Alan Stanton
Nudging Approval
Click to view enlarged. Or visit the website..
More information emerges about the borough of Haringey's behind-the-scenes dealings with property developers Grainger plc and John McAslan architects.
This is a screen-grab from the Welcome page of the Grainger website supposedly consulting on the re-development of Apex House - currently the Council's Customer Services and Housing office in Tottenham, at the corner of Seven Sisters Road and High Road Tottenham N15.
NOTE: My thanks to our friend and neighbour Martin Ball who pointed out a particular feature. I've edited the screengrab by adding a brown ring to highlight what Martin spotted.
On every one of the five pages of the website, people are invited, by a large green box, to "Subscribe". They can fill-in their name and email address and "Stay up to date with progress".
I'm entirely in favour of local people getting hard accurate information. It would make a refreshing change from the way Haringey Council does "consultation" and public information. That diseased body now seems to prefer putting hurdles in the way of residents who'd like to know what's happening in their borough. Or it "spins" any news as glossy, upbeat PR.
But notice that when I downloaded this, the default when signing-up for information and consultation was a little box which was already ticked. It read:
"I support the redevelopment of Apex House."
Some residents may indeed support Grainger's redevelopment of the site. Some may not. And perhaps others favour redevelopment but not necessarily the "early ideas" of John McAslan + Partners (JMP), their architects.
In fact, this is what the consultation process is supposed to test. The Feedback and next Steps page of the website, acknowledges this. And promises:
"We will be collating all the feedback received on
these plans so that we can incorporate them where
possible into our ongoing designs for the site."
Choice Architecture
Of course, people were free to untick the small box before giving their contact details. So at least they wouldn't be counted in the tally of people supporting Grainger's redevelopment proposals.
Why doesn't an option to untick a box solve the problem? Because there is now considerable academic research showing that people often tend to stick with default choices.
So one way to get them to make a particular "choice" is to present the options in a way which favours the preferred choices of those who frame the questions.
What's happening here is explained in a well known book called Nudge by Richard H. Thaler and Cass R. Sunstein.
They discuss "Choice Architecture" whereby this tendency is often exploited to influence selections and choices which may not be in the interests of individuals or groups of consumers; or perhaps of citizens generally. The book's subtitle is "Improving decisions about health, wealth and happiness" - setting out their aim: not simply to understand what's going on, but to enable people to make better choices.
Grainger's Tickbox
So whose interest is served by Grainger's default tick-box? In my view it's an example of "nudge". There is a purported choice, but for most practical purposes the choosers were "nudged" towards endorsing the "options" already decided by Haringey Council and Grainger, the property developer.
Their choice is to demolish Apex House and replace it with a tall residential tower with retail at street level; together with a few lower buildings - town houses or more likely a block of flats, also crammed onto the site.
On 28 February 2015 Martin Ball and I attended an information/ consultation event on the scheme at the John McAslan + Partners" (JMP) N17 Design Studio. We mentioned our concern about the tickbox to one of the consultation staff. I also completed a response card making the same point.
Nudging Approval
Click to view enlarged. Or visit the website..
More information emerges about the borough of Haringey's behind-the-scenes dealings with property developers Grainger plc and John McAslan architects.
This is a screen-grab from the Welcome page of the Grainger website supposedly consulting on the re-development of Apex House - currently the Council's Customer Services and Housing office in Tottenham, at the corner of Seven Sisters Road and High Road Tottenham N15.
NOTE: My thanks to our friend and neighbour Martin Ball who pointed out a particular feature. I've edited the screengrab by adding a brown ring to highlight what Martin spotted.
On every one of the five pages of the website, people are invited, by a large green box, to "Subscribe". They can fill-in their name and email address and "Stay up to date with progress".
I'm entirely in favour of local people getting hard accurate information. It would make a refreshing change from the way Haringey Council does "consultation" and public information. That diseased body now seems to prefer putting hurdles in the way of residents who'd like to know what's happening in their borough. Or it "spins" any news as glossy, upbeat PR.
But notice that when I downloaded this, the default when signing-up for information and consultation was a little box which was already ticked. It read:
"I support the redevelopment of Apex House."
Some residents may indeed support Grainger's redevelopment of the site. Some may not. And perhaps others favour redevelopment but not necessarily the "early ideas" of John McAslan + Partners (JMP), their architects.
In fact, this is what the consultation process is supposed to test. The Feedback and next Steps page of the website, acknowledges this. And promises:
"We will be collating all the feedback received on
these plans so that we can incorporate them where
possible into our ongoing designs for the site."
Choice Architecture
Of course, people were free to untick the small box before giving their contact details. So at least they wouldn't be counted in the tally of people supporting Grainger's redevelopment proposals.
Why doesn't an option to untick a box solve the problem? Because there is now considerable academic research showing that people often tend to stick with default choices.
So one way to get them to make a particular "choice" is to present the options in a way which favours the preferred choices of those who frame the questions.
What's happening here is explained in a well known book called Nudge by Richard H. Thaler and Cass R. Sunstein.
They discuss "Choice Architecture" whereby this tendency is often exploited to influence selections and choices which may not be in the interests of individuals or groups of consumers; or perhaps of citizens generally. The book's subtitle is "Improving decisions about health, wealth and happiness" - setting out their aim: not simply to understand what's going on, but to enable people to make better choices.
Grainger's Tickbox
So whose interest is served by Grainger's default tick-box? In my view it's an example of "nudge". There is a purported choice, but for most practical purposes the choosers were "nudged" towards endorsing the "options" already decided by Haringey Council and Grainger, the property developer.
Their choice is to demolish Apex House and replace it with a tall residential tower with retail at street level; together with a few lower buildings - town houses or more likely a block of flats, also crammed onto the site.
On 28 February 2015 Martin Ball and I attended an information/ consultation event on the scheme at the John McAslan + Partners" (JMP) N17 Design Studio. We mentioned our concern about the tickbox to one of the consultation staff. I also completed a response card making the same point.