Fighting gender violence with behavioral public policy: scope and limitations
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Since the concept of “nudge” was introduced in 2008 by Thaler and Sunstein, proposing that small interventions based on changes
in choice architectures can alter people’s behavior and make it easier for them to achieve their desired goals, the application in public policy of
behavioral economics has gained significant attention. This has led to the emergence of different types of policies based on behavioral insights,
which have been used in a variety of areas, including health or finance, with the goal of promoting well-being and addressing social and economic
issues. After providing a basic theoretical background as a frame of reference to understand gender violence, this study explores the use of tools from the field of behavioral economics as it is applied in public policy. Regulatory (paternalistic) and non-regulatory (libertarian) interventions based on behavioral insights will be considered: nudges, boosts, shoves, budges, or sludge audits, are examined as potential interventions to use in matters related to this type of violence. After evaluating these behavioral policy instruments and their potential effectiveness, the limitations of
the behavioral perspective are recognized, and the need for a multifaceted approach to combating gender violence is acknowledged. The article concludes by arguing that public policies addressing gender violence should not only utilize behavioral tools but should also incorporate strategies related to education, legislation, and social norms.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authorship: The list of authors signing must include only those people who have contributed intellectually to the development of the work. Collaboration in the collection of data is not, by itself, a sufficient criterion of authorship. "Retos" declines any responsibility for possible conflicts arising from the authorship of the works that are published.
Copyright: The Salesian Polytechnic University preserves the copyrights of the published articles, and favors and allows their reuse under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Ecuador license. They may be copied, used, disseminated, transmitted and publicly displayed, provided that: i) the authorship and the original source of their publication (journal, editorial and work URL) are cited; (Ii) are not used for commercial purposes; Iii) mention the existence and specifications of this license.
References
Almeida, S. R., Lourenço, J. S., Dessart, F. J., & Ciriolo, E. (2016). Insights from behavioural sciences to prevent and combat violence against women. JRC Science for Policy Report, EUR 28235EN. DOI, 10.
Banerjee, S., & John, P. (2021). Nudge Plus: incorporating reflection into behavioral public policy. Behavioural Public Policy, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2021.6
Busara. (2018). Using social nudges to enhance the effectiveness of anti-GBV advocacy material [Lab experiment]. Busara, partnered with Oxford Policy Management. Retrieved from Busara, partnered with Oxford Policy Management website: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1613xrQht1dyk3zwgWNivyb1b4U4AqlgG/view
Cumberbatch, J. R., & Barnes, G. C. (2018). This nudge was not enough: a randomised trial of text message reminders of court dates to victims and witnesses. Cambridge Journal of Evidence-Based Policing, 2(1–2), 35–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41887-018-0024-4
Dimant, E., & Shalvi, S. (2022). Meta-nudging honesty: Past, present, and future of the research frontier. Current Opinion in Psychology, 47, 101426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101426
Fishbane, A., Ouss, A., & Shah, A. K. (2020). Behavioral nudges reduce failure to appear for court. Science, 370(6517). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abb6591
Garnelo, M., Bustin, C., Duryea, S., & Morrison, A. (2019). Applying behavioral insights to intimate partner violence: improving services for survivors in latin america and the caribbean. Inter-American Development Bank. https://doi.org/10.18235/0001980
Grüne-Yanoff, T., & Hertwig, R. (2016). Nudge versus boost: how coherent are policy and theory? Minds and Machines, 26(1–2), 149–183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-015-9367-9
Hertwig, R., & Grüne-Yanoff, T. (2017). Nudging and Boosting: Steering or Empowering Good Decisions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(6), 973–986. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617702496
Hertwig, R. (2017). When to consider boosting: some rules for policy-makers. Behavioural Public Policy, 1(02), 143–161. https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2016.14
Hortal, A., & Segoviano Contreras, L. E. (2023). Behavioral Public Policy and Well-Being: Towards a Normative Demarcation of Nudges and Sludges . Review of Behavioral Economics.
Hortal, A. (2020a). Evidence-based policies, nudge theory and Nancy Cartwright: a search for causal principles. Behavioural Public Policy, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2020.55
Hortal, A. (2020b). Nudging and Educating: Bounded Axiological Rationality in Behavioral Insights. Behavioural Public Policy, 4(3), 292–315. https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2019.2
Hortal, A. (2022). Virtue nudges: using choice architecture to form virtuous citizens. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4274050
Kahan, D. M. (2000). Gentle nudges vs. hard shoves: solving the sticky norms problem. The University of Chicago Law Review, 67(3), 607. https://doi.org/10.2307/1600336
Klugman, J. (2017). Gender based violence and the law. World Bank, Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.1596/26198
Oliver, A. (2013). From Nudging to Budging: Using Behavioural Economics to Inform Public Sector Policy. Journal of Social Policy, 42(04), 685–700. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279413000299
Oliver, A. (2017). The origins of behavioural public policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108225120
Oliver, A. (2018). Nudges, shoves and budges: Behavioural economic policy frameworks. The International Journal of Health Planning and Management, 33(1), 272–275. https://doi.org/10.1002/hpm.2419
Poggi, F. (2019). Sobre el concepto de violencia de género y su relevancia para el derecho. Doxa: Revista Brasileira de Psicologia e Educação, (42), 285. https://doi.org/10.14198/DOXA2019.42.12
Reijula, S., & Hertwig, R. (2020). Self-nudging and the Citizen Choice Architect. Behavioural Public Policy, 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2020.5
Sehji, U., & Banerjee, S. (2021). Campaign design to nudge men in public spaces in order to reduce the crime rate against women. In A. Chakrabarti, R. Poovaiah, P. Bokil, & V. Kant (Eds.), Design for tomorrow—volume 3: proceedings of icord 2021 (pp. 339–349). Singapore: Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0084-5_27
Simon, H. (1947). Administrative Behavior. New York: Macmillan Co.
Simon, H. (1957). Models of man: social and rational; mathematical essays on rational human behavior in society setting (p. 312). Wiley.
Sunstein, C. (2013). Nudges vs. Shoves. Harvard Law Review Forum, 127, 210.
Sunstein, C. (2020). Sludge Audits. Behavioural Public Policy, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2019.32
Thaler, R., & Sunstein, C. (2009). Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth and Happiness. Penguin.
Thaler, R. (2018). Nudge, not sludge. Science, 361(6401), 431. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau9241
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124
UN / OHCHR. (2022). Ending violence against women and girls key to tackling global crises and achieving prosperity . Retrieved December 24, 2022, from https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2022/11/ending-violence-against-women-and-girls-key-tackling-global-crises-and
Van Rookhuijzen, M., De Vet, E., & Adriaanse, M. A. (2021). The Effects of Nudges: One-Shot Only? Exploring the Temporal Spillover Effects of a Default Nudge. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 683262. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.683262