Options to design more ethical and still successful default nudges: a review and recommendations

On the one hand, default nudges are proven to strongly influence behavior. On the other hand, a number of consumer autonomy and welfare concerns have been raised that hinder public policy applications. Both nudge success and ethical concerns depend heavily on the design of defaults. We identify six taxonomic characteristics that matter to the ethical and the nudge success dimension. We review the default nudge literature (N = 61) and review ethical studies to assess both dimensions concerning the taxonomy. When designing a default, a choice architect inevitably makes a decision concerning the characteristics. Among others, the results show three main findings. (1) The initial choice architecture regularly imposes welfare losses and impedes consumer autonomy. Forced active choosing can mitigate both issues. (2) Empirical evidence suggests that transparent defaults are similarly effective as the non-transparent counterparts. (3) The framing of the choice in combination with a choice structuring default leads to greater nudge success and tends to involve the reflective decision-making patterns. Choice architects can trade-off nudge success for legitimacy but a design change may also benefit one without harming the other. We discuss further options of choice architects to legitimize a default.

Data Protection and Competition Law Enforcement in the Digital Economy: Why a Coherent and Consistent Approach is Necessary

This contribution argues that a coherent and consistent interpretation of data protection and competition law is both possible and adequate. To illustrate this need, the ongoing abuse-of-dominance investigation by the French Autorité de la Concurrence against Apple is analysed. Representatives of the online advertising industry lodged a complaint against the introduction of Apple’s “App Tracking Transparency framework”. The latter includes a de facto obstacle to third-party tracking which shuts down advertisers’ access to those precious personal data that can be used for online advertising. With the Apple case in mind and by way of example, this paper argues that the regulation of consent to the processing of personal data under the GDPR serves as a dogmatic link between data protection and competition law, as this legal basis is at the heart of many digital business models. The GDPR provides a normative framework to determine when consent has been “freely given”. This can be a fruitful starting point for a competitive assessment, too, as both legal regimes pursue the objective of protecting consumer autonomy and consumer choice. The paper finishes by finding that its dogmatic approach corresponds to recent developments within competition law legislation and enforcement.

Putting trust into antitrust? Competition policy and data-driven platforms

Anti-competitive notions, it seems, are increasingly informing the critical debate on a data-driven economy organised into scalable digital platforms. Issues of market definitions, how to value personal data on multisided platforms, and how to detect and regulate misuses of dominant positions have become key nomenclature on the battlefield of addressing fairness in our contemporary digital societies. This article looks at the central themes for this special issue on governing trust in European platform societies through the lens of contemporary developments in the field of competition law. Three main questions are addressed: (1) To what extent are the platforms’ own abilities to govern their infrastructures, that is, to be de facto regulators over both human behaviour and market circumstances, a challenge for contemporary competition regulation? (2) In what way is the collection, aggregation, or handling of consumers’ data of relevance for competition? (3) How can the particular European challenges of governing US-based digital platforms more broadly be understood in terms of the relationship between transparency and public trust? Of particular relevance – and challenge – here are the platforms’ abilities to govern their infrastructures, albeit through automated moderation, pricing or scalable data handling. It is argued that this aspect of coded, and possibly autonomously adapting, intra-platform governance, poses significant anti-competitive challenges for supervisory authorities, with possible negative implications for consumer autonomy and wellbeing as well as platform-dependent other companies.

