Dr. Pete Lunn:

I will make a couple of points. Yes it can. The appeal to common sense can be effective, especially if it is made in the simplest possible terms. The crucial thing at all times in these collective action problems is that people can see rationale, whether it is a criminal sanction or just a social sanction, and that they can see the behaviour being requested is one that needs to be carried out by all for it to be best for all. If that can be communicated in a simple way, then usually voluntary compliance is sufficient. That is correct.

The Chairman was right to say this issue is linked to his previous question. We know from the behavioural evidence of collective action problems that continued non-compliance erodes the compliance of those who are acting in good faith. We have seen it within this pandemic. When there have been high-profile cases of non-compliance the overall level of public compliance falls. We also find that individual members of society who see others complying less, reduce their own levels of compliance. In a collective action problem, people do respond to what they see around them. This means that if there is no sanction for behaviour and people can genuinely simply get away with it and thumb their nose at everybody else, overall compliance will fall. It will not just be a minority that does not comply. The overall level of societal compliance will fall. In order to support a solution to a collective action problem, there has to be some degree of punishment for those who do not comply. There is a lot of behavioural evidence that would support that. In circumstances where there is, effectively, none, then one really has a problem because compliance can unravel. It becomes a question of what is the appropriate level of sanction when simple appeals to common sense begin to fail.