Political Dividends of Digital Participatory Governance: Evidence from Moscow Pothole Management

Abstract

The Policy Research Working Paper Series disseminates the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about development issues. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presentations are less than fully polished. The papers carry the names of the authors and should be cited accordingly. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent.

Providing Goods and Votes? Federal Elections and the Quality of Local Governance in Russia

“…Local roads represent a public good that depends on electoral outcomes and is visible by the majority of residents as opposed to the substandard housing issues that are 'visible' only to the small group of successful applicants. Mending potholes is one of the most popular ways to demonstrate 'the real work done' by local administrations (Gorgulu et al 2020). This is especially true for larger cities, as more residents are able to observe these changes, while in rural areas these efforts are less likely to have such a demonstrable effect.…”

Europe and Central Asia Economic Update, Spring 2021: Data, Digitalization, and Governance

“…But what are the incentives for governments to promote digital engagement? Gorgulu, Sharafutdinova, and Steinbuks (2020) show that digital participatory governance can also be a political boon for incumbents.…”

Do Autocrats Respond to Citizen Demands? Petitions and Housing Construction in the GDR

“…Authoritarian complaint systems are similar to constituency service in democracies. Like 311 calls in New York and San Francisco (Christensen and Ejdemyr 2020) or "FixMyStreet" requests in the United Kingdom (Dipoppa and Grossman 2020), they provide public officials with information about citizens' everyday grievances and permit them to improve service provision (Staadt 1996;Gorgulu, Sharafutdinova and Steinbuks 2020).…”

“…We propose that autocratic governments respond to citizen demands to improve public support. Directly addressing and solving the issue (henceforth: "tangible responsiveness") raises support by delivering on citizens' expectations of the government (Gorgulu, Sharafutdinova and Steinbuks 2020) and producing material improvements in citizens' livelihoods (Cho, Lee and Song 2019;Guriev and Treisman 2020). Moreover, even non-tangible responsiveness can improve citizen support.…”