|
on Law and Economics |
| By: | Xiqian Cai (Xiamen University); Pei Li (Zhejiang University); Qinyue Luo (RFBerlin); Hong Song (Fudan University); Huihua Xie (Zhejiang University) |
| Abstract: | Does gender identity affect judicial decisions? This paper provides novel evidence of in-group gender bias in the judicial decisions for almost all divorce cases in China. Exploiting the effectively random assignment of cases to judges, the analysis finds that female judges are 1.2 percentage points more likely to grant divorce petitions filed by female plaintiffs compared to male plaintiffs, relative to male judges. This bias primarily reflects female judges’ harsher treatment of male plaintiffs. The bias is significantly weaker in regions with stronger traditional gender norms, indicating that conservative cultural attitudes may constrain overt displays of in-group gender favoritism. Institutional legal development has little moderating effect, underscoring the primary role of culture. These findings highlight the importance of complementing efforts to promote judicial diversity with safeguards to detect and mitigate implicit bias. |
| Keywords: | gender, in-group bias, gender discrimination, judicial decisions |
| JEL: | J16 J14 J10 |
| Date: | 2025–06 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:crm:wpaper:2523 |
| By: | Sebastian Roché (PACTE - Pacte, Laboratoire de sciences sociales - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UGA - Université Grenoble Alpes - IEPG - Sciences Po Grenoble-UGA - Institut d'études politiques de Grenoble - UGA - Université Grenoble Alpes); Simon Varaine (PACTE - Pacte, Laboratoire de sciences sociales - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UGA - Université Grenoble Alpes - IEPG - Sciences Po Grenoble-UGA - Institut d'études politiques de Grenoble - UGA - Université Grenoble Alpes); Paul Le Derff (CED - Centre Émile Durkheim - IEP Bordeaux - Sciences Po Bordeaux - Institut d'études politiques de Bordeaux - UB - Université de Bordeaux - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique) |
| Abstract: | Can the behavior of civil servants with a large autonomy, the police, be regulated by law? In the case of the use of deadly force, the subject remains understudied in Europe. A 2017 law in France relaxed restrictions and allowed for the first time the national police to use weapons beyond self-defense. This quasi-experimental study examines the impact that this regulatory change, used as an exogenous shock, has had on the number of deaths of occupants of vehicles. The monthly number of killings has significantly increased for the national police (experimental group), who are directly affected by the new regulation, but not other forces unaffected by the regulation such as the French gendarmerie, a military status force (control group 1), and other police forces of two neighboring states (Germany, Belgium, control group 2 and 3). The findings hold after controlling for the variations in level of violence in society, and police exposure to and death in dangerous traffic violations during the study period. When using more conservative specifications, the observed increase in lethal shootings does not reach statistical significance due to a lack of statistical power related to the rarity of police lethal shootings in the European context. We recommend that national regulations governing the use of weapons by police more clearly and unambiguously embed the notions of proportionality and absolute necessity. |
| Keywords: | use of force, weapons, law and regulation, departmental policy, use of force weapons law and regulation departmental policy |
| Date: | 2025–09 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-05120493 |
| By: | Yoan Hermstrüwer (University of Zurich, Switzerland); Mahdi Khesali (University of Hamburg & Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods) |
| Abstract: | Why do people obey the law when it is not formally enforced? In this study, we explore the expressive power of democracy as a behavioral channel of compliance with the law. Using a modified version of the stealing game, we examine the effect of two distinct democratic interventions on stealing under normative ambiguity: a voting procedure in which the outcome is revealed, and a voting procedure in which the outcome of the vote remains unknown. We find that revealing the outcome of a vote significantly reduces stealing relative to a baseline treatment without a vote and the treatment in which the outcome of the vote remains unknown. We also observe suggestive evidence that participants who support the social norm proscribing theft are more likely to steal nonetheless when the outcome remains unknown. Our findings have important implications for the design of expressive law and of democratic voting procedures. |
| JEL: | C91 D72 D91 K14 K42 |
| Date: | 2025–05 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:mpg:wpaper:2025_06 |
| By: | Paolo Campana. Andrea Giovannetti; Paolo Pin; Roberto Rozzi |
