Nudge is an approach to public policy that changes the decision-making environment to encourage citizens to make a particular choice. The approach has been eagerly adopted by administrations around the world, with some governments establishing dedicated nudge units to advance their
use. One reason proposed for nudge’s popularity is that it supports evidence-based policy. Nudging seems to be firmly positioned in evidence-based policy rhetoric, and encourages the use of Randomised Control Trials to determine the effectiveness of a policy. There is little empirical
understanding on whether nudge’s association with this rhetoric has contributed to its increasingly widespread application. This research explores how nudge is understood in relation to the evidence-based movement, from the perspective of those designing, developing and implementing
nudge policies. In-depth, qualitative interviews were undertaken with policymakers in Australia. This paper finds policymakers perceive an interconnected relationship between nudging and evidence-based policy, with each providing fertile ground for the growth of the other. Consequences for
scholarship and practice are discussed including implications for what constitutes legitimate evidence in the public service.
The global infrastructure sector is thriving. But community opposition to major projects is also rising. Australian examples demonstrate the policy backflips, reputational pitfalls, and financial costs of project delays and cancellations. Failures to engage communities are surprising, given the widespread adoption of community engagement (CE) principles and the increasing professionalization of CE roles. If acceptance of the need for CE in infrastructure is more widespread than ever, why are we not seeing smoother project delivery, reduced protest, and cost savings? This paradox is the driving force behind the Next Generation Engagement project. This article offers a practitioners’ perspective to introduce the project and present key findings from its 12‐month pilot study aiming to establish a transdisciplinary, industry‐led research agenda for CE in Australia's infrastructure sector. The article contributes to our understanding of CE literature and research codesign. It maps out the top five priority themes for future research to support infrastructure selection, planning and delivery. The research agenda provides guidance for policy, and practice, offering consolidated, research‐based insights for policymakers and practitioners.
Public servants around the world have embraced nudges. Using nudges, public servants can encourage individuals towards a particular choice by changing the way the decision is presented. There are now over 200 institutions applying behavioral insights to public policy, with dedicated behavioral insights teams in countries such as Japan, Singapore, UK, Australia, and Germany. It is so popular that the approach has been described as a "policy movement" and the "default policy option." Advocates argue that by using nudges and behavioral insights, public servants can help people make better decisions. Yet critics from both academia and the public claim that the use of nudges is unethical. It is seen as a
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.