A Behavioural Approach to Public Policy and Its Reflections on Turkey

Abstract

This article aims at offering an analysis of the behavioural public policy approach, which has recently gained prominence for a wide range of policy domains, and its reception in Turkish public policies by drawing on a comprehensive literature survey. The article consists of five sections. The introduction presents the prominent place that the approach occupies in academia and international policy circles. The second section presents the foundations of behavioural economics. The third section explains the fundamentals of the behavioural public policy approach. The fourth section critically assesses its reception in Turkish public policies. The article concludes with the discussion of potential contributions that this approach offers for Turkish public policies. The article argues this approach, on the one hand, challenges the homo economicus assumption and calls for an improved evidence base to inform policy. On the other, its overemphasis on the nudge to individuals risks individualizing responsibility to tackle social problems. The article shows that the approach found a place within the Turkish bureaucracy, started to inform pensions, tobacco control and trade policies, and inspired public sector projects in employment and environmental policies. It also suggests that a critical view in its reception in Turkish public policies is still lacking.

Kamu Yöneti̇mi̇nde Davranişsal Yaklaşim Ve Bi̇rleşi̇k Krallik Davranişsal İçgörüler Eki̇bi̇ Örneği̇

“…Davranışsal iktisat, farklı alanlarda da davranışsal çalışmalara odaklanmayı desteklemiştir. Bu duruma örnek olarak halkla ilişkiler, maliye, finans ve kamu politikası disiplinleri içindeki davranışsal çalışmalar verilebilir (Yılmaz ve Canbazer, 2020: 1829.…”

“…20. yüzyıl, Birleşik Krallık'ın öncülüğünde liberal bir düzenle başlamıştır. Yüzyıl devletin faaliyet alanının çok geniş kapsamlı olmadığı bir durumla başlamışken, savaşla, devrimle, bunalımla ve yeniden savaşla bu liberal dünya düzeni parçalanmış ve yerini çok daha merkezi ve aktif bir devlete bırakmıştır (Fukuyama, 2004: 3) (Yılmaz ve Canbazer, 2020: 1841-1842. Ayrıca şu kaynağa bakılabilir: Kuşseven ve Yıldız (2020).…”