Reflecting on the insights from "Behavioral Mechanisms and Public Policy

Design: Preventing Failures in Behavioral Public Policy" by Strassheim, it's clear that
traditional approaches to policymaking often overlook the complexities of human
behavior. A crucial lesson to take away is acknowledging the shortcomings of
assuming rationality when making decisions. People's actions are shaped by various
cognitive prejudices and societal elements, resulting in less-than-ideal results if
ignored during policy development. Integrating behavioral mechanisms into
government programs can address the nuances often overlooked in traditional
policymaking. Therefore, it is crucial to prioritize the inclusion of behavioral economic
principles in public policy design for creating interventions that are better tailored and
more responsive toward people's decision-making behavior.
Interpreting these concepts into the Smoking Cessation and Rehabilitation
program, behavioral economics provides valuable knowledge regarding decision-
making, which can be utilized to advance initiatives for quitting smoking.
Governments could develop more effective cessation programs by comprehending
and utilizing behavioral mechanisms such as:
Default: Implementation of designated Non-smoking areas, such as
government offices, schools, elevators, stairwells stores, medical centers,
public conveyances, public facilities (airports, ship terminals, train, and bus
stations), (1) and places of worship inhibits areas for access and utilization of
the cigarette. This practice capitalizes on individuals' tendency to stick with
the default option.
Nudges: Subtle prompts or nudges could encourage smokers to consider
quitting. Increasing awareness and motivation to quit or seek help for
substance abuse can be achieved by strategically placing visual reminders in
public spaces or healthcare facilities. This prompts reflection on the benefits
of quitting, as well as the consequences of continued use, while also providing
information about available resources.
Incentives: Offering incentives, both monetary and non-monetary, could
motivate smokers to quit. Incentives such as rice and grocery vouchers could
be provided to better curb possible cravings and inculcate the proper mindset
to quit smoking (2). Non-monetary incentives such as prioritized health check-
ups with trained medical doctors and nurses, to address concerns, like how
mental health patients are managed.
Framing: To make quitting smoking more attractive, our municipality promotes
positive messages that highlight the benefits of cessation, such as improved
health and quality of life. Additionally, by offering incentives once smokers
become part of the program, we hope to reinforce this message and inspire
hope among individuals who want to quit. By framing cessation as an
achievable goal with great rewards in store for those who succeed, we aim to
increase motivation levels amongst smokers and ultimately boost their
willingness to give up cigarettes altogether.
Social Norms: By utilizing social norms, it is possible to establish an
encouraging ambiance for individuals attempting to quit smoking. To achieve

MASTER IN PUBLIC MANAGEMENT–HEALTH GOVERNANCE

PUBLICGOVERNANCE AND THE BUREAUCRACY
 this aim, we offer platforms where cured patients can communicate their
triumphs and episodes encountered in the past during similar circumstances.
Normalizing the cessation behavior through emphasizing the victories of ex-
smokers and establishing groups that extend communal support offers crucial
caregiving assistance as well as reinforcement from a public perspective.

To summarize, the application of behavioral mechanisms in municipal efforts

has yielded positive results. Nevertheless, further efforts and strategies are
necessary to refine and customize these methods for future obstacles. In saying so, I
believe it is important to recognize shortcomings and issues that arise with the
application of behavioral mechanisms. While behavioral mechanisms such as public
awareness campaigns, smoking bans, and cessation programs can be effective in
reducing smoking rates, their impact may vary depending on factors such as
population demographics, cultural norms, and socioeconomic status.

While behavioral mechanisms can effectively achieve short-term behavior

change such as controlling tobacco usage, maintaining this progress over a longer
period is challenging due to relapse and social pressures. The key factors for
achieving long-term success are ongoing support, strategies to prevent relapses,
and maintenance programs. However, certain interventions may have unintended
consequences - for instance, warning labels on cigarette packets meant to deter
smoking could lead to defensive reactions or desensitization among smokers while
stigmatizing approaches toward smoking cessation- inducing negative emotions that
hinder motivation (3).

Efforts to modify smoking behavior may be met with resistance or negative

reactions from individuals, especially if they view such interventions as coercive,
intrusive, or paternalistic. This opposition is called reactance and can take the form
of defiance, backlash, or disengagement from cessation endeavors (4). To curb this
reaction and increase involvement in behavioral mechanisms, it's essential to
establish trustworthiness by promoting autonomy and self-efficacy.

Addressing these issues requires a multi-faceted approach that prioritizes

equity, sustainability, and effectiveness in smoking cessation efforts within the
municipality. In conclusion, although the implementation of behavior-based methods
towards municipal endeavors has proven effective outcomes; there's always room
for improvement and flexibility in evolving circumstances. Municipalities can
strengthen the impact of these mechanisms by channeling resources towards
research activities targeted at specific contexts, involving stakeholders' participation
while considering the latest challenges hence endorsing sustainable societies to
thrive optimally.
References
1. Philippine Clean Air Act of 1999, 24 (1999).
2. Municipality of Banaybanay Anti-Smoking Ordinance EO 2016-01
3. Whitman, D. G., & Rizzo, M. J. (2015). The problematic welfare standards of
behavioral paternalism. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 6(3), 409–42
4. Kapsner, A., & Sandfuchs, B. (2015). Nudging as a threat to privacy. Review of
Philosophy and Psychology, 6(3), 455–468

MASTER IN PUBLIC MANAGEMENT–HEALTH GOVERNANCE

PUBLICGOVERNANCE AND THE BUREAUCRACY