More information, better knowledge? The effects of information campaigns on aid beneficiaries’ knowledge of aid projects (with Alexander De Juan and Paul Hofman)
Aid beneficiaries know little about development interventions in their own communities. This lack of transparency and information is likely to reduce beneficiaries' ability and willingness to become active in local development. It may also dampen intended aid effects on beneficiaries' political and social attitudes. Can targeted information campaigns strengthen beneficiaries' understanding of aid projects? We test the effects of two types of interventions: the provision of information only and the combination of information & feedback opportunities. We embed these interventions in a panel-survey in rural Mali. Our information treatment is highly customized to specific local aid projects in respondents' locations and corresponds to beneficiaries ex-ante information demands. Nonetheless, two months after the campaign, we find only small treatment effects on respondents' project-specific knowledge (type, location) and no effects on their procedural knowledge (selection mechanisms). Only people with favorable ex-ante views of the state's rule adherence and self-identified non-beneficiaries tend to update their views on procedural knowledge. Finally, we find that the combined information & feedback treatment has an effect on respondents' subjective knowledge which we interpret as promising mechanisms for engaging and identifying with aid projects.
Link to paper: https://doi.org/10.35188/UNU-WIDER/2023/365-9
Female Leaders, Regime Type and Public Goods Provision
This article starts with the observation that the share of women in parliaments has increased steadily over the last decades worldwide. Apart from the descriptive representation of women, do more women in parliament substantively affect public policy more generally? And if so how? Drawing on a rich literature that suggests women to be more prosocial than men on average, we argue that a higher share of women in parliaments increases the salience of other-regarding preferences in the legislative arena. By extension, this manifests in higher degrees of public goods policies. We refine our argument suggesting that this effect is conditional on a state’s regime type. We test our arguments with a mixed-method design. First, using time-series cross-sectional data we find that up from a share of 10%, female MPs make a substantive difference in increasing public (as opposed to private) goods provision. We also find that this effect depends on regime type and only works in democracies. Second, we use coarsened exact matching to select two cases along a most-similar systems design. The quantitative analysis lends strong support to our argument and thereby contributes to filling a gap in the literature on the substantive impact of women in politics.