Skip to main content

The Role of Law in the New Institutional Economics in Comparison With the Economic Analysis of Law

  • Chapter

Abstract

To describe the role of law in the new institutional economics (NIE), we compare this approach with the economic analysis of law (EAL) of the 1970s when the NIE evolved. At that time the EAL was dominated by the “Chicago” or “market-based” approach that builds on the theory of perfect competition. Contracts are complete and Pareto efficient (allocative efficient). Ten years on, informational economic models that are briefly touched upon here extended this approach. After a few methodological considerations, this chapter concentrates on the Williamsonian branch of the NIE, i.e., the transaction cost approach (TCA). This theory argues that, in the real world of positive transaction costs and limited foresight, adaptation to the unforeseen becomes a central issue. Incomplete contracts can at most be “adaptive efficient” (North 1990, p. 80). The governance structure of contracts matters and becomes a bargaining point. Court ordering has to be complemented or substituted by private ordering. Attentive actors come to terms on a governance structure that protects them against ex post opportunistic manoeuvres of their opponents. Generic governance structures are (according to Williamson) markets, hybrids, and hierarchies. Court ordering works best for market governance. In the case of hybrid modes (franchising, leasing, etc.), courts would mainly be supplanted by private ordering between the parties. As for hierarchies, courts would stay out of conflict resolution (fraud and conflict of interest excepted). While the objects of research in NIE and EAL remained different, the latter’s methodology appears to move closer to that of NIE.

In slightly changed form reprinted from Washington University Journal of Law & Policy, Vol. 26: 13; 2008, pp. 13–36 (Wahington University, St. Louis, MO, USA). The manuscript was finalized during my stay at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Fall 2006. I wish to thank Ken Arrow, Eirik Furubotn, Scott Kieff, Mitchell Polinsky and Oliver Williamson for their critical comments - and especially Ken Scott who advised me patiently on my legal presentations. Any remaining mistakes are the sole responsibility of the author.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The term “New Institutional Economics” is used as a generic term by different authors for different combinations of the above mentioned and other fields; see Richter (2005) and these Essays Chap. 1.

  2. 2.

    Veljanovski (1979, p. 1).

  3. 3.

    Legal Philosophy (2006).

  4. 4.

    What Posner (2006, p. 406) calls the “second generation of economic analysts of law.”

  5. 5.

    “Formal constraints” (North (1990, p. 46) or “court orderings” (Williamson 1985, p. 29) work perfectly.

  6. 6.

    Williamson and Ouchi (1981, p. 352).

  7. 7.

    As understood by this author, see Richter (2005).

  8. 8.

    That is the transaction cost approach (TCA), which considers issues of private law (contract law in particular) given an institutional framework; while the Northian branch of NIE, the new institutional economics of history (North 1986, 1990), deals more with issues of law making and public law (changes of the institutional framework). For a more detailed description of the two branches see Richter (2005) and Chap. 1 of these Essays.

  9. 9.

    “…which entails self-help efforts by the immediate parties to a transaction to align incentices and craft governance structures that are better attuned to their exchange needs.” (Williamson 2005a, b, p. 43).

  10. 10.

    The latter term seems to have been introduced by Veljanovski (1979).

  11. 11.

    Cf., e.g., Bebchuk (1984); for a review see Miceli (1997).

  12. 12.

    Kaplow and Shavell (2002, p. 1666).

  13. 13.

    The central claim is that the fundamental economic concepts, such as maximization, equilibrium, and efficiency are [understood to be] also fundamental to understanding and explaining the law.” (Cooter and Ulen 1988, p. 9).

  14. 14.

    Information, bargaining, contracting, monitoring, enforcement etc. costs.

  15. 15.

    Arrow (1974, p. 255). Note, however, that the concept of Pareto efficiency does not require general equilibrium, it is also applied to partial equilibria.

  16. 16.

    Cf. Eidenmüller (1995, p. 486 etc.).

  17. 17.

    Breaches of contracts or tortious acts are not an issue of general equilibrium theory (rational utility maximizers are in the zero transaction cost world by definition strictly law abiding people). Still, with some good will, one may use it to explain in neoclassical style the regulation of individual liability for contractual obligations and torts.

  18. 18.

    The classical rules demand that the state abstains from altering the personal wealth of its citizens and goes “not a step further than necessary to secure its citizens against themselves and foreign enemies; for no other final purpose should the State restrict their freedom” (Humboldt [1792] 1967, p. 52).

  19. 19.

    That is, they have (1) the right to use up their resources physically (ius utendi), (2) the right to the income from them (ius fruendi), and (3) the power of management, including that of alienation (ius abutendi) (see Lawson and Rudden 1982, p. 6).

