EDUCATION LAW AS AN OBJECT OF ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

Author
, associate professor, professor, Kharkiv, Svobody Sq. 4,
, associate professor, Kharkiv, Frunze, 21

In heading

 Economic analysis of law;

Signed print

 23.10.2015

Issues number

 2015 - № 4 (23)

Page

 98-108

Type of articles

 Scientific article

Code UDK

 340.11:37]:330.837

ISSN print

 2411-5584

Abstract

 Problem setting. The results of the economic analysis application to different branches of law vary significantly. Whereas for some branches these results are quite noticeable (e.g. liability for unintentional damage, property law, contract law, theory of civil litigation), the economic analysis of other branches of law is still in the earliest stages of its development. This is in particular true for education law.
Recent research and publications analysis. Among publications of special note are the works by V. L. Tambovtsev, A. Is. Shastri, L. M. Grigoriev, S. A. Afontsev, A. A. Auzan, Is. S. Gontmakher.
Paper objective. To determine the content and features of educational law as an object of economic analysis and interpretation in the context of economic theory of law.
Paper main body. The main reason for the limited application of economic approach to education law lies in the controversies related to the subject matter and method of education law both in the domestic and international science.
Social relations in education represent a complex system, in which two groups of relations can be identified.
The first group includes relations among direct participants in the education process, through which the main functions of education, i.e. training, enlightening, and upbringing, are realized. These are education-specific relations and they are regulated via specific rules of law.
The second group encompasses not only relations among direct participants in the education process but also relations between direct participants and numerous stakeholders of educational institutions. Such relations emerge with regard to the use and disposal of educational resources as well as the appropriation and distribution of education outputs. These relations are not education-specific and are regulated by legal norms related to other branches of law, such as civil law (when choosing a legal status of the educational
institution, concluding economic contracts with different external organizations); labor law (when hiring employees and concluding employment contracts with research and teaching staff); tax law (when setting up taxation regime and tax privileges for educational institutions) and so on.
The specificity of social relations in education as objects of the regulation by law determines the specificity of education law as a relatively independent complex body of law. Apart from the specificity of its subject matter, a relative autonomy of education law among other branches of law is determined by the peculiarities of ways, techniques, and means, which are used for the legal governance of relations in education.
Conclusions of the research. However, despite its specificity, education law lends itself to the application of those general principles of economic theory that have proved to be useful when applied to other areas of law.
Thus, the application of economic analysis to education law can be defined as an important and promising direction for the development of social studies both domestically and on an international scale.
Short Abstract for an article
Abstract. In the article, the content of education law as an object of economic analysis is defined. The characteristics of education law as a complex body of law are identified. The specificity of the interpretation of the content and structure of the education-related legislation is analyzed.

Keywords

 Education law, the economic theory of education law, economic analysis of law, a complex body of law.

