I will be speaking next at:
The annual International Behavioural Public Policy Conference 2025 at Cambridge University [June 25-26]
Behavioural Transformations 2025 at London School of Economics [June 27-28]
Annual European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists Conference in Leuven [July 1-4]
The annual Advances in Field Experiments 2025 Conference at London School of Economics [September 5-6]
9th Workshop on Experimental Economics for the Environment [September 10-11]
Sustainable Food Systems Symposium [September 16-17]. Keynote Lecture.
FINBEPOL Keynote Lecture. Finnish PMO BI Day [September 20]
BSRIA Briefing 2024 - Sustainable Futures: Redefining Retrofit for Net Zero Living. Keynote Lecture [November 22]
Warwick Economics Department Seminar Series [November 27-28]
Norway Tax Administration and Oslo RCT Brown Bag Seminar [December 4] (online)
WHO Athens Keynote Lecture in Quality of Care Conference [December 10] (online)
Imperial College Business School CEPHI Seminar [January 13, 2025]
Montpellier Behavioural and Experimental Economics Seminar [March 6, 2025]
According to my research...
When people are made to think about nudges, they can use them better.
Working papers
(*before title indicates where I am lead author)
What Nudges You to Take a Vaccine? Understanding Behavioural Drivers of COVID-19 Vaccinations using Large-Scale Experiments in the G-7 Countries (under review in Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine). Joint with Peter John, Andrew Hunter, Peter Loewen, Manu Savani, Brendan Nyhan, John McAndrews, Blake Lee-Whiting and Richard Koenig.
Working Paper available upon request.
Abstract: We present a unique multi-country, two-wave dataset of 42,417 survey responses drawn from nationally representative samples of citizens from the G-7 countries: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, UK, and USA. This data note outlines the motivation and methodology of the survey instrument and describes the measures contained in the dataset. We highlight areas for future research. We fielded an online survey over two waves (January–March and April–May 2022) measuring a range of demographic, social, political, and psychological variables. Samples were nationally representative by age, education, gender, and sub-national region. Each wave included of three experiments (one conjoint and two between-subjects) to facilitate randomised evaluation of behavioural health policies promoting the uptake of COVID-19 booster vaccinations. The dataset has produced two peer-reviewed publications at the time of writing (Banerjee et al, 2024; Koenig et al, 2024). Additional research outputs are currently under preparation. Our dataset combines observational and experimental data on behavioural health policies, offering numerous insights. First, the dataset's extensive size and geographical diversity enables comparative analysis of public health issues involving social, political, and behavioural factors. Second, the dataset is suited to advanced statistical methods that can explore heterogeneity in the uptake of behavioural health policies, such as vaccine nudges. Third, the timing of the data collection, coinciding with the rise of the Omicron variant, provides valuable insights into why some previously vaccinated individuals might hesitate to receive additional doses, potentially improving our understanding of the COVID-19 pandemic and possible responses to pandemics and other public health emergencies in the future.
Kahneman’s insights for climate risks: Lessons from bounded rationality, heuristics and biases (Under review in Environment & Resource Economics). Joint with Wouter Botzen & Louison Thepaut
Working Paper available upon request.
Abstract: Daniel Kahneman’s pioneering research in behavioral economics has profoundly influenced the field of environmental economics, shaping what is now known as behavioral-environmental economics. This paper provides a scoping review of how Kahneman’s theories have been applied by environmental economists to individual decision-making for climate change risks. We focus on deviations from rational behavior that impact climate adaptation decisions, such as loss aversion, the underweighting of low-probability events and the influence of heuristic- driven System 1 thinking over analytical System 2 reasoning. Our review outlines diversity in methodologies, including household surveys and economic experiments, used to analyze actions like investments in climate resilience and the purchase of disaster insurance. We synthesize these findings showing how Kahneman’s legacy explains suboptimal preparedness behaviors and discuss policy strategies derived from these insights, such as risk communication, nudges, and financial incentives for disaster preparedness. We conclude by proposing an agenda for future research to more systematically assess Kahneman’s ideas across various climate risk contexts and to deepen the application of Kahneman’s theories in tackling broader, wicked environmental problems that require changing human behaviors.