  20. 20.

    Caution is in place in accepting the proposition that unrestricted bargaining leads to Pareto efficiency. (Arrow 1969, 52 ff.).

  21. 21.

    See also Posner (1977, Ch. 1) or Cooter and Ulen (1988, p. 51) who write: “Efficiency is the prominent concept, while equity or fairness does not figure in the discussion of EAL.”

  22. 22.

    As excellently described by Debreu himself in his Theory of Value (1959).

  23. 23.

    For instance: I purchase x bushels of wheat to be delivered here, 1 year from now, payable today, on the condition that my next year’s crop has been destroyed by hail (i.e., the purchase of hail insurance). Individuals have full knowledge of all possible events (hail, drought, normal weather) and their probability distributions at each particular location etc.

  24. 24.

    Cooter and Ulen (1988, p. 235).

  25. 25.

    The complete commodity space of the economy.

  26. 26.

    Under this condition, since all firms are assumed to be privately owned, their managers have to maximize the firms’ profit subject to the firms’ production functions. Managers are fully informed about their technically feasible production plans.

  27. 27.

    No large (or infinite) number of buyers and sellers is needed but only “the utter dispersion of power” (Stigler 1968b, p. 181).

  28. 28.

    They are in particular mentioned as justification for the use of money, see, e.g., Hicks, J. R. (1935), “A Suggestion for Simplifying the Theory of Money,” Economica, N.S., 1, 1–19.

  29. 29.

    Complete contracts (or perfect contracts) are contracts whose terms are completely stated and verifiable for all possible contingencies. They are strictly enforceable (Cooter and Ulen 1988, p. 230).

  30. 30.

    The question of the social welfare function—as a target function of society—would be both, logically (cf. Arrow’s impossibility theorem) and institutionally (cf. the theory of public choice and constitutional economics) a rather difficult topic to deal with.

  31. 31.

    Miceli (1997, p. 6). Wealth is understood to be “… what people would pay for things (or demand in exchange for giving up things they possess), not what they do pay for them.” (Posner 2003, p. 16).

  32. 32.

    Or compensation criterion, see Varian 1992, p. 405).

  33. 33.

    Eidenmüller (1995, p. 95): “The EAL commits the state to ensure the establishment of efficient methods of public control where the transaction costs of private negotiations would be prohibitively high.” (Own translation).

  34. 34.

    As an example of informational economics (Stiglitz 1985).

  35. 35.

    A case of “adverse selection.”

  36. 36.

    A “moral hazard” case.

  37. 37.

    Under certain further conditions.

  38. 38.

    Cf., for instance, the description by Furubotn and Richter (2005, p. 218).

  39. 39.

    Friedman refers to the theories of monopolistic and imperfect competition which were explicitly motivated by the argument that the assumptions of “perfect competition” or “perfect monopoly” are a false image of reality. (ibid.)

  40. 40.

    This author tried to ask Milton Friedman himself while he was at the Hoover Institution during Fall 2007. But Friedman had just died.

  41. 41.

    Williamson (1981, pp. 40, 42).

  42. 42.

    Williamson uses instead the term “discrete transaction paradigm.”

  43. 43.

    That is, as it was widely understood during the period of time when Williamson developed his TCA.

  44. 44.

    As Crocker and Masten (1991, 69f.) explain: “As a number of legal and economic scholars have emphasized, contracts are not the precise, mechanically enforced documents often encountered in economic theory. Indeed, contracts are extremely imperfect tools for controlling opportunism.”

  45. 45.

    But also public regulation as in the case of private purchases of a natural monopoly (e.g., Williamson 1976); see below.

  46. 46.

    Williamson (1991b) quoted from Williamson (1996, p. 96).

  47. 47.

    According to Palay (1984, p. 265), the term governance (first used by Williamson (1979)) is in the contractual context a shorthand expression “…for the institutional framework in which contracts are initiated, negotiated, monitored, adapted, enforced, and terminated.”

  48. 48.

    Williamson avoids the term “incomplete contracts” in this context. Instead, he speaks of “a richer conception of contract” than the “market-based paradigm.” (Williamson 1981, p. 57).

  49. 49.

    To offer a predictive theory of contract the “critical transaction cost dimensions for describing transactions need to be identified, and the resulting mix of transactions needs to be matched with governance structures in a discriminating (economizing) way.” (Williamson 1981, p. 57).

  50. 50.

    North (1978, p. 974) even writes: “To abandon neoclassical theory is to abandon economics as a science.” It may be questioned whether he is still of this opinion.

