行為主義導向的公共政策研究：以政策工具「推力」為核心的初探

The Direction of Behavioralism in Public Policy Research: A Review on ＂Nudge＂ as a Policy Tool

10.29865/PAP.201812_(67).0001

賴怡樺(Yi-Hua Lai)；林水波(Shoei-Po Lin)；陳敦源(Don-Yun Chen)

公共政策 ； 行為科學 ； 行為經濟學 ； 行為政策學 ； 推力 ； public policy ； behavioral science ； behavioral economics ； behavioral public policy ； nudge

行政暨政策學報

67期（2018 / 12 / 01）

1 - 37

繁體中文

行為經濟學（behavioral economics）崛起自1990年代，促使經濟學研究轉向關注人類行為，近十年來被大量應用於公共政策領域，催生了「行為政策學」（behavioral public policy）。然而，領域的快速竄起，卻萌生出既有知識與發現過於雜亂混淆等問題。本文旨在界定與釐析行為政策學的理論與應用，聚焦於探討該領域當前最核心的政策工具：推力（nudge）。透過文獻檢閱，試圖討論幾個關鍵問題：行為政策學是新玩意或舊把戲？行為政策學從何而來？行為政策學是什麼？如何透過行為政策學「推」出影響「力」？細析「推力」一定正當且有效嗎？行為政策學只是一時之熱？研究發現行為政策學整合了傳統行為學派與行為經濟學的新元素，強調跨領域觀點與實驗法，可用以測試、設計與校準公共政策；其在西方正處於蓬勃發展階段，目前尚無止息的跡象，相對而言，臺灣的公共行政學門對此領域卻仍在草創的階段。推力訴求以效率方式改變政策標的行為，須具備五個要件，有六種常見策略；其可能存在倫理爭議且未必有效，關鍵在於與政策問題的適配。期使本文的初探能推開後續研究之門，促進國內公共政策領域學子乃至政府部門，對於行為政策學有更好的理解與應用，進而提升領域發展與實質的推動成效。

Behavioral economics -arose in the 1990's- criticized the assumptions of rational self-interest in traditional economics and led the economic research to transfer its focus to human behaviors. Those findings have been applied more and more to the field of public policies for decades and facilitated the domain of behavioral public policy. However, it is found that the concepts and findings in the field are too messy and confused due to its rapid development. This study aims to clarify the theories and applications of behavioral public policy, with a focus on the core concept ＂nudge＂. Through the literature review, we try to answer several key questions: Is behavioral public policy a new or an old idea? Where does behavioral public policy come from? What is behavioral public policy? How to nudge? Does nudge always work and valid? Will behavioral public policy just be a temporary fashion? Findings indicate that behavioral public policy integrates traditional behavioral approach and new elements of behavioral economics, and focuses on interdisciplinary aspects and experiments methods. It can be applied to test, design and adjust public policy. The field has been booming in the West, while still in the initial stage in Taiwan comparatively. Nudges can be used to change target behaviors effectively. There are five components and six common strategies of nudges. Nudges might be ethically controversial or ineffective, while the key is the adaptiveness to policy problems. This study can contribute to the clarification of behavioral public policy, and benefit to better understanding and application.

