No abstract

No abstract

Governments and NGOs are switching to phone-and Internet-based communication technologies to reduce costs and broaden access to public services. However, these technological shifts can backfire if they exacerbate administrative burden in high-need communities. We conducted a randomized controlled trial in Greece evaluating which communication mode best allows disadvantaged groups to solicit information about free services. Subjects were 18 times more likely to use a prepaid postcard and eight times more likely to use a postcard requiring postage than a hotline or email to seek information about free dental care. Focus groups indicate that low self-efficacy greatly limits disadvantaged groups' willingness to use newer technologies for bureaucratic inquiries. We demonstrate that the administrative burden associated with technological shifts is larger than previously believed and that widespread psychological barriers include not only the stigma of welfare receipt, but also the stigma of mishandling a conversation with a bureaucrat.

While numerous studies consider the roles that media consolidation, court-packing, and economic crises have played in Hungary's democratic decline since 2010, none have considered the subnational mechanisms driving illiberalism. This study examines the

As government welfare programming contracts and NGOs increasingly assume core aid functions, they must address a long-standing challenge—that people in need often belong to stigmatized groups. To study other-regarding behavior, we fielded an experiment through a text-to-give campaign in Greece. Donations did not increase with an appeal to the in-group (Greek child) relative to a control (child), but they were halved with reference to a stigmatized out-group (Roma child). An appeal to fundamental rights, a common advocacy strategy, did not reduce the generosity gap. Donations to all groups were lower near Roma communities and declined disproportionately for the Roma appeal. Qualitative research in 12 communities complements our experiment. We conclude that NGO fundraising strategies that narrowly emphasize either in-groups or out-groups, or fundamental rights language, may not be as effective as broader appeals, and we discuss implications for public goods provision in an era of growing nationalism.