1. Introduction

The goal of public services and deployment of government policies is to shape societal behaviors. Government services however have specificity that need to be reflected in its models. Today, with the spread of BE Labs government entities can benefit from the environment that help to capture opportunities and enhance the economic actors.

In this empirical research the differentiation between outcomes that is based on reasoning and field experience is contrasted.

In this paper the researcher shall compare all the characteristics of Nudge to Inspiration Economy Labs (IL’s) with specific focus on welfare services that influence the quality of life without extra resources or without the need of power or authority. The BE models are explored whether both would improve governments productivity and outcome. The methodology target to consider whether both concepts can be methodologies for future waves of government transformation.

The method of inquiry through “typical observations” or “experiments through observation” that leads to a differentiated mindset are reviewed to gather deeper evidence of similarities and differentiation. Actual empirical methods of inquiry (i.e. experiments, observations) are done in a comparative study. The comparative study here focuses only on social welfare and quality of life services in order to keep the focus on the BE role in creating differentiated outcomes and shaping the positive behaviours and the mindset of the communities with minimal resources. Therefore, the inter-related services such as Social Insurance (Pension Fund), Social Development and Healthcare Services are compared. This paper can be further developed in the future to show how utilising BE models can help create more radical changes in government services. Buheji and Ahmed (2018), Chetty (2015), Samson (2015), Dolan et al (2010).

2. Literature Review

2.1. Role of Governments in Shaping the Behaviours

Government main role is the development of nation. Therefore, each government utmost focus is on stabilising the overall socio-economic conditions and then to regulate such behaviour to achieve its both economic and social goals through services that would make continuous development for the citizen and the businesses. This can be achieved only through empirical scientific research and field research. Buheji (2016), Blanding (2017), Dolan et al (2010).

Different government programs in United Kingdom, the United States, Australia, Canada, Denmark, France and Singapore are pushing the decision makers to experiment and explore the intentional use of behavioural economics in social policy, Thaler and Sunstein (2008). In the small island of the Kingdom of Bahrain another type of BE labs called inspiration labs have been experimented in different government entities targeting also deeper socio-economic outcomes. The Economist (2012), Jahrami and Buheji (2012), Keating (2013), Chetty (2015).

2.2. Specificity of Government Services

Government organizations are characterized by the breadth of their powers compared to other sectors. Part of government differentiated power is their capacity to propose and enforce citizens. However, the main role of any government entity is to deliver services that improve the quality of life, ensure fairness of welfare system while ensure socio-economic development.

Government entities might lose the essence of their existence specially when they operate in market-based economy where they focus on satisfying certain conditions relating to their governance and operating conditions rather than the outcome of their services delivery.

Even though government organizations have the authority to make and enforce decisions on the society they usually can’t manage to change people decisions easily. Thaler and Sunstein (2008).

Government organization jurisdiction extends to all members of the community physical force and coercion. The political legitimacy of developed governments comes not only from their services, but from the outcome achieved.

2.3. Introduction to Behavioral Economics (BE)

Behavioural Economics (BE) today is becoming more solid branch of economics and management and started to incorporates best alternatives of field experimentation and solutions of human problems from different perspectives. BE targets to help create better life model outcome that may have not been exposed or predicted before. Buheji (2017), Dolan et al (2010), Thaler and Sunstein (2008).

Government BE models are built around cognitive rationality that reduces the risk and the uncertainty. Such BE models come as a result of focused labs attempt that target to identify systematic biases in specific area. This eagerness and drive to create models are improving the government curiosity towards using scientific approaches to develop testable hypotheses and predict socio-economic behaviors. This can be seen clearly in Nudge projects. McAuley (2007).

BE also fits the efforts that comes from inspirational observational learning that create practical application of mirror neurons which its existence hints the brain-behavioural link. The integration different intentional learning helps to improve the government entity capacity to adapt new environments and integrate knowledge from different inspiration sources. Samson (2015).

Inspiration labs (ILs) uses intentional integrative learning to build different government connections that seemingly bring in disparate information that create better decisions. ILs exploration journey in government entities help to diagnose the community learning needs, i.e. study the type of citizens’ attitudes and behaviours that would formulate the learning goals and outcomes. Blanding (2017) and Buheji and Ahmed, (2017a).

