State contract enforcement mattered mainly by lowering policing costs, not by filling a void.

Evidence

Thus our approach suggests that the importance of the role of the state enforcement of contracts was not that it provided a means of enforcing contracts where one previously did not exist. Rather, it was to reduce the transaction costs of policing exchange. — PAUL R. MILGRO, PAUL R. MILGRO - THE ROLE OF…, 176

Categorization

• CANDY: A clean, counterintuitive one-liner about what the state actually contributes to trade.
• XREF: Connects to the Milgrom et al. private-judges analysis and to North’s institutional economics the reader is already tracking. — connects to: Private enforcement institutions restore cooperation but impose priced transaction costs. — PAUL R. MILGRO, PAUL R. MILGRO - THE ROLE OF…, 125

Broader Connections

• Private enforcement institutions restore cooperation but impose priced transaction costs. #corroborates (0.85) — PAUL R. MILGRO, PAUL R. MILGRO - THE ROLE OF…, 125