NUDGE, SHOVE, BUDGE, SLUDGE AND ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN: Terminological Demarcation and Practical Implications

Aleksandar S. Mojašević, L. Nikolić
{"title":"NUDGE, SHOVE, BUDGE, SLUDGE AND ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN: Terminological Demarcation and Practical Implications","authors":"Aleksandar S. Mojašević, L. Nikolić","doi":"10.22190/fulp2102083m","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, the authors provide a precise terminological demarcation of the following behavioral concepts: “nudge”, “shove”, and “budge”. Based on these concepts and three defined criteria (freedom/coercion, internalities/externalities, and behavioral insights), the authors explain various behavioral public policies and their practical implications: 1) the behavioral public policy of libertarian-paternalistic orientation (the “nudge policy”); 2) the policy of coercive paternalism; and 3) the behavioral regulation of externalities. Then, the authors provide a terminological distinction between the concept of “sludge” and “nudge”, and discuss their potential misuses. Finally, based on the level of “frictions”, the authors distinguish between the concepts of “administrative burden” and “sludge”, as well as the types of public policies that are recommended for their reduction, particularly “sludge audits”. The conclusion is that all these public policies are very close, slightly different in terms of the subject matter of regulation and the intensity of encroachment on the freedoms of individuals, but that they all have a common root in behavioral insights.","PeriodicalId":237738,"journal":{"name":"Facta Universitatis, Series: Law and Politics","volume":"88 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Facta Universitatis, Series: Law and Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22190/fulp2102083m","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this paper, the authors provide a precise terminological demarcation of the following behavioral concepts: “nudge”, “shove”, and “budge”. Based on these concepts and three defined criteria (freedom/coercion, internalities/externalities, and behavioral insights), the authors explain various behavioral public policies and their practical implications: 1) the behavioral public policy of libertarian-paternalistic orientation (the “nudge policy”); 2) the policy of coercive paternalism; and 3) the behavioral regulation of externalities. Then, the authors provide a terminological distinction between the concept of “sludge” and “nudge”, and discuss their potential misuses. Finally, based on the level of “frictions”, the authors distinguish between the concepts of “administrative burden” and “sludge”, as well as the types of public policies that are recommended for their reduction, particularly “sludge audits”. The conclusion is that all these public policies are very close, slightly different in terms of the subject matter of regulation and the intensity of encroachment on the freedoms of individuals, but that they all have a common root in behavioral insights.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
轻推、推、挪、泥和行政负担:术语界定和实际意义
在本文中,作者提供了以下行为概念的精确术语划分:“轻推”,“推”和“挪”。基于这些概念和三个定义标准(自由/强制、内部性/外部性和行为洞察力),作者解释了各种行为公共政策及其实践意义:1)自由主义-家长式取向的行为公共政策(“轻推政策”);2)强制性家长主义政策;(3)外部性的行为调控。然后,作者提供了“污泥”和“助推”概念之间的术语区分,并讨论了它们的潜在误用。最后,根据“摩擦”的程度,作者区分了“行政负担”和“污泥”的概念,以及建议减少它们的公共政策类型,特别是“污泥审计”。结论是,所有这些公共政策都非常接近,在监管的主题和侵犯个人自由的强度方面略有不同,但它们都有一个共同的根源,即行为洞察力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
THE ENFORCEMENT OF ARBITRAL AWARDS UNDER THE ICSID CONVENTION AND PUBLIC POLICY A WEB OF CRIMES, ROUTINE ACTIVITY THEORY AND THE DEEPENING SCOURGE OF ARMED BANDITRY IN NIGERIA FORENSIC INTERVIEWS WITH CHILDREN PARTIES IN ADMINISTRATIVE DISPUTES THE FUNDAMENTAL BREACH OF CONTRACT OF SALE UNDER THE CISG
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1