Harming a favored side: an anomaly with supreme values and good intentions

B-Tier
Journal: Public Choice
Year: 2021
Volume: 186
Issue: 3
Pages: 275-285

Score contribution per author:

2.011 = (α=2.01 / 1 authors) × 1.0x B-tier

α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count

Abstract

Abstract Third-party adjudicators, be they governments, or politicians or academics, can take positions regarding who initiated a conflict, who is to blame for harm or damage, and who has violated international law. Decisions need not always be objective. There can be bias. I consider the anomaly of biased adjudicators providing incentives for harm to their favored side. The anomaly arises in real-life circumstances. The puzzle is why adjudicators with good intentions cooperate in bringing harm to the civilian population of the side with which they sympathize. Anomalies are usually addressed in a context of behavioral economics. I consider both behavioral and rational explanations.

Technical Details

RePEc Handle
repec:kap:pubcho:v:186:y:2021:i:3:d:10.1007_s11127-019-00750-z
Journal Field
Public
Author Count
1
Added to Database
2026-02-02