Libertarian Paternalism (Nudge Theory)

A New Path

Thaler and Sunstein argue that libertarian paternalism can appeal to conservatives and liberals: it seeks to influence choices while keeping alternatives available. They point to governments across the political spectrum that adopted behavioral approaches after the original publication of Nudge. The following institutional descriptions reflect their account at the time of writing.

In the United Kingdom, former Prime Minister David Cameron, the leader of the Conservative Party, embraced nudging and created the world’s first team devoted solely to this effort, officially called the Behavioural Insights Team, but often called the Nudge Unit.* In the United States, former President Barack Obama, a Democrat and a liberal, also embraced the basic idea, directed his agencies to adopt numerous nudges, and created a nudge unit of his own (originally known as the Social and Behavioral Sciences Team, and now called the Office of Evaluation Sciences). The United States Agency for International Development has an assortment of programs that use behavioral science and insights. In the years since the book was originally published, governments around the world, spanning the political landscape, have incorporated these and related ideas in an effort to make their programs more efficient and effective. There are behavioral insights teams or nudge units of various kinds in numerous nations, including Australia, New Zealand, Germany, Canada, Finland, Singapore, the Netherlands, France, Japan, India, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia. A great deal of relevant work is being done by the World Bank, the United Nations, and the European Commission. In 2020, the World Health Organization created a Behavioral Insights Initiative focusing on numerous public health issues, including pandemics, vaccination uptake, and risk-taking by young people.

Although the world seems to be becoming increasingly polarized, we continue to believe that libertarian paternalism can be a promising foundation for bipartisanship and for simple problem-solving. Better governance often requires less in the way of government coercion and more in the way of freedom to choose. Mandates and prohibitions have their place (and behavioral science can help to identify them), but when incentives and nudges replace requirements and bans, government will be both smaller and more modest. So, to be clear: this book is not a call for more bureaucracy, or even for an increased role of government. We just strive for better governance. In short, libertarian paternalism is neither left nor right. For all their differences, we hope that people with very different political convictions might be willing to converge in support of gentle nudges.