IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/diw/diwvjh/78-3-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Behavioral Economics: eine neue Grundlage für die Verbraucherpolitik?

Author

Listed:
  • Lucia A. Reisch
  • Andreas Oehler

Abstract

Consumer policy analysis and practice is largely embedded in the economic paradigm of neoclassical economics and its more recent forms (institutional economics, economics of information). However, there is increasing evidence that consumers not only fail to make optimal choices because of asymmetric information or suboptimal institutions, but that even well-informed, numerate and literate consumers exhibit systematic departures from rational behavior - making use of heuristics and being subject to biases. The homo oeconomicus is a theoretical archetype not found in real life, even though it is the basis for much demand-side regulation. By relying on experimental empirical research, behavioral economics may provide practical help in developing policies designed to affect consumer behavior. The paper discusses potentials and pitfalls for behavioral economics to be the base of a more effective consumer policy. Efforts in this direction undertaken by consumer policy actors worldwide (OECD, Australia, Great Britain, the German State of Baden-Württemberg) are sketched. Bis heute stellt das Paradigma der Neoklassik und ihrer neueren Formen (Institutionenökonomik, Informationsökonomik) die wichtigste theoretische Grundlage der Verbraucherpolitik dar. Heute sucht diese jedoch nach neuen, empirisch basierten Konzepten für ihre strategische Ausrichtung. Eine vielversprechende Entwicklung hat sich in jüngerer Zeit mit der Verhaltensökonomie (Behavioral Economics) ergeben. So interessieren sich das Committee on Consumer Policy der OECD, die Europäische Kommission sowie verschiedene Länder (Australien, Großbritannien, Baden- Württemberg) zunehmend für den Beitrag, den die Behavioral Economics für die Verbraucherpolitik leisten kann. Diese Forschungsrichtung untersucht, wie Menschen wirtschaftlich agieren. Sie verlässt die Modellannahme des rationalen homo oeconomicus und untersucht "Verhaltensanomalien", die das menschliche (Markt-)Verhalten prägen. Die Methoden der Behavioral Economics sind meist empirisch, häufi g experimentell. Eine Reihe von Verhaltenstendenzen, Entscheidungsregeln und "kognitiven Irrtümern" ("heuristics and biases") sind mittlerweile empirisch gut belegt. Der Beitrag untersucht, inwieweit sich die Erkenntnisse der Verhaltensökonomik als konzeptionelle Grundlage für Verbraucherpolitik eignen. Internationale Initiativen in diese Richtung werden skizziert.

