Sent an email to two economics professors in Cambridge and Oxford. Things I wrote in the email had been said here and there but since it was written in a concise format in the email, I post it here too:
People with the same moral values and principles behave differently under different circumstances. Many of these variations are necessary to avoid danger and therefore have been adapted for survival. An environmental input or a nudge can change one’s response. The same can be extended to economic processes where, with different environmental inputs, people with the same moral standards might exhibit varying amounts of integrity, for instance, in trade.
In physics, symmetry refers to mechanisms that protect the structure of the system in a dynamic environment. For instance, by pushing a balloon at one point, it will be reshaped to reach a new equilibrium. In an economic structure, the system should be organized in such a way that, under varying circumstances, structural behavioural nudges push the system toward a new equilibrium. Supply and demand, as an example, is a mechanism that pushes the price toward an equilibrium point. But there should also be behavioural mechanisms built into the system that protect its symmetry. Systemic corruption may very well point to a lack of such mechanisms.
Reputation is an example of behavioural mechanisms to restore balance. However, market failures point to a deficit in this mechanism. In some ways, it even appears to be disconnected from economic processes because reputation damage might not always impose enough costs on firms to persuade them to change their behaviours. The symmetry of the system is not properly functioning here.
Election campaigns are all about social nudges. The most effective nudges are the ones which form social networks. These campaigns harness some sociological phenomena to their advantage. Similar structural nudges can be used in the behavioural economy.
Many important elections will be held around the world in 2024. Election campaigns are required to be transparent and should be run with integrity. Unfortunately, technology provides tools capable of disputing the integrity of the process. On the other hand, technology also provides tools to protect campaigns from such disputes. This makes elections valuable opportunities for sociologists and behavioural economists to design and evaluate different methods with the purpose of building structural social nudges.
I’m contacting you regarding a non-profit online platform where users can create campaigns and events and earn money. This is in contrast to the method where political parties receive funds from organizations and spend it to nudge people to vote for them. This latter method is similar to investing a large sum of money to create a brand and a public image for a product. The former method, however, is based on reputation where the accumulation of the views of the public about a product creates a public image of that product.