Tag: policy feedback

Policy design and policy feedback in welfare retrenchment: A survey experiment in China

by Alex Jingwei He, Ling Zhu, and Jiwei Qian

Beyond conveying information about policy instruments, established government programs shape beliefs and expectations about policy benefits and burdens, as well as how individuals will be affected by existing policies. Social groups can then react to the information embedded in the design of policies, which, in turn, may strengthen or weaken them. The case study reported in this article explores how policy designs condition citizens’ behavioral and attitudinal responses to welfare retrenchment reforms in China. This article expands on recent policy feedback and comparative public policy literature by exploring how various policy designs, combined with individual proximity to reform, produce mixed responses. The article is guided by three hypotheses:

  1. Policy design that preserves individuals’ material self-interest will reduce opposition to welfare retrenchment reform.
  2. Policy design that improves the well-being of all in society will reduce opposition to welfare retrenchment reform.
  3. Individuals proximate to welfare retrenchment reform will exhibit stronger opposition than those with less policy proximity.

In 2020, the Chinese government engaged in a public consultation program regarding a proposed reform of the social health insurance system, which sought to reduce resources in individuals’ medical savings accounts. The authors conducted a survey experiment to gauge citizens’ responses to the proposed reforms and their hypothetical behavioral responses should the reforms go into effect. The survey participants were working and retired adults with social health insurance coverage and permanent residential status in Guangdong Province. Respondents were identified through a mature pre-existing sample and contacted via an online survey. The experiment measured socioeconomic characteristics and opposition to the healthcare reform before and after randomly receiving one of two policy design scenarios:

  1. Treatment Group 1 – Benefit-All Design: Reform will increase benefit generosity for both outpatient and inpatient care for social health insurance enrollees.
  2. Treatment Group 2 – Benefit-Family Design: Reform will allow individuals to use medical savings accounts to cover the healthcare expenses of their immediate family members.

The authors used a 1-4 Likert scale to measure opposition to the retrenchment reform. They measured demographic characteristics using a set of ordinal variables. They developed logistic regression models comparing group means with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals.

Figure 1 compares the mean opposition scores between groups before and after receiving the treatment message. Before treatment, the baseline preferences of the two groups were statistically similar. While both treatment messages reduced opposition, Treatment Group 2 (Benefit-Family Design) became more supportive of the reform compared to Treatment Group 1 (Benefit-All Design). At the same time, participants with higher educational attainment, poor health status, and large families were statistically more inclined to oppose the reform across both groups. These findings suggest that citizens prioritized preserving their material self-interest over supporting societal well-being. The authors therefore argue that sharing information on how a policy design allocates or reallocates resources garners meaningful attitudinal shifts. Therefore, this analysis supports hypotheses 1 and 2.

Figure 1. Comparing mean opposition scores before and after treatment. Vertical bars in the figure are the 95% confidence intervals.

Figure 2 compared whether the reduction of opposition to the reform varied by individuals’ proximity, specifically the frequency of medical savings account utilization. Based on the results, participants in Treatment Group 2 (Benefit-Family Design) who used their accounts at least once in the last 12 months showed significantly higher support for the reform compared to those in Treatment Group 1 (Benefit-All Design). Furthermore, individuals in Treatment Group 2 (Benefit-Family Design) who used their accounts more frequently (8-10 times) reported significantly higher opposition. These findings suggest that opposition to the reform increases as the frequency of utilization increases, which supports hypothesis 3.

Figure 2. Comparing mean opposition scores before and after treatment. Vertical bars in the figure are the 95% confidence intervals.

This article explores the significance of bridging policy design and feedback theories to better understand public response to the allocation and redistribution of material resources. While existing literature focuses on mass public opinion and participation behavior after policy adoption, this case study challenges scholars to examine citizens’ prospective assessments before policy changes as well. The authors suggest that future research should assess short-term feedback effects and long-term changes in those initial responses throughout the policy process. Unlike previous research, the findings reveal different sources of heterogeneous feedback effects other than partisanship, which vary by specific policy designs and individual experiences.

