IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/wpaper/hal-04986141.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Effective community mobilization: evidence from Mali.

Author

Listed:
  • Maria Laura Alzua

    (UNLP - Universidad Nacional de la Plata [Argentine], CEDLAS - Centro de Estudios Distributivos, Laborales y Sociales - UNLP - Universidad Nacional de la Plata [Argentine], PEP - Pemex Exploración y Producción [Campeche])

  • Juan Camilo Cardenas

    (UNIANDES - Universidad de los Andes [Bogota])

  • Habiba Djebbari

    (AMSE - Aix-Marseille Sciences Economiques - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - AMU - Aix Marseille Université - ECM - École Centrale de Marseille - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

Experts argue that the adoption of healthy sanitation practices, such as hand washing and latrine use, requires focusing on the entire community rather than individual behaviors. According to this view, one limiting factor in ending open defecation lies in the capacity of the community to collectively act toward this goal. Each member of a community bears the private cost of contributing by washing hands and using latrines, but the benefits through better health outcomes depend on whether other community members also opt out of open defecation. We rely on a community-based intervention carried out in Mali as an illustrative example (Community-Led Total Sanitation or CLTS). Using a series of experiments conducted in 121 villages and designed to measure the willingness of community members to contribute to a local public good, we investigate the process of participation in a collective action problem setting. Our focus is on two types of activities: (1) gathering of community members to encourage public discussion of the collective action problem, and (2) facilitation by a community champion of the adoption of individual actions to attain the socially preferred outcome. In games, communication helps raise public good provision, and both open discussion and facilitated ones have the same impact. When a community member facilitates a discussion after an open discussion session, public good contributions increase, but there are no gains from opening up the discussion after a facilitated session. Community members who choose to contribute in the no-communication treatment are not better facilitators than those who choose not to contribute.

