Can we learn from Nobel Prize-winning economist?

[horizon]

This man has won the Nobel prize for economics - it's interesting stuff:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/ ... ard-thaler

(sorry for always providing a Guardian link but you will find information from other sources).

I'm wondering if the seemingly unbridgeable gap between driving and cycling could be closed somewhat by his approach. For example: car use isn't charged at the point of use, making it cheaper than it appears to use a car. The Cycle to Work scheme though seems to have been successful in encouraging people to invest in bikes. And what about the new dockless bike hire schemes, making cycling completely hassle free?

Any ideas?

[Bonefishblues]

So this man has won the Nobel prize for economics - it's interesting stuff:


Any ideas?

I think you may have re-ignited the "starting a sentence with so" debate

[al_yrpal]

The 'nudge' concept is good but only if if the nudge appears to give a very obvious tangible benefit to an individual. The benefits conferred by cycling do offer some benefits but suffer from many tangible disadvantages - often slower with longer journey times, possibility of getting sweaty, cold or wet, percieved as more dangerous and requiring lots of physical effort. Thats why our local paper is full of boring stories about folk who dont usually cycle making charity cycle rides to raise funds, cycling is generally regarded as a pastime for fitness freaks and nutters. So....in many cases the nudges dont work. Its only when the individual appreciates that they will be doing something for the environment, making themselves fitter and saving money outweighing those so obvious disadvantages that the nudge works. Human beings are generally lazy, avoid discomfort and are often prepared to pay to avoid effort and discomfort after all.

Keep on nudging Horizon!

Al

[horizon]

So this man has won the Nobel prize for economics - it's interesting stuff:


Any ideas?

I think you may have re-ignited the "starting a sentence with so" debate

I thought you were going to ask whether Nobel was necessary on a bicycle . . .

[horizon]

The 'nudge' concept is good but only if if the nudge appears to give a very obvious tangible benefit to an individual. The benefits conferred by cycling do offer some benefits but suffer from many tangible disadvantages - often slower with longer journey times, possibility of getting sweaty, cold or wet, percieved as more dangerous and requiring lots of physical effort.

Absolutely. But for example, one way systems in towns are often UPhill. Or cycle sheds located further away than car parks. Or there is no secure lock-up for your bike + gear. Or the tax allowance for bikes lower than that for cars (why?).

[Bonefishblues]

So this man has won the Nobel prize for economics - it's interesting stuff:


Any ideas?

I think you may have re-ignited the "starting a sentence with so" debate

I thought you were going to ask whether Nobel was necessary on a bicycle . . .

Award yourself a hard-earned groan!

[Stevek76]

If you wander into behavioural studies a little more they tend to classify these interventions into 4 categories:

Hug: Obviously tangible encouragement - e.g. paid more to cycle to work
Nudge: less tangible/subconscious encouragement - I guess better infrastructure etc would come under this.
Shove: less tangible discouragement - congestion naturally provides this, also parking limits, perhaps even reallocation of road space
Smack: Obviously tangible discouragement - Road user charging etc.

Nudges are great, but as the stevenage discussion shows, it's not always enough. A few shoves/smacks are needed also. That doesn't necessarily mean those shoves are unfair. Road user charging is arguably just correctly charging car drivers for impacts on the economy that are currently externalised.