Read the original article in Policy Studies Journal:

He, Alex Jingwei, Ling Zhu and Jiwei Qian. 2025. “Policy Design and Policy Feedback in Welfare Retrenchment: A Survey Experiment in China.” Policy Studies Journal 53(2): 307–327. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12569.

About the Authors

Alex Jingwei is Associate Professor in the Division of Public Policy at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology and Acting Director of the Institute for Public Policy at The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST), where he also serves as the Co-Director of the Master of Public Policy (MPP) Program. He specializes in policy process theories, health policy and governance, and social welfare reforms. He received his PhD degree in Public Policy from the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore.

Ling Zhu is Professor of Political Science at the University of Houston. Her research interests include public management, health disparities, social equity in health care access, as well as the management of local health care networks. She received her Ph.D in Political Science at Texas A&M University and joined the faculty at University of Houston.

Jiwei Qian is Senior Research Fellow at the East Asian Institute, National University of Singapore. He currently serves as the secretary of the East Asian Social Policy Research Network (EASP). His research interests lie in health economics, political economy, and development economics. He obtained his B.Sc. in computer science from Fudan University, China and Ph.D. degree in Economics from the National University of Singapore.

, ,

The interactive effects of policies: Insights for policy feedback theory from a qualitative study on homelessness

by Anna Kopec

Existing policy feedback literature on participation examines how policy designs shape political behavior and argues that policies can encourage some people to participate whilst discouraging others. This prompts the inquiry: how do the effects of policy design characteristics interact? How might the positive effects of one element of a policy, for example, interact with the negative effects of another to influence participation of a marginalized group? How might multiple negative or positive effects influence participation? To explore these complex effects, this study compares how homelessness policies affect political engagement in Melbourne, Australia, and Toronto, Canada.

Drawing on 118 qualitative interviews with individuals experiencing homelessness, service providers, and policymakers, this comparative study explores how the effects of policy design characteristics (i.e., distribution of benefit, generosity, eligibility, visibility, delivery design, and integration) work together to either mobilize or discourage political engagement. Table 1 defines these terms below:

Table 1. Policy design characteristic operationalization.

Figure 1 demonstrates how the interaction of multiple policies, through their design characteristics, influences political participation. These effects are shaped by the resources allocated, the signals policies send about individuals’ roles in society, and their broader impact on institutional capacity to facilitate engagement.

Figure 1. Interactive effects of policy characteristics on participation.

The qualitative interview data reveals diverse service access among participants, highlighting key variations in characteristics, particularly visibility, delivery, and integration. Table 2 outlines the policy areas by city and sector, detailing policy characteristics and their effects on engagement as reported by participants. While both cities have many negative policy effects, Melbourne’s housing and health policies showed more positive impacts, particularly in integration, visibility, and delivery.

Table 2. Policy design characteristics of policies utilized by the sample of participants and effects on participation.

Notably, Table 3 illustrates that individuals experiencing homelessness actively engage in various efforts to drive change. While 56-64% of participants reported voting in their last federal election, over 90% engaged in actions such as peer work, providing organizational feedback, and joining advisory groups.

Table 3. Participation according to venues in Melbourne and Toronto.

The way in which different policy design characteristics interact can either amplify exclusion or help counteract it, depending on how services are structured and delivered. For example, integrated service delivery can moderate the negative effects of means-tested programs with strict eligibility rules. In Melbourne, social workers traveling to service centers helped reduce barriers related to eligibility and stigma. In contrast, Toronto’s lack of visibility and integration often left participants feeling isolated.

Policy feedback scholars must pay closer attention to the lived experiences of marginalized populations. These perspectives reveal how policy design and the interplay of its characteristics directly shape political participation. Without this understanding, we risk overlooking the conditions under which participation influences policy or the ways we might create spaces that meaningfully support civic engagement.