Right-wing backing a meat tax? Experimental evidence from Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands. Joint with Meike Morren (Reject and Resubmit from Nature Food).
Working Paper available upon request.
Abstract: Meat consumption and the willingness to reduce it is closely linked to one's political ideology and convictions. Contrary to standard beliefs suggesting that left-leaning individuals are predisposed towards meat reduction policies, more than those in the center or right, we show these political divisions depend on the specifics of the policy and shouldn't be taken as the absolute norm. Using a conjoint experiment involving nationally representative samples from Denmark, Germany, and the Netherlands (N=1,505), we find no significant differences in support for a hypothetical meat-tax policy among participants of varying political ideologies. Specifically, a shift towards the ideological right is only associated with diminished support when the policy includes a direct or indirect revenue recycling mechanism, accounts for the negative impacts of meat production in its costs, and emphasises environmental concerns over health. These disparities in political ideology are further explained by differing levels of Schwartz's human values. Based on our findings, we argue that the politicisation of meat should acknowledge these nuanced differences, as electoral support may not uniformly align across all domains.
A clash of norms? Experimental evaluation of cultural framing in promoting low-carbon diets. Joint with Julien Picard (Revise & Resubmit in npj Climate Action).
Working Paper available upon request.
Abstract: Vegetarian diets can reduce global ecological costs. Yet meat continues to be culturally dominant, especially in the West. Does culture hamper the adoption of vegetarian diets? In an online experiment, we observed the intentions of 2,775 English participants to choose vegetarian food. We causally test if framing food options with culturally familiar names alters the effectiveness of a nudge promoting vegetarianism. Facing culturally familiar food does not change the effect of the nudge. However, exploratory analyses reveal that participants ask for lower monetary compensation for being forced to choose vegetarian food when it is culturally framed. Thus, welfare losses of hard policies, like bans, may be lower when alternative options look familiar.
*Embedding the default in a multiple-choice list increases opting out. Joint with Peter John and Mollie Gerver.
Working Paper available on SSRN: 10.2139/ssrn.4551862
Abstract: Behavioural nudges, such as defaults, improve human welfare by reducing choice overload. But how far should policy-makers go in reducing available choices? Using a preregistered, online survey experiment, we randomly assign 1,518 UK citizens to two versions of the same opt-out default nudge aimed at encouraging charitable donations. In one version, the default was embedded in a list of multiple options, whereas in the other it was presented as a single choice. In both versions, participants could opt-out and choose any preferred donation amount. We find that when the default is embedded in a multiple-choice list, opting out rates and average individual donations are significantly higher compared to the standard single-choice default. Our findings suggest that encouraging active choosing alongside a default can improve agency without necessarily deteriorating behavioural outcomes.
Detect and Reject: Using JavaScript to Remove VPN Users from Survey Research. Joint with Blake Lee-Whiting*, Peter John, Andrew Hunter, Peter Loewen, Manu Savani, Brendan Nyhan, John McAndrews, and Richard Koenig.
Working Paper available upon request.
Abstract: Respondents from around the world are financially incentivized to complete surveys in higher paying markets, and some respondents are even willing to falsify their credentials to do so. We propose a new cost-free method for identifying and excluding non-target respondents who see blank JavaScript-programmed experiments due to VPN usage. Using a dataset of 72,200 respondents in the G-7 countries, we show that 94 respondents (0.13\%) in our entire G-7 sample and 49 respondents (0.49\%) who report being from the United States are likely using virtual private networks (VPNs) to disguise their locations to qualify for surveys outside of their country. These non-target respondents provide low-quality responses, affecting external validity. Simple JavaScript programming can reject this rare type of non-target respondent from surveys administered using Qualtrics.
Ongoing book
Nudge+, a nudge for good thinkers. Joint with Peter John. (Under consideration in Cambridge University Press)