Behavioural Economics, Neuroscience, and the Unfair Commercial Practises Directive

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

This article suggests how and to what extent insights from behavioural economics and neuroscience may be used for the interpretation of the 2005 Unfair Commercial Practices Directive. These disciplines provide useful insight in how the average consumer’s decisions are influenced by commercial information and conducts. As the Directive focuses on whether a commercial practise distorts the economic behaviour of consumers, arguments for whether a particular commercial practise should be considered unfair may be found within these disciplines. It is important to bear in mind that the assessment that courts are to make is normative, and that behavioural economics and neuroscience is of a more descriptive nature. Thus these disciplines may not help draw the fine line between the legitimate influence of commercial activities and the illegal distortion of the average consumer’s behaviour. However, the average consumer test is at least in principle flexible enough to allow the inclusion of research within human decision-making in order to apply a more realistic average consumer than the “Homo Economicus” applied by the European Court of Justice.
This article suggests how and to what extent insights from behavioural economics and neuroscience may be used for the interpretation of the 2005 Unfair Commercial Practices Directive. These disciplines provide useful insight in how the average consumer’s decisions are influenced by commercial information and conducts. As the Directive focuses on whether a commercial practise distorts the economic behaviour of consumers, arguments for whether a particular commercial practise should be considered unfair may be found within these disciplines. It is important to bear in mind that the assessment that courts are to make is normative, and that behavioural economics and neuroscience is of a more descriptive nature. Thus these disciplines may not help draw the fine line between the legitimate influence of commercial activities and the illegal distortion of the average consumer’s behaviour. However, the average consumer test is at least in principle flexible enough to allow the inclusion of research within human decision-making in order to apply a more realistic average consumer than the “Homo Economicus” applied by the European Court of Justice.
LanguageEnglish
JournalJournal of Consumer Policy
Volume34
Issue number3
Pages377-392
ISSN0168-7034
DOIs
StatePublished - 2011

Bibliographical note

Link to full text through CBS Library remote access

Keywords

    Cite this

    @article{911633054f5a40979aa9997842e690db,
    title = "Behavioural Economics, Neuroscience, and the Unfair Commercial Practises Directive",
    abstract = "This article suggests how and to what extent insights from behavioural economics and neuroscience may be used for the interpretation of the 2005 Unfair Commercial Practices Directive. These disciplines provide useful insight in how the average consumer’s decisions are influenced by commercial information and conducts. As the Directive focuses on whether a commercial practise distorts the economic behaviour of consumers, arguments for whether a particular commercial practise should be considered unfair may be found within these disciplines. It is important to bear in mind that the assessment that courts are to make is normative, and that behavioural economics and neuroscience is of a more descriptive nature. Thus these disciplines may not help draw the fine line between the legitimate influence of commercial activities and the illegal distortion of the average consumer’s behaviour. However, the average consumer test is at least in principle flexible enough to allow the inclusion of research within human decision-making in order to apply a more realistic average consumer than the “Homo Economicus” applied by the European Court of Justice.",
    keywords = "Behavioural economics , Neuroscience, Commercial practise, Informational advertising , Consumers",
    author = "Jan Trzaskowski",
    note = "Link to full text through CBS Library remote access",
    year = "2011",
    doi = "10.1007/s10603-011-9169-2",
    language = "English",
    volume = "34",
    pages = "377--392",
    journal = "Journal of Consumer Policy",
    issn = "0168-7034",
    publisher = "Springer",
    number = "3",

    }

    Behavioural Economics, Neuroscience, and the Unfair Commercial Practises Directive. / Trzaskowski, Jan.

    In: Journal of Consumer Policy, Vol. 34, No. 3, 2011, p. 377-392.

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Behavioural Economics, Neuroscience, and the Unfair Commercial Practises Directive

    AU - Trzaskowski,Jan

    N1 - Link to full text through CBS Library remote access

    PY - 2011

    Y1 - 2011

    N2 - This article suggests how and to what extent insights from behavioural economics and neuroscience may be used for the interpretation of the 2005 Unfair Commercial Practices Directive. These disciplines provide useful insight in how the average consumer’s decisions are influenced by commercial information and conducts. As the Directive focuses on whether a commercial practise distorts the economic behaviour of consumers, arguments for whether a particular commercial practise should be considered unfair may be found within these disciplines. It is important to bear in mind that the assessment that courts are to make is normative, and that behavioural economics and neuroscience is of a more descriptive nature. Thus these disciplines may not help draw the fine line between the legitimate influence of commercial activities and the illegal distortion of the average consumer’s behaviour. However, the average consumer test is at least in principle flexible enough to allow the inclusion of research within human decision-making in order to apply a more realistic average consumer than the “Homo Economicus” applied by the European Court of Justice.

    AB - This article suggests how and to what extent insights from behavioural economics and neuroscience may be used for the interpretation of the 2005 Unfair Commercial Practices Directive. These disciplines provide useful insight in how the average consumer’s decisions are influenced by commercial information and conducts. As the Directive focuses on whether a commercial practise distorts the economic behaviour of consumers, arguments for whether a particular commercial practise should be considered unfair may be found within these disciplines. It is important to bear in mind that the assessment that courts are to make is normative, and that behavioural economics and neuroscience is of a more descriptive nature. Thus these disciplines may not help draw the fine line between the legitimate influence of commercial activities and the illegal distortion of the average consumer’s behaviour. However, the average consumer test is at least in principle flexible enough to allow the inclusion of research within human decision-making in order to apply a more realistic average consumer than the “Homo Economicus” applied by the European Court of Justice.

    KW - Behavioural economics

    KW - Neuroscience

    KW - Commercial practise

    KW - Informational advertising

    KW - Consumers

    U2 - 10.1007/s10603-011-9169-2

    DO - 10.1007/s10603-011-9169-2

    M3 - Journal article

    VL - 34

    SP - 377

    EP - 392

    JO - Journal of Consumer Policy

    T2 - Journal of Consumer Policy

    JF - Journal of Consumer Policy

    SN - 0168-7034

    IS - 3

    ER -