Framing Choice Architectures

  • Marcelo Corrales CompagnucciEmail author
Part of the Perspectives in Law, Business and Innovation book series (PLBI)


This chapter is about cloud architectures, freedom of choice, and the legitimate scope of cloud brokers in softly nudging end-users and cloud providers—as a new form of soft paternalism—that can help them make better decisions without coercing or neglecting their choices. I attempt to examine these issues by taking into account the recent theories within behavioral law and economics, which are steadily on the rise and increasingly relevant as a point of reference in policy-making and regulation over the past decade. In this regard, behavioral economics offers a normative framework, which helps us better understand the pitfalls of the decision-making process.


  1. Abbots E, Lavis A (eds) (2016) Why we eat, how we eat: contemporary encounters between foods and bodies. Routledge, London, p 155Google Scholar
  2. Abraham R, Aier S, Winter R (2012) Two speeds of EAM-A dynamic capabilities perspective. In: Aier S et al (eds) Trends in enterprise architecture research and practice-driven research on enterprise transformation, 7th workshop, TEAR 2012, and 5th working conference, PRET 2012, held at the open group conference 2012 Barcelona, Spain, October 2012, Proceedings. Springer, Berlin, p 116Google Scholar
  3. Angner E (2016) A course in behavioral economics, 2nd edn. MacMillan Education Palgrave, London, p 264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anger E, Loewenstein G (2016) Behavioral economics, Elsevier’s handbook of the philosophy of science, vol 5. Accessed 10 May 2019
  5. Avineri E (2014) Nudging safer road behaviors. Accessed 10 May 2019
  6. Ben-Porath S (2010) Tough choices: structured paternalism and the landscape of choice. Princeton University Press, Princeton, p 11Google Scholar
  7. Berman D (2012) So, what’s your algorithm? Wall Str J, Business Technology. Accessed May 10 2019
  8. Biddle S, Mutrie N, Gorely T (2015) Psychology of physical activity: determinants, well-being and interventions, 3rd edn. Routledge, London, p 377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bishop M (2009) Essential economics: an A to Z guide, The Economist, 2nd edn. Bloomberg Press, New York, p 296Google Scholar
  10. Bloomberg J (2013) The agile architecture revolution: how cloud computing, rest-based SOA, and mobile computing are changing enterprise IT. Wiley, Hoboken, p 12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Blythe J (2013) Consumer behavior, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, Los Angeles, p 426Google Scholar
  12. Brown D (1972) Mill on liberty and morality. Philos Rev 87:133–158. In: Smith G (ed) (1998) John Stuart Mill’s social and political thought: critical assessments, vol II. Routledge, London, p 103Google Scholar
  13. Cahn N (2013) The new kinship: constructing donor-conceived families. New York University Press, New York, p 148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Catino M (2013) Organizational myopia: problems of rationality and foresight in organizations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 100Google Scholar
  15. Clark G, Strauss K, Knox-Hayes J (2012) Saving for retirement: intention, context, and behavior. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Clark R (2010) I’m just saying. Dog Ear Publishing, Indianapolis, p 176Google Scholar
  17. Clements P et al (2010) Documenting software architectures: views and beyond, Carnegie Mellon software engineering institute (SEI) series in software engineering, 2nd edn. Addison Wesley, Upper Saddle River, p 19Google Scholar
  18. Corrales Compagnucci M, Jurčys P (2016) Cass Sunstein, why nudge: the politics of libertarian paternalism, New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 2014 (Book review). Mod Law Rev 79:533–536Google Scholar
  19. Davidai S, Gilovich T, Ross L (2012) The meaning of default options for potential organ donors. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109(38):15201–15205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Detels R et al (2015) Oxford textbook of global public health, vol 1, 6th edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 782Google Scholar
  21. Devlin B (2012) Big data, big mistakes? Smart data collective Accessed 10 May 2019
  22. Djemame K et al (2011) A risk assessment framework and software toolkit for cloud service ecosystems. In: Cloud computing 2011, The second international conference on cloud computing, GRIDs, and virtualization, p 119Google Scholar
