Comments

Hi Terence, Not a problem. I actually had few extra thoughts after I posted: - Changing norm perception isn't just about numbers, but identification and legitimacy as well. A Coalition-voting audience (the most supportive of aid cuts in your opinion poll) might be more convinced by a petition to increase aid signed by 50 Coalition voters, than one signed by 50,000 Labor voters (or 500,000 Greens voters). A petition supported by an influential social referent for the Coalition voters (e.g., a Liberal politician) may add to the effect. - Presenting descriptive information is often ineffective in changing attitudes, as it can appear to normalise the status quo, even more so if it suggests momentum. So I'm not too surprised your condition showing declining aid volume wasn't convincing for participants (it may have actually been counterproductive if participants inferred declining normative support for aid in Australia along with those figures). I'd be really interested to see any followup studies! Cheers, Kylie

Thanks Kylie, That is a great comment, with a really interesting suggestion. Resources permitting I would love to run that test. The article looks excellent too -- thank you. Terence

Hi Terence, Interesting study! The results are in line with a mass of social psychological research that finds norms guide beliefs and behaviour above and beyond attitude persuasion (e.g., aid volume) Norm perception can be derived from individual behaviour, information about the group, and institutional signals. Given that the institutional signaling in Australia is pretty dismal, I wonder if the most effective method of garnering support for increasing aid would be to highlight the number of in-group members (Australians) who support aid increases, rather than emphasising the majority who don't? Your previous opinion poll study showed 43% oppose the cuts- that's (to extrapolate) over 10 million Australians who support aid increases! I wonder how this phrasing would change support compared to a control? Here's a great <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/sipr.12022/epdf" rel="nofollow">review article</a> about norms and social change: "Some interventions aimed at influencing norms simply present individuals with new summary information about the group, hoping to replace the individual's personal and subjective representation with this summary information." (p.189). Would be interesting to see this approach applied to perceptions of aid. Cheers, Kylie

Thanks for the clarification, Simon. Yes, I did notice that in the summary of the report but had been given contrary information. Great to have Kate's work acknowledged again.

Solid Waste Management is truly a concern in these two cities and other centers as well. If only we have a good management system with substantive regulations on SWM and strict compliance, then I think we will at least avoid all these problems.

Thanks Frank I’ll be in contact to get a copy of the policy as it isn’t available on any websites. There appears to be general agreement that the SME sector is important for more inclusive growth in PNG – and I certainly share that view. The leadership challenge is putting that objective into practice – both in policy formulation as well as implementation. Unfortunately, the new policy sounds as if it may be quite close to the scheme <a href="http://www.businessadvantagepng.com/return-of-png-government-sme-scheme-encourages-business-development/" rel="nofollow">described by Minister Maru</a> early in 2015 which the Prime Minister subsequently described as “unfortunate” – so it would be good to get more details. The <a href="http://www.adbpsdi.org/2013/11/getting-settings-right-on-sme-policy-in_11.html" rel="nofollow">ADB’s work on SME policy</a> suggests that broad business policy settings are vital – making it easy to start up and run a small business; creating an environment in which successful businesses are able to grow; and supporting the development of human capital through education and training. “Special policies can have unintended consequences and can ultimately undermine the broader objectives of social and economic development.” I hope that relevant organisations in PNG can make clear to the government the likely consequences of any policy based primarily on taking over existing businesses rather than growing new ones (as implied by your comment). There will be an active debate on the issues – this <a href="http://asopa.typepad.com/asopa_people/2015/02/we-must-ensure-that-protecting-small-business-will-deliver.html" rel="nofollow">Crocodile Prize entry</a> and subsequent discussion indicates some of the passion and issues. When reading the media reports of the policy, I was gobsmacked by the objective of creating 500,000 SMEs by 2030. This sounds great but appears based on some very, very optimistic modelling. PNG’s business community should ask for such models to be peer reviewed. My experience is that “money tree” models lead to poor policy decisions. A distinction between the informal sector and the SME sector may also be important in any revisions to the 1992 IPA Act. Pending getting more details, it is not clear from media reports that there has been the necessary hard headed analysis of what actually delivers on the goal of improving well-being for the citizens of PNG. There is much to be learnt from PNG’s own experience with the “reserve list”, on its experience with failed forms of protectionism especially on “infant industry” arguments, and learning from other Asian nations of what actually stimulated inclusive growth. I’ll also be interested to see if the policy talks about removing the foreign exchange restrictions and addressing the over-valued Kina which are hindering the opportunities for PNG’s small businesses to export. Cheers. Paul. PS I'll pass on the Zimbabwe comment. The Australian Financial Review headlines last month got me into trouble. Time will tell. But the SME policy, as well as the recent agriculture policy, seem to be more “muddling down” rather than “muddling through”.

