Nudging and Muddling through

In: Perspectives on public management and governance: PPMG, Band 4, Heft 4, S. 339-345

Abstract

AbstractDespite its grounding in prestigious theories of behavioral science, the findings of both academic and applied behavioral public administration (BPA) have tended to present a rather mixed picture of often contradictory results that appear highly context dependent. And more developed theory and better methods may not do much to remedy the situation. Rather, we should perhaps begin to view BPA through the lens of Charles Lindblom's notion of a science of muddling through. That is, BPA should perhaps be seen not so much as a theory-driven attempt to uncover universal regularities of human thought and behavior, but rather as a method of incremental, limited adjustments—tested by successive randomized controlled trials (RCTs)—that form part of an evolutionary process of trial-and-error aimed at solving applied problems in localized settings. Implications for academic and applied BPA are discussed.