Direct Democracy and Resource Allocation : Experimental Evidence from Afghanistan
Direct democracy is designed to better align public resource allocation decisions with citizen preferences. Using a randomized field experiment in 250 villages across Afghanistan, this paper compares outcomes of secret-ballot referenda with those o...
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Policy Research Working Paper |
Language: | English en_US |
Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2012
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2012/07/16506743/direct-democracy-resource-allocation-experimental-evidence-afghanistan http://hdl.handle.net/10986/11946 |
Summary: | Direct democracy is designed to better
align public resource allocation decisions with citizen
preferences. Using a randomized field experiment in 250
villages across Afghanistan, this paper compares outcomes of
secret-ballot referenda with those of consultation meetings,
which adhere to customary decision-making practices. Elites
are found to exert influence over meeting outcomes, but not
over referenda outcomes, which are driven primarily by
citizen preferences. Referenda are also found to improve
public satisfaction, whereas elite domination of allocation
processes has a negative effect. The results indicate that
the use of direct democracy in public resource allocation
results in more legitimate outcomes than those produced by
customary processes. |
---|