Abstract:Numerous recent studies show that sharing politician or bureaucrat performance information with voters seldom succeeds at generating bottom-up pressure. One explanation is that local politics in developing democracies are typically mediated through local "development broker" elites, who often lack critical procedural information. Does supplying local leaders with information about decentralized political processes allow them to participate more effectively, generate accountability pressure, and improve public goods provision? A randomized field experiment in Peru demonstrates that information can indeed provoke attitudinal and behavioral change among village elites regarding participation, government performance and protest, but often in unanticipated ways. The study finds that training workshops in fact reduce participation in local participatory budgeting processes, reduce satisfaction with mayors, and increase support for protest and recall elections. Aggregate behavioral measures find a reduction in participatory budgeting attendance, but no changes in the probability of protest or recall initiation. Although village leaders are frustrated with mayoral performance, they struggle to generate collective action and thus have to settle for withdrawing from processes they can leave unilaterally. A test of mechanisms indicates this is not driven primarily by rent-seeking. There are no overall effects on district government performance in the following year. The evidence indicates that information can prompt local leaders to make political moves, but the high costs of collection action makes it difficult to produce meaningful change in politician behavior.

Public Information Is an Incentive for Politicians: Experimental Evidence from Delhi Elections

Decentralization, Local Information, and Effort Substitution: Evidence from a Subnational Decentralization Reform in China

Good Politicians: Experimental Evidence on Motivations for Political Candidacy and Government Performance

Information Revelation and Pandering in Elections

Neighbour Effects in the Provision of Public Goods in A Young Democracy: Evidence from China

The Unintended Effects of Bottom-Up Accountability: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Peru

Paving the road to re-election

Should Politicians be Informed? Targeted Benefits and Heterogeneous Voters

Making Policies Matter: Voter Responses to Campaign Promises

Village Elections, Public Goods Investments and Pork Barrel Politics, Chinese-style

What Makes Local Governments More Accountable? Evidence from a Website Reform∗

Social Pressure and Voter Turnout: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment

Pork barrel politics, voter turnout, and inequality: An experimental study

Incentive Schemes for Local Government: Theory and Evidence from Comprehensive Performance Assessment in England

Pro-sociality of local democratic leaders: The impact and dynamics of being elected ⊥

Group Incentives for the Public Good: A Field Experiment on Improving the Urban Environment

When criminality begets crime: the role of elected politicians in India

Financial reporting, public services and local executives’ re-electability in Indonesia

Political Awareness, Microtargeting of Voters, and Negative Electoral Campaigning

Disclosing for Promotion or Perquisites: Local Government Financial Disclosure Strategy

The causal effect of political power on the provision of public education: Evidence from a weighted voting system