• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Economic Literature >Finance and Politics: A Review Essay Based on Kenneth Dam's Analysis of Legal Traditions in The Law-Growth Nexus
【24h】

Finance and Politics: A Review Essay Based on Kenneth Dam's Analysis of Legal Traditions in The Law-Growth Nexus

机译：金融与政治：基于肯尼斯·丹（Kenneth Dam）对法律与法律的联系中法律传统的分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Strong financial markets are widely thought to propel economic development, with many in finance seeing legal tradition as fundamental to protecting investors sufficiently for finance to flourish. Kenneth Dam finds that the legal tradition view inaccurately portrays how legal systems work, how laws developed historically, and how government power is allocated in the various legal traditions. Yet, after probing the legal-origins literature for inaccuracies, Dam does not deeply develop an alternative hypothesis to explain the world's differences in financial development. Nor does he challenge the origins core data, which could be origins' trump card. Hence, his analysis will not convince many economists, despite that his legal learning suggests conceptual and factual difficulties for the legal origins explanations. Yet, a dense political economy explanation is already out there and the origins-based data has unexplored weaknesses consistent with Dam's contentions. Knowing if the origins view is truly fundamental, flawed, or secondary is vital for financial development policy making because policymakers who believe it will pick policies that imitate what they think to be the core institutions of the preferred legal tradition. But if they have mistaken views, as Dam indicates they might, as to what the legal traditions' institutions really are and which types of laws are effective, or what is really most important to financial development, they will make policy mistakes-potentially serious ones.
机译：人们普遍认为，强大的金融市场可以推动经济发展，许多金融业人士将法律传统视为保护投资者充分，使金融蓬勃发展的基础。肯尼斯·达姆（Kenneth Dam）发现，法律传统观点不准确地描绘了法律制度的运作方式，法律的历史发展方式以及政府在各种法律传统中的权力分配方式。但是，在对法律渊源文献进行了不精确性调查之后，达姆并未深入发展替代假设来解释世界金融发展的差异。他也没有挑战起源核心数据，这可能是起源的王牌。因此，尽管他的法律学识为法律渊源的解释提出了概念和事实上的困难，但他的分析并不能说服许多经济学家。但是，已经有一个密集的政治经济学解释，并且基于起源的数据具有与Dam的论点一致的未开发的弱点。知道起源观点是真正的基础，有缺陷的还是次要的观点，对于金融发展政策的制定至关重要，因为相信这一观点的决策者会选择模仿他们认为是首选法律传统核心机构的政策。但是，如果达姆指出，他们可能对法律传统的制度真正是什么，哪种类型的法律有效，或者对于金融发展而言最重要的是什么，则可能会犯错误的观点，这可能是严重的错误。 。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号