This week I have set myself the task of re-writing my masters dissertation proposal, having dropped the previous plan to explore democratic legitimacy in NHS commissioning (yawn) in favour of behavioural economics and public policy. Notably this change in approach has come following a change in career, leaving behind my previous NHS role to take on a new challenge establishing ICE Creates’ new health and lifestyle services division.
This task has prompted some reflection.Being passionate about sustained behaviour change for many years through the social marketing work I have led on, it is great to see behaviour change and the ‘nudge’ becoming increasingly popular in public policy, so much so that the House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology is investigating behaviour change and its impact on achieving policy objectives (thanks committee, for doing my lit review!). The Cabinet Office also has a behavioural insights team whose role is to prompt government to think outside regulation with a team of civil servants drawing on behavioural economics to focus on a range of issues from smoking cessation to increasing charity donations.
I am eager to see the outcome of the Select Committee report as it should make great contemporary reading on the subject, especially as it is also analysing the evidence base for different forms of interventions to change behaviour and the ethical issues to which they give rise. The published written evidence should provide a considerable resource for local authorities, the NHS and their public and voluntary sector partners to assist in deciding which interventions are most likely to be effective, and to think through the ethical implications if they wish to take a behaviour change approach in a particular policy area.
However, with excitement and geeky fascination comes fear, fear that policy makers will jump on the bandwagon in an ill informed manner, peppering their policy papers with references to nudge, behavioural economics and interventions based on committee discussions and little insight or co-creation with the people whose behaviour we seek to change. I remember all too well when suddenly everyone got excited about social marketing (despite the concept being more than three decades old at the time) throwing considerable resource and energy at projects which were not properly insight-led, planned, executed or evaluated (often involving an advert on the side of a bus). It will be down to experts in the field to lead the way as changemakers and ensure that change is embraced, not crushed.
