Nudging Smokers: The Behavioural Turn of Tobacco Risk Regulation - Essay Example

Nudging By Before purchasing any product, all consumers will first make the purchase decision. The decision to purchase is mainly influenced by different factors, including the quality of the product and the price of the product, among others. Nonetheless, apart from just the underlying product, external influence on the consumer can make them make a purchase decision. In this case, nudging is considered to have a high influence on consumers’ choice. This essay therefore, discusses how nudging affects the healthy lifestyle of the consumer with the consumption of cigarettes and alcohol. According to Thaler & Sunstein (2008, p. 6), “A nudge ... is any aspect of the choice architecture that alters people’s behaviour in a predictable way without forbidding any options or significantly changing their economic incentives. To count as a mere nudge, the intervention must be easy and cheap to avoid. Nudges are not mandates.” On the other hand, Lunn (2014) defines nudging as the process by which peoples’ behaviours are altered in a predictable way without making restrictions on available options or without changing the economic incentives significantly. In another definition, Hausman and Welch (2010, p. 126): “Nudges are ways of influencing choice without limiting the choice set or making alternatives appreciably more costly in terms of time, trouble, social sanctions, and so forth. They are called for because of flaws in individual decision-making, and they work by making use of those flaws.” In this regard therefore, nudging is often used as a tool to influence behaviour, and this unlike laws, is not coercive in nature. Nudging has an important effect on consumer behaviour and thus has been adopted by various businesses and companies in different parts of the world. Since nudging influences the choices that consumers make, it also indirectly affects different aspects of their lives, depending on the kind of products the nudging led them to purchase. In the case of cigarettes and alcohol, the companies that produce these and the retailers that sell them directly to customers practice some form of nudging in order for more consumers of alcohol and cigarettes to make the purchase decision and buy these products. The consumption of alcohol and cigarettes has significant effects on the lifestyle of the users, and mostly negative effects especially when overconsumed. In this case therefore, nudging can be considered to indirectly affect the health lifestyle of consumers of the consumers of cigarettes and alcohol. According to Haug & Busch (2014), nudging can be considered in a broad perspective, ranging from government policy to the design of consumer products and services. Thaler & Sunstein (2008) argued that the government institutions and businesses should use nudging as a tool of helping the consumers make better decisions. The basis of this suggestion is that people will not always make decisions that serve their best interests or the best interests of others, hence nudging can be used to help people make better decisions that will serve their best interests. Although Thaler & Sunstein (2008) and others consider nudging as involving people making good choices, Saghai (2003) notes that this term is not exclusively used in this kind of manner, and there is need to make a distinction between nudging and libertarian paternalism. Whereas libertarian paternalism is a political outlook, nudging encompasses a variety of realms where the main goal of the nudger is to promote their own best interests. This is evident in the various consumer marketing strategies that companies adopt and the store layout of most retailers. Thus, from a broader perspective, nudging can have both negative and positive effects on the health lifestyles of consumers of cigarettes and alcohol. With regard to these consumers, nudging can be viewed from the side of government policy and intervention of non-governmental organizations as well as health-focused organizations, and the nudging from companies and businesses that encourage consumers to purchase more of these products. The political outlook of libertarian paternalism will have positive influence on healthy lifestyles of consumers. Through policy, the governments of most countries today consider health as a public policy problem. In this regard, governments have adopted various policy options including shoving, assisted nudging and pure nudging in order to address problems related to health in their countries. The government adopts shoves in various situations related to health and this is mainly through regulatory intervention and fiscal intervention (Australian Government n.d). For instance, with regard to regulatory intervention, the government eliminates choice, such that school children and all under 18 year olds are not legally allowed to purchase or consume alcohol and cigarettes. Additionally, most governments have banned smoking in public areas in order to protect the non-smokers (Alemanno n.d). On the other hand, fiscal intervention by governments is mainly in the form of increasing prices and taxes, including excise on cigarettes and alcohol in order to reduce the quantity demanded. Through the libertarian paternalism, governments may adopt assisted nudges, and this includes regulating companies to nudge its customers (Australian Government n.d). For instance, supermarkets are regulated to alter how goods are placed in the store, including the positioning of alcohol. In some countries, supermarkets do not sell alcohol and cigarettes. The government also regulates manufacturers to disclose the nutritional information of foods to customers (Australian Government n.d). In the case of cigarettes and alcohol, on their packaging, it is made clear to the consumers that excessive consumption of alcohol is harmful to their health and smoking kills. This may thus, influence a consumer to make an informed choice before overindulging. Governments also through libertarian paternalism adopt pure nudges in order to influence the health lifestyle of consumers. This is mostly through persuasion and direct government-to-consumer policy (Australian Government n.d). Persuasion is achieved through for example harnessing of authoritative personalities to influence positive behaviour. The government can hire general practitioners to persuade young people in public colleges and universities to drink less alcohol and avoid smoking cigarettes. This may therefore, help people to make good purchase decisions and inculcate positive behaviour in them which will have a positive influence on their health lifestyles as far as alcohol and cigarette consumption is concerned. Overall, in the case of libertarian paternalism, there is no economic motivation on the side of the government in wanting people to lead healthy lifestyles and reduce or eliminate their consumption of alcohol and cigarette smoking. Most businesses today apply behavioural economics to their marketing strategies in order to increase sales. Nudging is an important concept in behavioural economics, thus evident in most businesses and companies. In nudging, the consumer behaviour is considered as not always rational but sometimes unconscious and automated (Solomon, Russell-Bennett & Previte 2012). Nudging contributes to the influencing of choices that consumers make by stimulating a