Transparency and Responsibility Attribution: A Field Experiment in Western Uganda

Abstract

The implementation of public policy is increasingly diffuse with responsibilities divided among several levels of government administration, the private sector, and nonprofits. In the face of such diffusion, many advocate for transparency initiatives to inform the public about policymaking. However, it remains unclear whether transparency initiatives clarify the blame and credit for policy, or what this means for collective action and accountability. Such concerns are especially pressing in complex settings like the non- renewable extractives sector (oil, mining, and natural gas). We assess policy attributions of blame and credit using data from a field experiment that randomizes stakeholder engagement in Western Uganda’s oil sector, building on our prior work showing that this intervention increased collective action. While participating in multistakeholder forums improved transparency for communities, we find that it did not change their attributions. In other words, improving transparency does not ensure that citizens will update their opinions about who is to blame for the problems they face. Yet, this did not preclude greater collective action. Evidence from this intervention highlights the need for more exploration of pathways linking transparency, collective action, and accountability.

Bill Schultz

I’m a social scientist interested in research methodology and the equity implications of policy implementation choices, especially in environmental and health contexts. I specialize in data analysis using R, Stata, Python, and geospatial software.