Skip to main content

Give honour payment systems a chance

Give honour payment systems a chance

Honour systems operate all over the world, but not in Britain. Are high levels of social inequality solely to blame?

Phil Hall

I am used to using the rail and underground system in London. Here we have high prices, turnstiles and guards. Advertising campaigns try to intimidate us with posters showing mugshots of fare evaders with criminal records. Teachers, students and City workers stare down from the walls and CCTV cameras spotted with pigeon shit point down blankly at grubby platforms in run-down busy stations. It feels Orwellian and depressing. (The bus system, I'll admit, is much better.)

And so, when I went to Munich to celebrate the 99th birthday of my great uncle this month and used the S-Bahn and U-Bahn system, it was a joy. The German government was actually trusting me to pay for my ticket and use their clean and efficient system responsibly. And so I did – with pleasure.

Honour payment systems seem to work in Germany. There you pick up your newspaper, from a simple perspex box and drop the money in afterwards. In Berlin they even have honour bars and restaurants, where you can eat as much as you like and pay whatever you think the food was worth.

What stops us from using honour payment systems in the UK? Isn't trust one of the hallmarks of our society? No one steals the milk from our doorsteps. No one shoots the ducks in our parks or steals flowers from the flowerbeds. Everyone takes their turn. The level of social trust we still share in Britain is one of the best things about it. The gradual onset of a surveillance society belies this fact. The surveillance society clearly goes against the grain.

We are hungry for more trust in this country. When Tom Algie in Settle left his shop wide open all day he found the honesty box full of money along with messages from people thanking him for trusting them. But of course, honour payment systems probably work best in small communities where peer pressure is potent.

If, as Paul Zack and Stephen Nack found, the level of honour and social trust in a society is an important indicator of its health and economic success, then introducing more honour systems might make sense. They may increase social trust.

Honour systems can be effective. In optimum conditions the efficiency of honour payment system can rise above 90%. And of course significant savings are made when a large part of the enforcement system is dispensed with.

Moreover, ultimately, honour payment systems do still have sharp teeth. If a system that relies on trust is abused the result can, according to the Wikipedia entry, be "community shame, loss of status, loss of a personal sense of integrity and pride or in extreme situations, banishment from one's community". Strong stuff.

On the other hand, there are higher levels of social inequality in Britain than Germany, which would probably make it more difficult to implement honour systems, and, if given the choice, how many of us would voluntarily pay the high fares charged by the monopoly privatised rail companies?

But the lucky city dwellers of Munich do trust each other to use their public transport system properly, and consequently their experience of travelling through their city is better than ours. If only we could follow their example.

Comments

  1. The problem with honour systems is that you don't get to deprive poor people of the cool things that rich people use. And you don't get to put so many poor people in jail.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Aerogramme from Lisa and Richard

To: Mr & Mrs J. Hall, Box 49 Eikenhof (TVL) Johannesburg Afrique du Sud. 28.3.76 Dear John and Nola, Today a week ago we were still in New Delhi with Eve and Tony and the boys and the whole thing looks like a dream. We arrived on the 28.2 in New Delhi and were happy to see the whole family fit and in good health. The boys have grown very much, Phil is just about the size of Tony and the twins are above average. We stayed untill the 22nd March, as our visa ran out and we did not want to go through all the ceremony of asking for an extension. It also got hotter and I don't know how I would have supported the heat. The extra week would also have passed, so we decided not to go to all the trouble with the authorities and leave on the 22nd. I cannot tell you how happy we have been to see such a lovely family, so happy and united. It is rare to experience sucha thing and we have both all the reasons to be proud of them (when I say goth I mean you and us ). There is su

Guardian: Kate Harding's reactionary censorious blog on CiF

It should go without saying... ....that we condemn the scummy prat who called Liskula Cohen : "a psychotic, lying, whoring ... skank" But I disagree with Kate Harding , (in my view a pseudo blogger), posting her blog in the Guardian attacking bloggers. It's a case of set a thief to catch a thief. The mainstream media is irritated by bloggers because they steal its thunder and so they comission people like Kate Harding , people with nothing to say for themselves, apparently, other than that they are feminists, to attack bloggers. I'm black. So I can legitimately attack "angry white old men". I'm a feminist, so I have carte blanche to call all anonymous bloggers "prats." Because yes, that is her erudite response to bloggers. No I don't say that the blogging medium can't be used to attack progressives in whatever context. Of course it can. But to applaud the censorship of a blogger by a billion dollar corporate like Google, and moreov

Guardian books blog fringe: Norman Mailer

FLASHING THE GUARDIAN -- A BOOKS BLOGGERS' REBELLION :  The unheroic censor with a death wish Part 1: In which Norman Mailer stars in an experiment in search engine optimisation By ACCIACCATURE 3 February 2009 When Norman Mailer died in 2007, informed opinion – in the blogosphere, people who had read at least two of his books – was split. The army of readers who saw him as one of the most despicable misogynists writing fiction in the 20th century was perfectly matched by warriors on the other side, who raged that the label wasn’t just unwarranted but tantamount to heinous calumny. Before commenters returned to bitching-as-usual, tempers were lost on literary sites all over the net in debating temperatures high enough to bring to mind tiles burning off space shuttles re-entering Earth’s atmosphere. After I'd agreed to a spontaneous suggestion by our good friend Sean Murray -- a pioneer and stalwart of the comments section of The Guardian’s books blog – that we re-