specific product of choice in a non-coercive manner by making changes to the surroundings in which the choices are made, among other approaches. Basically, nudging produces a positive reinforcement leading to non-forced compliance of customers to make a purchase decision. For example, directing visual attention towards a desired choice, making the desired choice easier to make than others or unconsciously increasing the appetite for a specific product are some of the ways through which a customer is made to reach a purchase decision. An important aspect of nagging however is that the customers are free to make their own final choice without any form of coercion from an external party. Overall, as compared to libertarian paternalism, nudging is considered by economists to be more effective than the use of direct legislation, direct enforcement and direct instruction. This is mainly because while libertarian paternalism adopts mandatory measures for consumers, nudging on the other hand leaves the final decision for the consumer to make. However, nudging will mostly favour companies and not the consumers. In the case of cigarettes and alcohol, the nudgers will compel customers to buy these products yet they are harmful to the customers’ health. This sort of nudging therefore will have a negative impact on the healthy lifestyle of customers. Nudging by businesses is known to result in impulse buying on the side of the customer and may make customers to spend more than they had planned for. This leads customers to undergo extra expenses that they were not ready for. Alcohol and cigarettes can be considered to fall under the shopping category that is characterised by impulse buying. These products are not basic necessities, thus people may buy them to pleasure, especially those that are addicted to the consumption of these. Impulse buying is an important concept within market and psychology and has thus been an area of research in these fields. In the United States for example, statistics indicate that impulse buying accounts for approximately 62 percent of sales in all supermarkets (Chapman & Ogden 2012). For this reason therefore, it becomes apparent that nudging leads to impulse buying, and impulse buying in return increases the sales of retailers or businesses, thus more profits. In this case therefore, nudgers in businesses are shown to be economically motivated to nudge, as they know that the outcome of their nudging is a boost in their sales and profits. In this regard, nudging is only beneficial to the businesses or companies and not consumers (Hausmann & Welch 2010). Nudging that is beneficial to businesses or companies and detrimental to consumers should be shunned. The nudgers will pocket profits while consumers will end up spending out of their budget and make unhealthy purchase decisions that might impact their health lifestyles detrimentally, including purchase of cigarettes and alcohol and overindulgence in these. In order to address this situation therefore, companies should desist from nudging customers and instead let customers make their own purchase decision without any conscious or intended influence from the external environment. In most companies, salespeople are known to employ nudging by sending out indirect suggestions to unsuspecting customers. These salespeople should therefore, stop giving indirect suggestions to customers and let the customers make their purchase decisions without their influence (Haug & Busch 2014). Enhancing positive reinforcement to customers is advisable; however, it is better to let customers make their own purchase decisions. Nudging by businesses only influences the purchasing decision of customers, and may make them engage in impulse buying and experience additional expenses that they had not budgeted for. This way, nudging becomes only beneficial to the businesses and companies and detrimental to the customers. In return, this may reflect negatively on the image of the companies and businesses that nudge. Nudging leads to unfairness on the side of the customer while the nudgers benefit through increased sales and profits. This in some way comes out as an unethical business practice on the side of the nudgers. This portrays the nudgers as selfish and not considerate of the needs of the customers, especially the unplanned expenses that the customers might experience because of nudging, especially in these harsh economic times (Hansen & Jespersen 2013). In conclusion, this essay has addressed nudging from the broader perspective including the political outlook (libertarian paternalism) and nudging by businesses. This has shown that government nudging is not motivated by any economic factors. In addition, government nudging is most of the times beneficial to consumers, especially in cases where the health of consumers is concerned, such as cigarette smoking and alcohol consumption. Government nudging also influences consumers and product manufacturers directly. On the other hand nudging by businesses and companies is most of the time motivated by various economic gains, especially increase in sales and profits. This kind of nudging is detrimental to customers in different ways. First, this results in impulse buying and causes customers to incur more expenses that they had not planned for. With regard to health lifestyles of customers, nudging by businesses impacts this adversely. The businesses are interested in making sales, thus will nudge customers to purchase even unhealthy products including alcohol and cigarettes without considering the effects that such products have on the health of customers. Therefore, nudging is generally useful and beneficial to companies and businesses but in different ways detrimental to customers. Although businesses and companies may need to nudge in order to make sales, it is important for them to consider ethical nudging as opposed to aggressive nudging. Works Cited Alemanno, A n.d, “Nudging Smokers: The Behavioural Turn of Tobacco Risk Regulation,” Accessed from http://regulation.upf.edu/exeter-12-papers/Paper%20123%20-%20Alemanno%202012%20-%20Nudging%20smokers.pdf , 19 June 2015. Australian Government, Department of Finance and Deregulation n.d, “Influencing Consumer Behaviour: Improving Regulatory Design,” Accessed from https://www.dpmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/publications/Influencing_consumer_behaviour.pdf, 19 June 2015. Chapman, K. & Ogden, J 2012, “Nudging Customers toward Healthier Choices: An Intervention in the University Canteen,” Journal of Food Research, 1 (2): 13-21. Hansen, P.G., & Jespersen, A.M 2013, Nudge and the manipulation of choice: A framework for the responsible use of the nudge approach to behaviour change in public policy. The European Journal of Risk Regulation, 4(1), 3-28. Haug, A. & Busch, J 2014, “A Framework of Ethical Nudges in the Design of Consumer Goods,” PDF. Hausmann, D., & Welch, B 2010, Debate: To nudge or not to nudge. Journal of Political Philosophy, 18(1), 123-136. Lunn, P 2014, “Regulatory Policy and Behavioural Economics,” New York, OECD Publishing. Saghai, Y 2013, Salvaging the concept of nudge. Journal of Medical Ethics, 39(8), 487-493 Solomon, M., Russell-Bennett, R. & Previte, J 2012, “Consumer Behaviour;” London, Pearson Higher Education. Thaler, R., & Sunstein, C 2008, Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. Yale, CN: Yale University Press. Read More