The Role of Consumer Autonomy in Developing Sustainable AI: A Conceptual Framework

Artificial intelligence (AI)-based decision aids are increasingly employed by businesses to assist consumers’ decision-making. Personalized content based on consumers’ data brings benefits for both consumers and businesses, i.e., with regards to more relevant content. However, this practice simultaneously enables increased possibilities for exerting hidden interference and manipulation on consumers, reducing consumer autonomy. We argue that due to this, consumer autonomy represents a resource at the risk of depletion and requiring protection, due to its fundamental significance for a democratic society. By balancing advantages and disadvantages of increased influence by AI, this paper addresses an important research gap and explores the essential challenges related to the use of AI for consumers’ decision-making and autonomy, grounded in extant literature. We offer a constructive, rather than optimistic or pessimistic, outlook on AI. Hereunder, we present propositions suggesting how these problems may be alleviated, and how consumer autonomy may be protected. These propositions constitute the fundament for a framework regarding the development of sustainable AI, in the context of online decision-making. We argue that notions of transparency, complementarity, and privacy regulation are vital for increasing consumer autonomy and promoting sustainable AI. Lastly, the paper offers a definition of sustainable AI within the contextual boundaries of online decision-making. Altogether, we position this paper as a contribution to the discussion of development towards a more socially sustainable and ethical use of AI.

O consumo na hipermodernidade: o superendividamento como consequência da oferta irresponsável do crédito

RESUMOO artigo tem o objetivo analisar a relação entre hipermodernidade e consumo, com ênfase na oferta irresponsável do crédito e no superendividamento. Para tanto, por intermédio de estudo bibliográfico, analisa o problema do desenvolvimento da hipermodernidade com a busca da felicidade associada ao consumo na perspectiva de uma sociedade líquida, além de como a cultura do ter que estimula o superendividamento. Por fim, chega-se o entendimento de que o consumidor tem que ser um elemento protagonista nas relações de consumo com o escopo de garantir a autonomia da vontade no ato negocial.PALAVRAS-CHAVEHipermodernidade. Consumidor. Autonomia da Vontade. Superendividamento. ABSTRACTThe present article aims to analyze the connection between hypermodernity and consumption, with an emphasis on the irresponsible credit supply and over-indebtedness. Therefore, through a bibliographical study, it analyzes the problem of the development of hypermodernity with the search for happiness associated with consumption in the perspective of a liquid society, in addition to how the culture of “owning” stimulates super indebtedness. Finally, it arrives at the understanding that the consumer has to be a protagonist element in consumer relations with the scope of guaranteeing the autonomy of the will in the negotiating act.KEYWORDSHypermodernity. Consumer. Autonomy of Will. Over-indebtedness.

Autonomy as license to operate: Establishing the internal and external conditions of informed choice in marketing

The assumption that consumers voluntarily accept or decline marketing offerings provides the ethical justification that gives marketing as a social system its license to operate. Consumer autonomy is, therefore, the key ethical principle of marketing in capitalistic economies. However, even in domains with extensive regulatory frameworks and advanced market conditions, consumers are often ill-informed or underinformed. The resultant lack of epistemic confidence diminishes consumers’ ability to make informed choices. At the same time, consumers are by default exposed to promotional content designed to persuade them to accept marketing offerings. This threatens personal autonomy. We develop a concept of consumer autonomy which marketing regulations should protect and promote to enhance informed decision-making. We design autonomy to be robust in situations where individuals are exposed to persuasive attempts to influence them to choose a specific course of action. As such, our concept of autonomy is applicable to a range of contexts beyond marketing where it is necessary to balance external influences and individual autonomy.

Injustice in Food-Related Public Health Problems: A Matter of Corporate Responsibility

ABSTRACTThe responsibility of the food and beverage industry for noncommunicable diseases is a controversial topic. Public health scholars identify the food and beverage industry as one of the main contributors to the rise of these diseases. We argue that aside from moral duties like not doing harm and respecting consumer autonomy, the food industry also has a responsibility for addressing the structural injustices involved in food-related health problems. Drawing on the work of Iris Marion Young, this article first shows how food-related public health problems can be understood as structural injustices. Second, it makes clear how the industry is sustaining these health injustices, and that due to this connection, corporate actors share responsibility for addressing food-related health problems. Finally, three criteria (capacity, benefit, and vulnerability) are discussed as grounds for attributing responsibility, allowing for further specification on what taking responsibility for food-related health problems can entail in corporate practice.