This research highlights how policies are structured and delivered, not just how their content affects democratic engagement. Integrated, visible services can empower marginalized individuals to engage politically, even amid social and economic instability.

For marginalized and targeted populations, policy design can dictate their civic participation and relationship with the state. Too often, policies reinforce exclusion, further distancing individuals from decisions that directly impact their lives. By examining where and how these populations participate, we gain critical insight into whether their voices are meaningfully reflected in future policymaking.

Read the original article in Policy Studies Journal:

Kopec, Anna. 2025. “The Interactive Effects of Policies: Insights For Policy Feedback Theory From a Qualitative Study on Homelessness.” Policy Studies Journal 53(2): 243–262. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12532.

About the Author

Anna Kopec is an Associate Professor at the School of Public Policy at Carleton University. Her research agenda examines the relationship between political participation and public policy among marginalized populations in Western welfare states. How do policy designs influence the political agency of vulnerable groups, and how in turn do such groups participate to bring about changes to the policies and systems they interact with? This comparative work focuses on populations experiencing homelessness. A secondary research agenda examines intersectionality and homelessness, with a consideration of how policies and services individuals access influence how certain communities participate.

, , ,

The Particular and Diffuse Effects of Negative Interactions on Participation: Evidence From Responses to Police Killings

by Cody A. Drolc & Kelsey Shoub

Negative interactions between the public and government agencies, particularly with law enforcement, have long been thought to reduce political participation and trust in government. However, less attention has been given to how negative events in government-citizen interactions shape civic participation and broader policy feedback. Specifically, little research has examined how government contact, whether personal (e.g., being arrested) or proximal (e.g., a family member is arrested), informs public engagement with local services. To fill this gap, we focus on police killings and their impact on the public’s willingness to engage with local public services. 

Theoretically, we draw on the policy feedback literature, which explores how personal experiences with government and government agents influence political participation and public evaluation of government. This framework suggests that government decisions send community-wide signals about the public’s value in the eye of the state, which in turn leads to disempowerment and reduced willingness to engage. Additionally, negative government actions–even when indirectly experienced–undermine perceptions of government legitimacy and thereby reduce participation. Based on these insights, we hypothesize two potential outcomes: the “Police Particular Hypothesis,” where a local police killing reduces engagement with the police specifically, and the “Diffuse Government Hypothesis,” which posits that such negative events decrease participation with local government services more broadly.

To test these hypotheses, we conducted a two-part study. First, we used observational data from Los Angeles, including 911 emergency calls and 311 non-emergency service requests from 2016 to 2020. We use a generalized difference-in-difference approach with matching to explore the effect of police killings on these two types of public engagement. Second, we conducted a survey experiment where participants were exposed to one of three randomly assigned news clippings, including one about a local police killing, and compared their willingness to engage with local government.

The findings demonstrate strong support for the Diffuse Government Hypothesis. In the weeks following a police killing, the number of 311 service requests dropped significantly, indicating that negative interactions with the police led to broader disengagement from local government services. However, there was no significant change in 911 emergency calls, suggesting that despite the negative events, the public still sees the police as essential for emergency situations. The figure below illustrates such relationships over time. The survey experiment further confirmed these findings, showing that participants exposed to the police killing vignette were less likely to trust and engage with local government. However, it also showed a reduction in the likelihood that someone would reach out to the police, providing some support for the Police Particular Hypothesis and suggesting that we might have observed floor effects in the observational study.

Image Description

This study contributes to our understanding of how negative events in government-citizen interactions affect community participation, expanding on policy feedback theories that traditionally focus on political participation. The findings have important implications for policymakers and public managers, highlighting the potential for spillover effects from negative events, such as police killings, to erode broader government legitimacy and engagement. 

You can read the original article in Policy Studies Journal at

Drolc, Cody A. and Kelsey Shoub. 2024. “ The Particular and Diffuse Effects of Negative Interactions on Participation: Evidence From Responses to Police Killings.” Policy Studies Journal 52 (3): 623–646. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12541.

