The Dark Side of Nudging: The Ethics, Political Economy, and Law of Libertarian Paternalism

Libertarian paternalism, as advanced by Cass Sunstein, is seriously flawed, but not primarily for the reasons that most commentators suggest. Libertarian paternalism and its attendant regulatory implications are too libertarian, not too paternalistic, and as a result are in considerable tension with ‘thick’ conceptions of human dignity. We make four arguments. The first is that there is no justification for a presumption in favor of nudging as a default regulatory strategy, as Sunstein asserts. It is ordinarily less effective than mandates; such mandates rarely offend personal autonomy; and the central reliance on cognitive failures in the nudging program is more likely to offend human dignity than the mandates it seeks to replace. Secondly, we argue that nudging as a regulatory strategy fits both overtly and covertly, often insidiously, into a more general libertarian program of political economy. Thirdly, while we are on the whole more concerned to reject the libertarian than the paternalistic elements of this philosophy, Sunstein’s work, both in Why Nudge?, and earlier, fails to appreciate how nudging may be manipulative if not designed with more care than he acknowledges. Lastly, because of these characteristics, nudging might even be subject to legal challenges that would give us the worst of all possible regulatory worlds: a weak regulatory intervention that is liable to be challenged in the courts by well-resourced interest groups. In such a scenario, and contrary to the ‘common sense’ ethos contended for in Why Nudge?, nudges might not even clear the excessively low bar of doing something rather than nothing. Those seeking to pursue progressive politics, under law, should reject nudging in favor of regulation that is more congruent with principles of legality, more transparent, more effective, more democratic, and allows us more fully to act as moral agents. Such a system may have a place for (some) nudging, but not one that departs significantly from how labeling, warnings and the like already function, and nothing that compares with Sunstein’s apparent ambitions for his new movement.

Global Systemic Risk and International Regulatory Coordination: Squaring Sovereignty and Financial Stability

In recent years much attention has been given to systemic risk and maintaining financial stability. Much of the focus, rightly, has been on market failures and the role of regulation in addressing them. This article looks at the role of domestic policies and government actions as sources of global instability. The global financial system is built upon global markets controlled by national financial and macroeconomic policies. In this context, regulatory asymmetries, diverging policy preferences, and government failures add a further dimension to global systemic risk not present at the national level.
Systemic risk is a result of the interplay between two independent variables: an underlying trigger event, in this analysis a domestic policy measure, and a transmission channel. The solution to systemic risk requires tackling one of these variables. In a domestic setting, the centralization of regulatory power into one single authority makes it easier to balance the delicate equilibrium between enhancing efficiency and reducing instability. However, in a global financial system in which national financial policies serve to maximize economic welfare, regulators will be confronted with difficult policy and legal tradeoffs.
We investigate the role that financial regulation plays in addressing domestic policy failures and in controlling the danger of global financial interdependence. To do so we analyse global financial interconnectedness, and explain its role in transmitting instability; we investigate the political economy dynamics at the origin of regulatory asymmetries and government failures; and we discuss the limits of regulation.

Review of Mark F. Chingono. The State, Violence and Development. The Political Economy of War in Mozambique, 1975–1992.

Book review of: Mark F. Chingono. The State, Violence and Development. The Political Economy of War in Mozambique, 1975–1992. Avebury (Aldershot, Brookfield USA, Hong Kong, Singapore, Sydney), 1996. 291 pp. Foreword by Keith Hart. Tables. Appendix. Selected Bibliography. Index. £42.00. $71.95. Cloth.

Review of Protestant Churches and the Formation of Political Consciousness in Southern Mozambique (1930–1974).

Book review of Protestant Churches and the Formation of Political Consciousness in Southern Mozambique (1930–1974). By TERESA CRUZ E SILVA. Introduction by DAVID HEDGES. Basel: P. Schlettwein Publishing, 2001. Pp. xvii+210. CHF 48; €32 (ISBN 3-908193-09-5).

Psychological interventions for children and young people affected by armed conflict or political violence: a systematic literature review.

