The hidden cost of poor choice architecture

There is a hidden cost to poor choice architecture that it’s opponents are not willing to see. It is all the jobs not created, the prosperity – unobtained. It is about the safe and secure future that never will be, and in a very real sense it has been stolen from us.

Critics argue that it’s better to leave people “free” to make the choices they want to. Being on the more Libertarian end of Libertarian Paternalism I am inclined to agree; except there is a big, glaring problem with this. The problem is that there is no such thing as “free”.

Now that is a big claim so let me explain. I am not denying free will, and I am not supporting political authoritarianism. I’m articulating a well understood behavioural principle. B.F. Skinner, in his expansive career, defined a system to understand behaviour that has stood the test of time. Essentially his theory – Radical Behaviourism – explains that behaviour is a product of the environment and past reinforcement (see Behaviour in Context).

Detroit - an example of where a Nudge could have made all the difference

We are never “free” from our environment and so our behaviour is never free from what is going on around us. Choice Architecture follows a similar pattern. When we pick an apple from the produce section we may be making a free choice, but the choice is predicated on a number of factors including (but not limited to) our history with apples, the position of the apples, the relative availability of other items etc… all of which affect our choices.

So back to the criticism. It’s not an issue of letting people be free or not, it’s an issue of arranging the environment one way or another to elicit the best choice in any given situation (what constitutes a “best choice” is still a hot topic).

One way or another our environment is being arranged – Libertarian Paternalists argue that it should be arranged to best serve the individual in any given situation. This leads me back to my earlier point. All the things that could have been, the benefits we could have reaped, all of them are invisible – but very, very real. Imagine how low the crime rate could be, or how moral our business transaction, or anything else you can possible conceptualise – imagine what could have been in a world that embraces the nudge as a way of life.