About the Authors

Cody A. Drolc is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of South Carolina. His research primarily addresses program implementation and oversight in an intergovernmental context, specifically focusing on policies such as Social Security Disability and veteran healthcare. 

Kelsey Shoub is an Assistant Professor in the School of Public Policy at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Her research examines two broad questions: How do descriptive identities (e.g., race and gender) of officials and civilians intersect with context to shape outcomes; and How does language relate to policy and perceptions of politics? She has been published in Science Advances, the Journal of Public Administration and Theory, and the American Journal of Political Science, among others.

, , , , ,

The Policy Feedback Effects of Preemption

by Mallory E. SoRelle & Allegra H. Fullerton

Preemption has become a powerful tool for policymakers to disrupt policymaking at lower levels of government and consolidate governing authority. It occurs when a higher level of government enacts laws that override or limit the authority of lower levels of government. The federal government can preempt state governments; likewise, state governments can preempt local governments. This tactic can prevent local governments from implementing their own regulations on issues like public health, labor rights, and civil rights, leading to a centralization of power and often stifling local innovation and responsiveness.

Existing scholarship on preemption has focused on explaining its causes. Very little research has investigated the consequences of preemptive policies for policymaking and governance. In our paper, we develop a theoretical framework to examine these effects systematically, focusing on the lasting impacts of preemption on political engagement, policy innovation, and public trust. 

In developing this framework, we expand on policy feedback theory, which examines how policies, once enacted, can influence future political behavior and policy development. Feedback occurs through two mechanisms: resource effects and interpretive effects. The former includes the effects that influence the capacity of actors to participate in politics by changing access to resources (i.e., monetary, education, civic skills, etc.). The latter includes the effects that shape values and attitudes associated with a policy that influence policy preferences and political actions. We suggest ways of analyzing the resource and interpretive feedback effects of preemption on policymakers, interest groups, and individuals (see Table 1).

We apply the framework to two cases. First, we discuss federal preemption of consumer financial protections. When the federal government overrides state-level protections, consumers may lose trust in their ability to influence financial regulations, and state policymakers may become less inclined to innovate or push for stronger consumer protections. This centralization of power can also empower certain interest groups while weakening others, leading to a shift in the political landscape.

Next, we analyze the consequences of state preemption of municipal anti-discrimination ordinances, particularly in the context of LGBTQ+ rights. When states pass laws that prevent cities from enacting their own anti-discrimination measures, this preemption can stifle innovation and reduce the capacity of local governments to respond to their constituents’ needs. For LGBTQ+ individuals, these laws can lead to worsened health outcomes, decreased political efficacy, and a diminished sense of belonging, as the state sends a clear message about whose rights are prioritized.

This article highlights the significant and far-reaching impacts of preemption on politics, and it proposes a research agenda for future scholarship on the feedback effects of this common policy tool. By understanding how preemption shapes political behavior, policy development, and social attitudes, scholars and policymakers can better navigate the complexities of federalism and work towards more equitable and responsive governance. 

You can read the original article in Policy Studies Journal at

SoRelle, Mallory E. and Allegra H. Fullerton 2024. “ The Policy Feedback Effects of Preemption.” Policy Studies Journal 52 (2): 235–255. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12528.

About the Authors

Mallory SoRelle is an Assistant Professor at the Sanford School of Public Policy at Duke University. Her research and teaching explore how public policies are produced by, and critically how they reproduce, socioeconomic and political inequality in the United States. She focuses primarily on issues like consumer financial protection and access to civil justice that fundamentally shape the welfare of marginalized communities yet are often overlooked by scholars of the welfare state because they are not traditional redistributive programs. Mallory is the author of Democracy Declined: The Failed Politics of Consumer Financial Protection (University of Chicago Press, 2020), which explores the political response—by policymakers, public interest groups, and ordinary Americans—to one of the most consequential economic policy issues in the United States: consumer credit and financial regulation.

