To read this content please select one of the options below:

The single constituency argument in the economic analysis of business law

Law & Economics: Toward Social Justice

ISBN: 978-1-84855-334-7, eISBN: 978-1-84855-335-4

Publication date: 19 May 2009

Abstract

The essay points out a common thread that runs through law-and-economics business law scholarship. Working largely independently of each other, economically oriented scholars working in different areas have argued that the law should focus on the interests of a single constituency – shareholders in corporate law, creditors in bankruptcy law, and consumers in antitrust law. Economic analysts thus have rejected arguments advanced by “progressive” scholars working in each of these areas that the law should instead concern itself with the full range of constituencies affected by business activity. The law-and-economics single constituency claim rests in part on skepticism about judicial competence, but the underlying premise is an objection to the use of law for redistributive purposes. The primary value is efficiency, defined in terms of market-generated outcomes. It is argued here that this political commitment implies a strong tendency toward maintenance of the existing distribution of wealth, and that even more importantly, the single constituency claim may actually have redistributive implications. In each of these areas of business law, however, a regressive program favors owners of capital against those who are generally less well off, such as workers and small-business owners.

Citation

Millon, D. (2009), "The single constituency argument in the economic analysis of business law", Gold, D.L. (Ed.) Law & Economics: Toward Social Justice (Research in Law and Economics, Vol. 24), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 43-60. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0193-5895(2009)0000024007

Publisher

:

Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2009, Emerald Group Publishing Limited