Why rules don’t work for some of the population
Excessive regulatory burden causes economic harm and can undermine trust in government. Policymakers wishing to ease this should be more mindful of people’s differing responses to rules, says PhD candidate Ritsart Plantenga in his dissertation.
Governments have been trying to ease regulatory burden and bureaucracy for decades, particularly from an economic perspective. But people have different attitudes towards rules, some being driven by past experiences and emotions. Plantenga researches these psychological aspects of regulatory burden.
Roughly speaking, Plantenga explains, our brains have two information processing systems, which work together closely: an experiential and a rational system. People appear to have a preference for one of the two. If they prefer the experiential system, they mainly rely on past experiences, emotions and intuition. If they prefer the rational system, they use more reason and logic. Plantenga’s PhD research shows that these preferences can be measured and play an important role in our attitude with rules.
Uncertain outcome
Plantenga found that these different preferences cause people to view and experience regulatory burden differently. ‘When faced with regulatory burden, people who prefer the experiential system are more likely to be led by their intuition and emotions. That has an uncertain outcome, which means rules do not always have the desired effect. Governments and policymakers do not take enough account of this. They mainly draw up rules with rational people in mind.’
Negative experiences of regulatory burden can make people less willing to comply with rules. ‘Emotions from the past accumulate; concern becomes anger and anger rage. Then people keep complaining about regulatory burden, which means the rules are not working for some of the population.’
Socio-emotional concerns
How governments could be more considerate of people whose response to rules is driven by experiences and emotions is difficult to say from his research, says Plantenga. ‘There has been over 40 years of research on the rational side of regulatory burden. This is the first study looking at people’s intuitive and emotional responses to rules.’
His research does indicate what policymakers should focus on more. ‘Being more mindful of the socio-emotional concerns. Experiential-focused people often respond without thinking. They are guided by the morality of the group to which they belong. If you fail to consider that in your rulemaking, your regulations will never work. Then you only foster dissatisfaction.’
Text: Tom Janssen
Photo: Pixabay