In a series of publications, Cass Sunstein & Richard Thaler, and Colin Camerer et al., have proposed an approach to legal policy that encourages individuals to pursue actions that will maximize their expected utility while not imposing on those individuals' decisional autonomy. I contend that this policy approach - which has been called "libertarian paternalism" - implies a complementary approach as well, which I call "libertarian welfarism." Libertarian welfarism relies on the same set of policy tools as does libertarian paternalism but with a different goal: to encourage individuals to act in a way that maximizes social welfare. I show that libertarian welfarism leads to different policy prescriptions than does libertarian paternalism, and I argue that the former approach rests on a stronger normative foundation and is less subject to problems of indeterminacy than the latter.
Libertarian Welfarism
|
VIEW PDF
Circuit: Archived Content
RECENT POSTS
The Preventive Dilemma: A Reply to David Cole
- Robert ChesneyMOST POPULAR
The Preventive Dilemma: A Reply to David Cole
- Robert ChesneyRight Problem; Wrong Solution
- Joseph L. Hoffmann and Nancy J. KingBY DATE
- August 2010 (1)
- May 2010 (1)
- February 2010 (1)
- January 2010 (3)
BY CATEGORY
- california supreme court (1)
- chesney (1)
- cole (1)
- detention (1)
- elkins (1)
- family (1)
- Independence (1)
- Professionalism (1)
- Torture (1)
- Yoo (1)
- zelon (1)
NEWS & EVENTS
META
The California Law Review is the preeminent legal publication at the UC Berkeley School of Law.
Founded in 1912, CLR publishes six times per year on a variety of engaging topics in legal scholarship.
The law review is edited and published entirely by students at Berkeley Law.
Founded in 1912, CLR publishes six times per year on a variety of engaging topics in legal scholarship.
The law review is edited and published entirely by students at Berkeley Law.