The growth of knowledge as grounds against paternalism

This paper considers the significance of the growth of knowledge for the efficacy of paternalistic intervention. Three cases are examined. The first is government intervention in the consumption of fatty food. Second is the evolution of knowledge that occurred after a law mandated the use of cycle helmets. The third examines information flows that characterised the smoking debate. This paper argues that although knowledge continues to evolve, inertia, path dependency and expert bias can impede the removal of paternalistic laws that do not raise welfare but continue to restrict individual agency.