Häyry Matti, Ahola-Launonen Johanna, Takala Tuija
Aalto University School of Business, PO Box 21210, FI-00076 Aalto, Finland.
Society. 2023 May 12:1-14. doi: 10.1007/s12115-023-00844-x.
Nudging, according to its inventors and defenders, is supposed to provide a non-coercive way of changing human behavior for the better-a freedom-respecting form of "libertarian paternalism." Its original point was to complement coercive modes of influence without any need of justification in liberal frameworks. This article shows, using the example of food-product placement in grocery stores, how this image is deceptive. Although nudging may not restrict the freedom of consumers, nudging by public health authorities do restrict the freedom of shopkeepers in standard liberal senses. Libertarianism cannot justify this coercion, and the creed is best left out of the equation as the ideological ruse that it, in this discussion, is. Other liberal theories can justify the coercion, but on grounds that can also be applied to other methods of public health promotion by subsidies and regulation. This result reaffirms that nudging should be seen to complement, not to replace, those other methods.
根据其发明者和捍卫者的说法,助推旨在提供一种非强制性的方式,将人类行为变得更好——一种尊重自由的“自由意志家长制”形式。其初衷是在自由框架内补充强制性影响方式,而无需任何正当理由。本文以杂货店食品摆放为例,说明这种形象具有欺骗性。虽然助推可能不会限制消费者的自由,但公共卫生当局的助推在标准自由主义意义上确实限制了店主的自由。自由主义无法为这种强制行为辩护,在这场讨论中,这种信条不过是一种意识形态的诡计,最好不要纳入考量。其他自由主义理论可以为这种强制行为辩护,但依据的理由也同样适用于通过补贴和监管进行的其他公共卫生促进方法。这一结果再次证明,助推应被视为对其他方法的补充,而非替代。