Suchergebnisse

AbstractDo Protestant missionaries affect community cohesion? This study puts forth two mechanisms that link missionaries to trusting, cooperative community life: pro-social preferences and social networks. On the one hand, Protestant missionaries espouse charity, and they establish regular venues of social interaction. On the other hand, Protestant missionaries propagate an individualist faith, and they provide an identity along which communities may separate. The effect of Protestant missionaries on community cohesion is thus unclear. To make headway on these conflicting theoretical predictions, we study variation in missionary activity in southeastern Peru. We document that villages with Protestant missions show lower levels of community cohesion compared to non-missionized, Catholic villages. We point to weakened networks as the most likely causal channel and show that effect sizes are particularly large among Pentecostal missionaries.

What drives people to migrate? Amid a stark increase in international migration at the global scale, we lack individual-level evidence that causally adjudicates between migration's many drivers. We implement a survey experiment in Northern Lebanon—a hotbed of international migration—to a random sample of 1,000 Syrian refugees and 1,000 Lebanese residents. Respondents were shown the profile of a hypothetical Syrian refugee and asked whether they recommended that the refugee migrate to the European Union. The vignette randomly primed five prominent causes of migration, including push factors (political instability and poverty) and pull factors (open borders, employment opportunities, and cultural openness). We find that pull factors outweighed push factors, suggesting that migrants carefully weigh their chances in Europe. Still, all five primes yielded positive effect sizes, which underlines that prominent theories of migration are complements, not substitutes. Taken together, the evidence suggests that empirical models of migration can be improved if they take into consideration both pull and push factors, rather than prioritizing one over the other.

abstract: Does government spending on public goods affect the vote choice of citizens? On one hand, prior research has characterized voters as fiscal conservatives who may turn toward conservative parties when government spending goes up. On the other hand, increased spending may signal that the economy is doing well, which makes progressive parties a more viable option. To adjudicate between both hypotheses, this article draws on a natural experiment, which created exogenous variation in government spending. A discontinuity in the 2011 German census meant that some municipalities saw an unforeseen increase in budgets. Using a regression discontinuity design, the authors show that the increase in budgets and subsequent spending on public goods benefited left-leaning parties but had no detectable effect on incumbent support. To parse out the causal channel, the authors rely on panel evidence and demonstrate that treated residents viewed their economic situation more favorably than did untreated residents, which led the former to espouse progressive parties.

We study whether religious anti-violence norms can reduce violent attitudes in settings of deep religious divisions. Our study context is a neighborhood in Nairobi with a history of religious violence. We randomly expose 576 Christian and Muslim respondents to anti-violence norms drawn from religious sources and find that the primes reduce violent attitudes by 0.2 standard deviations. We find no evidence, however, that highlighting the norms' religious source increases their effectiveness. Rather, we show that subjects apply the norms in a literal manner, suggesting that it is the norms' content that make them effective.

We study whether religious anti-violence norms can reduce violent attitudes in settings of deep religious divisions. Our study context is a neighborhood in Nairobi with a history of religious violence. We randomly expose 576 Christian and Muslim respondents to anti-violence norms drawn from religious sources and find that the primes reduce violent attitudes by 0.2 standard deviations. We find no evidence, however, that highlighting the norms' religious source increases their effectiveness. Rather, we show that subjects apply the norms in a literal manner, suggesting that it is the norms' content that make them effective.

Does physical surveillance hinder or foster antiregime resistance? A common view holds that surveillance prevents resistance by providing regimes with high-quality intelligence on dissident networks and by instilling fear in citizens. We contrast this view using formerly classified data from Communist Poland. We find that communities exposed to secret police officers were more likely to organize protests but also engaged in less sabotage. To ensure that the relationship is causal, we use an instrumental variable strategy, which exploits the exogenous assignment of Catholic "spy priests" to local communities. To trace the underlying mechanisms, we draw on qualitative interviews and archival sources. We document that Poland's comprehensive use of surveillance created widespread anger as well as an incentive for citizens to reveal their true loyalties, thus facilitating antiregime collective action. Once on the streets, protesters refrained from sabotage to signal their political motivation to bystanders and authorities alike.

AbstractDoes public opinion affect political speech? Of particular interest is whether public opinion affects (i) what topics politicians address and (ii) what positions they endorse. We present evidence from Germany where the government was recently forced to declassify its public opinion research, allowing us to link the content of the research to subsequent speeches. Our causal identification strategy exploits the exogenous timing of the research's dissemination to cabinet members within a window of a few days. We find that exposure to public opinion research leads politicians to markedly change their speech. First, we show that linguistic similarity between political speech and public opinion research increases significantly after reports are passed on to the cabinet, suggesting that politicians change the topics they address. Second, we demonstrate that exposure to public opinion research alters politicians' substantive positions in the direction of majority opinion.

Does public opinion affect political speech? Of particular interest is whether public opinion affects (i) what topics politicians address and (ii) what positions they endorse. We present evidence from Germany where the government was recently forced to declassify its public opinion research, allowing us to link the content of the research to subsequent speeches. Our causal identification strategy exploits the exogenous timing of the research's dissemination to cabinet members within a window of a few days. We find that exposure to public opinion research leads politicians to markedly change their speech. First, we show that linguistic similarity between political speech and public opinion research increases significantly after reports are passed on to the cabinet, suggesting that politicians change the topics they address. Second, we demonstrate that exposure to public opinion research alters politicians' substantive positions in the direction of majority opinion. ; Peer Reviewed

Despite numerous studies on the social and political impact of refugees in Europe, we have very little systematic evidence on the impact of refugee settlement on social cohesion in the developing world. Using data gathered in Northern Lebanon, we show that increased salience of the "refugee crisis" decreases natives' trust and prosocial preferences toward refugees, suggesting a negative impact of mass refugee settlement. However, this negative impact is driven exclusively by respondents with no individual exposure to refugees. In fact, despite concerns that refugee settlements may result in local conflict, we find that individual proximity to refugees is positively correlated with trust towards refugees, and that proximity has a positive spillover effect on social capital towards other migrants. This implies that, while the refugee crisis may have had a negative impact on social cohesion, this negative impact is mitigated in areas where natives are in contact with refugees.