Direct Democracy and Resource Allocation: Experimental Evidence from Afghanistan
Fotini Christia () and
Additional contact information
Fotini Christia: Department of Political Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
No w0192, Working Papers from Center for Economic and Financial Research (CEFIR)
Direct democracy is designed to better align policy outcomes with citizen preferences. Using a randomized field experiment in 250 villages across Afghanistan, we compare outcomes of the selection of village-level development projects through secret-ballot referenda and through consultation meetings. We find that elites exert more influence over resource allocation decisions in consultation meetings as compared with referenda. Referenda also improve public satisfaction. The results indicate that the use of direct democracy in public resource allocation mitigates elite capture and results in more legitimate outcomes than those produced by less representative consultative processes.
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-cdm, nep-dev, nep-exp and nep-pol
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (9) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Journal Article: Direct democracy and resource allocation: Experimental evidence from Afghanistan (2017)
Working Paper: Direct democracy and resource allocation: experimental evidence from Afghanistan (2012)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:cfr:cefirw:w0192
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in Working Papers from Center for Economic and Financial Research (CEFIR) Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Julia Babich ().