IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bpubpo/v9y2025i4p865-873_12.html

How sludge impairs the effectiveness of policy programs: a field experiment with SMEs

Author

Listed:
  • Grieder, Manuel
  • Kistler, Deborah
  • Schmitz, Jan

Abstract

Small and medium-sized enterprises constitute the largest share of companies in most economies. As major resource users and significant contributors to environmental pollution, they are relevant targets for public policy programs aimed at increasing sustainability. We study how ‘sludge’ – small frictions in the choice architecture – can impact the uptake and effectiveness of such public policy programs targeted at SMEs. To this end, we conducted a field experiment within an existing policy program designed to support SMEs in implementing cost-effective environmental management practices. We manipulated the process of receiving free green items intended to support the implementation of those environmentally friendly practices within firms. We find that sludge, in the form of minor additional effort required to order the items, substantially undermined the program’s effectiveness. These results have important implications for policymakers: even minor sludge in the choice architecture can seriously impair the effectiveness of public policy programs targeted at companies.

Suggested Citation

  • Grieder, Manuel & Kistler, Deborah & Schmitz, Jan, 2025. "How sludge impairs the effectiveness of policy programs: a field experiment with SMEs," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(4), pages 865-873, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:bpubpo:v:9:y:2025:i:4:p:865-873_12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2398063X24000447/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:9:y:2025:i:4:p:865-873_12. 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.