| Abstract: | In this work, we provide empirical evidence on organized criminal groups' (OCGs) behavior across the Liverpool area in the U.K. (Merseyside). We find that violent crimes concerning OCGs concentrate in the areas yielding the highest revenue, while OGCs primarily control areas yielding middle or low revenue. We explain and generalize these empirical observations with a theoretical model examining how OCGs strategically select which area to exploit based on expected revenue and the presence of other OCGs. We prove our results for three OCGs analytically and extend them to larger numbers of OCGs through numerical simulations. Both approaches suggest that, when the frequency of OCG activity is sufficiently high, each OCG controls one area, while the violence between OCGs remains low across all areas. When the frequency of OCG activity reduces, violent collisions between OCGs occur in the areas yielding the highest revenue, while some OCGs retain control over the medium-revenue areas. Our results suggest important policy recommendations. Firstly, if interventions are only violence-driven, they might miss critical underlying factors. Secondly, police operations might have unintended negative externalities in other areas of a city when they target criminal property rights, like increased violence in the areas yielding the highest revenue. |
| Date: | 2025–08 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:arx:papers:2508.02561 |
| By: | Monique Newiak (Inclusion and Gender Unit, International Monetary Fund); Ratna Sahay (National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCAER), India)); Navya Srivastava (National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCAER), India)) |
| Abstract: | Domestic violence is a global phenomenon. We study the interplay of determinants of a woman’s risk of facing intimate partner violence (IPV) for the case of India—using information from up to 235 thousand female survey respondents and exploiting state-level variation in institutions, law enforcement and attitudes. Unless in paid and formal employment, a woman’s economic activity is associated with a higher risk of IPV. However, household and other characteristics, such as higher agency within the household, higher education of the husband, lower social acceptance of IPV, and normalization of reporting incidences of violence counter this association. At the state level, the presence of more female leaders, better reporting infrastructure for victims of IPV, and higher charge-sheeting rates are associated with a lower risk of IPV |
| Keywords: | Female employment, labor force participation, intimate partner violence, legal rights, institutions |
| JEL: | J01 J16 K14 O15 |
| Date: | 2025–01–02 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nca:ncaerw:177 |
| By: | Corrado Giulietti (University of Southampton); Brendon McConnell (City St George’s, University of London); Yves Zenou (Monash University) |
| Abstract: | How can crime be disrupted effectively without increasing resources? To answer this question, we develop a spatial network model of crime diffusion, using London as a case study. Moving beyond traditional hot spot policing, we identify key player neighborhoods—highly connected areas in the network. Counterfactual analysis shows that targeting top 10% of key players reduces crime by 10.7% (5.8 percentage points) more than targeting top 10% of hot spots, resulting in potential annual savings exceeding £130 million. Examining the underlying mechanisms, we find that while hot spots attract crime locally, key players facilitate its propagation across areas. |
| Keywords: | C23, D85, H50, K42 |
| Date: | 2025–06 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:crm:wpaper:2525 |
| By: | Christoph Engel (Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, Bonn); Yoan Hermstrüwer (University of Zurich); Alison Kim (University of Zurich) |
| Abstract: | Recent advances in AI create possibilities for delegating legal decision-making to machines or enhancing human adjudication through AI assistance. Using classic normative conflicts-the trolley problem and similar moral dilemmas-as a proof of concept, we examine the alignment between AI legal reasoning and human judgment. In our baseline experiment, we find a pronounced mismatch between decisions made by GPT and those of human subjects. This misalignment raises substantive concerns for AI-powered legal decision-aids. We investigate whether explicit normative guidance can address this misalignment, with mixed results. GPT-3.5 is susceptible to such intervention, but frequently refuses to decide when faced with a moral dilemma. GPT-4 is outright utilitarian, and essentially ignores the instruction to decide on deontological grounds. GPT-o3-mini faithfully implements this instruction, but is unwilling to balance deontological and utilitarian concerns if instructed to do so. At least for the time being, explicit normative instructions are not fully able to realign AI advice with the normative convictions of the legislator. |
| Keywords: | large language models, human-AI alignment, rule of law, moral dilemmas, trolley problems |
| JEL: | C99 D63 D81 K10 K40 Z13 |
| Date: | 2025–04 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:mpg:wpaper:2025_03 |
| By: | Koski, Heli |
