Outlooks and Issues of Private Law Transformation under Influence of Behavioural Economics and Data Science

Dmitry Tekutyev

Dmitry Tekutyev Higher School of Economics

Abstract

Corporations are now increasingly embracing the advances of Data Science and behavioural economics. It will undoubtedly have far-reaching implications for many areas of legal regulation . In author’s opinion, private law institutions aimed at regulating relations between business and customers will be the first to deal with transformation. The paper outlines the main questions and issues that lawyers will face in the next five to ten years as the ideas of behavioural economy and Data Science spread to private law, and offers some thoughts addressing these issues. In the beginning the author briefly reviews the progress of behavioural economy and how its achievements help to attain the aims of legal regulation. In particular, the author surveys private law tools such as discretionary rules and information disclosure for “pushing” individuals to a more rational behaviour. The author then analyses how the current level of Big Data collection, processing and use can affect the discretionary rules and information disclosure in corporate contracts with consumers, including the possibility of private law institution “personalisation” with account of the individual features of the parties to the transactions. Further on, the asks and attempts to answer the key question of the article: What regulatory environment should be in place to enable behaviourally informed personalisation of private law institutions using Big Data? In responding to this question, the author analyses three related problems arising at the intersection of law, Data Science, psychology, and economics: How to ensure freedom of choice and autonomy of will of individuals while using information and behavioural innovations? How much information should legal actors be able to receive in order to make the best decision? How to find a balance between private law “personalisation” and personal data protection? In conclusion, the author summarises the results of the study and concludes that to date there are no universal rules and algorithms for private law personalisation, and the introduction of Data Science and behavioural economics into law is still taking place in individual legal relations on case-by-case basis.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Dmitry Tekutyev, Higher School of Economics

Candidate of Sciences (Law)

References

Becker G.S. (1976) Economic approach to human behavior. Chicago: University Press, 314 p.

Ben-Shahar O., Porat A. (2016) Personalizing negligence law. New York University Law Review, no. 627, pp. 627–688.

Ben-Shahar O., Schneider C. (2014) More than you wanted to know. Princeton: University Press, 240 p.

Bovens L. (2009) The ethics of nudge. In: T. Grune-Yanoff, S. O. Hansson (eds.) Preference change: Approaches from philosophy, economics and psychology. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 207–219.

Busch C. (2016) The future of pre-contractual information duties: from behavioral insights to Big Data. In: C. Twigg-Flesner (ed.) Research Handbook on EU Consumer and Contract Law. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 1–11.

Cartwright E. (2014) Behavioral economics: a textbook. 2nd ed. L: Routledge, 556 p.

Cominelly L. (2018) Framing choices to influence behaviors: A debate on the pros and cons of “nudging”. Diritto & Questioni Pubbliche, no. 1, pp. 293–306.

Cooter R., Ulen T. (2014) Law and economics. Seattle: Pearson/Addison-Wesley, 545 p.

Cserne P. (2012) Freedom of contract and paternalism, prospects and limits of an economic approach. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 194 p.

De Geest G., Kovac M. (2009) The formation of contracts in the draft common frame of reference. European Review of Private Law, no. 17, pp. 113–132.

Elkin-Koren N., Gal M. (2019) The chilling effect of governance-by-data on data markets. The University of Chicago Law Review, no. 2, pp. 403–432.

Elster J. (1990) When the rationality fails. In: K. Cook (ed.) The limits of rationality. Chicago: University Press, pp. 19–51.

Gowdy J. (2008) Behavioral economics and climate change policy. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, no. 68, pp. 632–644.

Hacker P. (2017) Personalizing EU private law. From disclosures to nudges and mandates. European Review of Private Law, no. 3, pp. 651–678.

Hansen G., Jespersen A. (2013) Nudge and the manipulation of choice: A framework for the responsible use of the nudge approach to behavior change in public policy. European Journal of Risk Regulation, no. 4, pp. 3–28.

Johnson E., Goldstein D. (2003) Do defaults save lives? Science, vol. 302, pp. 1338–1339.

Jolls C., Sunstein C., Thaler R. (1997) Behavioral approach to law and economics. Stanford Law Review, vol. 50, pp. 1471–1550.

Karampatzos A. (2020) Private law, nudging and behavioral economic analysis — the Mandated-choice model. London: Routledge, 174 p.

Lane J., Stodden V. et al. (2014) Privacy, Big Data, and the public good: frameworks for engagement. Cambridge: University Press, 322 p.

Laney D. (2001) 3-D Data management: controlling data volume, velocity and variety. Application delivery strategies. META group. Available at: http://blogs.gartner.com/doug-laney/deja-vvvue-othersclaiming-gartners-volume-velocity-variety-construct-for-big-data (accessed: 28.01.2024)

Lodge M., Wegrich K. (2016) The rationality paradox of nudge: rational tools of government in a world of bounded rationality. Law & Policy, no. 3, pp. 1–24.

Misostishkhov T. Z. (2020) Personalized law and fundamental rights. Tsifrovoye pravo=Digital Law, no. 1, pp. 56–73 (in Russ.)

Mitchell G. (2002) Why law and economics’ perfect rationality should not be traded for behavioral law and economics. Georgetown Law Journal, vol. 91, pp. 1–148.

Moller A., Ryan R., Deci E. (2006) Self-determination theory and public policy: improving the quality of consumer decisions without using coercion. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, no. 4, pp. 104–116.

Mullainathan S., Thaler R. (2001) Behavioral economics. In: N. J. Smelser et al. (eds.) International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 1–13.

Porat A., Strahilevitz L. (2014) Personalizing default rules and disclosures with Big Data. Michigan Law Review, no. 112, pp. 1417–1478.

Posner R. (1998) Rational choice, behavioral economics and the law. Stanford Law Review, vol. 50, pp. 1551–1575.

Saveliev A.I. (2015) Application of legislation on personal data in the era of “big data”. Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki=Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, no. 1, pp. 43–66 (in Russ.)

Schlag P. (2010) Nudge, choice architecture, and libertarian paternalism. Michigan Law Review, vol. 108, pp. 913–924.

Sibony A., Helleringer G. (2015) EU consumer protection and behavioral sciences: revolution or reform? In: Nudge and the Law: A European perspective. London: Bloomsbury, pp. 209–233.

Simon H. (1955) A behavioral model of rational choice. Quarterly Journal of Economics, no. 1, pp. 99–118.

Sunstein C. (2015) Fifty shades of manipulation. Journal of Behavioral Marketing, no. 1, pp. 1-13.

Thaler R., Sunstein C. (2003) Libertarian paternalism. American Economic Review. Papers and Proceedings, no. 2, pp. 175–179 .

Thaler R., Sunstein C. (2008) Nudge: improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven: Yale University Press, 293 p.

Wright J., Ginsburg D. (2012) Behavioral law and economics: its origins, fatal flaws and implications for liberty. Northwestern University Law Review, vol. 106, pp. 1033–1089.