The objective of this paper is to explore how two BE techniques one is becoming globally known and called Nudge and the other is just emerging in limited government practices called Inspiration Labs (IL’s) are leading to better government services outcomes with more efficient alternatives. Both techniques have their own way of exploring and exploiting on opportunities and building model that leads to behavioural change or architecting decisions with less bureaucratic approaches. While Nudge depends on the small changes to the “choice environment” can encourage large changes in people’s actions, IL’s depends on discovering hidden opportunities and capitalising on them to create major leap without extra resources. Both ways are very useful for governments and government organisation that are serious towards creating legacy. Buheji and Ahmed (2018), Blanding (2017), Samson (2015), Sunstein (2014), Thaler and Sunstein (2008).

2.4. BE Labs Role in Government Service Development

Thaler and Sunstein (2008) seen that nudge in services as in government would play like a choice architecture that alters behaviour in a predictable way without forbidding any options, or significantly changing their economic incentives.

Since government services is very important for any society development, BE labs are considered one of the best accelerators for achieving this development since it addresses cultural dynamical needs. This is why Nobel psychologist Daniel Kahneman sees that what is called government behavioural economics is in fact social psychology. A growing body of evidence demonstrates that behavioural science research findings help to make effective direction that would improve government policies. Samson (2015), Dolan et al (2010).

The core questions of BE labs therefore focus on why the government services are delivered without a foreseen outcome? Can’t they really solve the problem? Have they try to see the way or the mindset in which the current services are delivered and have they tried to change it? What type of hidden opportunities did the government tried to discover? What are the values, strategies and practice that the government managed to change to improve and develop its targeted socio-economic outcomes? Sunstein (2014).

2.5. Capturing Opportunities through BE Models

BE help to create a pull thinking in government decision making process. This specifically can be seen when government decides where to capture opportunities to create the targeted behavioural change. Thaler and Sunstein (2008).

Governments once started to collect the possible opportunities they would usually manage to link between the pieces of information using different observational analysis techniques and type of thinking that focus on the essence of the service itself. This type of thinking helps them to see or visualise the future and thus weight the present benefits or costs compared to the future benefits or costs. For example, many government spends millions of dollars annually on encouraging people to take flu prevention shots to reduce absenteeism, however one could see opportunities in people not attending to such vaccination for specific demographics and explore techniques that would alter those vulnerable of further condition or diseases if they catch the flu. Sunstein (2013).

Once the government entity build passion about the essence of the services they deliver to the extent they would do this codification and classification, then they could build a holistic understanding of the process of change and move towards finding a measured outcome. Government would then use the models to change its people assumptions and enhance their involvement.

2.6. BE and Government Economic Actors

BE focus on government economic actors to improve the society wellbeing and future generations. Economic actors of government entities use mechanics of the economics to enhance different factors that influence the way people behave and interact when they are engaged in economic activities. Samson (2015). Therefore, in earlier research inspiring governments were characterised as those that have the capacity to use the different socio-economic actors to develop services and products that would meet best outcome and the purpose of their existence, where Buheji (2016) called it an End-Customer-End. i.e. The ultimate goal of any excellent, inspiring government service.

Governments almost design their citizens services and measure it by cost or volume. Hence, usually their business models is designed based on focus of what is perceived is good for the citizens, as shown Figure (1). While BE labs work on creating citizens services that are measured by value where the business model is focused on the value that addresses real citizens needs. Buheji (2016), Sunstein (2013).

Figure (1). Government Transformation when Influenced by BE actors

Buheji and Ahmed (2017) mentioned that behavioural inspirational model influence would not only help in developing emotional connections, but goes also towards changing attitudes that will enhance the culture of communication, collaboration and innovation, thus leading to realised change. The model focuses on achieving the end-result; it clearly illustrates what the organisation expects and inspires others to achieve higher performance level. Hence such BE models would also help the government organisations to see the big picture and build a clear view of the future.

Behavioural inspirational model could also create energy and excitement in the workplace, as it would involve the stakeholders using pull-thinking techniques that enhance passion towards bringing in focused initiatives or improve the capacity of solving problems. Customers can play a great role in being another inspirational source.

Government BE actors could start with the disruptive questions, such as questioning what business we are in, while observing the visualised target, the End-Customer-End mindset would work effectively. This type of thinking would turn government organisations to be more consumer-driven; where their products, services and solutions would be grounded around consumers’ needs. Buheji (2017), Thaler (2015).