  23. Dold M (2016) Condorcet’s jury theorem as a rational justification of soft paternalistic consumer policies. In: Mathis K, Tor A (eds) Nudging—possibilities, limitations and applications in european law and economics. Springer, Cham, p 50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Eppinger S, Browning T (2012) Design structure matrix methods and applications. The MIT Press, Cambridge, p 7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Evans J (2003) In two minds: dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends Cognit Sci 7(10):454–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Evans-Pritchard B (2013) Aiming to reduce cleaning costs, works that work. Accessed 10 May 2019
  27. Felin T (2014) Nudge: managers as a choice architect. The saïd business school’s working paper series, University of Oxford, p 3. Accessed 10 May 2019
  28. Gigerenzer G (2000) Adaptive thinking: rationality in the real world. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 125Google Scholar
  29. Gigerenzer G (2015) On the supposed evidence for libertarian paternalism. Rev Phil Psych 6:361–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gigerenzer G, Selten R (eds) (2002) Bounded rationality: the adaptive toolbox. The MIT Press, Cambridge, p 4Google Scholar
  31. Gilovich T, Griffin D, Kahneman D (eds) (2002) Heuristics and biases: the psychology of intuitive judgement. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  32. Hamilton D, Zufiaurre B (2014) Blackboards and bootstraps: revisioning education and schooling. Sense Publishers, Rotterdam, p 18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hardman D (2009) Judgment and decision making: psychological perspectives. Wiley, Chichester, p 24Google Scholar
  34. Hartley D (2012) Education and the culture of consumption: personalization and the social order. Routledge, London, p 70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Heshmat S (2011) Eating behavior and obesity: behavioral economics strategies for health professionals. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Heshmat S (2015) Addiction: a behavioral economic perspective. Routledge, New York, p 243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Heukelom F (2014) Behavioral economics: a history. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 71–96Google Scholar
  38. Holt J (2011) Two brains running, The New York Times, Sunday book review, Nov 25, 2011. Accessed 10 May 2019
  39. Iyengar S, Lepper M (2000) When choice is demotivating: can one desire too much of a good thing? J Pers Soc Psychol 79(6):995–1006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Jackman R, Miller R (2007) Before norms: institutions and civic culture. The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, p 20Google Scholar
  41. Jackson J (2006) Ethics in medicine: virtue, vice and medicine. Polity Press, Cambridge, pp 68–69Google Scholar
  42. Jamson S (2013) The role of acceptance in behavioral adaptation. In: Rudin-Brown C, Jamson S (eds) behavioral adaptation and road safety: theory, evidence and action. CRC Press, Boca Ratón, p 298Google Scholar
  43. Jansen A, Bosch J (2005) Software architecture as a set of architectural design decisions. In: Nord R et al (eds) 5th working IEEE/IFIP conference on software architecture WICSA 2005, papers and working session results, proceedings, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, November 6–10, 2005. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, pp 109–120Google Scholar
  44. John P et al (2013) Nudge, nudge, think, think: experimenting with ways to change civic behavior. Bloomsbury, London, p 104Google Scholar
  45. Jolls C, Sunstein C, Thaler R (1998) A behavioral approach to law and economics. Stanford Law Rev 50:1471–1550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Jolls C (2004) Behavioral law and economics, Public law and legal theory, research paper no 130, John M. Olin center for studies in law, economics, and policy, research paper no 342. Paper prepared for the economic institutions and behavioral economics conference held in Helsinki in June of 2004, pp 1–3Google Scholar
  47. Kahneman D (2003) A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality. Am Psychol 58(9):697–720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kahneman D (2011) Thinking, fast and slow. Penguin Books, London, p 98Google Scholar
  49. Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A (eds) (1982) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  50. Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2):263–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kirchgaessner G (2000) Homo oeconomicus: Das ökonomische Modell individuellen Verhaltens und seine Anwendung in den Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften. Mohr Siebeck, TübingenGoogle Scholar
