Nudge and co-design: complementary or contradictory approaches to policy innovation?

Einfeld, Colette; Blomkamp, Emma

doi:10.1080/01442872.2021.1879036

Cited by 20 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although co‐design approaches are increasingly applied in health care, questions remain regarding its ability to produce gains in health outcomes 26,27 . Little is known from the literature on determining whether co‐design is the most suitable approach to achieve the given project goals, the levels of involvement required to realize the benefits of co‐design or the potential unintended consequences 16,28‐31 . Can we potentially do more harm than good?…”

Section: Unintended Consequences From Co‐designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…26 , 27 Little is known from the literature on determining whether co‐design is the most suitable approach to achieve the given project goals, the levels of involvement required to realize the benefits of co‐design or the potential unintended consequences. 16 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 Can we potentially do more harm than good?…”

Section: Unintended Consequences From Co‐designmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mitigating unintended consequences of co‐design in health care

Shé

Harrison

2021

Health Expectations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Co‐design and associated terms are increasingly being used to facilitate values‐based approaches to health‐care improvement. It is messy and complex, involving diverse actors. Methods We explore the notion that initiatives have outcomes other than initially planned is neither new nor novel but is overlooked when thinking about co‐design. We explore some of the unintended consequences and outline some optimal conditions that can mitigate challenges. Discussion Although co‐design approaches are being applied in health care, questions remain regarding its ability to produce gains in health outcomes. Little is known about determining whether co‐design is the most suitable approach to achieve the given project goals, the levels of involvement required to realize the benefits of co‐design or the potential unintended consequences. There is a risk of further marginalizing or adding burden to under‐represented populations and/or over‐researched populations. Conclusion Undertaking a co‐design approach without the optimal conditions for inclusive involvement by all may not result in an equal partnership or improve health or care quality outcomes. Co‐design requires on‐going reflective discussions and deliberative thinking to remove any power imbalances. However, without adequate resources, a focus on implementation and support from senior leaders, it is a tough ask to achieve. Patient or Public Contribution This viewpoint article was written by two academics who have undertaken a significant amount of PPI and co‐design work with members of the public and patient's right across the health system. Our work guided the focus of this viewpoint as we reflected on our experiences.

show abstract

Section: Unintended Consequences From Co‐designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Unintended Consequences From Co‐designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mitigating unintended consequences of co‐design in health care

Shé

Harrison

2021

Health Expectations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recently, one of the promising ways to impact policy-related decisions is through behavioral interventions, specifically nudges, and boosts ( 49 ). Nudges refer to contextual changes as part of public policy interventions meant to promote a particular choice ( 50 ). Nudges should be considered complements to traditional policy tools rather than substitutes for them ( 51 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Delay discounting of money and health outcomes, and adherence to policy guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic

Krawiec

Mizak

Tagliabue

et al. 2022

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Delay discounting refers to the observation that the subjective value of an outcome decreases as the delay to its receipt increases. It is well-established that steep delay discounting is related to various maladaptive behaviors, including poorer health-related choices. One of the current challenges of public health policies that emerged during the COVID-19 pandemic is to encourage preventive behaviors against infectious diseases. In this study, we aimed to explore possible underpinnings of adherence to COVID-19 related public health policy guidelines such as disinfection, distancing, and masks (DDM). Participants completed monetary and health discounting tasks across two outcome amounts in gain and loss conditions, and they provided self-report measures of adherence to the DDM policy. Contrary to the theoretically plausible prediction that higher discounting rates would be negatively associated with adherence to health-related public policy guidelines, we found no compelling evidence to support such statement. We discuss the potential weaknesses of declarative measurements of attitudes toward COVID-19 and consider using behavioral interventions for influencing discounting rates for complementing and enhancing current policy guidelines.

show abstract

“…Another significant trend that is likely to become increasingly relevant in the public sector is experimental policymaking and governance (Bason and Austin, 2021; Clarke and Craft, 2019; Einfeld and Blomkamp, 2021). PSA scholarship can (and should) make valuable contributions to those discussions as well.…”

Section: Perspectives On Public Sector Accountingmentioning

confidence: 99%

The future of public sector accounting research. A polyphonic debate

Grossi

Steccolini

Adhikari

et al. 2023

QRAM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this polyphonic paper is to report on interdisciplinary discussions on the state-of-the-art and future of public sector accounting research (PSAR). The authors hope to enliven the debates of the past and future developments in terms of context, themes, theories, methods and impacts in the field of PSAR by the exchanges they include here. Design/methodology/approach This polyphonic paper adopts an interdisciplinary approach. It brings into conversation ideas, views and approaches of several scholars on the actual and future developments of PSAR in various contexts, and explores potential implications. Findings This paper has brought together scholars from a plurality of disciplines, research methods and geographical areas, showing at the same time several points of convergence on important future themes (such as accounting as a mean for public, accounting, hybridity and value pluralism) and enabling conditions (accounting capabilities, profession and digitalisation) for PSA scholarship and practice, and the richness of looking at them from a plurality of perspectives. Research limitations/implications Exploring these past and future developments opens up the potential for interesting theoretical insights. A much greater theoretical and practical reconsideration of PSAR will be fostered by the exchanges included here. Originality/value In setting out a future research agenda, this paper fosters theoretical and methodological pluralism in the interdisciplinary research community interested in PSAR in various contexts. The discussion perspectives presented in this paper constitute not only a basis for further research in this relevant accounting area on the role, status and developments of PSAR but also creative potential for practitioners to be more reflective on their practices and also intended and united outcomes of such practices.

show abstract

Nudge and co-design: complementary or contradictory approaches to policy innovation?

Cited by 20 publications

References 47 publications

Mitigating unintended consequences of co‐design in health care

Mitigating unintended consequences of co‐design in health care

Delay discounting of money and health outcomes, and adherence to policy guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic

The future of public sector accounting research. A polyphonic debate

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About