Page 296 - The Handbook of Persuasion and Social Marketing

272 The Handbook of Persuasion and Social Marketing

In a democratic society, social marketing offers the advantage of sug-
gesting voluntary changes in behavior in contrast to behavior change man-
dated by the legal system. The law may be used to prohibit certain behavior
(e.g., cigarette sales to minors) or to establish incentives either toward
positive behavior or away from negative behavior (e.g., cigarette taxes). In
addition, the law, like social marketing, may be used to counter the per-
ceived excesses of commercial marketing through the general regulation of
commercial marketing practices (e.g., prohibiting false advertising) or
through specific regulations addressing social issues (e.g., cigarette adver-
tising regulations). This chapter first examines the relationship between
law and social marketing. It then examines the regulation of commercial
marketing and compares that to the regulation of social marketing.

Law and Social Marketing: Substitutes and Complements

Based on MacInnis, Moorman, and Jaworski (1991), Rothschild (1999)
suggested that the audience’s motivation, opportunity, and ability to act in
the desired way should influence the selection of approaches to achieve
public policy goals. For example, he suggested that if people are motivated
and have the opportunity and ability to act, then education may be suffi-
cient to change behavior. Opportunity addresses environmental factors
that make it easier or more difficult for people to change their behavior.
Motivation is the desire to change behavior, but change might still be in-
hibited by an inability to change (e.g., addiction to certain substances).
Rothschild (1999) suggested that in situations where people are not
motivated to change their behavior, regardless of their ability and oppor-
tunity to change, the use of the law should be considered. If consumers
who understand the risks are not motivated to change their behavior, the
law can create incentives that discourage undesirable behavior (e.g., ciga-
rette taxes) or incentives to engage in the desired behavior (e.g., manda-
tory health or life insurance discounts). If incentives are insufficient to
motivate the desired behavioral change, then behavior can be mandated,
as in laws that require obtaining a driver’s license before operating a motor
vehicle on public highways or that prohibit the sale of alcoholic beverages.
Of course, complete prohibitions run the risk of encouraging illegal con-
sumption, as illustrated by the United States’ experiment with alcoholic
beverage prohibition from 1920 to 1933.
However, contrary to Rothschild’s (1999) suggestion that if people are
motivated to change their behavior, the law is not needed, the law may still
be useful in improving the opportunity for people’s ability to change. For
example, if inner-city children can’t find healthier food choices in their