Using Behavioral Science Insights To Better Serve the American People

Overview

Behavioral Science in Policy

Executive Order 13707, signed by President Barack Obama on September 15, 2015, seeks to integrate insights from behavioral science into federal policymaking. At its core, the order champions the use of behavioral economics and psychology to optimize the design and implementation of government policies. The rationale is to leverage empirical findings regarding decision-making and behavior to improve federal programs' effectiveness and efficiency. This initiative arises from the recognition that traditional policy models may not sufficiently account for how people actually behave, often leading to suboptimal policy outcomes.

Specific Objectives

The Executive Order outlines several specific directives for federal agencies. Agencies are urged to identify policies that might benefit from behavioral insights and to develop strategies for applying these insights to improve public welfare and program cost-effectiveness. The order emphasizes the need for rigorous testing and evaluation, which reflects a broader trend toward evidence-based policymaking. Additionally, agencies are encouraged to recruit behavioral science experts to advance this initiative and to establish stronger ties with the research community.

Applications and Examples

Practical applications envisaged by this order include streamlining access to federal programs, enhancing how information is presented to target audiences, and designing better default options, such as automatic enrollment in retirement savings plans. The broader goal is to deliver improved services to the public, whether by enhancing financial accessibility to college or promoting healthier lifestyle choices. This reflects a public policy strategy that not only seeks efficiency but also aims to support national priorities like public health and climate change mitigation.

Legal and Policy Implications

Regulatory Integration

This Executive Order implies a shift in governmental operations by formalizing the integration of behavioral science into federal policymaking. While it doesn't create statutory changes per se, it encourages regulatory bodies to reassess existing regulations through the lens of behavioral insights. This directive is notably aligned with Executive Order 13563 on improving regulation and regulatory review, suggesting an overarching effort to refine regulatory processes not just for efficiency but for grounded, behavioral-based effectiveness.

Administrative Complexity

Legally, the order falls within the President's purview to direct executive agencies, with the unique aspect of formalizing a relatively new domain of science in policy formation. It poses potential complexities in its implementation, primarily due to the need for agencies to both interpret and apply behavioral insights accurately. This could also necessitate training and potentially restructuring within agencies to foster and accommodate behavioral science applications.

Focus on Evidence-Based Policy

The directive underscores the importance of evidence-based policymaking, embedding a scientific approach into federal administrative practices. This represents a shift from anecdotal or tradition-driven policy decisions to ones empirically backed by behavioral research. By promoting collaborations with the scientific community, the order may pave the way for new methodologies and frameworks within policy-making bodies, ideally leading to more nuanced and empirically anchored decisions.

Who Benefits

Individuals and Families

The primary beneficiaries of Executive Order 13707 are individuals and families who interact with federal programs. The incorporation of behavioral insights is designed to make navigating these programs more intuitive and less cumbersome, thereby increasing accessibility. For instance, streamlining forms and reducing administrative hurdles can facilitate quicker access to benefits like financial aid or healthcare, directly benefiting low-income families and students.

Educational and Employment Opportunities

Students and job seekers are particularly poised to benefit from these changes. By optimizing how educational information and resources are presented, agencies can enhance accessibility to college financial aid and career services. Simplified processes and clear communication can lead to increased participation in educational programs and improved employment outcomes.

Retirees and Savers

Individuals planning for retirement or actively saving benefit from policies like automatic enrollment in retirement savings plans. Behavioral insights support the implementation of "nudge" techniques, which aim to increase savings rates by setting beneficial defaults. Such policies aim to foster long-term financial security and stability among Americans, particularly in uncertain economic climates.

Healthcare Access

Healthcare consumers might also benefit as the order encourages reviewing how benefits and options are presented. Insights into how patients engage with healthcare choices can lead to better-designed programs that promote preventive care and healthier lifestyles. This may lead to improved public health outcomes and potentially lower healthcare costs due to more preventative measures.

Public Wellbeing and Environmental Initiatives

Broader societal benefits include improved public welfare and accelerated transition toward a low-carbon economy. By fostering healthier lifestyle choices and facilitating energy-efficient behaviors, the directive potentially amplifies efforts related to public health improvements and environmental sustainability initiatives.