Therefore, one could consider that the maturity of any government organisation today is no longer measured by its years in business, but rather by its experience of creating an environment of fulfilling the End-Customer-End visualisation through adopting more BE designed tools and practices.

2.7. Comparing Spirit of Nudge vs. Inspiration Economy Approaches and Projects

BE is a multi-disciplined concept that explore and then architect the behaviour of the organisation and the people to deliver better outcomes. For example, behavioural scientists focus on architecting designs when Nudging to specific needs to have auto Opt-In or Opt-Out in order to transform specific government challenges and/or speed up towards a designed outcome that would build later success stories. Sunstein (2014) Thaler (2015).

Inspiration Economy Labs even though they focus too on architecting the essence of government service designs, they target actually to change the government services outcomes through changing the mindset and the assumptions that these services were built on. The uniqueness here is that this change doesn’t depend first on systems and standards, but on people involvement through collections of observations that focus on higher availability and capacity to discover the intrinsic powers within. Once the opportunities are exploited through realised models then the results of IL’s project are generalised. Buheji (2018a).

Both BE techniques have their unique spirits. This is due to the way they are differentiated in their delivery. Synthesis of the work of Thaler and Sunstein (2008) and Buheji and Ahmed (2017a) the following could be seen in comparing Nudge vs. Inspiration Labs. Nudge would focus mostly on exploring the government service business objectives, improving it choices dimension and implementing behavioural concepts through promoting and mitigating risks, as shown in Figure (2). While IL’s would depend on visualisation of the essence of the government services that is usually followed by a curiosity spirit that comes from exploring of the opportunities and building models that are generalised to show the influence positive change. In order for both BE techniques to reach their targets, continuous adjustment of biases artefacts towards the targeted outcomes.

Figure (2). Flow of Spirit of Nudge vs. Inspiration Labs towards Targeted Outcome

2.8. BE Success Stories in Changing Government Outcomes

Once the BE government models achieve its targeted outcomes, the policymaker should consider seeing how to link between the choices and eliminate any negative or unpopular results from the community, or from the government partners. Some governments would use public feedback to shape their next behavioural interventions. However, most governments would study the effect of these interventions in order to calibrate their processes and procedures where necessary. The Economist (2012), Buheji (2016), Chetty (2015), Dolan et al (2010).

Studies of Thaler and Sunstein (2008) and Buheji and Ahmed (2017a) shows that BE techniques are very suitable for government services if it managed to promote people’s health, safety or welfare, but without compromising, or manipulating people goals or interests or values. Actually, the focus on either BE techniques bring more scientific approaches inside the government culture.

Success stories in government organisation as reported by Jahrami and Buheji (2012) and earlier by Thaler and Sunstein (2008) needs governments that can use choice architecture and default options to encourage citizens to do what is better for them. This means that government organisations would improve their level of communications to what is visualised as a moral or civic responsibilities not just services delivery. The role of each government entity would then be to explore opportunities and then help people to make better choices for themselves, or for the betterment of their society. Sunstein (2013) and Buheji (2016).

In the United Kingdom, the government’s Behavioural Insights Team (BIT) work on creating success stories through applying Nudge economics practices to policy issues. More and more behavioural scientists are involved in government services design and are implementing nudges to steer citizens’ decisions away from what is ‘bad’ towards what is ‘good’ for the individual or the society, Chetty (2015), Samson (2015), Sunstein (2014), Dolan et al (2010), McAuley (2007).

2.9. Building the Government Service BE Models

This paper tries to recognize the current BE government models with focus on Nudge and Inspiration Economy. Both BE labs work through government teams to improve government effectiveness, or efficiency, leading to better government service innovation. Building such government models would help to build new services that improve outcomes at best operational costs. Buheji (2016), McAuley (2007).

Government BE models are generalised when they manage to create positive behaviour change besides when they influence people lives, Buheji (2018b). For example, through Nudge, organ donations are simply changed to be the default option same as the retirement savings plans which leads to an enormous uptick in the numbers who participate and amounts saved. In another example models that target to change citizens’ behaviour through encouraging payment of traffic tickets are delivered by violators letter that carries “Pay Now” in red letters at the top where photos of traffic camera is sent too in the letter. Sunstein (2014).

