Network Structure and the Aggregation of Information: Theory and Evidence from Indonesia

Abstract

We use unique data from 600 Indonesian communities on what individuals know about the poverty status of others to study how network structure influences information aggregation. We develop a model of semi-Bayesian learning on networks, which we structurally estimate using within-village data. The model generates qualitative predictions about how cross-village patterns of learning relate to different network structures, which we show are borne out in the data. We apply our findings to a community-based targeting program, where villagers chose which households should receive aid, and show that networks the model predicts to be more diffusive differentially benefit from community targeting.

Social networks and health: A systematic review of sociocentric network studies in low- and middle-income countries

“…No interventions were conducted or evaluated in any of the health-focused studies, nor were any experiments conducted. Among the development-related studies, two discussed randomized intervention experiments (Cai et al, 2012; Comola and Prina, 2013), one discussed results in relation to an intervention (Banerjee et al, 2013), two discussed manipulated games (Apicella et al, 2012; D'Exelle and Riedl, 2010), and one discussed simulations as compared to real world data (Alatas et al, 2012). …”

“…Two studies also elicited ties by asking about participation in community groups and then the studies assumed ties between people who participated in the same community group (Alatas et al, 2012; Helleringer and Kohler, 2007). Some papers with multiple network types available combined the ties into one synthesized network for analysis (see the India development-related papers for an example).…”

“…Community-level social connectedness, as measured by several network structure characteristics, may exert different effects on various outcomes across different network types (Alatas et al, 2012; Cai et al, 2012; Entwisle et al, 2007; Shakya et al, 2014b; Zelner et al, 2012). For example, one study in China showed that take-up of weather insurance among rice-farming households was much greater in villages where households were clustered together.…”

“…Likewise, a study of latrine ownership in India demonstrated that households were more likely to own a latrine in less cohesive network communities (Shakya et al, 2014b). Finally, a study in Indonesia showed that people in more networked villages were better at identifying which community members were poor than people in less networked villages (Alatas et al, 2012). Likely related to social cohesion, several studies demonstrated clustering of kin within close proximity in sociocentric networks (i.e.…”

“…If complete census data cannot be obtained prior to NG-based data collection, then an understanding of what percentage of the network is needed for relatively accurate network descriptions should be taken into careful consideration, as some studies have done (e.g. Alatas et al, 2012; Banerjee et al, 2013). Moreover, if a longitudinal outcomes study is planned, then both census and network data may need to be collected multiple times as part of an open-cohort research design.…”