- Concurring Opinions - http://www.concurringopinions.com -

Shoves, Nudges, and Freedom

Posted By Frank Pasquale On February 18, 2013 @ 9:37 pm In Behavioral Law and Economics,Health Law | 4 Comments

Cass Sunstein reviews a book [1] by Sarah Conly on coercive paternalism in the NYRB this month:

A natural objection [to paternalism] is that autonomy is an end in itself and not merely a means. On this view, people should be entitled to choose as they like, even if they end up choosing poorly. . . . Conly responds that when government makes (some) decisions for us, we gain not only in personal welfare but also in autonomy, if only because our time is freed up to deal with what most concerns us. . . .

Conly’s most controversial claim is that because the health risks of smoking are so serious, the government should ban it. She is aware that many people like to smoke, that a ban could create black markets, and that both of these points count against a ban. But she concludes that education, warnings, and other nudges are insufficiently effective, and that a flat prohibition is likely to be justified by careful consideration of both benefits and costs, including the costs to the public of treating lung cancer and other consequences of smoking.

As Big Beverage’s tactics [2] come closer [3] and closer [4] to those of big tobacco, might it be the next target [5]?

For those who’d like government to influence decisions in subtler ways, check out Kate Greenwood’s review [6] of recent health care proposals from Richard Frank and Christopher Robertson. Very interesting ideas there.

4 Comments (Open | Close)

4 Comments To "Shoves, Nudges, and Freedom"

#1 Comment By Brett Bellmore On February 19, 2013 @ 7:01 am

The problem with “nudges”, is that, unless you’re willing to accept the “nudge” not working, you just keep ramping them up until you’re really shoving. And nobody who’s willing to let people make their own choices has much interest in nudging in the first place.

Really, nudges are just the gateway drug for outright coercion. It’s just public relations for people who want to order other people around, and not admit what they’re doing.

#2 Comment By Shag from Brookline On February 19, 2013 @ 7:21 am

I think the Yiddish definition of “nudge” is more in context. So, Brett, don’t be a nudge.

#3 Comment By Patrick S. O’Donnell On February 19, 2013 @ 8:44 am

I’m all for nudging, even grabbing the inattentive person and pulling him or her out of the way when the wave approaching at high tide threatens to crash in and pull them out to sea: [7]

#4 Comment By Frank On February 19, 2013 @ 9:51 am

Patrick, that is a fantastic post…certainly one of the most nuanced things written about the soda debate, and the ideas go well beyond it.

Article printed from Concurring Opinions: http://www.concurringopinions.com

URL to article: http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2013/02/shoves-nudges-and-freedom.html

URLs in this post:

[1] reviews a book: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2013/mar/07/its-your-own-good/?pagination=false

[2] Big Beverage’s tactics: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/02/12/1575461/big-tobacco-big-food/

[3] closer: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/20/health/research/us-study-finds-children-consuming-too-much-sugar.html

[4] closer: http://www.sugarydrinkfacts.org/

[5] next target: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/14/business/health-officials-urge-fda-action-on-soft-drinks.html

[6] Kate Greenwood’s review: http://www.healthreformwatch.com/2013/02/10/giving-patients-a-piece-of-the-action-appealing-proposals-from-richard-frank-and-christopher-robertson/

[7] : http://ratiojuris.blogspot.com/2012/06/drinking-sodas-appetitive-incontinence.html

Copyright © 2010 Concurring Opinions. All rights reserved.