  51. 51.

    At least in their earlier writings.

  52. 52.

    Actors don’t know all possible contingencies. Valid probabilities cannot be calculated in such a context. On this problem see, e.g., Wiseman (1991, 151f).

  53. 53.

    See, e.g., Williamson (1981, p. 45).

  54. 54.

    Williamson (1981, p. 45). As in the trust-abuse game, a person is assumed to be honest only if it is more advantageous to him than being unreliable (cf. Telser 1980).

  55. 55.

    Williamson (1993, p. 104) writes: “The Fundamental Transformation explains why the problem of bilateral dependence—previously treated as a very special condition of pre-existing bilateral monopoly—is actually a very widespread and troublesome condition. … The discovery and explication of the Fundamental Transformation is very much a transaction cost economics exercise.” (Italics in the original).

  56. 56.

    That details all possible future contingencies.

  57. 57.

    More detailed examples of opportunistic tactics of contractors “..to effect a redistribution of the gains from trade include capitalizing on ambiguous terms, suing for trivial deviations, making false claims of dissatisfaction, withholding relevant information, interfering with or failing to cooperate in the other party’s performance, and failing to mitigate damages where a breach has occurred.” (Crocker and Masten (1991, p. 72) with a long footnote on sources for more extensive lists and further discussions.

  58. 58.

    “The courts (at least in the United States) will not enforce a “no renegotiation” clause in a contract…” (Roberts 2004, p. 86).

  59. 59.

    Williamson (1991b).

  60. 60.

    Which one is chosen depends among others on its involved degree of asset specificity and level of transaction costs (its governance costs) (loc. cit., 105 ff.).

  61. 61.

    For more complete overviews of the empirical work on transaction cost economics see Shelanski and Klein (1995) and Boerner and Macher (2002).

  62. 62.

    Optimality could at most be determined in very simple decision problems, where everything relevant can be known and computation and deliberation are virtually costless (Gigerenzer 2001, 40 f.).

  63. 63.

    An alternative may be to use Williamson’s (1996, p. 379) term “remediable.” He understands, however, the term in an objectively profitable sense and writes: “A condition is held to be remediable if a superior feasible alternative can be described and implemented with net gains.” At another place he remarks, the NIE “…eschews hypothetical ideals and insists that the relevant comparisons are with feasible alternatives, all of which are flawed.” (Williamson 1996, 7 quoting Coase 1964). See also Furubotn and Richter (2005, p. 109).

  64. 64.

    Williamson (2005a, b), p. 3).

  65. 65.

    Friedman (1953, p. 38).

  66. 66.

    Further developed, i.a., by Holmstrom and Tirole (1991), Bernheim and Whinston (1985) and Bajari and Tadelis (2001). Leading German representatives of this approach are Nöldecke and Schmidt (1995), both from the Bonn school (see Schweizer 1999).

  67. 67.

    See below footnote 50.

  68. 68.

    In the sense of Coombs, et al. (1954, p. 24).

  69. 69.

    Williamson (1981, p. 49).

  70. 70.

    Williamson (1996, p. 107): “…the hybrid mode is located between market and hierarchy with respect to incentives, adaptability, and bureaucratic costs,…” Examples are complex contracts or partial ownership arrangements.

  71. 71.

    As Williamson (1991a, p. 79) puts it: TCA is an effort to “align transactions, which differ in their attributes, with governance structures, which differ in their costs and competencies, in a discriminating (mainly, transaction cost minimizing) way.”

  72. 72.

    They point out: “The empirical work in transaction cost economics uses a variety of econometric and historical methods. …qualitative case studies, quantitative case studies, and cross-sectional econometric analyses. …. The bulk of the empirical literature…consists of case analyses of various kinds…because the main variables of interest—asset specificity, uncertainty and frequency—are difficult to measure consistently across firms and industries.” (loc. cit. 338 f. See also Boerner and Macher (2002).

  73. 73.

    Though not necessarily in the sociological literature (see Richter 2001).

  74. 74.

    Macneil (1974, 1978).

  75. 75.

    Williamson (1981, p. 42).

  76. 76.

    Williamson (2005a, b, p. 3).

  77. 77.

    Williamson (2005a, b), p. 2).

  78. 78.

    Probably for this reason, Williamson (2005a, b) calls his approach also the “economics of governance.”

  79. 79.

    Shavell (2004, p. 301).

  80. 80.

    Mackaay (2000, p. 90).

  81. 81.

    Williamson (1985, p. 29).

  82. 82.

    Cf., e.g., Scott (2005), Shavell (2005), Craswell (2005).

