Saving the Planet
Despite the urgency of climate change, progress on emissions reductions is limited by high costs. This decision framework advocates for adaptation policies that incorporate choice architecture and nudges to reduce harms from wildfires, sea-level rise, and heat and drought.
THE IDEA
Saving the Planet
Come gather ’round, people
Wherever you roam And admit that the waters Around you have grown And accept it that soon You’ll be drenched to the bone If your time to you is worth savin’ And you better start swimmin’ Or you’ll sink like a stone For the times they are a-changin’ —Bob Dylan
As anyone who has been paying even a little bit of attention knows, the world faces a crisis known as climate change. Gradually the planet is getting hotter and the climate is getting more volatile, with a host of harmful effects on public health and welfare. People in poor countries are especially vulnerable, but those in wealthy countries are also at serious risk. Violent storms and gigantic fires do not spare anyone.
Because this is such an enormous problem, we might expect that everyone would be united in working to respond to it. And indeed some countries have adopted bold initiatives, incurring significant costs in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But to date, progress has been limited. A key reason is those significant costs; large reductions in emissions are not going to come cheap.
For the sake of simplicity, our focus here is on reducing emissions, but unfortunately it is inevitable that the world will have to find a way to deal with the effects of climate change over time. Temperatures, sea levels, storm intensity, and wildfires will be rising over the coming decades even if the rate of growth of emissions is greatly slowed. That means that policies to adapt to these adverse effects will be needed, and those policies should incorporate choice architecture best practices and a host of nudges. Adaptation is essentially a means of reducing the harm of climate change. For example, many interventions can make wildfires less frequent and/or easier to control. Building sea walls can reduce the risk of flooding from higher sea levels, and if we can shift home building toward places where flooding is less likely, we can do even better. It is possible to develop hybrid crops that are more resilient to heat and drought, but farmers might need to be nudged to switch to those crops, having grown something else for generations. You get the idea. An understanding of choice architecture could spur many reforms to reduce the harms of a warmer world.
When to use it
Designing coastal-protection policies that combine physical defenses with clear flood-risk information and application processes that make lower-risk locations easier to choose.
Developing agricultural extension programs that use opt-out enrollment for drought-resistant seed varieties.
Creating insurance products that reward homeowners for installing wildfire mitigation measures through automatic discounts.
In urban planning, distinguish mandatory flood-proofing codes from optional design defaults that builders or buyers can decline.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
Sea Walls and Home Building
Building sea walls reduces flood risk from rising sea levels. Complementing this with nudges to encourage home building in less flood-prone areas can further reduce harm.
Hybrid Crops and Farmer Nudges
Developing hybrid crops resilient to heat and drought is possible, but farmers may need nudges to switch from traditional crops they have grown for generations.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
How can choice architecture be applied to encourage communities to adopt fire-resistant building materials and landscaping?
What nudges could local governments use to steer new housing developments away from flood-prone areas?
In what ways might behavioral insights help farmers transition to climate-resilient crops despite long-standing traditions?
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- Nudge The Final Edition (Richard H. Thaler Cass R. Sunstein)