Ethnic Diversity and Ethnic Discrimination: Explaining Local Public Goods Provision

Abstract

Numerous studies have found that ethnic diversity is negatively associated with the provision of local public goods. However, these accounts neglect both the strong role of central institutions in the provision of many “local” public goods and the frequently positive correlation between diversity and the presence of less politically powerful ethnic groups. These factors suggest that existing diversity findings may be explained in some cases by central governments discriminating against areas inhabited by less powerful groups. This hypothesis is tested using data in village-level public goods provision in Northern India, supplemented by data on service provision in Kenyan villages and American cities. While there is evidence that the presence of socially powerful groups is positively associated with service provision, evidence for the diversity hypothesis is weak. The results suggest that failures of public services in diverse areas may reflect larger inequalities within the political system rather than local problems in cooperation.

Fundraising for Stigmatized Groups: A Text Message Donation Experiment

“…However, even if some respondents consider their in-group the baseline category, the literature's emphasis on in-group ties leads us to expect that an explicit in-group reference would generate at least some additional giving. The context of our study supports the same expectation; we fielded the text experiment at the height of the refugee crisis in March 2016, when Greek ethnicity was particularly salient (Carlson, Jakli, and Linos 2017;2018).…”

“…First, the literature is unclear on the magnitude of the intergroup generosity gap. Since heterogeneous communities often suffer from multiple disadvantages, observational studies may overstate the effects of in-group favoritism and out-group bias (Lee 2018;Singh and vom Hau 2016). Indeed, the most robust observational studies -natural experiments-do not find that an increase in out-group presence reduces support for social welfare (Gerdes 2011).…”

“…Even state-of-theart experiments typically capture other-regarding preferences in narrow geographic regions, leaving some uncertainty about how institutional and geographic context shape the experimental results (e.g., Alexander and Christia 2011; Condra and Linardi 2019). Two recent lab-in-the field experiments have moved the literature forward by employing multiple study sites to examine intra-Jewish cleavages and Jewish-Palestinian discrimination (Enos and Gidron 2016;2018), but the geographic range of our experiment is unparalleled, as Figures 1 and 3 show.…”

“…Numerous observational studies suggest that diverse communities provide less funding for public goods than homogenous ones (e.g., Alesina and La Ferrara 2000;Stichnoth and van der Straeten 2013). However, they may overstate the effect of ethnic heterogeneity because minority communities suffer from multiple disadvantages (including less wealth, weaker institutions, and weaker social trust) for which observational research cannot fully control (Lee 2018;Singh and vom Hau 2016).…”

It’s Not Just Welfare: Racial Inequality and the Local Provision of Public Goods in the United States

“…But the power of group identities and attitudes to shape voters’ preferences about redistribution complicates this prediction (Alesina and Glaeser 2004; Hero 1998; A. Lee 2017; Tajfel and Turner 2004).…”