IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirc/v38y2020i2p214-232.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Questioning post-political perspectives on the psychological state: Behavioural public policy in the Netherlands

Author

Listed:
  • Mark Whitehead
  • Rhys Jones

    (Aberystwyth University, UK)

  • Jessica Pykett

Abstract

Behavioural public policy is associated with the rising influence of psychological and behavioural sciences on systems of government. Related policies are based on the assumption of human irrationality and use a series of often unconsciously oriented policy tools to pursue varied public policy goals. This paper argues that existing critical analyses of behavioural public policy can be categorized as post-political in their orientation. Post-political theory is primarily concerned with how political consensuses, particularly around expert forms of government administration, tend to close off opportunities for political contestation and challenge. Drawing on an empirical case study of emerging forms of behavioural public policy in the Netherlands, this paper challenges some of the core assumptions of post-political critiques of behavioural governance. The case of the Netherlands is also used to challenge the often absolutist assumptions about the nature of the political, expertise, and consensus that characterize post-political forms of inquiry more generally.

Suggested Citation

  • Mark Whitehead & Rhys Jones & Jessica Pykett, 2020. "Questioning post-political perspectives on the psychological state: Behavioural public policy in the Netherlands," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 38(2), pages 214-232, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:38:y:2020:i:2:p:214-232
    DOI: 10.1177/2399654419867711
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2399654419867711
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2399654419867711?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark D. White, 2013. "The Manipulation of Choice," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-137-31357-7, September.
    2. Carter, Eric D., 2015. "Making the Blue Zones: Neoliberalism and nudges in public health promotion," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 374-382.
    3. Sanders, Michael & Snijders, Veerle & Hallsworth, Michael, 2018. "Behavioural science and policy: where are we now and where are we going?," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 144-167, November.
    4. Sunstein,Cass R., 2016. "The Ethics of Influence," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107140707.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Dik Roth & Michiel Köhne & Elisabet Dueholm Rasch & Madelinde Winnubst, 2021. "After the facts: Producing, using and contesting knowledge in two spatial-environmental conflicts in the Netherlands," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 39(3), pages 626-645, May.
    2. Nicola da Schio & Bas van Heur, 2022. "Resistance is in the air: From post-politics to the politics of expertise," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 40(3), pages 592-610, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Schubert, Christian, 2017. "Green nudges: Do they work? Are they ethical?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 329-342.
    2. Bart Engelen, 2019. "Nudging and rationality: What is there to worry?," Rationality and Society, , vol. 31(2), pages 204-232, May.
    3. Eyert, Florian & Irgmaier, Florian & Ulbricht, Lena, 2018. "Algorithmic social ordering: Towards a conceptual framework," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 48-57.
    4. Ramzi Mabsout, 2022. "John Stuart Mill, soft paternalist," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 58(1), pages 161-186, January.
    5. Danuta Miłaszewicz, 2022. "Survey Results on Using Nudges for Choice of Green-Energy Supplier," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-19, April.
    6. Eyal Pe’er & Yuval Feldman & Eyal Gamliel & Limor Sahar & Ariel Tikotsky & Nurit Hod & Hilla Schupak, 2019. "Do minorities like nudges? The role of group norms in attitudes towards behavioral policy," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 14(1), pages 40-50, January.
    7. Roberto Fumagalli, 2016. "Decision sciences and the new case for paternalism: three welfare-related justificatory challenges," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(2), pages 459-480, August.
    8. Cadario, Romain & Chandon, Pierre, 2019. "Viewpoint: Effectiveness or consumer acceptance? Tradeoffs in selecting healthy eating nudges," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 1-6.
    9. Christian Schubert, 2015. "On the ethics of public nudging: Autonomy and Agency," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201533, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    10. Philp, Matthew & Mantonakis, Antonia, 2020. "Guiding the consumer evaluation process and the probability of order-effects-in-choice," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 13-22.
    11. Barlow, P. & Thow, A.M., 2021. "Neoliberal discourse, actor power, and the politics of nutrition policy: A qualitative analysis of informal challenges to nutrition labelling regulations at the World Trade Organization, 2007–2019," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 273(C).
    12. Jan Schnellenbach, 2016. "A Constitutional Economics Perspective on Soft Paternalism," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(1), pages 135-156, February.
    13. James Alm & Laura Rosales Cifuentes & Carlos Mauricio Ortiz Niño & Diana Rocha, 2019. "Can Behavioral “Nudges” Improve Compliance? The Case of Colombia Social Protection Contributions," Games, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-23, October.
    14. Meder, Björn & Fleischhut, Nadine & Osman, Magda, 2018. "Beyond the confines of choice architecture: A critical analysis," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 36-44.
    15. Gencer, Busra & van Ackere, Ann, 2021. "Achieving long-term renewable energy goals: Do intermediate targets matter?," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    16. Dragos C Petrescu & Gareth J Hollands & Dominique-Laurent Couturier & Yin-Lam Ng & Theresa M Marteau, 2016. "Public Acceptability in the UK and USA of Nudging to Reduce Obesity: The Example of Reducing Sugar-Sweetened Beverages Consumption," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-18, June.
    17. Martin Binder, 2019. "Soft paternalism and subjective well-being: how happiness research could help the paternalist improve individuals’ well-being," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 539-561, April.
    18. Romain Cadario & Pierre Chandon, 2019. "Viewpoint: Effectiveness or consumer acceptance? Tradeoffs in selecting healthy eating nudges," Post-Print hal-02508983, HAL.
    19. Hildebrandt, Mireille, 2020. "Smart technologies," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 9(4), pages 1-16.
    20. Matija Franklin & Tomas Folke & Kai Ruggeri, 2019. "Optimising nudges and boosts for financial decisions under uncertainty," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-13, December.

    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:sae:envirc:v:38:y:2020:i:2:p:214-232. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.