When Is Community-Based Monitoring Effective? Evidence from a Randomized Experiment in Primary Health in Uganda

Björkman, Martina; Svensson, Jakob

doi:10.1162/jeea.2010.8.2-3.571

Cited by 23 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They find that increased radio access has no impact on community--level participation, although it does seem to affect private behavior supportive of children's learning, such as purchasing books or making informal or private tuition payments to schools. Bjorkman and Svensson (2009) Almost all of the interventions described thus far, as well as much of the existing theoretical literature, focus on the provision of factual information that increases citizens' appreciation of the (usually deficient) quality of government services. But information provision might also generate citizen activism through other channels: by informing citizens about the importance of taking action and providing ideas about the specific actions they might take in order to improve the quality of government service provision (or substitute for it).…”

Section: Relation To the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Does Information Lead to More Active Citizenship? Evidence from an Education Intervention in Rural Kenya

Lieberman¹,

Posner²,

Tsai³

2014

World Development

146

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Relation To the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Does Information Lead to More Active Citizenship? Evidence from an Education Intervention in Rural Kenya

Lieberman¹,

Posner²,

Tsai³

2014

World Development

146

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…6 For comprehensive reviews of the experimental literature relating to behavior in public goods experiments see Ledyard (1995) and Chaudhuri (2011). 7 One important society characteristic that has been shown to be negatively correlated with individual contributions to a publi c good (Habyarimana et al 2007), participation in community activities (Alesina and La Ferrara, 2000), community-based monitoring of public service providers (Bjorkman and Svensson, 2010), and local public good provision (Miguel and Gugerty, 2004) is ethnic fragmentation. Neighborhood social and economic inequalities have also been shown to matter for urban violence (Morenoff, Sampson and Raudenbush, 2001) and collective civic action (Sampson et al, 2005). cooperation is also salient.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Participatory accountability and collective action: Experimental evidence from Albania

Barr

Packard

Serra

2014

European Economic Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Participatory accountability is often advocated as the solution to deficient top-down accountability systems. However, the evidence on the effectiveness of participatory accountability institutions is mixed and the reasons behind the contrasting results produced by the literature are unclear. We argue that the mixed evidence could be owing at least partly to heterogeneities in individuals' willingness and ability to overcome collective action problems. We investigate whether individuals' propensity to cooperate with others for the common good plays a role in their decisions to participate in both a school accountability system -i.e., a "short route" to accountability -and parliamentary electionsi.e., a "long route" to accountability. We combine survey data on 1800 individuals' participation decisions with measures of their willingness to contribute to a public good in the context of a very simple, clearly defined laboratory experiment. We conduct our study in a new democracy, Albania, involving a representative sample of parents of children enrolled in primary schools. Our findings confirm that, both across individuals within communities and across communities, cooperativeness in a simple public goods game correlates with both the decisions to participate in holding teachers and school directors accountable via school-level institutions and the decision to participate in holding all public servants to account via national elections.JEL CODES: C93, D72, H4, O12

show abstract

“…Participation in the CMI will be influenced by the strength of the community to act collectively. For example, communities with a history of grassroots participation are expected to organise more rapidly and more efficiently (Björkman and Svensson, 2010). History can play an important role in this crucial phase of the theory of change.…”

Section: How the Intervention Might Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Four Olken (2004Olken ( , 2005Olken ( , 2007 and Woodhouse (2005) analyse the social audit evaluated in Olken (2007). We also included Banerjee et al (2007Banerjee et al ( , 2010, Björkman and Svensson (2010), Molina (2013b), Pandey et al (2007), Pradhan et al (2014), and Singh and Vutukuru (2009)…”

Section: Assessment Of Risk Of Bias In Included Studies Of Effects Tomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(iv) Beliefs that other citizens would not participate Björkman and Svensson (2010), a follow up to Björkman and Svensson (2009), suggest that citizen participation may be threatened by differences within the community. They find that 'income inequality, and particularly ethnic fractionalization, adversely impact collective action for improved service provision'.…”

Section: (I) Inadequate Information On How To Monitor the Projectmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Community monitoring interventions to curb corruption and increase access and quality of service delivery in low- and middle-income countries

Molina¹,

Carella²,

Pacheco³

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) is an international grant-making NGO promoting evidence-informed development policies and programmes. We are the global leader in funding, producing and synthesising high-quality evidence of what works, for whom, why and at what cost. We believe that better and policyrelevant evidence will help make development more effective and improve people's lives.3ie systematic reviews 3ie systematic reviews appraise and synthesise the available high-quality evidence on the effectiveness of social and economic development interventions in low-and middle-income countries. These reviews follow scientifically recognised review methods, and are peer-reviewed and quality assured according to internationally accepted standards. 3ie is providing leadership in demonstrating rigorous and innovative review methodologies, such as using theory-based approaches suited to inform policy and programming in the dynamic contexts and challenges of low-and middle-income countries. About this reviewCommunity monitoring interventions to curb corruption and increase access and quality of service delivery in low-and middle-income countries, was submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of grant SR4.1034 issued under Systematic Review Window 4. This review is available on the 3ie website. 3ie is publishing this report as received from the authors; it has been formatted to 3ie style. This review has also been published in the Campbell Collaboration Library and is available here.All content is the sole responsibility of the authors and does not represent the opinions of 3ie, its donors or its board of commissioners. Any errors are also the sole responsibility of the authors. Comments or queries should be directed to the corresponding author, Ezequiel Molina, molina@worldbank.org Funding for this systematic review was provided by 3ie's donors, which include UK aid, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Hewlett Foundation and 16 other 3ie members that provide institutional support. What did the review study?Corruption and inefficient allocation of resources in service delivery are widespread in low-and middle-income countries. Community monitoring interventions (CMIs) are intended to address this problem. The community is given the opportunity to participate in monitoring service delivery: observing and assessing providers' performance to provide feedback to providers and politicians.This review assesses the evidence on the effects of community monitoring interventions on corruption and access and quality of service delivery outcomes. The review also considers the mechanism through which CMIs effect a change in corruption and service delivery outcomes, and possible moderating factors such as geographic region, income level or length of exposure to interventions. What studies are included?To assess the effect on corruption included studies had to have either an experimental or a quasi-experimental design. Qualitative studies were included to assess mechanisms and moderators.The review as...

show abstract

When Is Community-Based Monitoring Effective? Evidence from a Randomized Experiment in Primary Health in Uganda

Cited by 23 publications

References 9 publications

Does Information Lead to More Active Citizenship? Evidence from an Education Intervention in Rural Kenya

Does Information Lead to More Active Citizenship? Evidence from an Education Intervention in Rural Kenya

Participatory accountability and collective action: Experimental evidence from Albania

Community monitoring interventions to curb corruption and increase access and quality of service delivery in low- and middle-income countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About