Governmental assurance steers conduct without defining it, unlike reward-based inducement

Evidence

The technioue of general governmental assurance is to be distinguished from that of inducement of particular conduct by promise of reward because the government does not undertake the burden of defining exactly what conduct it wants to have take place. Obviously, the two techniques shade toward each other. In the extremes, however, they represent the difference between planning for indeterminate ends and planning for determinate ones. — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 885

Categorization

• DEFINE: Sets the governing taxonomy distinction between assurance (indeterminate planning) and subsidy (determinate inducement) that structures the whole chapter.
• XREF: connects to: Government contracts can control private conduct by inducement rather than regulation — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 837; Power emerges when rewards are threatened with withdrawal to exact unenvisaged conduct — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 622

Broader Connections

• Power emerges when rewards are threatened with withdrawal to exact unenvisaged conduct #expands (0.80) — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 622