Eliciting Risk Attitudes in the Field: Surveys or Experimental Methods? An Empirical Comparison in Rural Niger

We compare several risk preference elicitation methods – including incentivised, non-incentivised, and framed methods as well as a traditional Likert survey question – in a developing country and empirically test how well consequent measures of risk attitudes predict risk taking behaviour. We find that Likert scale and non-incentivised framed survey questions are not sufficient substitutes for costlier incentivised methods in rural Niger. Instead, the incentivised framed question works best while a simplified incentivised lottery question works almost as well. More risk and ambiguity averse farmers are less likely to adopt fertiliser microdosing indicating the importance of insurance and strategies to promote learning.     

THE STATE IS STRONG BUT I AM WEAK: WHY THE IMMINENT LAWLESS ACTION STANDARD SHOULD NOT APPLY TO TARGETED SPEECH THAT THREATENS INDIVIDUALS WITH VIOLENCE

Surely there is a profound difference between inciting to arson by the use of words and inciting to revolution by the use of words. We do not have a ready word for the distinction, yet it is a deep and obvious one.—Harry Kalven, Jr.     

Distributional impact assessments and the record of the Coalition Government: the tyranny of numbers without interpretation

This paper reflects upon the gross discrepancies between the reassurances given in 2010 by the 2010-2015 UK Coalition Government that their budget and welfare cuts would fall ‘fairly’ across the income spectrum, and the reality of what had happened by the end of that government. It asks how the ‘distributional impact assessment’ provided with the 2010 Comprehensive Spending Review could have been so wrong. In seeking to answer this question, types of systematic bias are considered along with a discussion of ‘marginality’ in assessments of impact. Drawing upon the role of ‘power’ in impact assessment, it traces the ways in which methodological assumptions can eclipse the real life effects of policies behind ‘the average’ as well as by the unfair selection of the ‘unit-of-analysis’.     

Prosecutorial regulation in the Global South: Environmental civil litigation by prosecutors in China compared to Brazil

Brazil's successful prosecutorial civil action against polluters could be a regulatory example for the Global South. This paper analyses whether such regulation could also develop without the major political, institutional, and legal reforms that spurred it in Brazil. To do so, it analyzes China, where similar reforms have so far not occurred, but where prosecutors have recently started to initiate civil litigation against polluters. It finds that prosecutorial civil litigation in China has only a limited regulatory effect or potential. Prosecutors in China are influenced by conflicting incentive structures that reward one‐off lower level test cases with an innovation bonus, while structurally stimulating a focus on general crime fighting. Ironically, as a result of such incentives, the recent legal reform, toward providing standing for prosecutors in public interest litigation, will, in contrast to Brazil, decrease rather than increase the regulatory effect of these cases. These findings have implications for understanding how the interaction between regulatory independence, legal reform, and regime type shapes possibilities for regulatory innovation in the Global South.     

The Dark Sides of Artificial Intelligence: An Integrated AI Governance Framework for Public Administration

ABSTRACT

As government and public administration lag behind the rapid development of AI in their efforts to provide adequate governance, they need respective concepts to keep pace with this dynamic progress. The literature provides few answers to the question of how government and public administration should respond to the great challenges associated with AI and use regulation to prevent harm. This study analyzes AI challenges and former AI regulation approaches. Based on this analysis and regulation theory, an integrated AI governance framework is developed that compiles key aspects of AI governance and provides a guide for the regulatory process of AI and its application. The article concludes with theoretical implications and recommendations for public officers.