Who Suffers

Traditional Policy Professionals

The introduction of behavioral science into government policymaking could marginalize professionals who are accustomed to traditional policy analysis frameworks. This shift may lead to a cultural and professional adjustment within government entities, requiring these professionals to adapt to new expectations that prioritize behavioral insights over historical policy approaches.

Administrative Costs and Resource Allocation

Although the order seeks cost efficiencies, the initial implementation might incur substantial administrative costs. Recruiting experts, fostering new partnerships, and conducting rigorous evaluations demand resources, both financial and human, that could strain existing agencies' budgets especially in smaller or resource-constrained departments.

Potential for Misapplied Science

There is a risk that behavioral science could be misapplied or oversimplified, which would lead to unintended consequences or ineffective policy interventions. Agencies inexperienced with the nuances of behavioral science might implement strategies without fully understanding their implications, potentially causing harm or public confusion.

Privacy and Ethical Concerns

The use of behavioral insights may raise ethical concerns, particularly around privacy and autonomy. Policies featuring nudges must consider the balance between guiding behavior and respecting individual choice, avoiding perceived manipulation. This requires careful ethical consideration to prevent infringing on personal freedoms.

Historical Context

Shifting Policy Paradigms

Executive Order 13707 reflects a broader trend of integrating behavioral science into public policy, which gained prominence following the successful application of behavioral insights in different sectors worldwide. The idea of "nudging" individuals towards better decisions emerged as a popular policy tool under the Obama Administration, signifying a shift towards more nuanced government intervention.

Administrative Vision

This order aligns with President Obama's vision of a government that is both efficient and empathetic. By designing policies that genuinely reflect how individuals make decisions, the administration sought to enhance public trust in federal programs and improve their efficacy. The incorporation of behavioral science represents a fusion of scientific rigor with policymaking, indicative of the administration's commitment to innovation.

Nudge Theory in the Limelight

The merging of behavioral science with public policy during Obama's tenure aligns with global movements towards evidence-based policy, particularly notable in the UK with the establishment of the Behavioral Insights Team, also known as the "Nudge Unit." Such international precedents highlight a growing recognition of the role behavioral insights can play in policy efficacy.

Legacy and Influence

While novel at the time, this executive action laid a foundation for subsequent administrations to continue integrating behavioral science into the policy process. It exemplified a modern approach to governance, advocating policies that respond dynamically to insights about human behavior, and set a precedent for future executive initiatives focused on innovation in governmental processes.

Institutional Mechanisms

The formation of teams like the Social and Behavioral Sciences Team (SBST) within the government, as directed by the order, underscores a lasting institutional mechanism established under the Obama administration. This mechanism aims at sustaining the transdisciplinary collaboration between fields like economics and psychology to enrich policy development and implementation.

Potential Controversies or Challenges

Ethical and Autonomy Challenges

The ethical implications of employing behavioral science in policy could provoke controversy. Critics argue that such practices may border on paternalism, potentially infringing on individual autonomy. While "nudges" are designed to steer individuals toward beneficial behaviors, they can be perceived as manipulative, leading to potential public distrust.

Congressional Skepticism

Despite its progressive goals, the influence of behavioral science in shaping policy could face skepticism or pushback from Congress. Lawmakers may question the novelty of its application, budget allocations needed for its implementation, and the evaluation metrics used to gauge its effectiveness. This could lead to contentious debates about its role in public administration and demand rigorous justifications for its continued application.

Evaluative Rigors

The call for rigorous testing and evaluation poses challenges, particularly in ensuring that behavioral strategies are thoughtfully designed and empirically validated before implementation. Missteps might arise if rushed or inadequately vetted strategies fail, risking public skepticism about the approach and tarnishing its potential credibility as a policy tool.

Legal Ambiguities

The order’s reliance on behavioral insights may spark legal scrutiny if perceived as leading to overreach or if conflicting with existing law or regulations. Agencies must navigate the fine line between innovative policy adjustments and adherence to statutory mandates, ensuring that behavioral applications complement rather than complicate existing legal frameworks.

Public Perception and Policy Complexity

Another challenge is the public’s understanding of behavioral policies. These interventions must be transparently communicated to avoid misconceptions about government intentions. Ensuring clarity and public buy-in is crucial, as poorly communicated policies could provoke backlash, undermining the potential successes behavioral insights might offer in refining how public services are delivered.