|
Abstract
|
Proposals for unconventional policies often receive a lot of negative reactions, from media, citizens, politicians, interest groups, etc. The counterfactual check may be a simple method to explore if such policies are really a bad idea.
In a recent paper on growing support for controversial policies, we briefly discussed the idea of asking people whether the counterfactual of a controversial policy proposal would be a good idea (Van Wee et al., Citation2023). We gave the example of the proposal to convert a two-way street into a one-way street. I live in Amersfoort, a medium-sized city (almost 161,000 inhabitants on January 2023) in the Netherlands, in a 1930s neighbourhood (i.e. the Leusderkwartier). Some years ago, the local municipality suggested to convert that road in that neighbourhood to a one-way street for motorised traffic (not for cyclists), for reasons of safety and liveability. The road is frequently used by cyclists, including 12-18-year-old high school students. In the street where I live, many people had a poster behind their window stating the following: "keep the Leusderkwartier accessible". I did not have such a poster. One of my neighbours asked why. I explained that I was not sure if I thought it was a bad idea. He responded telling me that I certainly must think it was a bad idea. I asked him why. He responded saying that the idea was ridiculous because we then would have to take a detour driving in "opposite direction". I said he was right, that of course that would mean a (small) detour, but also that it would become a safer, quieter and consequently more attractive street. I asked him: suppose the street would always have been a one-way street, as the local municipality now suggested. And suppose the proposal was to make it a two-way street. Would he then think this would be a brilliant idea? I hypothesised that he and many others would show a poster behind their window with the following text: "keep the Leusderkwartier safe and liveable". He responded that he would not know if he would support the counterfactual change, and that this conversation made him think. ... |