  52. Lahti A (2010) Globalization & the nordic success model—part I. Ventus Publishing ApS (e-book), s l, p 35Google Scholar
  53. Le Grand J, New B (2015) Government paternalism: nanny state or helpful friend? Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 1–3Google Scholar
  54. Leitzel J (2015) Concepts in law and economics: a guide for the curious. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 137Google Scholar
  55. Lessig L (2006) Code. Version 2.0. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  56. Lindberg A, Svensson D (2010) IT law from a practitioner’s perspective. In: Wahlgren P (ed) ICT legal issues: Scandinavian studies in law, vol 56. Stockholm Institute for Scandinavian Law, Stockholm, p 13Google Scholar
  57. Mill J (1859) On liberty. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 21–22Google Scholar
  58. Minton E, Kahle L (2013) Belief systems, religion, and behavioral economics: marketing in multicultural behavioral insights team. Accessed 10 May 2019
  59. Munro A (2009) Bounded rationality and public policy: a perspective from behavioral economics, the economics of non-market goods and resources, vol 12. Springer, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Perry D, Wolf A (1992) Foundations for the study of software architecture. Softw Eng Notes 17(4):40–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Perry M (1988) Morality, politics & law. Oxford University Press, New York, p 92Google Scholar
  62. Prinz A (2013) Should the state care for the happiness of its citizens? In: Brockmann H, Delhey J (eds) Human happiness and the pursuit of maximization: is more always better? Springer, Dordrecht, p 182Google Scholar
  63. Pomerol J (2012) Decision-making and action. Wiley, London, pp 70–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Quigley M, Stokes E (2015) Nudging and evidence-based policy in Europe: problems of normative legitimacy and effectiveness. In: Alemanno A, Sibony A (eds) Nudge and the law: a European perspective, modern studies in European law. Hart Publishing, Oxford, p 64Google Scholar
  65. Raisinghani M et al (2015) Cloud computing in the 21st century: a managerial perspective for policies and practices. In: Aljawarneh S (ed) Advanced research on cloud computing design and applications. Idea Group, Hershey, p 188Google Scholar
  66. Ramanathan J, Rammath R, Desai A (2009) Adaptive IT architectures as a catalyst for network capability in government. In: Saha P (ed) Advances in government enterprise architecture. Information science reference (IGI Global), Hershey, p 171Google Scholar
  67. Reason J (1990) Human error. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Reb J et al (2014) Performance appraisals as heuristics judgments under uncertainty. In: Highhouse S, Dalal R, Salas E (eds) Judgment and decision making at work, The organizational frontiers series. Routledge, New York, p 14Google Scholar
  69. Riley J (2015) The right to liberty. In: Schefczyk M, Schramme T (eds) John Stuart Mill: Über die Freiheit. Walter de Gruyter GmbH., Berlin, p 11Google Scholar
  70. Rodriguez-Sickert C (2009) Homo economicus. In: Peil J, van Staveren I (eds) Handbook of economics and ethics. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, p 223Google Scholar
  71. Safire W (2004) The right word in the right place at the right time: wit and wisdom from the popular “on language,” first printed edition. Simon & Schuster, New York, p 242Google Scholar
  72. Shafir E (ed) (2013) The behavioral foundations of public policy. Princeton University Press, Princeton, p 496Google Scholar
  73. Simon H (1955) A behavioral model of choice. Quart J Econ 69(1):99–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Simon H (1972) Theories of bounded rationality. In: McGuire C, Radner R, Arrow H (eds) Decision and organization: a volume in honor of Jacob Marschak, study in mathematics & managerial economics, 1st edn. North-Holland Pub. Co., Amsterdam, p 162Google Scholar
  75. Simon H (1984) Models of bounded rationality: economic analysis and public policy, vol 1. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  76. Simon H (1990) Invariants of human behavior. Annu Rev Psychol 41:1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Simon H (1998) Rationality in psychology and economics. In: Wiener Katz A (ed) Foundations of the economic approach to law, interdisciplinary readers in law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 270–274Google Scholar
