regulations (from the growing number of student cheating and plagiarism incidents) subsequent legal intervention may be characterised by situations where the university is the defendant and the alleged plagiarist is the plaintiff (seeking compensation for interrupted study and/or tarnished reputation). University defences can flounder around the issue of proving intent to deceive. What can they do to try to prevent such occurrences? This paper uses economic analysis to examine such issues. Economic models of plagiarism motivated primarily by (i) time-saving and (ii) dishonesty are developed to help frame the discussion. Both model approaches overlap in their implications, namely, ensuring that sufficient resources are devoted to monitoring coursework (to increase the probability that cheating and plagiarism are detected) and of providing sufficiently clear and severe institutional penalties (to counter-balance any expected benefits that the student may perceive to be available from cheating and plagiarism). Policy proposals are raised for further debate and consideration.


Plagiarism Cheating Deception Higher education 

JEL codes

I21 H42 K42 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Akerlof, G. A. (1980). A theory of social custom, of which unemployment may be one consequence. Quarterly Journal of Economics, XCIV, 749–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. BBC (2004). Quarter of students cheating. BBC News 20th June 2005. education/3852869.stm [date accessed 3/2/05]
  3. BBC (2005). Madonna in plagiarism case defeat BBC News 18th November 2005 [date accessed 19/11/2005]
  4. Becker, G. (1965). A theory of the allocation of time. Economic Journal, 75, 493–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Becker, G. (1968). Crime and punishment: An economic approach. Journal of Political Economy, 76(2), 169–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Byrne, C. (2003). USA today journalist resigns in ethics row. The Guardian (9th January 2004-01-13),3858,4832590-105414,00.html [date accessed 15/01/04]
  7. Curtis, P. (2003). Cheating MBA student faces course expulsion. The Guardian (Thursday 24th July 2003),3858,4719394-108229,00.html [date accessed 15/01/04]
  8. Enders, W., & Hoover, G. A. (2004). Whose line is it? Plagiarism in economics. Journal of Economic Literature, XLII, 487–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Furedi, F. (2004). Cheats are having a field day on campus. The Daily Telegraph (Wednesday 17th March) 19.Google Scholar
  10. Galles, G., Graves, P. E., Sexton, R. L., & Walton, S. M. (2003). Monitoring costs and tolerance levels for classroom cheating. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 62(4), 713–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gifford, A. Jr. (1999). Being and time: On the nature and evolution of institutions. Journal of Bioeconomics, 1(1), 127–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) (2005). Deterring, detecting and dealing with student plagiarism. [date accessed 16/02/04]
  13. JISC Plagiarism Advisory Service (JISCPAS) (2004). Northumbria University and the Joint Information Systems Committee. site/jiscpas.asp [date accessed 15/01/04]
  14. Larkham, P. J., & Mann, S. (2002). Plagiarism and its treatment in higher education. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 26(4), 339–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. McCabe, D. L. (2003). Ethics and teaching: Academic Integrity. Paper presented at the 2003 Conference on Ethics in Teaching and Research, Newark, New Jersey. TA%20Conference.index.html [date accessed 15/01/04]
  16. Park, C. (2004). Rebels without a clause: Towards and institutional framework for dealing with plagiarism by students. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 28(3), 291–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Rangwala, G. (2003). British Intelligence Iraq Dossier Relies on Recycled Academic Articles. [date accessed 3/02/05]
  18. Sharpe, T. (1974). Porterhouse blue. London: Secker & Warburg.Google Scholar
  19. Stevens, P., & Weale, M. (2004). Lazy students? A study of student time use. National Institute of Economic and Social Research. [date accessed 3/02/05]
  20. Szabo, A., & Underwood, J. (2003). Cybercheats: Is information and communications technology fuelling academic dishonesty?. Active Learning in Higher Education, 5(2), 180–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. (2005). [date accessed 3/02/05]

Case referred to

  1. Clark V. University of Lincolnshire and Humberside (2000), UK Court of Appeal (Civil Division) 19th April 2000. Reference: [2000] 3 All ER 752.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsUniversity of PortsmouthPortsmouthUK
  2. 2.Department of EconomicsUniversity of SurreyGuildfordUK

Personalised recommendations