kaal:claim:2267560-020

In the conventional NIE learning process, the requirements for rules and their adaptability to future states become clear only after stable and presumptively optimal rules have already emerged as suboptimal, so anticipation of future developments plays no role and learning is confined to learning from mistakes.

Anticipation of future developments does not play a role in this learning process.

Wulf A. Kaal, Evolution of Law Dynamic Regulation in a New Institutional Economics Framework (2013), III. Rulemaking in a Dynamic Framework, p. 7
https://ssrn.com/abstract=2267560 · source PDF

Wulf A. Kaal, Evolution of Law Dynamic Regulation in a New Institutional Economics Framework (2013). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2267560

• conventional, non-dynamic learning process

failuresupport: arguedfailure: retrospective-only learning in rulemakingfamily: rule-obsolescence-and-ossificationdynamic-regulation

• extended_by kaal:claim:2808132-016 The ex post facts-based approach to rulemaking worked historically because the optimal requirements for rules ...

The quote above is an exact substring of the source PDF, whose sha256 is 7ecc9dd1826121a95bf252476cdaa1c8737ad8079e12caf66c4342ffae7af8af. Extraction method: pdf-text-layer.
Attestation record: colloquium/attestations/84333307857d5ba5...json
Verify the binding yourself: curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2267560-020.md | sha256sum