Youths exposed to armed conflict have a higher prevalence of mental health and psychosocial difficulties. Diverse interventions exist that aim to ameliorate the effect of armed conflict on the psychological and psychosocial wellbeing of conflict affected youths. However, the evidence base for the effectiveness of these interventions is limited. Using standard review methodology, this review aims to address the effectiveness of psychological interventions employed among this population. The search was performed across four databases and grey literature. Article quality was assessed using the Downs and Black Quality Checklist (1998). Where possible, studies were subjected to meta-analyses. The remaining studies were included in a narrative synthesis. Eight studies concerned non clinical populations, while nine concerned clinical populations. Review findings conclude that Group Trauma Focused-Cognitive Behavioural Therapy is effective for reducing symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety, depression and improving prosocial behaviour among clinical cohorts. The evidence does not suggest that interventions aimed at non clinical groups within this population are effective. Despite high quality studies, further robust trials are required to strengthen the evidence base, as a lack of replication has resulted in a limited evidence base to inform practice.

Political Socialisation

The process of political socialisation (PS) has been classically defined as the “learning of social patterns corresponding to [an individual’s] societal position as mediated through various agencies of society” (Hyman, 1959, p. 25). Distinguishing PS from other types of socialisation (e.g. ethnic, cultural), this definition still serves as the foundation for the majority of empirical research in this area, despite methodological advances and new attention to previously under researched aspects of PS. As it was assumed that PS was relatively stable throughout life, early research focused on analysing this process during early childhood (Merelman, 1986). However, more recent studies found that ideas and attitudes acquired during childhood change through emerging adulthood due to multiple factors, such as personality, maturation and past experiences (“Beyond Political Socialization,” 2014). Therefore, current research has expanded beyond the effects of the classic socialisation agents (i.e., parents, peers, school) to include other relevant factors such as overarching context and individual cognitive development. Yet, the research to date offers a fragmented perspective of the process with heterogeneous results related to PS outcomes (e.g., voting behaviour, political engagement, identities, intergroup attitudes, prejudice, discrimination, etc.). This fact highlights the need for further research from childhood through emerging adulthood that also considers a wider-range of multiple socialisation agents, the over-arching context, and a greater numbers of outcomes related PS processes.

Philosophy and Political Engagement: Reflection in the Public Sphere

Do philosophers have a responsibility to their society that is distinct from their responsibility to it as citizens? This edited volume explores both what type of contribution philosophy can make and what type of reasoning is appropriate when addressing public matters now. These questions are posed by leading international scholars working in the fields of moral and political philosophy. Each contribution also investigates the central issue of how to combine critical, rational analysis with a commitment to politically relevant public engagement. The contributions to this volume analyse issues raised in practical ethics, including abortion, embryology, and assisted suicide. They consider the role of ethical commitment in the philosophical analysis of contemporary political issues, and engage with matters of public policy such as poverty, the arts, meaningful work, as well as the evidence base for policy. They also examine the normative legitimacy of power, including the use of violence.

Waiting for International Political Sociology: A Field Guide to Living In-Between

This paper explores the in-between positionality of International Political Sociology (IPS) and offers a field guide to help scholars, students and thinkers embrace this disposition more energetically. It makes the case for a more balanced transdisciplinarity that attends to the international, the political and the social at the same time and in equal measure. The power of this in-between approach is that it forces thinkers in IPS to constantly look at the horrors of our contemporary world without turning away. Through the ambivalent position of the ‘happy wreck’, the paper explores the need to do something about these horrors (e.g. diagnose, act, intervene) while fully acknowledging that such actions always produce new forms of violence and exclusion. To help thinkers in IPS inhabit this challenging space of inquiry more confidently, the paper makes four suggestions: (i) broadening our emotional responses to the horrors of the world; (ii) resisting resolution through non-cathartic dispositions; (iii) pursuing slow research to contest dominant rhetorics of crisis and emergency; and (iv) re-imagining shared conditions of vulnerability.