1. 汪曼穎、葉怡玉、黃榮村(2013)。臺灣認知心理學的應用：從認知研究到科技脈絡裡的人性化設計。中華心理學刊，55(3)，381-404。
   連結：
2. Akerlof, G. A.(1976).The Economics of Caste and of the Rat Race and Other Woeful Tales.Quarterly Journal of Economics,XC,599-617.
3. Akerlof, G. A.,Kranton, R. E.(2000).Economics and Identity.Quarterly Journal of Economics,CVX(3),715-753.
4. Akerlof, G. A.,Kranton, R. E.(2001).Identity Economics: How Our Identities Shape Our Work, Wages, and Well-Being.Princeton:Princeton University Press.
5. Akerlof, G. A.,Shiller, R. J.(2015).Phishing for Phools: The Economics of Manipulation and Deception.Princeton, NJ, US:Princeton University Press.
6. Akerlof, G. A.,Shiller, R. J.(2009).Animal Spirits: How Human Psychology Drives the Economy, and Why It Matters for Global Capitalism.Princeton, NJ, US:Princeton University Press.
7. Ambrosi, G. M.(2003).Keynes, Pigou and Cambridge Keynesians: Authenticity and Analytical Perspective in the Keynes-Classics Debate.UK: Houndmills, Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan.
8. Becker, G. S.(1976).The Economic Approach to Human Behavior.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
9. Bhargava, S.,Loewenstein, G.(2015).Behavioral Economics and Public Policy 102: Beyond Nudging.American Economic Review: Papers & Proceedings,105(5),396-401.
10. Camerer, C. F.,Issacharoff, S.,Loewenstein, G.,O'Donoghue, T.,Rabin, M.(2003).Regulation for Conservatives: Behavioral Economics and the Case for 'Asymmetric Paternalism'.University of Pennsylvania Law Review,151(2003),1211-54.
11. Dolan, P.,Hallsworth, M.,Halpern, D.,King, D.,Vlaev, I.(2010).MINDSPACE: Influencing Behaviour for Public Policy.London:Institute of Government.
12. Executive Office of the President, National Science and Technology Council(2015).Social and Behavioral Sciences Team 2015 Annual ReportSocial and Behavioral Sciences Team 2015 Annual Report,未出版
13. Gopalan, M.,Pirog, M. A.(2017).Applying Behavioral Insights in Policy Analysis: Recent Trends in the United States.Policy Studies Journal,45(S1),S82-S113.
14. Halpern, D.(2015).Inside the Nudge Unit: How Small Changes Can Make a Big Difference.London, United Kingdom:WH Allen.
15. Hanoch, Y.(ed.),Barnes, A. J.(ed.),Rice, T.(ed.)(2017).Behavioral Economics and Healthy Behaviors: Key Concepts and Current Research.New York:Routledge.
16. House of Lords(2011).Behaviour Change.London:The Stationery Office.
17. Howlett, M.,Fraser, S.(2018).Matching Policy Tools and Their Targets: Beyond Nudges and Utility Maximization in Policy Design.Policy & Politics,46(1),101-124.
18. Howlett, M.,Rayner, J.(2013).Patching vs Packaging in Policy Formulation: Assessing Policy Portfolio Design.Politics and Governance,1(2),170-182.
19. James, O.,Jilke, S. R.,Ryzin, Van(2017).Experiments in Public Management Research: Challenges and Contributions Paperback.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
20. John, P.(2018).Assessing Behavioural Public Policy: New Horizons in Public Policy Series.Cheltenham, UK:Edward Elgar Publishing.
21. Kahneman, D.(2011).Thinking, Fast and Slow.London:Allen Lane.
22. Kahneman, D.,Tversky, A.(1979).Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk.Econometrica,47(2),263-91.
23. Keynes, J. M. 1936. The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. London: Macmillan & Co.
24. Leibenstein, H.(1966).Allocative Efficiency vs. X-Efficiency.American Economic Review,56(3),392-415.
25. Loewenstein, G.,Chater, N.(2017).Putting Nudges in Perspective.Behavioral Public Policy,1(1),26-53.
26. Lourenco, J. S.,Ciriolo, E.,Almeida, S. R.,Troussard, X.(2016).Behavioural Insights Applied to Policy.Brussels:Joint Research Centre.
27. Mises, L. von. 1949. Human Action: A Treatise on Economics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
28. Norman, D. A.(1988).The Design of Everyday Things.New York:Doubleday.
29. OECD. 2015. Behavioural Insights and New Approaches to Policy Design: The Views from the Field. from https://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/behavioural-insights-summary-report-2015.pdf. Retrieved May 1, 2018.
30. OECD(2017).Behavioural Insights and Public Policy: Lessons from Around the World.
31. Oliver, A.(2013).Behavioural Public Policy.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
32. Oliver, A.(2017).The Origins of Behavioural Public Policy.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
33. Pottenger, M., and A. Martin. 2014. “Insights into Behavioural Public Policy.” from http://bespoke-production.s3.amazonaws.com/msog/assets/57/a90860db6a11e598e6ffb0dfa6cc94/MSG_Behavioural_Public_Policy_6-14.pdf. Retrieved May 2, 2018.
34. Purnell, J. Q.,Thompson, T.,Kreuter, M. W.,McBride, T. D.(2015).Behavioral Economics: 'Nudging' Underserved Populations to Be Screened for Cancer.Public Health Research, Practice, and Policy,12(6),1-9.
35. Riedl, A.(2010).Behavioral and Experimental Economics Do Inform Public Policy.Public Finance Analysis,66(1),65-95.
36. Samuelson, W.,Zeckhauser, R.(1988).Status Quo Bias in Decision Making.Journal of Risk and Uncertainty,1,7-59.
37. Shafir, E.(ed.)(2013).The Behavioral Foundations of Public Policy.Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.
38. Simon, H. A.(1957).Models of Man: Social and Rational.Oxford, UK:Wiley.
39. Simon, H. A.(1955).A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice.Quarterly Journal of Economics,69(1),99-118.
40. Sunstein, C. R.(2016).The Ethics of Influence: Government in the Age of Behavioral Science.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
41. Sunstein, C. R.(2017).Default Rules Are Better Than Active Choosing (Often).Trends in Cognitive Sciences,21(8),600-606.
42. Sunstein, C. R.(2017).Nudges That Fail.Behavioral Public Policy,1(1),4-25.
43. Thaler, R. H.(2015).Misbehaving: The Making of Behavioural Economics.New York, NY:W. W. Norton & Company..
44. Thaler, R. H.(2016).Behavioral Economics: Past, Present and Future.American Economic Review,106(7),1577-1600.
45. Thaler, R. H.(1994).The Winner's Curse: Paradoxes and Anomalies of Economic Life.New York:The Free Press.
46. Thaler, R. H.(1980).Does the Stock Market Overreact?.The Journal of Finance,40(3),793-805.
47. Thaler, R. H.(1980).Toward a Positive Theory of Consumer Choice.Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization,1(1),39-60.
48. Thaler, R. H.,Sunstein, C.(2008).Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth and Happiness.New Haven, CT:Yale University Press.
49. Tversky, A.(1972).Elimination by Aspects: A Theory of Choice.Psychological Review,79(4),281-299.
50. Tversky, A.,Kahneman, D.(1974).Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.Science,185(4157),1124-1131.
51. Veblen, T. 1899. The Theory of the Leisure Class. New York: Penguin Books.
52. Weimer, D. L.(2018).When are Nudges Desirable? Benefit Validity When Preferences Aren't Consistently Revealed.Public Administration Review (PAR) Symposium on behavioral approaches to bureaucratic red tape and administrative burden,Washington, DC.:
53. Weimer, D. L.(2017).Behavioral Economics for Cost-Benefit Analysis: Benefit Validity When Sovereign Consumers Seem to Make Mistakes.New York, N.Y.:Cambridge University Press.
54. 吳宓穎(2017)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。臺灣大學科際整合法律學研究所。
55. 汪丁丁(2017)。行為社會科學基本問題。上海:上海人民出版社。
56. 松村真宏(2018)。仕掛學：使人躍躍欲試、一舉兩得的好設計。臺北市:遠流。
57. 常鑫、殷紅海(2003)。Daniel Kahneman 與行為經濟學。心理科學進展，11(3)，256-261。
58. 陳怡璇(2012)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。臺中科技大學說媒體設計系。
59. 陳恭平(2009)。人非聖賢：簡介行為經濟學。人文與社會科學簡訊，10(4)，16-28。
60. 陳敦源、賴怡樺(2018)。國民健康署委託研究計畫國民健康署委託研究計畫,未出版
61. 趙駿(2011)。行為法經濟學在中國的挑戰與機遇。浙江學刊，5，176-181。
62. 劉汗曦(2009)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立政治大學法律學研究所。
63. 薛求知、黃佩蓉、魯直、張曉蓉(2005)。行為經濟學：理論與應用。臺北市:智勝文化。
64. 謝明瑞(2007)。行為經濟學理論的探討。商學學報，15，1-46。
65. 羅清俊(2015)。公共政策：現象觀察與實務操作。臺北市:揚智。