| Abstract: | Abstract This paper examines the effects of data privacy regulation on R&D investment in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology sectors. In these industries, access to personal health data is essential for innovation, particularly in clinical research. Leveraging a firm-level panel of the world’s top R&D investors from 2013 to 2023, we exploit the staggered implementation of major data protection regimes to estimate their causal impact. Using a dynamic event-study design, we find that stricter privacy regulation leads to a significant decline in R&D spending. By year four after implementation, treated firms reduced R&D investment by approximately 39 percent. The effects are heterogeneous: firms without foreign affiliates and small and medium-sized enterprises experience larger declines. Our findings suggest that privacy regulation may constrain the foundations of data-driven innovation and shape the geographic distribution of R&D activity. |
| Keywords: | Privacy regulation, R&D investment, Innovation, Pharmaceuticals, Biotechnology, Firm-level panel, GDPR, Compliance costs |
| JEL: | D22 K23 L65 O32 O38 |
| Date: | 2025–08–11 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:rif:wpaper:130 |
| By: | Romano, Roberta; Sanga, Sarath |
| Abstract: | This article analyzes a private ordering solution to multiforum shareholder litigation: exclusive forum provisions in corporate charters and bylaws. These provisions require that all corporate-law-related disputes be brought in a single forum, typically a court in the statutory domicile. Using hand-collected data on the 746 U.S. public corporations that have adopted the provision, we examine what drives the growth in these provisions and whether, as some critics contend, their adoption reflects managerial opportunism. We find that nearly all new Delaware corporations adopt the provision at the IPO stage, and that the transition from zero to near-universal IPO adoption over 2007--2014 is driven by law firms. Characteristics of individual companies appear to play little or no role in adoption decisions. Instead, the pattern of adoption follows what can be described as a light-switch model, in which law firms suddenly switch from never adopting to always adopting the provision in the IPOs they advise. For post-IPO (or “midstream”) adoptions, we compare corporate governance features of adopters to a matched sample of nonadopters to test the hypothesis that midstream bylaw adoption reflects managerial opportunism. If the hypothesis were correct, then we would expect to find that the midstream adopters exhibit poor corporate governance compared to nonadopters (using the metrics of good governance practices as identified by critics of the provisions). We find, however, that there are either no significant differences in governance or that it is adopters that have higher-quality governance features. We also find no significant differences in governance and ownership structures between firms whose boards adopt the provisions as bylaws and those who obtain shareholder approval. The absence of significant differences across firms using disparate adoption procedures suggests that the method of adopting an exclusive forum provision--- whether with or without shareholder approval---should not be a matter of import for investors. |
| Date: | 2025–08–05 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:lawarc:dr42x_v1 |
| By: | Ayres, Ian; Donohue, John J. III |
| Abstract: | In a remarkable paper published in 1997, John Lott and David Mustard managed to set the agenda for much subsequent dataset work on the impact of guns on crime in America by creating a massive dataset of crime across all U.S. counties from 1977 through 1992 and by amassing a powerful statistical argument that state laws enabling citizens to carry concealed handguns had reduced crime. The initial paper was followed a year later by an even more comprehensive and sustained argument to the same effect in a book solely authored by John Lott entitled More Guns, Less Crime (now in its second edition). The work by Lott and Mustard has triggered an unusually large set of academic responses, with talented scholars lining up on both sides of the debate. Indeed, a panel of the National Academy of Sciences has been convened to sort through the now large body of conflicting studies. But in the world of affairs rather than ideas, it did not take long for the National Rifle Association (NRA) and politicians across the country to seize upon the work of Lott and Mustard to oppose efforts at gun control and advance the cause of greater freedom to carry guns. For example, in the same year that the initial article was published, Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho) introduced The Personal Safety and Community Protection Act, which was designed to facilitate the carrying of concealed firearms by nonresidents of a state who had obtained valid permits to carry such weapons in their home state. Senator Craig argued that the work of John Lott showed that arming the citizenry via laws allowing the carrying of concealed handguns would have a protective effect for the community at large because criminals would find themselves in the line of fire. On May 27, 1999, Lott testified before the House Judiciary Committee that the stricter gun regulations proposed by President Clinton either would have no effect or would actually cost lives, and a number of Republican members of Congress have since included favorable references in their speeches to Lott's work. Moreover, Lott has also testified in support of concealed gun laws before several state legislatures, including Nebraska (1997), Michigan (1998), Minnesota (1999), Ohio (2002), and Wisconsin (2002). |
| Date: | 2025–08–07 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:lawarc:e72nj_v1 |