Diversity and the provision of public goods: Experimental evidence from South Africa

Burns, Justine; Keswell, Malcolm

doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2015.02.018

Cited by 11 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Interestingly, yet, the finding is consistent with results from Uruguay, where small-scale fishers did not extract more in mixed-village groups than in single-village groups in a CPR experiment that focussed on punishment [47]. Previous social dilemma experiments not related to natural resource use have similarly found that cooperation in heterogeneous groups (individuals with different ethnicities) can be as high as in homogeneous groups [59,60]. The conclusion we take away from this result is that sociocultural heterogeneity of the type that we investigated does not generally limit cooperativeness in CPR dilemmas.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Sociocultural heterogeneity in a common pool resource dilemma

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Collective action of resource users is essential for sustainability. Yet, often user groups are socioculturally heterogeneous, which requires cooperation to be established across salient group boundaries. We explore the effect of this type of heterogeneity on resource extraction in lab-in-the-field Common Pool Resource (CPR) experiments in Zanzibar, Tanzania. We create heterogeneous groups by mixing fishers from two neighbouring fishing villages which have distinct social identities, a history of conflict and diverging resource use practices and institutions. Additionally, we analyse between-village differences in extraction behaviour in the heterogeneous setting to assess if out-group cooperation in a CPR dilemma is associated with a community’s institutional scope in the economic realm (e.g., degree of market integration). We find no aggregate effect of heterogeneity on extraction. However, this is because fishers from the two villages behave differently in the heterogeneity treatment. We find support for the hypothesis that cooperation under sociocultural heterogeneity is higher for fishers from the village with larger institutional scope. In line with this explanation, cooperation under heterogeneity also correlates with a survey measure of individual fishers’ radius of trust. We discuss implications for resource governance and collective action research.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Sociocultural heterogeneity in a common pool resource dilemma

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(Van Der Merwe et al ., 2008; Bashagi and Muchapondwa, 2009; Klasen and Woolard, 2009; Brick et al ., 2012; Muchapondwa and Sterner, 2012; Baten and Fourie, 2015; Burns and Keswell, 2015; Barrientos et al ., 2016; Dikgang and Muchapondwa, 2016; Eyal and Burns, 2019)…”

Section: Data Analysis and Interpretationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Given the above background, the researcher initiates a novel attempt to research and understand the predominant themes actively contributing towards economic development in South Africa; for merely talking about economic development and growth is not enough, until and unless it is reviewed in terms of plausible opportunities and threats (Mmopelwa et al ., 2009; Abdelfattah et al ., 2014; Baten and Fourie, 2015; Burns and Keswell, 2015; Baker et al ., 2016; Kollamparambil, 2020). This work aims to comprehend research conducted towards the South African economy in the last 25 years of time by the systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic Development and South Africa: 25 Years Analysis (1994 to 2019)

Dhamija

2020

South African J Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Economic Development highlights the growth and progression of every nation towards prosperity, and South Africa is not an exception to this phenomenon. Present article reviews economic progression in South Africa for last 25 years of time by applying systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis (1,241 articles) on Scopus extracted database (1994 to 2019; until 06 June). Inferences evidence significant work contributed by top universities, authors, funding sources, journals and citation statistics. Noticeably, implementation of a concept solely will not fetch real situation; however, a systematic review extends good to excellent understanding of the considered research agenda. Findings reveal the contradictory inter-connectivity of Cluster 1 Economic Inequality and Poverty, Cluster 2 Developing Country and Corruption and Cluster 6 Economic Development and Economic Policy. It is very important to understand that if a nation is facing economic inequality, corruption, and poverty; how it can achieve the status of economically developed nation. Identification of Cluster 3 Industrialization and Industry 4.0, Cluster 4 Unemployment and Entrepreneurship Education and Cluster 5 Sustainable Development and Economic Growth signifies scope of improvement. Conclusively, the researcher has proposed a conceptual model to address above stated concerns.

show abstract

“…Harrison et al (1998) make an important distinction between "surface-level" characteristics-features that are visible and can be perceived readily-and "deep-level" characteristics, such as personality and ability. The current research focuses on actual surfacelevel diversity (i.e., gender and race) because demographic differences are most visible as groups are in their beginning stages (Harrison et al, 2002) and because people may rely on demographic differences as a cognitive heuristic to infer deep-level differences (Burns & Keswell, 2015).…”

Section: Composition On Identification In Small Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Harrison, Price, and Bell (1998) make an important distinction between “surface-level” characteristics—features that are visible and can be perceived readily—and “deep-level” characteristics, such as personality and ability. The current research focuses on actual surface-level diversity (i.e., gender and race) because demographic differences are most visible as groups are in their beginning stages (Harrison et al, 2002) and because people may rely on demographic differences as a cognitive heuristic to infer deep-level differences (Burns & Keswell, 2015). Furthermore, surface-level diversity has also found to be a barrier to achieving group consensus in deep-level characteristics, with one study finding that consensus in values was harder to achieve in more culturally diverse groups than in more homogenous groups (Meeussen, Schaafsma, & Phalet, 2014).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%