Allegra H. Fullerton is a PhD Candidate at the University of Colorado Denver School of Public Affairs. The bulk of her research examines the intricate relationships between emotions, beliefs, and coalition dynamics within marginalized communities. She has published in Policy Studies Journal, Review of Policy Research, International Review of Public Policy, and more on gender policy, policy feedback in the US and Germany, transgender healthcare, power, and policy learning. She teaches courses on policy processes and democracy, as well as negotiation. She sits on the organizing committee for the Conference on Policy Process Research, a community dedicated to advancing policy process theories and methods internationally. She also serves as the Digital Associate Editor at Policy and Politics.

, , , ,

The Paradoxical Power of Policy Loss in Group Identity and Action: A Study of the NRA’s Strategic Resilience

by Matthew J. Lacombe

Policy feedback scholarship has illustrated how policies shape group behaviors and political processes, primarily focusing on the benefits accrued by their proponents and supporters. This narrative typically celebrates the “winners”—those who benefit from policy enactments. However, less attention is paid to the groups that oppose the policies—what happens to the policy “losers”? 

I shift the focus to these overlooked groups and explore how policy losers turn their defeats into strategic opportunities for power-building. These groups often successfully engage in post-loss power-building efforts, especially when the policy (1) recognizes their members as a distinct class, and (2) does not undercut incentives for membership and mobilization. Such policy setbacks enable organized groups to point to the negative consequences these changes could have on their members, thereby increasing the political relevance and salience of their membership. In turn, organized groups strategically leverage these setbacks to their advantage, transforming defeats into opportunities to strengthen their group identity and collective action. 

I apply this framework to the realm of gun politics, focusing on the National Rifle Association (NRA) and its responses to two legislative defeats: the Gun Control Act of 1968, and the Brady Act of 1993 and the Federal Assault Weapons Ban of 1994. Both losses mark significant moments when the NRA failed to prevent the enactment of stringent gun regulations. The data is obtained from various sources, including public records of gun legislation and its amendments, key NRA communications such as newsletters, press releases, and statements, as well as gun sales and membership data. 

Here are some of the key findings:

  • In the aftermath of legislative defeats, the NRA framed new policies as targeted threats to gun owners as a group. The NRA leveraged these perceived threats to cultivate shared grievances among its members and to rally support for pro-gun candidates in subsequent elections and policy battles. 
  • In response to losses, NRA supporters, following the organization’s lead, expressed frustration with how the new laws treated them. These sentiments likely influenced the NRA’s membership numbers and gun sales, with each increasing in the aftermath of gun laws being enacted. 
  • The NRA’s post-loss actions manifested in subsequent political battles, often as strong opposition against the policy. The NRA, in short, was able to use anger about losses to mobilize strong support during downstream policy debates.

This study highlights the power of strategic framing in political mobilization. Policy losses can fortify a group’s resolve, cohesion, and future political capabilities when these losses do not disrupt the incentives that groups rely on to drive collective action. This paper invites policymakers and political strategists to reconsider the effects of legislative outcomes not just on policy winners, but also on those who initially face defeats. Understanding that policy losers might use defeats as a springboard for greater organizational cohesion and political power could influence both the design and communication strategies around new policies.  

You can read the original article in Policy Studies Journal at

 Lacombe, M.J. (2022) “Post-loss power building: The feedback effects of policy loss on group identity and collective action.” Policy Studies Journal, 50, 507–526. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12446

About the Author

Matthew Lacombe is the Alexander P. Lamis Associate Professor in American Politics in the Department of Political Science at Case Western Reserve University and the author of Firepower: How the NRA Turned Gun Owners into a Political Force.


, ,

Coalition Cascades: The Politics of Tipping Points in Clean Energy Transitions

by Jonas Meckling & Nicholas Goedeking

Recent scholarship on policy change has devoted increased attention to change across subsystems – the passage of new healthcare legislation, for example, will change not only health policy, but will also impact labor policy and tax policy (among other domains). The means by which trans-subsystem policy change occurs, however, are not clearly defined. 