There are many types of BE models that are suitable for government services, however here only two types are discussed, Nudge and IL’s based models. Nudge models are designed to change behaviours through manipulating people decision. For example, redesigning the hospital ads reminders from “Hand Hygiene prevents you from catching diseases” by replacing the word (you) with (patients); i.e. to make it read as “Hand Hygiene prevents patients from catching diseases”. This simple change found to encourage physicians and patients to wash hands effectively. While IL’s models are designed to change people mindset which behavior is one of its components through raising the stakeholders’ capacity to discover hidden opportunities. For example, IL’s would to find opportunities to enhance patients discharge to avoid stagnation of beds and protect patients from getting infection due to length of stay. Sunstein (2014), Buheji (2018a), Dolan et al (2010), Thaler and Sunstein (2008).

Both models would have an influence on the society while improving the socio-economic outcome. The first model would help to increase those who use the soap and handwashing, thus reducing cross-infection, while the second model would help towards giving more priority and fairness for those patients that need the bed most. Buheji (2018b).

BE models in government Inspiration labs (IL’s) are created through effective learning techniques that help to change the mindset and its explored intrinsic powers. Both Nudge and IL’s create their models through exploring, assembling, composing, constructing, creating, designing, developing, formulating, organizing, analysing and proposing practices that would help to come up with the best suitable inspiration reference for the society, Buheji (2018a). Government can deliver solutions to specific community phenomenon or behaviours through exactly describing, or indicating, or restating, re-translating, or re-arranging, re-defining, re-labelling, or re-producing specific solutions that create a nudge or inspiration that is reflected in overcoming the complexity of the problem or the challenge tackled. Blanding (2017), Buheji (2017), Dolan et al (2010).

However, if we study the inspiration models well see they are organised first by knowledge capturing and dissemination. The BE models in inspiration economy use the available resources, or with minimal resources. The models are usually designed to allow individuals to interact with their environment. Buheji and Ahmed (2017a).

Hence, government entities would build models based on different qualitative and quantitate studies that show specific pattern recognitions.

For example, through IL’s government can re-invent the business models to address many chronic issues in the society that accumulated after the service design and delivery. Same would happen with Nudge, when observing interactions of the way services are delivered. Buheji (2016), Thaler (2015).

2.10. Welfare Analysis in Behavioral Models

Dealing with mindset goes beyond the economist arguments rational or irrational behaviours and/or its influence techniques on public policy or services development. Therefore, dealing with assumption, attitudes and behaviours in government services should be still the most important aim and should be more examined through the lens of multi-disciplined social scientists. Actually, it should go beyond the academic circles, especially if BE models are to tackle complex issues as improvement of a country’s quality of life and welfare system. Chetty (2015), Keating (2013).

Role of developed governments is to establish a welfare system and quality of life net that would determine the best optimal policy that would deal with the possibilities of behavioral biases. With the turbulent socio-economic environment, contemporary time have shown that the challenges to social welfare programs does not depends only on governments experiences in dealing with the welfare issues only, but on how governments can practically tackle the consistent behavioral change and challenges. Buheji (2016) and Sunstein (2014).

2.11. Role of BE in Government Services Productivity

According to their analysis, money spent on nudges can in some cases be more than 40 times more effective than the next most effective method, a dramatic result for governments dealing with scarce resources. Chetty (2015).

Buheji and Ahmed (2017b) emphasis that the outcome of government productivity is beyond quantitative returns as it is very high compared to ‘the Return on Capital Employed’. As besides its delivered differentiated outcome in relevance to the essence of the existence of the government service, IL’s also manage to improve the government entities culture towards being more proactive and very efficient in their hit rate and in dealing or solving different issues.

Today, one could hear more behavioural teams are formed as part of ministerial and/or state level. These scientific teams provide not only strategic guidance for the government, but in fact work on capacity building through innovation lab and rigorous testing in relevance to citizens’ behavioural characteristics and required change.

3. Methodology

The scientific process of hypothetico-deductive model is utilised to compare two different approaches of behavioural economics, namely Nudge vs. Inspiration Economy Labs (called IL’s). The sequence of the observation and the experimentation and then the influence of both approaches are reviewed to generate similarities and differences. The methods of inquiry through observations and/or experiments and how they influence the government mindset are reviewed in literature and then compared to gather evidence of similarities and differentiations. Actual empirical methods of inquiry (i.e. experiments, observations) are done in a comparative study.