References

  • Alchian, A. A. (1961). Some economics of property. Santa Monica, CA: RAND D-2316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, K. J. (1969). The organization of economic activity: Issues pertinent to the choice of market versus non-market allocation. In The analysis and evaluation of public expenditures: The PBB-System, Joint Economic Committee, 91st Congress, lst. Session, Vol. 1, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, K. J. (1974). General economic equilibrium: Purpose, analytic technique, collective choice. American Economic Review, 64, 253–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod, R. M. (1984). The evolution of cooperation. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bajari, P., & Tadelis, S. (2001). Incentives versus transaction costs: A theory of procurement contracts. Rand Journal of Economics, 32, 381–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bebchuk, L. A. (1984). Litigation and settlement under imperfect information. The Rand Journal of Economics, 15, 404–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernheim, D., & Whinston, M. D. (1985). Common marketing agency as a device for facilitating collusion. Rand Journal of Economics, 16, 269–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boerner, C., & Macher, J. (2002). Transaction cost economics: An assessment on empirical research in the social sciences. Unpublished manuscript, University of California-Berkeley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, J. M., & Tullock, G. (1962). The calculus of consent. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burrows, P., & Veljanovsky, C. G. (1981). Introduction: The economic approach to law. In P. Burrows, & C. G. Veljanovsky (eds.), The economic approach to law. London et al.: Butterworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calabresi, G. (1961). Some thoughts on risk distribution and the law of torts. Yale Law Journal 70, 499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coase, R. H. (1937). The nature of the firm. Economica, 4, 386–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coase, R. H. (1960). The problem of social cost. Journal of Law and Economics, 3, 1–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coase, R. H. (1964). The regulated industries: Discussion. American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings, 54, 194–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coombs, C. H., Raiffa, H., & Thrall, R. M. (1954). Mathematical models and measurement theory. In R. M. Thrall, C. H. Coombs, & R. L. Davis (Eds.), Decisions processes (pp. 19–37). New York: Wiley and Chapman & Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooter, R., & Ulen, T. (1988). Law and economics. Glenvis, IL: Scott, Foresman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craswell, R. (2005). The ‘Incomplete contracts’ Literature and efficient precautions. Case Western Reserve Law Review, 56, 151–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crocker, K. J., & Masten, S. E. (1991). Pretia Ex Machina? Prices and process in long-term contracts. Journal of Law and Economics, 34, 69–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Debreu, G. (1959). Theory of value: An axiomatic analysis of economic equilibrium. New York and London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eidenmüller, H. (1995). Effizienz als Rechtsprinzip. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, R. A. (2006). The optimal complexity of legal rules. In C. Engel & G. Gigerenzer (Eds.), Heuristics and the law (pp. 141–157). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1953). Essays in positive economics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furubotn, E. G., & Richter, R. (2005). Institutions and economic theory. The contribution of the new institutional economics, 2nd revised and extended edition (1st ed. 1997). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G., & Todd, P. M. (1999). Simple heuristics that make us smart. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G. (2001). The adaptive toolbox. In G. Gigerenzer & R. Selten (Eds.), Bounded rationality: The adaptive toolbox (pp. 37–50). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, S. J., & Hart, O. D. (1986). The costs and benefits of ownership: A theory of vertical and lateral integration. Journal of Political Economy, 94, 691–719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, O. (1995). Firms, contracts, ND financial structure. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, O., & Holmström, B. (1987). The theory of contracts, Chapter 3. In T. Bewley (Ed.), Advances in economic theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, J. R. (1935). A suggestion for simplifying the theory of money. Economica, N.S., 1, 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmstrom, B. R., & Tirole, J. (1991). Transfer pricing and organizational form. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 7, 201–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplow, L., & St. Shavell, M. (2002). Economic analysis of law. In A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (Eds.), Handbook of public economics. Rotterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keohane, R. O. (1984). After Hegemony. Cooperation and discord in the world political and the competitive contracting process. Journal of Law and Economics, 28, 297–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kronman, A. T. (1985). Contract law and the state of nature. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 1, 5–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, F. H., & Rudden, B. (1982). The law of property. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Legal Philosophy: The economic analysis of law, (2006) NN. in: Stanford encyclopaedia of philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/legal-econanalysis/

