IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/24048.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Participatory Decision Making: A Field Experiment on Manipulating the Votes

Author

Listed:
  • Vreeland, James
  • Spada, Paolo

Abstract

Many believe that deliberative democracy, where individuals discuss alternatives before voting on them, should result in collectively superior outcomes because voters become better informed and decisions are justified using reason. These deliberations typically involve a moderator, however, whose role has been under-examined. We conduct a field experiment to test the effects moderators may have. Participants in a class of 107 students voted on options over their writing and exam requirements. Before voting, they participated in group discussions of about five people each with one moderator. Some (randomly assigned) moderators remained neutral throughout, while others made limited interventions, supporting a specific option. We find a substantial moderator effect. Our experiment is structured like deliberations used world-wide to make community decisions and thus should have some external validity. The results indicate that if organized interest groups had influence over moderators, they might be able to hijack a deliberative decision-making process.

Suggested Citation

  • Vreeland, James & Spada, Paolo, 2010. "Participatory Decision Making: A Field Experiment on Manipulating the Votes," MPRA Paper 24048, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:24048
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/24048/1/MPRA_paper_24048.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/24769/1/MPRA_paper_24769.pdf
    File Function: revised version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ghazala Mansuri, 2004. "Community-Based and -Driven Development: A Critical Review," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 19(1), pages 1-39.
    2. Platteau, Jean-Philippe & Gaspart, Frederic, 2003. "The Risk of Resource Misappropriation in Community-Driven Development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 31(10), pages 1687-1703, October.
    3. Kevin M. Morrison & Matthew M. Singer, 2007. "Inequality and Deliberative Development: Revisiting Bolivia's Experience with the PRSP," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 25(6), pages 721-740, November.
    4. James D. Fearon & Macartan Humphreys & Jeremy M. Weinstein, 2009. "Can Development Aid Contribute to Social Cohesion after Civil War? Evidence from a Field Experiment in Post-conflict Liberia," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(2), pages 287-291, May.
    5. Rebecca Abers, 1998. "From Clientelism to Cooperation: Local Government, Participatory Policy, and Civic Organizing in Porto Alegre, Brazil," Politics & Society, , vol. 26(4), pages 511-537, December.
    6. Dimitri Landa & Adam Meirowitz, 2009. "Game Theory, Information, and Deliberative Democracy," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(2), pages 427-444, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Raffaele Calabretta, 2011. "Doparies," SAGE Open, , vol. 1(3), pages 21582440114, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Saguin, Kidjie, 2018. "Why the poor do not benefit from community-driven development: Lessons from participatory budgeting," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 220-232.
    2. Grillos, Tara, 2017. "Participatory Budgeting and the Poor: Tracing Bias in a Multi-Staged Process in Solo, Indonesia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 343-358.
    3. Nguyen, Tu Chi & Rieger, Matthias, 2017. "Community-Driven Development and Social Capital: Evidence from Morocco," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 28-52.
    4. Sheely, Ryan, 2015. "Mobilization, Participatory Planning Institutions, and Elite Capture: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Rural Kenya," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 251-266.
    5. Araujo, M. Caridad & Ferreira, Francisco H.G. & Lanjouw, Peter & Özler, Berk, 2008. "Local inequality and project choice: Theory and evidence from Ecuador," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(5-6), pages 1022-1046, June.
    6. Desai, Raj M. & Olofsgård, Anders, 2019. "Can the poor organize? Public goods and self-help groups in rural India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 33-52.
    7. King, Elisabeth & Samii, Cyrus, 2014. "Fast-Track Institution Building in Conflict-Affected Countries? Insights from Recent Field Experiments," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 740-754.
    8. Vallino, Elena & Aldahsev,Gani, 2013. "NGOs and participatory conservation in developing countries: why are there inefficiencies?," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201318, University of Turin.
    9. Shigute, Z., 2019. "Community participation and the quality of rural infrastructure in Ethiopia," ISS Working Papers - General Series 643, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), The Hague.
    10. Borisova, Ekaterina I. & Polishchuk, Leonid & Peresetsky, Anatoly, 2014. "Collective management of residential housing in Russia: The importance of being social," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 609-629.
    11. Lund, Jens Friis & Saito-Jensen, Moeko, 2013. "Revisiting the Issue of Elite Capture of Participatory Initiatives," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 104-112.
    12. D'Exelle, Ben & Riedl, Arno, 2008. "Elite Capture, Political Voice and Exclusion from Aid: An Experimental Study," IZA Discussion Papers 3673, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Barr, Abigail & Owens, Trudy & Perera, Ashira, 2020. "Collective management of an environmental threat when exposure is heterogeneous – A complementary methods approach," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    14. Classen, Lauren & Humphries, Sally & FitzSimons, John & Kaaria, Susan & Jiménez, José & Sierra, Fredy & Gallardo, Omar, 2008. "Opening Participatory Spaces for the Most Marginal: Learning from Collective Action in the Honduran Hillsides," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 2402-2420, November.
    15. repec:foi:wpaper:2010_14 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Bansi Malde & Marcos Vera-Hernández, 2022. "Spillovers of Community-Based Health Interventions on Consumption Smoothing," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 70(4), pages 1591-1629.
    17. Baird, Sarah & McIntosh, Craig & Özler, Berk, 2013. "The regressive demands of demand-driven development," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 27-41.
    18. Cameron, Lisa A. & Olivia, Susan & Shah, Manisha, 2015. "Initial Conditions Matter: Social Capital and Participatory Development," IZA Discussion Papers 9563, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Speer, Johanna, 2012. "Participatory Governance Reform: A Good Strategy for Increasing Government Responsiveness and Improving Public Services?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(12), pages 2379-2398.
    20. Jung, Woojin, 2020. "Two models of community-centered development in Myanmar," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    21. Deininger, Klaus W. & Galab, Shaik & Olsen, Tore, 2005. "Empowering Poor Rural Women In India: Empirical Evidence From Andhra Pradesh," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19123, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    deliberative democracy; participatory decision making; interest group; manipulation; moderators; facilitators;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D70 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - General
    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:24048. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.