Due to the limitation and the feasibility of this research paper Government Social Welfare and Quality of Life Service are used to further specify the scope of comparison. A separate list for both Nudge and Inspiration Labs are done ensure effective understanding about the type of field experiment and what is the outcome expected.

Careful focused discussion and analysis targeted to mainly see the differentiation between the approaches of Nudge and IL’s. Since Behaviour economics believe in the scientific principles of determinism and orderliness and in what likely to respond as a result, an attempt towards understanding of what happens to the mindset of the government organisations when experiments and observations are carried out in a certain sequence is explored.

The scientific approach to the unobserved influence without power or with minimal resources is studied in both Nudge and IL’s process as per an earlier work of Buheji (2018b). Full understanding, prediction of both approaches complexity of environment and outcomes are studied too.

4. Comparative Study

4.1. Purpose of This Comparative Study

From the recent literature reviewed in this paper we can see clearly that leading governments are becoming more aware about the importance of BE in creating a positive change in society. However, there is still huge literature gap that need to address how governments can use BE techniques other than nudge, in order to create behavioural change for complex issues as social welfare that would lead to better quality of life. Therefore, the following comparison target to focus only on three main sectors that any developed or developing government would consider it as part of its main service responsibilities and be most accountable towards it as would be presented later in Tables (1) and (2).

4.2. Government Social Welfare and Quality of Life Service

Most important needs for any society is to improve the quality of life of its citizens and specially for the most vulnerable ones through focusing first on the effectiveness of the social welfare services delivered and what is relevant to quality of life. Today, literature have enough data to explore the different BE projects carried out by governments with the intention of improving the outcomes of social development. Therefore, the comparison tables (1) and (2) in this study targets to focus mainly on projects related to inter-related services of Social Insurance (Pension Fund), Social Development and Healthcare Services. Buheji (2016) and Sunstein (2014).

In certain highly developed countries as Norway, the social security system is linked with processes of pension, social welfare and healthcare services to help improve the return-to-work outcomes. An example of the benefit of integrating these services is illustrated through the return of holding just one meeting between the employee, the employer, and the treating physician. The behavioural move of just holding such meetings led to enhance the employees returning to their job 10 days faster than those that didn’t get such service. Keating (2013).

Since almost all governments spend lots huge time and money annually in dealing with vulnerable cases or in caring or treating people and most of the time get involved with problems that could’ve been preventable, BE comes as a highly alternative solution to deal with such environment. Therefore, the following tables (1) and (2) give example of the published work of both BE techniques under study Nudge and IL’s for the three services that are considered one of the main pillars for social welfare that usually lead to better quality of life in any community or country.

4.3. Nudge List

Table (1). Selected Nudge List in Government Social Welfare Services that leads to Quality of Life

4.4. Inspiration Labs List

Table (2). Selected Inspiration Labs List in Government Social Welfare Services that leads to Quality of Life

5. Discussion

5.1. Way Data Being Collected before Taking the Countermeasures

From literature reviewed and the comparative tables, both concepts Nudge and IL’s capitalise on collecting on observation and experimentation before setting the final countermeasure. However, IL’s seems not to have any pre-judgement of what should be the countermeasure, while Nudge would have different hypothesis that would be tested by people reaction. IL’s would depend on the results of the field observation and impulses that challenge the mindset while exploring the clear or hidden opportunities in relevance to a value based visualisation.

The argument can be clarified with time, as with time more evidences of what happens to service organisations, as governments, when experiments and observations are carried out in a certain sequence. i.e. what happens to the mindset of the government when they do Nudge or IL’s, which one is more effective. Even though this comparative data does not cover this issue in detail, it is considered an early attempt to see the big picture of the outcome of such BE projects or approaches.

5.2. Characteristics of Deploying BE Techniques in Government Services

From the comparative tables (1) and (2), and the literature reviewed, one could notice that Nudge and IL’s focus on governments doing something to create citizens behavioural change. According to behavioural scientists, such BE projects or labs is good for both the government and the society. Chetty (2015), Dolan (2010).

However, the two BE techniques can be clearly differentiated in the way they tackle their projects. As shown in Figure (3), Nudge projects which is usually led by behavioural scientists in Nudge Units, would usually start with the selection of scope of the choice architecture which is represented by for example setting the citizens choices for Opt-in or Opt-Out. This cause more acceptance and higher availability that lead to better government outcomes and success stories. The flow is from top to down, i.e. from government top management decision makers to the beneficiaries of the services.

