NOT long before David Cameron became UK prime minister, he famously for his colleagues: a book modestly entitled Nudge.
Cameron wasn鈥檛 the only world leader to find it compelling. US president Barack Obama soon appointed one of its authors, Cass Sunstein, a social scientist at the University of Chicago, to a powerful position in the White House. And thus the nudge bandwagon began rolling. It has been picking up speed ever since (see 鈥�Nudge power: Big government鈥檚 little pushes鈥�).
So what鈥檚 the big idea? We don鈥檛 always do what鈥檚 best for ourselves, thanks to cognitive biases and errors that make us deviate from rational self-interest. The premise of Nudge is that subtly offsetting or exploiting these biases can help people to make better choices.
Advertisement
If you live in the US or UK, you鈥檙e likely to have been nudged towards a certain decision at some point. You probably didn鈥檛 notice. That鈥檚 deliberate: nudging is widely assumed to work best when people aren鈥檛 aware of it. But that stealth breeds suspicion: people recoil from the idea that they are being stealthily manipulated.
There are other grounds for suspicion. It sounds glib: a neat term for a slippery concept. You could argue that it is a way for governments to avoid taking decisive action. Or you might be concerned that it lets them push us towards a convenient choice, regardless of what we really want.
These don鈥檛 really hold up. Our distaste for being nudged is understandable, but is arguably just another cognitive bias, given that our behaviour is constantly being discreetly influenced by others. What鈥檚 more, interventions only qualify as nudges if they don鈥檛 create concrete incentives in any particular direction. So the choice ultimately remains a free one.
聯Our distaste for being nudged is understandable, but is arguably just another cognitive bias聰
Nudging is a less blunt instrument than regulation or tax. It should supplement rather than supplant these, and nudgers must be held accountable. But broadly speaking, anyone who believes in evidence-based policy should try to overcome their distaste and welcome governance based on behavioural insights and controlled trials, rather than carrot-and-stick wishful thinking. Perhaps we just need a nudge in the right direction.
This article appeared in print under the headline 鈥淕ently does it鈥�
