Advertisement

Soft paternalism and subjective well-being: how happiness research could help the paternalist improve individuals’ well-being

  • Martin BinderEmail author
Regular Article

Abstract

Soft paternalists claim to respect individuals’ preferences by trying to nudge them towards actions that would satisfy said preferences if they were suitably informed and debiased. This paper argues that soft paternalists neither respect preferences nor credibly improve individuals’ welfare through their nudges, as these are based on ad hoc judgements of what individuals’ informed preferences would look like. Recourse to an evolutionary economics methodology and empirical research on subjective well-being can solve the problem of establishing individuals’ interests and offers an “ex post” welfare test to find out to what extent revealed preferences are actually distorted or not. Individual welfare should always be based on ex post liking, not “ex ante” wanting, both of which do not necessarily coincide. The (evolutionary) process-view of well-being defended in this paper focuses on a number of important issues regarding the dissociation of wanting and liking and how nudges will be affected by this distinction (including phenomena such as faulty affective forecasting, hedonic adaptation and induced preference change).

Keywords

Subjective well-being Soft paternalism Libertarian paternalism Wanting Liking Ex post 

JEL Classification

D18 D63 I31 D91 

Notes

Acknowledgments

I wish to thank Leonhard K. Lades for helpful discussions and valuable input. Thank you also to Michael Asslaender, Lisa Herzog, Martin Kolmar, Christian Neuhaeuser, Ingo Pies and the other participants at the meeting of the Ausschuss Wirtschaft und Ethik of the Verein fuer Socialpolitik in Zittau 2016. Anonymous referees provided guidance in revising the manuscript, my thanks to them. Errors are my own.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interests

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Arneson RJ (1999) Human flourishing versus desire satisfaction. Soc Philos Policy 16(1):113–142Google Scholar
  2. Bentham J (1789) An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. Hafner, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Berg N, Biele G, Gigerenzer G (2011a) Does consistency predict accuracy of beliefs?: economists surveyed about PSA. MimeoGoogle Scholar
  4. Berg N, Eckel C, Johnson C (2011b) Inconsistency pays?: time-inconsistent subjects and EU violators earn more. MimeoGoogle Scholar
  5. Berridge KC (1999) Pleasure, pain, desire, and dread: hidden core processes of emotion. In: Kahneman et al (1999), pp 525–557Google Scholar
  6. Berridge KC (2009) Wanting and liking: observations from the neuroscience and psychology laboratory. Inquiry 52(4):378–398Google Scholar
  7. Berridge KC, Robinson TE, Aldridge JW (2009) Dissecting components of reward: “liking”, “wanting”, and learning. Curr Opin Pharmacol 9(1):65–73Google Scholar
  8. Beshears J, Choi JJ, Laibson D, Madrian BC (2008) How are preferences revealed? J Public Econ 92(8–9):1787–1794Google Scholar
  9. Binder M (2010) Elements of an evolutionary theory of welfare. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Binder M (2013) Innovativeness and subjective well-being. Soc Indic Res 111 (2):561–578.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-012-0020-1 Google Scholar
  11. Binder M (2014a) A constitutional paradigm is not enough—would sovereign citizens really agree to manipulative nudges?—A reply to Christian Schubert. J Evol Econ 24(5):1115–1120Google Scholar
  12. Binder M (2014b) Should evolutionary economists embrace libertarian paternalism? J Evol Econ 24(3):515–539Google Scholar
  13. Binder M, Broekel T (2012) Happiness no matter the cost? An examination on how efficiently individuals reach their happiness levels. J Happiness Stud 13(4):621–645Google Scholar
  14. Binder M, Lades LK (2015) Autonomy-enhancing paternalism. Kyklos 68 (1):3–27Google Scholar
  15. Bovens L (2009) The ethics of nudge. In: Grüne-Yanoff T, Hansson S (eds) Preference change: approaches from philosophy, economics and psychology. Springer, Berlin, pp 207–220Google Scholar
  16. Brennan G, Lomasky L (1983) Institutional aspects of “merit goods” analysis. FinanzArchiv 41(2):183–206Google Scholar
  17. Buchanan JM (1991) The economics and the ethics of constitutional order. The University of Michigan Press, Ann ArborGoogle Scholar
  18. Cabanac M (1992) Pleasure: the common currency. J Theor Biol 155:173–200Google Scholar
  19. Camerer C, Issacharoff S, Loewenstein GF, O’Donoghue T, Rabin M (2003) Regulation for conservatives: behavioral economics and the case for “asymmetric paternalism”. Univ Pa Law Rev 151:1211–1254Google Scholar
  20. Camerer CF (2006) Wanting, liking, and learning: neuroscience and paternalism. Univ Chic Law Rev 73:87–110Google Scholar
  21. Chai A (2016) Tackling Keynes’ question: a look back on 15 years of Learning To Consume. J Evol EconGoogle Scholar
  22. Choi JJ, Laibson D, Madrian BC, Metrick A (2004) For better or for worse: default effects and 401(k) savings behavior. In: Wise DA (ed) Perspective on the economics of aging, chapter 2. University of Chicago Press, pp 81–125Google Scholar
  23. Christman J (2001) Autonomy in moral and political philosophy. In: Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2011/entries/autonomy-moral/ Accessed 18 Oct 2013
  24. Christman J, Anderson J (2005) Autonomy and the challenges to liberalism. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  25. Conlisk J (1996) Why bounded rationality? J Econ Lit 34(2):669–700Google Scholar
  26. Deci EL, Ryan RM (2000) The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychol Inq 11(4):227–268Google Scholar
  27. Diener E, Seligman MEP (2004) Beyond money - toward an economy of well-being. Psychol Sci Public Interest 5(1):1–31Google Scholar
  28. Dolan P, Peasgood T, White M (2008) Do we really know what makes us happy? A review of the economic literature on the factors associated with subjective well-being. J Econ Psychol 29:94–122Google Scholar
  29. Dolan P, White M (2006) Dynamic well-being: connecting indicators of what people anticipate with indicators of what they experience. Soc Indic Res 75:303–333Google Scholar
