Comment on Want to sell aid to the Australian public? Look to values, not national interests

Thanks Marcus,

Good point.

For what it's worth I think (as Tony points out below) that the moral sell (for want of a better term) is probably the most effective one for the wavering and pro-aid parts of the electorate. But I think you're right that for a particular audience the enlightened-national interest argument may work best (if there are any arguments that work at all -- some people aren't likely to like aid no matter what you have to say about it).

However, the segment of the population likely to be swayed by enlightened-national interest arguments is a minority, which I think means it would be it a mistake on the government's behalf to talk about benefits to Australia too much. (After all there's a sort of person likely to be put off by this argument too.)

cheers

Terence

Comment on Want to sell aid to the Australian public? Look to values, not national interests

Thanks Tony - and sorry I missed the Canberra presentation (I was overseas). I'm definitely looking forwards to talking more about your findings.

Comment on Want to sell aid to the Australian public? Look to values, not national interests

Hi Chris,

We have conducted such research. Last year we commissioned message testing with 1500+ people (cross section of Australians) and dial tested six different messages. The survey was extensive (15min+ per person). We are presenting a summary of that research at three "Transforming our Message" workshops. The Canberra one was last week, but we have the Melbourne and Sydney ones next week. We hope to also present at ACFID conference and other opportunities.

One key finding - national interest arguments (what's in it for us) are not mobilizing for our core supporters and not persuasive to the middle ground.

Comment on Want to sell aid to the Australian public? Look to values, not national interests

Terence and Camilla, is it possible that the Ministers you quote aren't talking to "all Australians" (the demographic that the survey samples), but rather, are talking to the populist right flank of the Australian voting public that currently vote coalition, but are considering switching their support to One Nation (or similar)? I think the proposition that Australians are generally supportive of helping poor people in foreign countries is credible, but the populist right of the Australian voting public probably have a different attitude to foreign aid, and I think the Ministers may be referring more to the latter group, rather than all Australians. What do you think?

Comment on Want to sell aid to the Australian public? Look to values, not national interests

Thanks Chris, a good question

*Looking at correlations*
It's not quite what you're after but I looked for a relationship between support for aid and positive views about multilateral organisations and positive views about China and Indonesia in this (older) paper and found a positive correlation: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2672704

There were also questions asked about globalisation in the survey the paper was based on. There seems (with some caveats) to be a positive correlation between people who view globalisation as good for them (or for Australia, which was an additional question) and support for aid. However, the relationship isn't super robust.

I need to look through our other datasets and see whether we have any surveys in which people were asked about climate change and about aid. That would be an interesting one to look at too.

*Looking at message testing*
This is what I think you're asking after. I agree it would be an interesting area. It may well be better approached experimentally rather than simply looking for correlations. We haven't done this yet. If you have good ideas for questions, please email them to us.

Terence

Comment on Want to sell aid to the Australian public? Look to values, not national interests

Terence & Camilla, has anyone tested public attitudes to messages around international cooperation to solve common problems (i.e. global public goods) vs messages about aid? I appreciate this would be hard to test - and coming up with compelling messages for the former might be a challenge(!) - but I think it might provide some useful insights into what new narratives may, or may not resonate.

Comment on Telecommunication and broadcasting regulation in Papua New Guinea – in conversation with the regulator

Thank you for your comment Tess. In fact, your blog post written with Vanuatu’s telecommunication regulator inspired me to commence discussions with NICTA about writing this post.

To learn about the Vanuatu context, check out Tess Newton Cain and Dalsie Baniala’s post at: http://devpolicy.org/telecommunications-regulation-in-vanuatu-in-conversation-with-dalsie-baniala-20160809/

Amanda. 

Comment on The end of the golden age

Very interesting take on the current situation and lot of it applies to Indian context as well. With rising Indian middle class the sector seems to growing, however at the same time International NGOs are facing fund crisis and the reason you have rightly communicated is the 'Getting own house in order'. Good read. Sharing it within team.

Comment on Inequality and immigration in Australia

Inequality is everywhere in the world. Our capitalist system ends up making things even more difficult. Here in Brazil we see much more the difference of classes, and we are even more far from the equality that you there in Australia. I hope we can change our mentality and build a more egalitarian and better world for all.

Comment on Telecommunication and broadcasting regulation in Papua New Guinea – in conversation with the regulator

It is interesting that NICTA's focus according to its Act has always been the interest of service providers or carriers. One of the biggest challenges in Papua New Guinea is the protection of consumers. The Papua New Guinea ICCT Act does not regulate the Telecommunication Sector because that Sector is regulated by NICTA through the NICTA Act.

The protection of telecommunication consumers remain a key challenge for NICTA to improve on by bringing in reforms to its Act to ensure consumer rights are protected and consumers are not exploited by telecommunications companies.

I would like to see NICTA redefining CONSUMER in the NICTA Act to include users and telecommunications companies.

NICTA also need to review the long held belief that telephone and Internet penetration in PNG is still below world standards, I disagree, an independent research will find that Internet penetration in PNG has gone up and a starking indication is the huge revenue by telecommunications company on data which has exceeded voice.