Hasta que la muerte -o el divorcio- nos separe. Cómo una regla por defecto eficiente puede mejorar el bienestar social (y evitar discusiones incómodas en la pareja)

  1. Rocío Albert
  2. Rogelio Biazzi
Journal:
Economía industrial

ISSN: 0422-2784

Year of publication: 2015

Issue Title: Análisis económico del derecho

Issue: 398

Pages: 65-78

Type: Article

More publications in: Economía industrial

Abstract

We analyze the standard legal rules on the economics of marriage applying concepts from Behavioral Law and Economics. We applied bounded rationality and choice architecture implications. We consider that the most common default rule for the economic marriage regime in Spanish regions is not the best in efficiency terms, and we propose a change in favor of the alternative rule (separation of property). Moreover, we propose some nudges as a second best solution

Bibliographic References

  • ARTIGOT, M. y otros (2003). «Separación de bienes y autonomía privada familiar en Cataluña: ¿Un modelo pacífico sujeto a cambio?», Indret, Working Paper de Dret Català nº: 7.
  • BECKER, G. (1976). The Economic Approach to Human Behavior. (University of Chicago Press).
  • BECKER, G. (1981). Tratado sobre la familia. Alianza Editorial, Madrid.
  • BELK, R. (1988). «Possessions and the extended self», Journal of Consumer Research., 15 (september), pp. 139-160.
  • CABRILLO, F. (1996). «Matrimonio, Familia y Economía», Minerva Ediciones, Madrid.
  • CAMERER, C. (1997). «Labor Supply of New York City Cab Drivers». Quarterly Journal of Economics, pp. 407-441.
  • KAHNEMAN, D. (2003). «Maps of bounded rationality: Psychology for behavioral economics», The American Economic Review, nº 93, pp. 1449-1475.
  • KAHNEMAM, D. y TVERSKY, A (1979). «Prospect theory: Decision Making Under Risk», Econometrica, vol. 47, nº 2, pp. 263-292.
  • KHANEMAN, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. London: Allen Lane.
  • LI, D.; HAWLEY, Z. y SCHNIER K.J (2013). «Increasing organ donation via changes in the default choice or allocation rule», Econ. 2013 Dec; vol. 32,nº 6, pp. 1117-29
  • LIEBOWITZ, S. y MARGOLIS, S. (2000). Bouckaert, Boudewijn; De Geest, Gerrit, eds. Encyclopedia of Law and Economics, Volume I. The History and Methodology of Law and Economics. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. p. 985
  • MAHAR, H. (2003). «Why are there so few Prenuptial Agreements?», Discussion Paper Nº 436, 09/2003, John M. Olin Center for Law, Economics, and Business; Harvard Law School.
  • SAMUELSON, W. y ZECKHAUSER, R (1988). «Status quo bias in decision making», Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, nº1, pp. 7-59.
  • SIMON, H. (1957), «A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice» Models of Man, Social and Rational: Mathematical Essays on Rational Human Behavior in a Social Setting. New York: Wiley.
  • SUNSTEIN, C. y THALER, R. (2008).«Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness», Yale University Press: New Haven.
  • SUNSTEIN, C. (2014). «Why Nudge. The Politics of Libertarian Paternalism», Yale University Press, New Haven & London.
  • THALER, R. (1980). «Toward a Positive Theory of Consumer Choice». Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization . pp. 39-60.
  • THALER, R. (1992). «The Winner’s Curse: Paradoxes and Anomalies of Economic Life». New York, The Free Press. Princeton University.