  30. Dunn EW, Gilbert DT, Wilson TD (2011) If money doesn’t make you happy, then you probably aren’t spending it right. J Consum Psychol 21:115–125Google Scholar
  31. Dunn EW, Wilson TD, Gilbert DT (2003) Location, location, location: the misprediction of satisfaction in housing lotteries. Personal Soc Psychol Bull 29 (11):1421–1432Google Scholar
  32. Dworkin G (2010) Paternalism. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/paternalism
  33. Easterlin RA (2003) Explaining happiness. Proc Natl Acad Sci 100 (19):11176–11183Google Scholar
  34. Feinberg J (1986) Harm to self. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  35. Frederick S, Loewenstein GF (1999) Hedonic adaptation. In: Kahneman et al (1999), pp 302–329Google Scholar
  36. Frey B, Stutzer A (2014) Economic consequences of mispredicting utility. J Happiness Stud 15(4):937–956Google Scholar
  37. Frey BS, Luechinger S, Stutzer A (2010) The life satisfaction approach to environmental valuation. Ann Rev Resour Econ 2:139–160Google Scholar
  38. Gigerenzer G, Todd PM, the ABC Research Group (1999) Simple heuristics that make us smart. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  39. Gilbert DT (2007) Stumbling on happiness. Harper Perennial, LondonGoogle Scholar
  40. Gilbert DT, Pinel EC, Wilson TD, Blumberg SJ, Wheatley TP (1998) Immune neglect: a source of durability bias in affective forecasting. J Pers Soc Psychol 75(3):617–638Google Scholar
  41. Gilbert DT, Wilson TD (2007) Prospection: experiencing the future. Sci 317:1351–1354Google Scholar
  42. Glaeser EL (2005) Paternalism and psychology. NBER Working Paper No. 11789Google Scholar
  43. Graham C (2009) Happiness around the world. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  44. Graham C (2011) The pursuit of happiness. The Brookings Institution Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  45. Gruber JH, Mullainathan S (2005) Do cigarette taxes make smokers happier? B E J Econ Policy Anal 5(1):1–43Google Scholar
  46. Gruene-Yanoff T (2012) Old wine in new casks: libertarian paternalism still violates liberal principles. Soc Choice Welf 38(4):635–645Google Scholar
  47. Gruene-Yanoff T, Hertwig R (2016) Nudge versus boost: how coherent are policy and theory? Mind Mach 26:149–183Google Scholar
  48. Guala F, Mittone L (2015) A political justification of nudging. Rev Philos Psychol 6(3):385–395Google Scholar
  49. Hammond P (1983) Ex-post optimality as a dynamically consistent objective for collective choice under uncertainty. In: Pattanaik PK, Salles M (eds) Social choice and welfare, chapter 10, pp 175–205. North-Holland, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  50. Hansen PG, Jespersen AM (2013) Nudge and the manipulation of choice - a framework for responsible use of the nudge approach to behaviour change in public policy. European J Risk Regul 1:3–28Google Scholar
  51. Harris R, Olewiler N (1979) The welfare economics of ex post optimality. Economica 46(182):137–147Google Scholar
  52. Hausman DM, McPherson MS (1994) Preference, belief, and welfare. Am Econ Rev 84(2):396–400Google Scholar
  53. Hausman DM, Welch B (2010) Debate: to nudge or not to nudge. J Polit Philos 18(1):123–136Google Scholar
  54. Hsee CK, Hastie R (2006) Decision and experience: why don’t we choose what makes us happy? Trends Cogn Sci 10(1):31–37Google Scholar
  55. Kahneman D (1999) Objective happiness. In: Kahneman et al (1999), pp 3–27Google Scholar
  56. Kahneman D (2003) Maps of bounded rationality: psychology for behavioral economics. Am Econ Rev 93(5):1449–1475Google Scholar
  57. Kahneman D (2011) Thinking fast and slow. Allen Lane, LondonGoogle Scholar
  58. Kahneman D, Diener E, Schwarz N (1999) Well-being: the foundations of hedonic psychology. Russell Sage Foundation, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  59. Kahneman D, Wakker PP, Sarin RK (1997) Back to Bentham? explorations of experienced utility. Q J Econ 112(2):375–405Google Scholar
  60. Kirchgässner G (2017) Soft paternalism, merit goods, and normative individualism. Eur J Law Econ 43(1):125–152Google Scholar
  61. Koeszegi B, Rabin M (2008) Choices, situations, and happiness. J Public Econ 92(8–9):1821–1832Google Scholar
  62. Krueger AB, Schkade D (2008) The reliability of subjective well-being measures. J Public Econ 92:1833–1845Google Scholar
  63. Lades LK (2014) Impulsive consumption and reflexive thought: Nudging ethical consumer behavior. J Econ Psychol 41(0):114–128Google Scholar
  64. Layard R (2005) Happiness - lessons from a new science. Allen Lane, LondonGoogle Scholar
  65. Loewenstein G, Haisley E (2008) The economist as therapist: methodological ramifications of ‘light’ paternalism. To appear. In: Caplin A, Schotter A (eds) Perspectives on the future of economics: positive and normative foundations, volume 1 in the handbook of economic methodologies. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  66. Loewenstein G, O’Donoghue T, Rabin M (2003) Projection bias in predicting future utility. Q J Econ 118(4):1209–1248Google Scholar
  67. Loewenstein GF (1996) Out of control: visceral influences on behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 65(3):272–292Google Scholar
  68. Loewenstein GF, Schkade D (1999) Wouldn’t it be nice? predicting future feelings. In: Kahneman et al (1999), chapter 5, pp 85–105Google Scholar
  69. Madrian BC, Shea DF (2001) The power of suggestion: inertia in 401(k) participation and savings behavior. Q J Econ 116(4):1149–1187Google Scholar
  70. Mill JS (1869) On Liberty. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  71. Mitchell G (2005) Libertarian paternalism is an oxymoron. Northwest Univ Law Rev 99(3):1245–1277Google Scholar
  72. Mitchell TR, Thompson L, Peterson E, Cronk R (1997) Temporal adjustments in the evaluation of events: the ‘rosy view’. J Exp Soc Psychol 33:421–448Google Scholar
  73. Ng Y-K (2003) From preference to happiness: towards a more complete welfare economics. Soc Choice Welf 20:307–350Google Scholar
  74. Odermatt R, Stutzer A (2015) (Mis-)predicted subjective well-being following life events. Soep Papers 787Google Scholar
  75. O’Donoghue T, Rabin M (2003) Studying optimal paternalism, illustrated by a model of sin taxes. Am Econ Rev 93(2):186–191Google Scholar
  76. Oswald AJ, Powdthavee N (2007) Book review feature: two reviews of the challenge of affluence: self-control and well-being in the United States and britain since 1950. Econ J 117(521):F441–F454Google Scholar
  77. Qizilbash M (2011) Sugden’s critique of Sen’s capability approach and the dangers of libertarian paternalism. Int Rev Econ 58(1):21–42Google Scholar
  78. Qizilbash M (2012) Informed desire and the ambitions of libertarian paternalism. Soc Choice Welf 38(4):647–658Google Scholar
  79. Rabin M (1998) Psychology and economics. J Econ Lit 36(1):11–46Google Scholar
  80. Rebonato R (2012) Taking liberties - a critical examination of libertarian paternalism. Palgrave-Macmillan, BasingstokeGoogle Scholar
  81. Rizzo MJ, Whitman DG (2009a) The knowledge problem of the new paternalism. Brigham Young Univ Law Rev 905(4):103–161Google Scholar
  82. Rizzo MJ, Whitman DG (2009b) Little brother is watching you: new paternalism on the slippery slopes. Ariz Law Rev 51(3):685–739Google Scholar
  83. Rosati CS (1995) Persons, perspectives, and full information accounts of the good. Ethics 105(2):296–325Google Scholar
  84. Rothenberg J (1968) Consumer sovereignty. In: Sills D (ed) International encyclopedia of the social sciences, vol III. Macmillan, New York, pp 326–335Google Scholar
  85. Samuelson P (1938) A note on the pure theory of consumer’s behaviour. Economica 5(17):61–71Google Scholar
  86. Schnellenbach J (2012) Nudges and norms: on the political economy of soft paternalism. Eur J Polit Econ 28(2):266–277Google Scholar
  87. Schnellenbach J (2016) A constitutional economics perspective on soft paternalism. Kyklos 69(1):135–156Google Scholar
  88. Schreiber CA, Kahneman D (2000) Determinants of the remembered utility of aversive sounds. J Exp Psychol Gen 129(1):27–42Google Scholar
  89. Schubert C (2012) Is novelty always a good thing? Towards an evolutionary welfare economics. J Evol Econ 22(3):585–619Google Scholar
  90. Schubert C (2014) Evolutionary economics and the case for a constitutional libertarian paternalism—a comment on martin binder, should evolutionary economists embrace libertarian paternalism? J Evol Econ 24(5):1107–1113Google Scholar
  91. Schubert C (2015) Opportunity and preference learning. Econ Philos 31(2):275–295Google Scholar
