Nudge and co-design: complementary or contradictory approaches to policy innovation?

ABSTRACT

Nudge and co-design are gaining popularity as innovative approaches to solving similar policy problems. Nudge is an approach to public policy that changes the context in which decisions are presented to citizens in order to encourage a particular choice. Co-design uses creative and participatory methods to engage citizens, stakeholders and officials in an iterative process to respond to shared problems. Both nudge and co-design supposedly achieve more effective outcomes, address big societal problems, and, in contrast to traditional policy approaches, consider humans’ actual behaviour in a real-world context. In practice, we see them emerging and even merging together, despite significant tensions and contradictions between them. We critically examine the use of the approaches as policy instruments and consider the instrument constituencies that support them. By comparing and contrasting the two concepts in scholarship for the first time, the article highlights the assumptions underpinning the use of both nudge and co-design, arguing that each approach has its own underlying philosophy and claims on knowledge and authority. We reflect on the implications for policy effectiveness, political trust, and subsequently on government legitimacy.

KEYWORDS:

• Nudge
• co-design
• policy innovation
• instrument constituencies
• policymakers

Acknowledgements

This paper was originally presented at a workshop funded by the Australian Political Studies Association (ASPA) and hosted by The Policy Lab at the University of Melbourne. We are grateful for the opportunity to present the paper and for all those who provided feedback. Colette Einfeld’s work was supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.

Disclosure statement

In accordance with Taylor & Francis policy and my ethical obligation as a researcher, I – Emma Blomkamp – am reporting that I am a consultant whose business may be affected by the research reported in the enclosed paper. The research was developed prior to my current role, when I was fully employed at The University of Melbourne, and where I continue to be an Honorary Fellow.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Colette Einfeld

Colette Einfeld is a Research Associate and PhD Scholar at Crawford School of Public Policy at Australian National University. She is a research and evaluation specialist with over ten years’ experience working with government, industry and not-for-profits. She is a published author and experienced presenter and facilitator. Her PhD research is focused on the use of Nudges and Behavioural Insights in public policy. Other scholarly interests include the use of knowledge, evidence and expertise in public policy.

Emma Blomkamp

Emma Blomkamp is an Honorary Research Fellow at the University of Melbourne and a social innovation consultant. Emma’s research and practice focuses on creative and participatory approaches to the design and evaluation of social systems, policies and services. She holds a PhD in urban cultural policy and has published on public sector innovation, co-design, cultural policy, local governance and evidence-based policy.