Skip to main content
Log in

In search for rules that secure gains from cooperation: the heuristic value of social dilemmas for normative institutional economics

  • Published:
European Journal of Law and Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We ask how normative statements are possible within an economic theory framework that recognises the importance of institutional arrangements. Instead of applying established outcome-oriented criteria of social welfare, we examine whether the rules of economic interaction allow the acquisition of gains from cooperation. We suggest to reconstruct any interaction as an existing or repealed social dilemma. This approach helps to identify common rule interests which create room for improvement of all parties involved, and to suggest desirable institutional reforms. Our policy applications include the unemployment problem and rural credit markets.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, D. W. (1992). Taking a fresh look at informal finance. In D. Adams & D. A. Fitchett (Eds.), Informal finance in low-income countries (pp. 5–23). Boulder, San Francisco, Oxford: Westview Press.

  • Becker, G. S. (1976). The economic approach to human behavior. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, C. (1988). Credit markets and interlinked transactions. In H. Chenery & T. N. Srinivasan (Eds.), Handbook of development economics (Vol. I, pp. 763–830). Amsterdam: North Holland.

  • Binmore, K. (1994). Game theory and the social contract volume I: Playing fair. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowles, S. (2004). Microeconomics. Behavior, institutions, and evolution. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, G., & Buchanan, J. M. (1985). The reason of rules. Constitutional political economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, J. M. (1959). Positive economics, welfare economics, and political economy. Journal of Law and Economics, 2, 124–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, J. M. (1975a). A contractarian paradigm for applying economic theory. American Economic Review, 65, 225–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, J. M. (1975b). The limits of liberty. Between anarchy and leviathan. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, J. M. (1987). Constitutional economics. In J. Eatwell, M. Milgate, & P. Newman (Eds.), The New Palgrave: A dictionary of economics (pp. 585–588). London: Macmillan.

  • Buchanan, J. M. (2004). The status of the Status Quo. Constitutional Political Economy, 15, 133–144.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Coco, G. (2000). On the use of collateral. Journal of Economic Surveys, 14, 191–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Meza, D., & Webb, D. (1987). Too much investment: A problem of asymmetric information. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 102, 281–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Meza, D. & Webb, D. (2000). Does credit rationing imply insufficient lending? Journal of Public Economics, 78, 215–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demsetz, H. (1969). Information and efficiency: Another viewpoint. Journal of Law and Economics, 12, 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eggertsson, T. (1998). Limits to institutional reforms. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 100, 335–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. M. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114, 817–868.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghatak, M., & Guinnane, T. W. (1999). The economics of lending with joint liability: Theory and practice. Journal of Development Economics, 60, 195–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gravelle, H., & Rees, R. (1992). Microeconomics (2nd ed.). London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homann, K., & Suchanek, A. (2005). Ökonomik. Eine Einführung. 2. Auflage. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inman, R. P. (1987). Markets, governments, and the “new” political economy. In A. J. Auerbach, & M. Feldstein (Eds.), Handbook of Public Economics (Vol. II, pp. 647–777). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

  • Krahnen, J. P., & Schmidt, R. H. (1994). Development finance as institution building. A new approach to poverty-oriented banking. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindbeck, A., & Snower, D. J. (1988). The insider-outsider theory of employment and unemployment. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindbeck, A., & Snower, D. J. (2001). Insiders versus outsiders. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15, 165–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, G. J. (1992). Managerial dilemmas. The political economy of hierarchy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nalebuff, B. (1998). Prisoners’ dilemma. In P. Newman (Ed.), The New Palgrave dictionary of economics and the law (pp. 89–95). London: Macmillan.

  • Ordeshook, P. C. (1986). Game theory and political theory. An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrick, M. (2004). Credit rationing of Polish farm households: A theoretical and empirical analysis, Studies on the agricultural and food sector in Central and Eastern Europe (Vol. 26). Halle (Saale): Institute of Agricultural Development in Central and Eastern Europe. <http://www.iamo.de/dok/sr_vol26.pdf>.

  • Petrick, M. (2005). Governing structural change and externalities in agriculture: Toward a normative institutional economics of rural development. In K. M. Ortner (Ed.), Assessing rural development policies of the Common Agricultural Policy (pp. 85–104). Kiel: Vauk Wissenschaftsverlag.

  • Pies, I. (1996). A methodological interpretation of the Buchanan research program. Constitutional Political Economy, 7, 21–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pies, I. (2000). Ordnungspolitik in der Demokratie. Ein ökonomischer Ansatz diskursiver Politikberatung. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pies, I. (2001). Eucken und von Hayek im Vergleich. Zur Aktualisierung der ordnungspolitischen Konzeption. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K. R. (1967/1985). The rationality principle. In D. Miller (Ed.), Popper Selections (pp. 357–365). Princeton: Princeton University Press.

  • Rasmusen, E. (2001). Games and information. An introduction to game theory (3rd ed.). Malden: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (1999). A theory of justice, Revised Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Schelling, T. C. (1960). The strategy of conflict. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schelling, T. C. (1995/2006). What do economists know? In T. C. Schelling (Ed.), Strategies of commitment and other essays (pp. 151–159). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

  • Snower, D. J. (1997). The simple economics of benefit transfers. In D. J. Snower, & G. de la Dehesa (Eds.), Unemployment policy: Government options for the labour market (pp. 163–198). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Spermann, A. (1999). Fighting long-term unemployment with targeted employment subsidies: Benefit transfer programme (BTP) versus targeted negative income tax. Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik, 218, 647–657.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. E., & Weiss, A. (1981). Credit rationing in markets with imperfect information. American Economic Review, 71, 393–410.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchanek, A. (1994). Ökonomischer Ansatz und theoretische Integration. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tullock, G. (1985). Adam Smith and the prisoners’ dilemma. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 100, 1073–1081.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanberg, V. J. (1994). Morality and economics – De moribus est disputandum. In V. J. Vanberg (Ed.), Rules and choice in economics (pp. 41–59). London: Routledge.

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

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Petrick.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Petrick, M., Pies, I. In search for rules that secure gains from cooperation: the heuristic value of social dilemmas for normative institutional economics. Eur J Law Econ 23, 251–271 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-007-9014-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-007-9014-x

Keywords

Jel Classification

Navigation