  • Mackaay, E. (2000). History of law and economics. In B. Bouckaert & G. De Geest (Eds.), Encyclopedia of law and economics (Vol. 1). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macneil, I. R. (1974). The many futures of contracts. Southern California Law Review, 47, 691–816.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miceli, T. J. (1997). Economics of the law. Torts, contracts, property, litigation. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nöldecke, G., & Schmidt, K. (1995). Sequential investments in options to own. Rand Economic Journal of Economics, 29, 633–653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • North, D. (1978). Structure and performance: The task of economic history. Journal of Economic Literature, 16, 963–978.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C. (1986). The new institutional economics. In: Furubotn and Richter (1986), 230–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palay, T. M. (1984). Comparative institutional economics. The governance of rail freight contracting. Journal of Legal Studies, 13, 265–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polinsky, A. M. (2003). An introduction to law and economics (3rd ed.). Boston and Toronto: Little, Brown and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, R. A. (1977). Economic analysis of law (2nd ed.). Boston and Toronto: Little, Broen and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, R. A. (1993). The new institutional economics meets law and economics. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 149, 73–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, R. A. (2003). Economic analysis of law (6th ed.). New York: Aspen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, R. A. (2006). A review of Steven Shavell’s Foundations of economic analysis of law. Journal of Economic Literature, 44, 405–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richter, R. (2001). New economic sociology and new institutional economics. In: Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the International Society for New Institutional Economics (ISNIE) Berkeley, California, USA September 13–15, 2001 and these Essays Chap. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richter, R. (2005). The new institutional economics—Its start, its meaning, its prospects. The European Business Organization Law Review (EBOR), 6, 161–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J. (2004). The modern firm. Organizational design for performance and growth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, P. A. (1947). Foundations of economic analysis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, A., & Watson, J. (2004). The law and economics of costly contracting. Journal of Law Economics and Organization, 20, 2–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schweizer, U. (1999). Vertragstheorie. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck).

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, K. E. (1993). The new institutional economics meets law and economics, Comment. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, (JITE), 92–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, R. E. (2005). Incomplete contracts and the theory of contract design. Case Western Reserve Law Review, 56, 187–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shavell, S. (2004). Foundation of economic analysis of law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shavell, S. (2005). Contracts, holdup, and legal intervention. Harvard Law School Discussion Paper, 3/05.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shavell, S. (2006). On the writing and the interpretation of contracts. Journal of Law, Economics & Organization, 22, 289–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shelanski, H. A., & Klein, P. G. (1995). Empirical research in transaction cost economics: A review and assessment. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 11, 335–361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stigler, G. J. (1968a). Production and distribution theories. The formative period. New York: Agathon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stigler, G. J. (1968b), Art. “Competition”. In: International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences (Vol 3, pp. 181–182). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. E. (1985). Information and economic analysis: A perspective. Economic Journal, 95(5), 21–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Telser, L. G. (1980). A theory of self-enforcing agreements. Journal of Business, 53, 27–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Varian, H. R. (1992). Microeconomic analysis (3rd ed.). New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veljanovski, C. G. (1979). Bibliography of law and economics—Contract analysis. Oxford: Centre for Socio-Legal Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Humboldt, W. (1792/1967). Ideen zu einem Versuch, die Grenzen der Wirksamkeit des Staates zu bestimmen. Stuttgart: Philipp Reclam, Jr.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1976). Franchise bidding for natural Monopolies—in general and with respect to CATV. Bell Journal of Economics, 7, 73–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1979). Transaction-cost economics: The governance of contractual relations. Journal of Law and Economics, 22, 233–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1981). Contract analysis: The transaction cost approach. In P. Burrows & C. G. Veljanovski (Eds.), The economic approach to law (pp. 39–60). London: Burrows.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1991a). Strategizing, economizing, and economic organization. Strategic Management Journal, 23, 75–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1991b). Comparative economic organization: The analysis of discrete structural alternatives. Administrative Science Quarterly 36, 269–296; reprinted in: Williamson (1996, 93–119).

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1993). The evolving science of organization. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 149, 36–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1996). The mechanism of governance. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (2005a). The economics of governance. In: Richard T. Ely Lecture, American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings, 95, 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (2005b). Transaction cost economics. In C. Menard & M. M. Shirley (Eds.), Handbook of new institutional economics (pp. 41–65). AA Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E., & Masten, S. E. (Eds.). (1995). Transaction cost economics (Policy and applications, Vol. 2). Aldershot: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E., & Ouchi, W. G. (1981). The markets and hierarchies and visible hand perspectives. The market and hierarchies program of research: Origins, implications, prospects. In W. Joyce & A. Van de Ven (Eds.), Organizational design (pp. 347–370). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiseman, J. (1991). The black box. Economic Journal, 101, 149–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Richter, R. (2015). The Role of Law in the New Institutional Economics in Comparison With the Economic Analysis of Law. In: Essays on New Institutional Economics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14154-1_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics