1 thought on “Regulatory Conduct Authority applies behavioural economics to regulators”

  1. Posted 01/04/2014 at 15:16 | Permalink

    What kind of person becomes a regulator? Is it someone who, if there seems to be nothing to be done, is content to do just that — i.e. nothing? Or is it more likely to be someone who is always itching to interfere, who thinks — like Douglas Jay — that ‘the gentleman in Whitehall really does know better’? Only today some bright spark has come up with the idea that it’s not just FIVE pieces of fruit and vegetable per day that is necessary for an ideal diet, but SEVEN pieces. In terms of behavioural economics, I classify this as yet another attempt to make the entire population feel guilty — as with the amount of weekly exercise we all take, the number of weekly ‘units’ of alcohol were allowed (whatever they are), etc. etc. At least, at the moment, all three of these appear to be ‘voluntary’. In many professions instead of such voluntary guidelines, there are compulsory instructions. (I’m thinking of accounting, but there are many other examples in other professions.) One occasionally hears of things like ‘No Smoking’ days; wouldn’t it be wonderful if we could have an occasional ‘No New Regulation’ year!

Comments are closed.