Thanks Jo. My inclination is that it's norm confirming not competition. (Would people really sacrifice their taxes just to say they were better than the British?) That said more research would be great for fleshing out the picture.

Your title suggests you think the UK example has impact because of global norms and the idea of being a good global citizen. I'd like to think this, but wonder if experiment three simply highlights a desire to compete and be better than other countries, rather than any commitment to a global norm. (Although, arguably, it could be competition over achieving the global norm.) I'll be interested to see what further inquiry shows. What it does highlight is how little we really know about how publics approach these issues of global citizenry, and what are the key factors driving or influencing their thinking.

Dear Paul, Last Friday Minister Richard Maru and the Prime Minister issued a new SME Policy aimed at making 70% of the companies nationally owned through the required sale of these companies to PNG Nationals. This is probably the most devastating policy we have ever witnessed. All companies with less than 200 employees, K20M in investments, or K15M in Sales are aimed for confiscation. I say confiscation as if we have several thousand companies for sale with the only purchasers| PNG Nationals the price may tumble to 5-6% of book value. Once taken over where is the technical experience to run these companies|? It would appear that we are on a path of Zimbabwe. All is worthwhile of your investigation and printing of a new blog.

Thanks Garth, You've made a couple of very good points. On survey mode (the second point): you are correct that the populations that online survey companies sample from are potentially atypical in unobservable ways (i.e. ways that cannot be treated by weighting). That said, (a) online surveys don't involve self-selection, but use random sampling from a large 'population' of willing participants, which is not nearly as bad as samples constructed simply by self-selection. (b) of course, the population may still be atypical in some unobserved sense. (c) but this is only an issue for experiments if the unobservable difference is something that interacts with the treatment effect. (So not just the fact that participants in online surveys are different from Australians in general, but that they're different in the extent to which they respond to treatment effects.) This is fairly unlikely. (d) also, the regression analysis we've run using online data has produced very similar results to that we've run using data from the ANU poll (which is phone based). (e) there's a recognised issue with face to face surveys (covered by an English team of researchers in the aid conference) in so much as that respondents may give answers biased by their desire to seem nice to the person sitting across the other side of the room interviewing them (social desirability bias). So your concern here is a technically correct, and definitely worth considering. But I don't think it's too much of an issue for our work at present. That said, we are planning to place a suite of (non-experimental) questions in the AuSSA, which is a gold-standard Australian postal poll. This will give us separate data from a different survey mode. Which will be a good check. On your first point--once again it is a good point. There are limits to what we can do here because we have finite amounts of funding. However, that said we are going to try and conduct some experiments where respondents are presented with a richer, less artificial, suite of information before answering questions. Good points, and thanks again for engaging on this. Terence

It's great to see a methodical approach to these questions Terence. Can I suggest as well as testing other additional information in the questions (eg information about what aid has achieved) that Devpolicy also compares results from one-off questions in general surveys with questions in dedicated surveys on aid where a respondent has time to give more thought to the question of aid through a range of aid related questions. I would also test online polling against telephone or in person polling. These online polling panels often receive payment for participating in surveys which may influence participation and results despite sample weighting corrections.

Activate Taskforces to do activity on the smoke free policies by assisting to arrange meetings to discuss and to implement tobacco control act 2005. http://www.natabbd.org/taskforces-to-do-activity-on-the-smoke-free-policies/