Figure (3). Characteristics of Nudge and IL’s in Creating Government Services Success Stories

While as per Figure (3) the inspiration economy labs projects would start exploring opportunities from the field, i.e. where the beneficiaries would be ensured that the essence of the government services are addressed. The first behavioural change towards this level of mutual agreement starts with involving the concerned parties in discovering the opportunities and then turning it into a realised state through building a model that target specific outcome. Here the government top management would work on generalising the model and creating a governmental success story that can inspire other entities to try to replicate the model. Buheji and Ahmed (2018).

5.3. Process of Exploring Opportunities of BE Change

Coming back to the literature and comparative tables (1) and (2), shows that both Nudge and IL’s create a type of codification first that help to absorb better the scope of the alternative business model that was not foreseen in the scope of the government service under study. Both, Nudge and IL’s, would start also a classification process where they would be able to develop further the capability of interactions of the people involved through piloting the proposed solutions in different setting and environment.

When the BE process is closely evaluated for both Nudge and IL’s, one could see a clear differentiation. As shown in Figure (4) where both Nudge and IL’s goes through similar first two steps of their process, i.e. during observation and exploration of the opportunities that would bring in the behavioural change. However, based on both the literature reviewed and the comparative tables there are no clear evidence that Nudge would go more further than this point, i.e. it would stop at the end of exploration point to take actions about the proposed behavioural pattern that would disrupted. While if we study the cases of IL’s we would see more steps are taken to help continue to create BE model through power of ‘learning by doing’ that would help to generalise its outcomes later. This differentiation of IL’s from Nudge helps to further develop the stakeholders mindset and influence their capacity to effectively reflect and visualise the best opportunities. Thaler (2015), Buheji and Ahmed (2018). It is believed therefore that IL’s seem to give the government entity more capability to stratify complex problems compared to Nudge.

Figure (4). BE Development process and where both Approaches of Nudge and Inspiration Labs meet and/or differentiate

6. Conclusions

When BE models are alive in the targeted government organisation, they would be more competent to confront adversity, or challenges that are faced by or reflected on the beneficiaries. Positive BE models create a sort of empowering waves that prepare the government organisation or the community to develop their capacity in comparison with the expected demands.

Both BE techniques in this study found to be superior in certain characteristics when their influence on government services are compared from the specific scope as welfare system that lead to better quality of life. Nudge is found to be faster and simpler for government programs, but IL’s create more effective and deeper mindset changes.

In the end of the day BE is considered now a clearly unique development opportunity for all government entities. Recognition of BE programs means that government should optimise the spirit of scientific exploration that come when investigation on the type of behavioural change start to deliver opportunities for best outcomes. Great government transformation could occur if BE is systematically applied and the benefit of this multi-disciplined field is institutionalized in its culture.

Government organisations now have greater choices in solving chronic issues in many important areas while also being able more to promote socially desirable citizens’ behaviours. For example, Nudge could be used to encourage participation of positive behaviours that would enhance the social welfare, while IL’s could be used more to solve chronic problems that could not be solved with such behaviours, or it would need time or resources if to be solved. Both techniques would help to build some proactive government entities and better citizenship that brings in welfare measures before problems occurs over time.

Even though the comparative data in this study doesn’t give a clear cut about the effectiveness of the sequence of field experiments and observations on the mindset of the government organisation, i.e. whether the way of Nudge or IL’s would influence the mindset more; this research can be considered an early attempt to see the big picture of the outcome of such BE approaches. The study shows that there are more BE approaches for improving government outcomes than just Nudge. Therefore, governments are highly recommended to keep up the new spirit of BE curiosity, but also be open minded to try techniques as Inspiration Labs in order to create new cultures that can see variety of solutions to problems and still with most efficient way.

The objectivity in this research is optimised against any sources of bias related to personal experience or subjective ideas. However, in order to avoid any potential biases of the researcher influences due to his personal feelings and experiences, more studies are recommended in this line, i.e. comparing Nudge with similar BE driven field experiment labs, and in different countries and in variety of fields as done in this study, i.e. in healthcare, or education, etc. Studies as observing the government and citizens’ behaviours after such BE approaches are highly recommended too.