1. 黃心怡,陳敦源(2023)。人工智慧協作下的公共行政研究：對公部門組織議題的多層次反思。政治科學論叢，96，139-178。
2. 賴怡樺,陳敦源,陳志道,周繡玲,周燕玉,吳建遠,王英偉(2020)。行為主義導向公共政策的設計與應用：以提升大腸癌篩檢率的推力工具為例之探究。東吳政治學報，38(3)，65-119。
3. 劉俐良,陳敦源,許弘毅(2020)。邁向循證基礎的公共政策宣導：一個以臺灣酒駕防制廣告類型有效性為核心的準實驗研究。政治科學論叢，84，71-111。
4. 石振國(2021).「推力」政策工具的倫理省思.文官制度季刊,13(2),33-64.
5. 王保鍵(2020)。初探臺灣離島發展之法律框架再造：英國離島（蘇格蘭）法的啟發。文官制度季刊，12(4)，33-60。
6. 張四明(2020)。臺灣 2020 年新冠肺炎防疫大作戰之啟示：政策工具觀點分析。文官制度季刊，12(4)，1-32。
7. (2024)。不尊重專業vs.不懂政治：循證政策的政治觀點。公共行政學報，66，139-148。
8. (2024)。個人資料授權在知情同意機制的優化研究。行政暨政策學報，78，67-93。