Should Governments Invest More in Nudging?

Shlomo  Benartzi; John  Beshears; Katherine L. Milkman; Cass R. Sunstein; Richard H. Thaler; Maya  Shankar; Will  Tucker-Ray; William J. Congdon; Steven  Galing

Article | Psychological Science | August 2017

Should Governments Invest More in Nudging?

by Shlomo Benartzi, John Beshears, Katherine L. Milkman, Cass R. Sunstein, Richard H. Thaler, Maya Shankar, Will Tucker-Ray, William J. Congdon and Steven Galing

Abstract

Governments are increasingly adopting behavioral science techniques for changing individual behavior in pursuit of policy objectives. The types of “nudge” interventions that governments are now adopting alter people’s decisions without coercion or significant changes to economic incentives. We calculated ratios of impact to cost for nudge interventions and for traditional policy tools, such as tax incentives and other financial inducements, and we found that nudge interventions often compare favorably with traditional interventions. We conclude that nudging is a valuable approach that should be used more often in conjunction with traditional policies, but more calculations are needed to determine the relative effectiveness of nudging.

Keywords: nudge; nudge unit; choice architecture; behavioral science; Behavioral economics; savings; pension plan; education; college enrollment; energy; electricity usage; preventive health; influenza vaccination; flu shot; open materials; Behavior; Governance; Economics; Policy; Power and Influence;

Format: Print

Find at Harvard Read Now

Citation:

Benartzi, Shlomo, John Beshears, Katherine L. Milkman, Cass R. Sunstein, Richard H. Thaler, Maya Shankar, Will Tucker-Ray, William J. Congdon, and Steven Galing. "Should Governments Invest More in Nudging?" Psychological Science 28, no. 8 (August 2017): 1041–1055.

In 2016, members of the U.S. Women's National Soccer Team (WNT) took steps to fight for equal pay relative to the U.S. Men's National Soccer Team. Their legal representative declared that the memorandum of understanding governing the relationship between the players and the U.S. Soccer Federation (USSF) was terminable at will. If a court agreed with this position, the players could threaten to strike in advance of the upcoming Olympics. In addition, five of the top WNT players filed a wage-discrimination complaint against the USSF with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. This case describes the history of the WNT and the USSF leading up to these events.

In 2016, members of the U.S. Women's National Soccer Team (WNT) took steps to fight for equal pay relative to the U.S. Men's National Soccer Team. Their legal representative declared that the memorandum of understanding governing the relationship between the players and the U.S. Soccer Federation (USSF) was terminable at will. If a court agreed with this position, the players could threaten to strike in advance of the upcoming Olympics. In addition, five of the top WNT players filed a wage-discrimination complaint against the USSF with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. This case describes the events following from the actions of the WNT players.

Faculty & Research

Should Governments Invest More in Nudging?

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author