We look at the role of policy feedback in bringing about trans-subsystem policy change. Specifically, we argue that trans-subsystem policy feedback can result in what we call “coalition cascades”. Coalition cascades represent a kind of domino effect, whereby a policy change that happens within one subsystem can alter coalitions across subsystems, by bringing together actors already inside a subsystem, introducing new actors into a subsystem, and/or moving actors into other subsystems. If policy feedback is positive, these coalition cascades can bring about trans-subsystem policy change by solving coordination challenges that are often part and parcel of making policy change that cuts across policy subsystems. Conversely, negative policy feedback may only partially fix these coordination challenges, if at all.

Figure 1. Coalition cascades

We apply our model to California’s clean energy transition. In 2002, California adopted a renewable portfolio standard (RPS) that required investor-owned utilities (IOUs) to derive a specific percentage of their energy from renewable sources. The next decade and a half saw positive policy feedback as the RPS was expanded upon and gained greater popular support. Even IOUs, which had initially opposed an RPS, gradually turned in favor, resulting in a coalition that was able to repel efforts to roll back California’s renewable energy initiatives, such as Proposition 23 in 2010.

The adoption and subsequent expansion of the RPS, however, also challenged the capacity of the state’s energy grid. Energy storage eventually crystallized as the solution. New storage startups emerged to meet this demand, and a coalition of storage companies formed the California Energy Storage Alliance in 2009 to advocate on behalf of energy storage interests. Storage companies, in league with environmental groups, lobbied state lawmakers for rules requiring energy companies to store a percentage of their load. This effort initially met with opposition from utilities, but by 2013 the state had adopted a storage mandate. 

Figure 2. Storage mandate

In addition to transforming the state’s energy grid, California’s renewables initiatives also had implications for passenger vehicles. In 2009, state legislators and regulators began exploring how to roll out charging infrastructure to support widespread electric vehicle ownership. One issue that emerged was whether utilities would be involved in setting up this infrastructure. A coalition of utilities and environmental groups were in favor, while charging companies and ratepayers organizations were opposed, fearing the market power of utilities. Eventually, however, it became clear that utilities were essential for a state-wide build-out of charging infrastructure, and as a result both ratepayer groups and charging companies shifted their stance. Beginning in 2014-15, utilities became major players in the electric vehicle subsystem.

Figure 3. Utility charging programs.

The evolution of California’s renewable energy policies offers an excellent illustration of the relationship between policy feedback and trans-subsystem policy change. First, we see how policy feedback surrounding the adoption of an RPS changed the coalition supporting renewables by bringing utilities on board. Then we identify spillover effects as more ambitious renewables policies triggered changes in both grid policy (through the adoption of storage technology to manage load intermittency) and transportation policy (through the creation of a charging infrastructure to encourage electric vehicles). In both cases, changes in policy – and the ways those changes were received – shifted coalitional makeups. 

We studied coalition cascades in the context of California’s energy policies, but expect that the dynamics we observed are present across a wide array of policy domains. Our model offers greater insight into how policy change can have ripple effects across multiple domains. Specifically, it shows that how a policy change is received – whether positively or negatively, and by whom – can shift the coalitions for or against specific sets of policies, thus either encouraging or inhibiting additional policy change. In our case study, policy feedback was largely positive, resulting in policy change across multiple subsystems. Additional work is needed to look at examples of negative feedback. 

You can read the original article in Policy Studies Journal at

Meckling, Jonas and Nicholas Goedeking. 2023. “ Coalition Cascades: The Politics of Tipping Points in Clean Energy Transitions.” Policy Studies Journal 51(4): 715–739. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12507.

