This paper is concerned with the application of economic analysis to law and public policy. Its aim is not to highlight the well‐documented merits of economic analysis but to shed light on some of its flaws and to propose an agenda for future research in the field.
The paper takes as a case study the debate over the economic rationale for investor protection regulation.
The paper discusses the main economic arguments for and against regulation and explains why arguments of this type are weaker than commonly thought.
The paper reviews the main arguments for and against the economic rationale for investor protection regulation and identifies the economic reasoning entrenched in the arguments of both sides of the debate, spells out its shortcomings and proposes an agenda for future research.
