This blog has been shared with us by Rebecca Rubin, a third-year BA Liberal Arts student, following her attendance of the recent UK Government Behavioural Insights Conference at King’s College London. Read on for her summary of the event, and reflections on the role of behavioural science in Policymaking.
On the 8th September, Kings College London hosted the UK Government Behavioural Insights Conference ‘Behavioural Science in the Government: Bringing the Magic Back’. The conference was organised by HM Revenue and Customs Behavioural Insights and Trials Team and other governmental organisations and was supported by the School for Government at King’s College London.
The purpose of the event was to bring academics, practitioners, and behavioural scientists together to explore the question of having their voices heard within government decision making, while sustaining curiosity, and fostering collaboration across disciplines. These themes looked towards answering the broader questions of how to keep behavioural thinking relevant, influential, and innovative, to help encourage others to adopt behavioural tools.
Behavioural science has been present within the government for many years, and gained prominence with the launch of the ‘Nudge Unit’ in the early 2010s. However, in today’s post-COVID-19, AI-driven landscape where insights have been made cheap and available, there is a sense that the ‘magic’ has faded. This has required behavioural scientists to adopt empirical, sceptical and experimental principles that can account for the flawed yet predictable nature of humanity.
The opening presentations by civil service, academic and independent behavioural scientists highlighted the ways in which behavioural science is, or should be, a core asset for government. From encouraging vaccine uptake during the pandemic, to helping citizens decide on organ donation, the potential for behavioural science to make a meaningful impact seems clear. Yet speakers argued that there is still work to be done with behavioural science not fully penetrating many aspects of government decision-making. Perhaps simply ‘bringing back the magic’ shouldn’t be the focus? Do we instead need behavioural thinking to become integrated within both public and private bodies, and build trust in the value of behavioural science? Seeming reliable might be better than appearing magical.
A panel discussion identified key barriers to knowledge exchange between practitioners and policymakers, including differences in timing, levels of trust, and the ways evidence is gathered and used in academia versus policymaking. One solution that was agreed upon was that the relationships between these sectors could be strengthened by using real world data in behavioural science.
How to sustain momentum and integrate behavioural thinking into governmental action was a core topic of the day. Multiple strategies were proposed, including:
- Bringing behavioural experts in earlier to projects
- Behavioural science clinics and training
- ‘Sludge audits’; in-depth assessment of barriers to action within a service
- Greater use of trials to confirm effectiveness
- Demonstrating the cost-effectiveness of behavioural science interventions
Finally, for the closing panel, discussions delved into the future direction of behavioural science, areas in the field that appear the most promising, and gaps that are yet to be solved. The experts concluded that the indispensable nature of behavioural science depends most importantly on finding comfort in uncertainty, enhancing preparedness, and engaging with communities to ensure a stronger future within public policy. Magic or not, behavioural science is here to stay.