About the Authors

Jonas Meckling is Associate Professor of Energy and Environmental Policy at the University of California, Berkeley, and Climate Fellow at Harvard Business School. He studies the politics of climate policy and the energy transition. He received multiple awards for his research, including the American Political Science Association’s Emerging Young Scholar Award in the field of science, technology, and environmental politics. At Berkeley, he leads the Energy and Environment Policy Lab and the Climate Program of the Berkeley Economy and Society Initiative. Previously, he was a visiting professor at Yale University, served as Senior Advisor to the German Minister for the Environment and Renewable Energy, was a Research Fellow at Harvard University, and worked at the European Commission. 

Nicholas Goedeking is Senior Researcher at the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS) and Visiting Fellow at the University of Sussex Business School. His work examines the political economy of climate policy and sustainability transitions. He is particularly interested in urban climate governance and the politics of low-carbon infrastructure systems. Before his doctorate, Nicholas worked on energy efficiency policy in Berlin and Brussels, including for the European Commission. He holds a Ph.D. in Environmental Science, Policy, and Management from the University of California, Berkeley. 

, , , ,

Policy Feedback via Economic Behavior: A Model and Experimental Analysis of Consumption Behavior

by Gregory S. Schober

Policy feedback scholars have done extensive work to understand how public policies affect mass behavior (the feed) and subsequent policy outcomes (the back). Thus far, this literature has focused mainly on political behavior feeds. However, the impact of these policies extends beyond the realm of politics, influencing the economic behavior of individuals and, in turn, shaping future policy outcomes.

In my paper, I develop a policy feedback model of consumption behavior in mass publics. Illustrated in Figure 1, the model shows how policies influence consumption capacity and preferences, which in turn affect future policy decisions. For example, social assistance policies transfer resources to beneficiaries, thus altering their spending decisions and influencing government policy responses (see path A-C-F-H).

I use this theory to investigate how targeted cash assistance policies (TCAPs) influence not just the immediate consumption patterns but also the subsequent policies. To do this, I analyzed the effects of Progresa—a Mexican TCAP that aimed to reduce poverty—by utilizing data collected during a randomized field experiment. I performed downstream analysis on the data to estimate the effects of Progresa.

In the short term, Progresa positively influenced private consumption of basic utilities. When households received the cash transfers, they used them to purchase private access to drainage (via septic tanks). However, in the medium term, a startling shift occurred. In communities where Progresa was implemented and private access to drainage increased, the government began making less of an effort to maintain the public water system.

My work offers key insights into the complex relationship between short-term consumption changes and (unintended) medium-term policy outcomes. It emphasizes that while consumption effects did occur swiftly, leading to increased private access to drainage, the subsequent impact on government policy ultimately led to reductions in basic utility access.

An intriguing question arises when considering the medium-term results: are targeted cash assistance policies—which generally are administered at the national level—letting local governments off the hook in terms of basic utility provision? When program beneficiaries use cash transfers to invest in private access to basic utilities, they in turn may be disincentivizing local governments from investing in public utility systems.

The implications of this study reverberate across various domains of policy feedback research. It highlights the need to broaden the scope of policy feedback analysis beyond political spheres to include economic mechanisms. These findings prompt further exploration into how economic feeds could influence future political behavior and policy outcomes.

In conclusion, this research breaks new ground by unraveling the ripple effects of social assistance policies, shedding light on how they influence consumption patterns and government policies regarding basic utilities. Understanding these intricate dynamics between policy, consumption behavior, and subsequent governance decisions is crucial for designing effective, holistic policies that address poverty while ensuring sustained access to essential services for vulnerable populations.

You can read the original article in Policy Studies Journal at

Schober, Gregory S. 2023. “Policy feedback via economic behavior: A model and experimental analysis of consumption behavior.” Policy Studies Journal 51: 607–627. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12474.

About the Author

Gregory S. Schober is an Assistant Professor in the Rehabilitation Sciences Program at The University of Texas at El Paso. His research examines social policy, political and economic behavior, and health in developing countries and the United States.


, , , ,