Suggested Citation

  • Maria Laura Alzua & Juan Camilo Cardenas & Habiba Djebbari, 2025. "Effective community mobilization: evidence from Mali. ," Working Papers hal-04986141, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-04986141
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-04986141v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-04986141v1/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri & Kuhn, Michael A., 2012. "Experimental methods: Between-subject and within-subject design," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 1-8.
    2. Vivi Alatas & Abhijit Banerjee & Rema Hanna & Benjamin A. Olken & Julia Tobias, 2012. "Targeting the Poor: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Indonesia," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(4), pages 1206-1240, June.
    3. Martina Björkman & Jakob Svensson, 2009. "Power to the People: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment on Community-Based Monitoring in Uganda," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(2), pages 735-769.
    4. Fischbacher, Urs & Gachter, Simon & Fehr, Ernst, 2001. "Are people conditionally cooperative? Evidence from a public goods experiment," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 397-404, June.
    5. Ariel BenYishay & Lisa Mueller & Katherine Nolan & Philip Roessler, 2022. "Testing multi‐stakeholder dialogue for better local governance in Niger: An experiment. Can we talk our way out of development problems?," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 40(4), July.
    6. Juan Camilo Cardenas & Jeffrey Carpenter, 2008. "Behavioural Development Economics: Lessons from Field Labs in the Developing World," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(3), pages 311-338.
    7. Aflagah, Kodjo & Bernard, Tanguy & Viceisza, Angelino, 2022. "Cheap talk and coordination in the lab and in the field: Collective commercialization in Senegal," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    8. Alexandre Belloni & Victor Chernozhukov & Christian Hansen, 2014. "Inference on Treatment Effects after Selection among High-Dimensional Controlsâ€," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 81(2), pages 608-650.
    9. Arkedis, Jean & Creighton, Jessica & Dixit, Akshay & Fung, Archon & Kosack, Stephen & Levy, Dan & Tolmie, Courtney, 2021. "Can transparency and accountability programs improve health? Experimental evidence from Indonesia and Tanzania," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    10. Ghazala Mansuri, 2004. "Community-Based and -Driven Development: A Critical Review," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 19(1), pages 1-39.
    11. Jacquemet,Nicolas & L'Haridon,Olivier, 2018. "Experimental Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107060272, December.
    12. Cason, Timothy N. & Khan, Feisal U., 1999. "A laboratory study of voluntary public goods provision with imperfect monitoring and communication," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 533-552, April.
    13. Alexandre Belloni & Victor Chernozhukov & Christian Hansen, 2014. "High-Dimensional Methods and Inference on Structural and Treatment Effects," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 28(2), pages 29-50, Spring.
    14. R. Mark Isaac & James M. Walker, 1988. "Group Size Effects in Public Goods Provision: The Voluntary Contributions Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 103(1), pages 179-199.
    15. Allakulov, Umrbek & Cocciolo, Serena & Das, Binayak & Habib, Md. Ahasan & Rambjer, Lovisa & Tompsett, Anna, 2023. "Transparency, governance, and water and sanitation: Experimental evidence from schools in rural Bangladesh," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    16. Cameron, Lisa & Gertler, Paul & Shah, Manisha & Alzua, Maria Laura & Martinez, Sebastian & Patil, Sumeet, 2022. "The dirty business of eliminating open defecation: The effect of village sanitation on child height from field experiments in four countries," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    17. Vivi Alatas & Abhijit Banerjee & Rema Hanna & Benjamin A. Olken & Ririn Purnamasari & Matthew Wai-Poi, 2019. "Does Elite Capture Matter? Local Elites and Targeted Welfare Programs in Indonesia," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 109, pages 334-339, May.
    18. Jennifer Zelmer, 2003. "Linear Public Goods Experiments: A Meta-Analysis," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 6(3), pages 299-310, November.
    19. Casey, Katherine, 2018. "Radical Decentralization: Does Community Driven Development Work?," Research Papers 3629, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    20. Bochet, Olivier & Putterman, Louis, 2009. "Not just babble: Opening the black box of communication in a voluntary contribution experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 309-326, April.
    21. Madajewicz, Malgosia & Tompsett, Anna & Habib, Md. Ahasan, 2021. "How does delegating decisions to communities affect the provision and use of a public service? Evidence from a field experiment in Bangladesh," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Alzua, Maria Laura & Cardenas, Juan Camilo & Djebbari, Habiba, 2025. "Effective community mobilization: Evidence from Mali," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    2. Karakostas, Alexandros & Kocher, Martin G. & Matzat, Dominik & Rau, Holger A. & Riewe, Gerhard, 2023. "The team allocator game: Allocation power in public goods games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 73-87.
    3. d'Exelle, B. & Riedl, A.M., 2008. "Elite capture, political voice and exclusion form aid: an experimental study," Research Memorandum 024, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    4. Ardanaz, Martín & Otálvaro-Ramírez, Susana & Scartascini, Carlos, 2022. "Does Citizen Participation in Budget Allocation Pay? A Survey Experiment on Political Trust and Participatory Governance," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 12256, Inter-American Development Bank.
    5. Diego Vera-Cossio, 2022. "Targeting Credit through Community Members," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 20(2), pages 778-821.
    6. Ardanaz, Martin & Otálvaro-Ramírez, Susana & Scartascini, Carlos, 2023. "Does information about citizen participation initiatives increase political trust?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    7. Madajewicz, Malgosia & Tompsett, Anna & Habib, Md. Ahasan, 2021. "How does delegating decisions to communities affect the provision and use of a public service? Evidence from a field experiment in Bangladesh," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    8. Dannenberg,Astrid & Martinsson,Peter, 2015. "The effect of nonbinding agreements on cooperation among forest user groups in Nepal and Ethiopia," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7325, The World Bank.
    9. Fellner, Gerlinde & Lünser, Gabriele K., 2014. "Cooperation in local and global groups," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 364-373.
    10. Kreitmair, Ursula & Bower-Bir, Jacob, 2021. "Too different to solve climate change? Experimental evidence on the effects of production and benefit heterogeneity on collective action," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    11. Yoshio Iida, 2021. "Communication, choice continuity, and player number in a continuous-time public goods experiment," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 16(4), pages 955-988, October.
    12. Balafoutas, Loukas & Kocher, Martin G. & Putterman, Louis & Sutter, Matthias, 2013. "Equality, equity and incentives: An experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 32-51.
    13. Arifovic, Jasmina & Ledyard, John, 2012. "Individual evolutionary learning, other-regarding preferences, and the voluntary contributions mechanism," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(9-10), pages 808-823.
    14. Spraggon, John & Oxoby, Robert J., 2009. "An experimental investigation of endowment source heterogeneity in two-person public good games," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 102-105, August.
    15. Bluffstone, Randy & Dannenberg, Astrid & Martinsson, Peter & Jha, Prakash & Bista, Rajesh, 2020. "Cooperative behavior and common pool resources: Experimental evidence from community forest user groups in Nepal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    16. Trinh, Trong-Anh & Feeny, Simon & Posso, Alberto, 2022. "Political connections and post-disaster assistance in rural Vietnam," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    17. Peter Martinsson & Clara Villegas-Palacio & Conny Wollbrant, 2015. "Cooperation and social classes: evidence from Colombia," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 45(4), pages 829-848, December.
    18. Barr, Abigail & Packard, Truman & Serra, Danila, 2014. "Participatory accountability and collective action: Experimental evidence from Albania," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 250-269.
    19. Keuschnigg, Marc & Schikora, Jan, 2014. "The dark side of leadership: An experiment on religious heterogeneity and cooperation in India," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 19-26.
    20. Felix Kolle, 2012. "Heterogeneity and Cooperation in Privileged Groups: The Role of Capability and Valuation on Public Goods Provision," Discussion Papers 2012-07, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Public good provision; behavioral experiments; community-based development; sanitation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods
    • O12 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Microeconomic Analyses of Economic Development
    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth

    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:hal:wpaper:hal-04986141. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.