Reviewer

External reviewer

Article in PDF

 4 98-108

Bibliography

 1. Velianovsky Ts. H. (2010). Еkonomycheskyi podkhod k pravu: krytycheskoe
vstuplenye. Retrieved from: http://www.nsu.ru/nif/people_1/016.pdf/.
2. Kouz R. ( 1993). Fyrma, rіnok y pravo. M. Delo LTD, Catallaxy.
3. Calabresi G. (1961). Some Thoughts on Risk Distribution and the Law of Torts. The
Yale Law Journal, Vol. 70, 4. 499–553.
4. Nort D. (2012) V teny nasylyia: uroky dlia obshchestv s ohranychennыm dostupom
k polytycheskoi y еkonomycheskoi deiatelnosty : dokl. k XIII Apr. mezhdunar. nauch.
konf. po problemam razvytyia еkonomyky y obshchestva. M.Yzd. dom Visshei shkoly
ekonomyky.
5. Nort D. (1997) Ynstytuti, ynstytutsyonalnie yzmenenyia y funktsyonyrovanye
ekonomyky. M. Fond ekon. kn. «NAChALA».
6. Nort D. (1997). Ynstytutsyonalnыe yzmenenyia: ramky analyza : per. s anhl. Vopr.
еkonomyky. 3. 6–17.
7. Pozner R. (2004) Economicheskiy analiz prava. CPB. Ekonom. shkola.
8. Becker G. S., Stigler, G. J. (1974). Law Enforcement, Malfeasance, and Compensation
of Enforcers. Journal of Legal Studies. 3. 1–18.
9. Tambovtsev V. L. (2009). Osnovy ynstytutsyonalnoho proektyrovanyia. M. YNFRA-M.
10. Tambovtsev V. L. (2005). Pravo y ekonomycheskaia teoryia. M. YNFRA-M.
11. Tambovtsev V. L. (2009). Teoryy ynstytutsyonalnykh yzmenenyiv. M. YNFRA-M.
12. Hryhorev L. M. (2010). Ekonomyka perekhodnikh protsessov. M. Yzd. dom. Mezhdun.
un-ta v Moskve.
13. Hruppa еkonomystov «Syhma». Retrieved from:: http://www.sigma-econ.ru/.
14. Shastytko A. (2013). Predmetno-metodolohycheskye osobennosty novoi
ynstytutsyonalnoi еkonomycheskoi teoryy. Vopr. еkonomyky.1. 24–41.
15. Shastytko A. (1997). Uslovyia y rezultatы formyrovanyia ynstytutov. Vopr.
еkonomyky.3. 67–81.
106
ISSN 2411-5584. Економічна теорія та право. № 4 (23) 2015
16. Tymoshenkov I. V. (2012). Ekonomichni zasady vprovadzhennia Osvitnoho Kodeksu
Ukrainy. Biznes Inform. 10. 48 – 52.
17. Tymoshenkov I. V. (2013). Instytutsiini osnovy rozvytku systemy osvity : monohrafiia.
Nar. ukr. akad. Kh. Vyd-vo NUA.
18. Tymoshenkov I. V., Nashchekina O. M. (2010). Rozbudova osvitnoho prava v Ukraini
yak obiekt ekonomichnoho analizu. Kh. 109–110.
19. Antecol H., Smith J. K. (2012). The Early Decision Option in College Admission and
its Impact on Student Diversity. The Journal of Law & Economics. 55. 1. 217–249.
20. Botero J., et al. (2013). Education, Complaints, and Accountability. The Journal of
Law & Economics, 56, 4. 959–996.
21. Geddes R., et al. (2012). Human Capital Accumulation and the Expansion of Women’s
Economic Rights. The Journal of Law & Economics. 55,4. 839–867.
22. Miller A. R., Zhang, L. (2012). Intergenerational Effects of Welfare Reform on
Educational Attainment. The Journal of Law & Economics. 55.2. 437–476.
23. Sass T. R. (2015). Licensure and Worker Quality: A Comparison of Alternative Routes
to Teaching. The Journal of Law & Economics. 58.1. 1–35.
24. Vlast y vlastnie otnoshenyia v sovremennom myre : materyaly IX nauchno-praktycheskoi
konferentsyy, pryurochennoi k 15-letyiu Humanytarnoho unyversyteta. Ekaterynburh:
Humanytar. un-t. T. 2.195–205.
25. Sukhanov E. A. (2002). O kontseptsyy Kodeksa ob obrazovanyy y samostoiatelnoho
«obrazovatelnoho prava». Problemy y perspektyvy zakonodatelstva ob obrazovanyy
y eho kodyfykatsyy. M. Yzd-vo RUDN. 68–69.
26. Shkatulla V. Y.(1997). Obrazovatelnoe zakonodatelstvo: teoretycheskye y praktycheskye
problemy. Obshchaia chast. M. Yssled. tsentr probl. kachestva podhotovky
spetsyalystov.
27. Shkatulla V. Y. (2001). Obrazovatelnoe pravo. M. NORMA.
28. Fedorova M. Yu. (2003). Obrazovatelnoe pravo. M. VLADOS.
29. Kudriavtse Yu. A., Ehorova Y. Yu., Vorozheikyna O. L., Puhach V. F., Tarasiuk L. N.
(2003). Zakonodatelstvo ob obrazovanyy. Obrazovatelnoe zakonodatelstvo hosudarstv –
uchastnykov SNH y stran Baltyy. M.Hotyka.

Code DOI

This post is also available in: Russian, Ukrainian

06.10.2015