IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bpubpo/v2y2018i02p227-234_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Complexity as an opportunity and challenge for behavioural public policy

Author

Listed:
  • SPENCER, NATHALIE

Abstract

This paper is a response to Sanders, Snijders and Hallsworth (2018). The challenges and opportunities of behavioural public policy Sanders, Snijders and Hallsworth discuss highlight a conundrum for the field: the impact of behavioural interventions is difficult to measure accurately in complex situations, and yet complexity is inherent in the very areas in most need of impact. Behavioural interventions will be only one tool of many to work towards broader organisational, systems and social change. As a field, we should be looking to other disciplines, inviting them into the fold of discussions on how to achieve these changes. Finally, while the mantra of nudge for good is a useful beacon, intentions are only part of the equation, and a number of questions should be asked when considering a behavioural policy intervention.

Suggested Citation

  • Spencer, Nathalie, 2018. "Complexity as an opportunity and challenge for behavioural public policy," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 227-234, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:bpubpo:v:2:y:2018:i:02:p:227-234_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2398063X18000209/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. S. Mills & S. Costa & C. R. Sunstein, 2023. "AI, Behavioural Science, and Consumer Welfare," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 387-400, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:bpubpo:v:2:y:2018:i:02:p:227-234_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/bpp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.