  78. Sommer J (2009) When humans need a nudge toward rationality, The New York Times. Accessed 10 May 2019
  79. Stanovich K (2010) Rationality and the reflective mind, 1st edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Stanovich K, West R (2000) Individual difference in reasoning: implications for debate? Behav Brain Sci 23(5):645–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Stewart D (ed) (2015) The handbook of persuasion and social marketing: historical and social foundations, vol 1. Praeger, Santa Barbara, p 78Google Scholar
  82. Sunstein C (ed) (2000) Behavioral law & economics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  83. Sunstein C (2013a) Simpler: The Future of Government. Simon & Schuster, New York, pp 38–39Google Scholar
  84. Sunstein C (2013b) Deciding by default. Univ Pa Law Rev 162(1):11Google Scholar
  85. Sunstein C (2014) Why nudge? The politics of libertarian paternalism, Storrs lectures on jurisprudence. Yale University Press, New Haven & London, pp 33–36Google Scholar
  86. Sunstein (2015) Choose not to choose: understanding the value of choice. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 206 and 218Google Scholar
  87. Tanner M (2007) Leviathan on the right: how big-government conservatism brought down the republican revolution. Cato Institute, Washington, D.C., p 200Google Scholar
  88. Thaler R (2009) Opting in versus opting out, The New York Times. Accessed 10 May 2019
  89. Thaler R, Sunstein C (2003) Libertarian paternalism is not an oxymoron, University of Chicago public law & legal theory working paper no 43, pp 1–3. Accessed 10 May 2019
  90. Thaler R, Sunstein C (2009) Nudge: improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. Penguin Group, New York, p 6Google Scholar
  91. Thaler R, Sunstein C, Balz J (2010) Choice architectures. Accessed 10 May 2019
  92. Thaler R, Sunstein C, Balz J (2013) Choice architecture. In: Shafir E (ed) The behavioral foundations of public policy. Princeton University Press, Princeton, p 430Google Scholar
  93. The Economist (2006) The perils of prosperity: can you be too rich? Accessed 10 May 2019
  94. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1973) Availability: a heuristics for judging frequency and probability. Cognit Psychol 4:207–208. Accessed 10 May 2019
  95. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185(4157):1124–1131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Tversky A, Kahneman D (2004) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. In: Shafir E (ed) Preference, belief, and similarity: selected writings. The MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 203–220Google Scholar
  97. Utts J (2014) Seeing through statistics, 4th edn. Cengage Learning, Stamford, p 348Google Scholar
  98. Van Aaken A (2015) Judge the nudge: in search of the legal limits of paternalistic nudging in the EU. In: Alemanno A, Sibony A (eds) Nudge and the law: a european perspective. Hart Publishing, Oxford, p 88Google Scholar
  99. Viale R (2012) Methodological cognitivism, vol 1: mind, rationality, and society. Springer, Berlin, p 25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Wallace D (2008) Plain old untrendy troubles and emotions, The Guardian. Accessed 10 May 2019
  101. White M (2013) The manipulation of choice: ethics and libertarian paternalism. Palgrave Macmillan, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. White M (2016) The crucial importance of interests in libertarian paternalism. In: Mathis K, Tor A (eds) Nudging—possibilities, limitations and applications in European law and economics. Springer, Cham, p 26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Wright O (2014) The nudge team started out as a sort of mission impossible: how the government’s successful behaviour insights team has had a profound effect on whitehall, The Independent. Accessed 10 May 2019
  104. Willis O (2015) Behavioral economics for better decisions, Accessed 10 May 2019
  105. World Development Report (2015) Mind, science and behavior. A world bank group flagship report. Accessed 10 May 2019
  106. Zamir E (2015) Law, psychology, and morality: the role of loss aversion. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Zeiler K, Teitelbaum J (eds) (2015) Research handbook on behavioral law and economics. Edward Elgar Publishing, NorthamptonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Advanced Studies in Biomedical Innovation Law (CeBIL)University of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations