Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorDe Juan, Alexander
dc.contributor.authorKoos, Carlo
dc.contributor.authorPellicer, Miquel
dc.contributor.authorWegner, Eva
dc.date.accessioned2023-02-06T15:26:58Z
dc.date.available2023-02-06T15:26:58Z
dc.date.created2022-11-14T10:59:54Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.issn0038-2280
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/3048695
dc.description.abstractPostconflict reconstruction programmes often aim to improve state–society relations but fail to spell out the underlying process. We specify a mechanism that links aid programmes through (1) short-term and (2) medium-term improvements in basic services and (3) subjective progress to (4) perceptions of the state and spell four conditions (quality, sustainability, magnitude and attribution to the state) that must be met for this process to occur. We use this framework to evaluate a large-scale reconstruction programme in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). We find that the programme improved basic services in the short term and midterm and positively affected beneficiaries' subjective well-being. However, we do not find evidence that aid benefits have translated into political trust towards state institutions—on the contrary, project villages display slightly more negative attitudes than control villages. We suggest that this is due to lack of attribution of the improvements to the state that which was included in the selection phase but largely absent in the implementation. This implies that improved services can erode state legitimacy when citizens interpret the provision by nonstate actors as a signal of the state's inability or unwillingness to provide these services.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherWileyen_US
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleCan reconstruction programmes improve political perceptions in conflict contexts? Evidence from eastern Democratic Republic of the Congoen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2022 the authorsen_US
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/saje.12330
dc.identifier.cristin2073356
dc.source.journalSouth African Journal of Economicsen_US
dc.source.pagenumber427-455en_US
dc.identifier.citationSouth African Journal of Economics. 2022, 19 (4), 427-455.en_US
dc.source.volume19en_US
dc.source.issue4en_US


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal