Negotiating Neuroliberalism: Changing Behaviours, Values and Beliefs.

There has been a subtle, yet far-reaching, transformation in the way in which the human subject has been conceptualised within academic research and policy agendas in recent years. The growing significance of notions of behaviour change testify to a re-calibration of understandings of subjectivity; with a vision of an inadequate, irrational and fundamentally flawed human subject assuming greater significance. This conception of the attenuated capacities of humans has, moreover, gained increasing purchase within policy discourses in a number of states. While some research has been undertaken on the growing significance of a neuroliberal agenda, it possesses three major gaps, which act as the basis of our research questions. We ask:

1) To what extent is a neurological agenda informing public policy initiatives across the world and to what degree is this agenda being translated and 'stretched' into novel configurations?

We will construct a genealogical account of the emergence of neuroliberalism as a global policy rationale. The first stage will involve a documentary/web-based survey in order to establish a baseline account of the geographic distribution of neuroliberal initiatives. On the basis of this survey, six states will be chosen for further qualitative research in order to establish: the extent to which, and the mechanisms through which, ideas from the 'psy sciences' have informed recent policy initiatives; and the degree to which ideas of behaviour change have been adapted by policy-makers within those states. While we cannot, at this stage, indicate with certainty the states that we will study, we envisage that they will in all likelihood include: the US (as the alleged birthplace of behaviour change interventions); the UK (a state that makes sense given the recent prevalence of behaviour change initiatives); two European states with possibilities here including Denmark (a country with a large welfare state and a strong tradition of state intervention) and France (a country lying outside and sometimes in opposition to Anglo-American politics); India (a state from the global south); and New Zealand (a state that has experimented with and subsequently drawn back from behaviour change initiatives). A total of 35 semi-structured interviews will be conducted with governmental actors. A further 15 interviews will be conducted with key academics in each of the states researched, whose ideas have underpinned these neuroliberal policy experiments.

2) How effective are behaviour change initiatives and what methods are best used to monitor and understand their effectiveness?

We will analyse the effectiveness of behaviour change initiatives and analyse the effectiveness of different evaluative methods - including randomised control trials, online surveys, interviews and focus groups - for elucidating the actual impact that existing behaviour change initiatives have on individuals and groups. This element of the research programme will comprise two main methods; qualitative analysis of the interviews conducted in work strand 1 and a synthetic review of documents produced within each of the six states, which have sought to evaluate the effectiveness of behavioural policies.

3) To what extent is it possible to develop alternative effective and empowering ways of changing behaviours; in ways that move beyond the attenuated vision of subjectivity exhibited by the behaviour change agenda?

We will evaluate the effectiveness of alternative mechanisms for changing behaviours and values. The ethical problems associated with behaviour change strategies necessitate research into the efficacy of other approaches, which engage with the values and beliefs that underpin behaviour. Action research involving 40 participants will investigate a range of alternative initiatives designed to change behaviour and values, including, but not limited to, mindfulness training, connected conversations and behavioural literacy sessions.

Our project is a transformative study of the increasing use of psychological and neurological insights to frame public policy interventions in a large number of states. Moreover, this is a topic of enquiry in which the non-academic impact of academic research has been especially prevalent to date; witnessed most clearly in the use made of key academic texts such as Nudge within public policy and the role played by 'celebrity' academics in popularising notions of behaviour change. As such, we are confident that there is a considerable appetite within public policy circles for additional academic insights concerning the utility of, and challenges associated with, a behaviour change agenda; one that we will be able to exploit as part of our project.The research has the potential to increase the effectiveness of public services and policy, change cultures of service delivery amongst private and third sector organisations and, increase public engagement with research and societal issues.

Who will benefit?

1. Various government departments in the UK but also in at least five other states (potentially the US, Denmark, France, India and New Zealand). These departments will include those responsible for coordinating the promotion of behaviour change techniques within their respective governments, (e.g. the Cabinet Office in the UK and the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the US) as well as other departments that have made use of these insights in constructing policy interventions (e.g. departments of the Environment, Energy, Finance, Health, Local Government).

2. Non-governmental organisations involved in seeking to promote - or resist - changes in behaviour. NGOs increasingly use insights from the psychological sciences to instigate a change in behaviour among individuals and groups (e.g. the role of Sustrans in seeking to re-design streets in ways that are more conducive to pedestrians and cyclists). NGOs are also involved in seeking to draw attention to the potential insidiousness of behaviour change interventions (e.g. the Church in Wales has sought to counter the Welsh Government's proposals of presumed consent for organ donation).

3. The general public is, obviously, being affected in far-reaching ways by this behaviour change agenda but, almost by definition, they could remain largely ignorant of this fact as choice architectures are manipulated in ways unbeknownst to them. The findings of this project will draw attention to behaviour change policies in public debate, primarily in the UK, but also potentially in the other five states that we will study.

How will they benefit?

1. Government departments will benefit from the research since they will develop:
a) more nuanced understanding of how their use of behaviour change insights relates to the use being made of these insights in other states;
b) more detailed comprehension of what kinds of behaviour change interventions work and the most appropriate ways of evaluating the effectiveness of these interventions;
c) awareness of alternative, more ethical, progressive, democratic and potentially effective ways of changing long-term behaviours and values.

2. NGOs will benefit from the research since they will develop:
a) a more detailed appreciation of the potential effectiveness of behaviour change initiatives as a means of addressing their key goals as organisations;
b) greater understanding of the mechanisms used by governments and others to change behaviours, thus arming them with the knowledge and expertise to challenge or amend them.

3. The general public will benefit from the research since they will develop:
a) greater awareness of the increasing role played by choice architectures in shaping the contexts within which they make a range of decisions about their personal welfare;
b) understanding of the alternative mechanisms that may help to change their behaviours, attitudes and underlying values in positive ways.