Public acceptability of government intervention to change public behavior: The effect of intrusive interventions
The question regarding that governments, to what extent, can intervene to change social approaches about their behavior including various measures that are sensitive to redesign public attitudes, is mostly controversial nowadays. In addition, a fundamental consideration for governments in deciding how to intervene to change public behavior is the attitude of the public towards such interventions. In other words, the clarification of to what extent any interventions are likely to be acceptable is highly considerable to asses and predict the ability of the achievement of states’ policies and functional strategies.
Such a necessity focuses on public attitudes towards a range of policy interventions aimed at changing either health-related issues like tobacco and alcohol use, diet, and physical activity, or educational ones. Destructive effects of disease worldwide including cancers and diabetes or epidemic viruses like Covit19, for example, could be reduced if people changed their behavior. In addition, stopping smoking, reducing alcohol intake and following healthier diets assist them in becoming more physically active. Policy makers, hence, have a variety of means to influence their behavior ranging from the provisions, through to measures that restrict their choice by regulations limiting behavior or restricting the use of particular products. It also may include some encouraging programs to advise teenagers or elderly people to spend more time on a daily sport schedule. Therefore, policy makers are increasingly interested in this approach changing behavior in populations, but the lack of clarity on how best to do, has not been solved yet.
Another field that is accounted as an important matter to intervene considerably is economic issues. A government intervention is requested controversially to achieve economic efficiency. The achievement of economic efficiency is observed when nobody can be made better off without someone else being made worse off. Such efficiency boost prosperity up by ensuring resources allocating and using in the most productive manner possible. Meanwhile, the cultural economic atmosphere should be restructured by the government defining the new border of sovereignty in order to prepare the best facilities and capacities containing welfare, happiness, the improvement of the level of individual and public lifestyle and so on for those who live in its territory.
Last but not least is the government intervention in the field of education . This sector has been justified on various grounds. The private purchase of schooling and especially of higher education, for instance, is beyond the means of many poor families in terms of education and culture. It is likely to change the increasing rate of crime commitment in some third world countries like Iraq and Jordan as mentioned by UN annual report published by CCPCJ (2018). Unemployed persons who desire to play their roles more effectively as a good citizen and to serve their societies as well as they are expected, are persuaded to behave adversely. Obviously they and their family members, therefore, are also affected by poor educational programs, due to the fact that education aims citizens who are proposed to act their roles in societies. This target may not be achieved unless policy makers intervene by a comprehensive, perfect and up-to-date pedagogical system. If not, governments fail to reach the targets recognized as important function of them.
To sum up, the levels of acceptability may critically affect the effectiveness of the intervention. Adversely, governments need to be aware of public attitudes, if they are decided to act in the public interest justifying their own chances of being re-elected. In addition, public acceptability of government interventions is greatest for the least intrusive interventions, which are often the least effective, and for interventions targeting the changing behavior of others. Experimental studies are needed to assess how the presentation of the problem and the benefits of intervention might increase acceptability for those interventions which are more effective but currently less acceptable.