Suggested Citation

  • Lucia A. Reisch & Andreas Oehler, 2009. "Behavioral Economics: eine neue Grundlage für die Verbraucherpolitik?," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 78(3), pages 30-43.
    • Handle: RePEc:diw:diwvjh:78-3-2
    DOI: 10.3790/vjh.78.3.30
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.3790/vjh.78.3.30
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3790/vjh.78.3.30?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cornelissen, Gert & Pandelaere, Mario & Warlop, Luk & Dewitte, Siegfried, 2008. "Positive cueing: Promoting sustainable consumer behavior by cueing common environmental behaviors as environmental," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 46-55.
    2. David Hirshleifer, 2008. "Psychological Bias as a Driver of Financial Regulation," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 14(5), pages 856-874, November.
    3. Waldo Tapia & Juan Yermo, 2007. "Implications of Behavioural Economics for Mandatory Individual Account Pension Systems," OECD Working Papers on Insurance and Private Pensions 11, OECD Publishing.
    4. Howard Beales, 2008. "Consumer Protection and Behavioral Economics: To BE or Not to BE?," CPI Journal, Competition Policy International, vol. 4.
    5. Mark Armstrong, 2008. "Interactions between Competition and Consumer Policy," CPI Journal, Competition Policy International, vol. 4.
    6. Oecd, 2006. "Report on a Roundtable on Demand-side Economics for Consumer Policy," OECD Digital Economy Papers 116, OECD Publishing.
    7. Gerd Gigerenzer & Christoph Engel (ed.), 2006. "Heuristics and the Law," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262072750, December.
    8. Oehler, Andreas, 2004. "Anlegerschutz in einem markt- und intermediärbasierten System: Eine Analyse im Lichte der Neuen Institutionenökonomik, der Theorie der Finanzintermediation und der Behavioral Economics & Finance," Discussion Papers 28, University of Bamberg, Chair of Finance.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Christina Werner & Andreas Oehler, 2009. "Verbraucherbildung und Verbraucherberatung in der Altersvorsorge: ein Überblick über deutsche und britische Initiativen," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 78(3), pages 125-143.
    2. Hans Pitlik & Thomas Url, 2020. "Schätzung der Kosten staatlicher Regularien in der österreichischen Versicherungsbranche," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 65933.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Susan E. Dudley & Zhoudan Xie, 2022. "Nudging the nudger: Toward a choice architecture for regulators," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 261-273, January.
    2. Domingo Gil-Giménez & Gladys Rolo-González & Ernesto Suárez & Gabriel Muinos, 2021. "The Influence of Environmental Self-Identity on the Relationship between Consumer Identities and Frugal Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-15, August.
    3. Michel, Christian, 2017. "Market regulation of voluntary add-on contracts," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 239-268.
    4. Shi, Daqian & Lu, Shan & Fang, Ziwei, 2024. "The effect of executive green human capital on greenwashing," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    5. Sokolovskyi, Dmytro, 2018. "Analysis of dependencies between state tax behavior and macroeconomic indicators," MPRA Paper 86417, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. van Dalen, Hendrik Peter & Henkens, Kene, 2018. "Do people really want freedom of choice? : Assessing preferences of pension holders," Other publications TiSEM 448e8a93-9ded-401f-9da0-7, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    7. Constantinos Antoniou & Emilios C. Galariotis & Daniel Read, 2014. "Ambiguity Aversion, Company Size and the Pricing of Earnings Forecasts," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 20(3), pages 633-651, June.
    8. Saul Lach & José L. Moraga†González, 2017. "Asymmetric Price Effects of Competition," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(4), pages 767-803, December.
    9. Cattaneo, Cristina & D’Adda, Giovanna & Tavoni, Massimo & Bonan, Jacopo, 2019. "Can We Make Social Information Programs More Effective? The Role of Identity and Values," RFF Working Paper Series 19-21, Resources for the Future.
    10. Sharp, Anne & Wheeler, Meagan, 2013. "Reducing householders’ grocery carbon emissions: Carbon literacy and carbon label preferences," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 240-249.
    11. Zhe Zhang & Siyu Peng, 2022. "Licensing Effect in Sustainable Charitable Behaviors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-16, December.
    12. Martin Gelter & Kristoffel Grechenig, 2014. "History of Law and Economics," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2014_05, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    13. Michael Grubb, 2015. "Failing to Choose the Best Price: Theory, Evidence, and Policy," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 47(3), pages 303-340, November.
    14. Kenneth A. Kim & Jungsoo Park, 2010. "Why Do Price Limits Exist in Stock Markets? A Manipulation†Based Explanation," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 16(2), pages 296-318, March.
    15. Kylie J. Gilbey & Sharon Purchase, 2023. "Segmented financial risk tolerances within the standardised initial public offering regulatory environment of the Australian Securities Exchange," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(S1), pages 1447-1475, April.
    16. Noel Struchiner & Ivar R. Hannikainen & Guilherme da F. C. F. de Almeida, 2020. "An experimental guide to vehicles in the park," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(3), pages 312-329, May.
    17. Panzone, Luca A. & Ulph, Alistair & Zizzo, Daniel John & Hilton, Denis & Clear, Adrian, 2021. "The impact of environmental recall and carbon taxation on the carbon footprint of supermarket shopping," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    18. Amanjot Singh, 2022. "COVID‐19 and ESG preferences: Corporate bonds versus equities," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 22(2), pages 298-307, June.
    19. Nofsinger, John R., 2012. "Household behavior and boom/bust cycles," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 161-173.
    20. Christian Michel, 2018. "Contractual structures and consumer misperceptions," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 188-205, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Behavioural economics; consumer policy; libertarian paternalism;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D3 - Microeconomics - - Distribution
    • D18 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Protection
    • G28 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Government Policy and Regulation

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:diw:diwvjh:78-3-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Bibliothek (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/diwbede.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.