  92. Schumpeter JA (1942) Capitalism, socialism and democracy. Harper, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  93. Schwarz N, Strack F (1999) Reports of subjective well-being: Judgmental processes and their methodological implications. In: Kahneman et al (1999), chapter 4, pp 61–84Google Scholar
  94. Sobel D (1994) Full information accounts of well-being. Ethics 104(4):784–810Google Scholar
  95. Sugden R (2004) The opportunity criterion: consumer sovereignty without the assumption of coherent preferences. Am Econ Rev 94(4):1014–1033Google Scholar
  96. Sugden R (2008) Why incoherent preferences do not justify paternalism. Constit Polit Econ 19:226–248Google Scholar
  97. Sugden R (2013) The behavioural economist and the social planner: to whom should behavioural welfare economics be addressed? Inquiry 56(5):519–538Google Scholar
  98. Sumner LW (1996) Welfare, happiness and ethics. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  99. Sunstein CR (2013a) Deciding by default. Univ Pa Law Rev 162(1):1–57Google Scholar
  100. Sunstein CR (2013b) The storrs lectures: behavioral economics and paternalism. Yale Law J 122:1826–1899Google Scholar
  101. Sunstein CR (2014) Why nudge? Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  102. Sunstein CR, Reisch LA (2013) Green by default. Kyklos 66(3):398–402Google Scholar
  103. Sunstein CR, Thaler RH (2003) Libertarian paternalism is not an oxymoron. Univ Chic Law Rev 70(4):1159–1202Google Scholar
  104. Thaler R, Sunstein CR (2003) Libertarian paternalism. Am Econ Rev 93(2):175–179Google Scholar
  105. Thaler RH, Sunstein CR (2008) Nudge - improving decisions about health wealth and happiness. Penguin Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  106. Trout JD (2005) Paternalism and cognitive bias. Law Philos 24:393–434Google Scholar
  107. Ubel PA, Loewenstein G, Jepson C (2005) Disability and sunshine: can hedonic predictions be improved by drawing attention to focusing illusions or emotional adaptation? J Exp Psychol Appl 11(2):111–123Google Scholar
  108. Vanberg VJ (2005) Market and state: the perspective of constitutional political economy. J Inst Econ 1(1):23–49Google Scholar
  109. Vanberg VJ (2014) Evolving preferences and welfare economics: the perspective of contitutional political economy. J Econ Stat 234(2 + 3):328–349Google Scholar
  110. Voorhoeve A (2012) A response to Rabin. In: Behavioural public policy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 140–147Google Scholar
  111. Welsch H (2002) Preferences over prosperity and pollution: environmental valuation based on happiness studies. Kyklos 16(11):1227–1244Google Scholar
  112. White MD (2008) Behavioral law and economics: the assault on consent, will, and dignity. new essays on philosophy, politics and economics: integration and common research projects. In: Gaus G, Favor C, Lamont J (eds) Stanford University Press, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1274444
  113. White MD (2013) The manipulation of choice - ethics and libertarian paternalism. Palgrave Macmillan, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  114. Wilson TD, Gilbert DT (2003) Affective forecasting. In: Zanna M (ed) Advances in experimental social psychology, vol 35. Elsevier, New York, pp 345–411Google Scholar
  115. Wilson TD, Gilbert DT (2005) Affective forecasting - knowing what to want. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 14(3):131–134Google Scholar
  116. Witt U (1987) Individualistische Grundlagen der evolutorischen Oekonomik. J.C.B Mohr (Paul Siebeck), TuebingenGoogle Scholar
  117. Witt U (1991) Economics, sociobiology, and behavioral psychology on preferences. J Econ Psychol 12:557–573Google Scholar
  118. Witt U (2001) Learning to consume - a theory of wants and the growth of demand. J Evol Econ 11:23–36Google Scholar
  119. Witt U (2008) What is specific about evolutionary economics? J Evol Econ 18(5):547–575Google Scholar
  120. Witt U, Binder M (2013) Disentangling motivational and experiential aspects of “utility” - a neuroeconomics perspective. J Econ Psychol 36(1):27–40Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bard College BerlinBerlinGermany
  2. 2.Levy Economics Institute of Bard CollegeBlithewood, Bard CollegeNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations