USAID Peru Baseline Report
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
BASELINE REPORT DRG LEARNING, EVALUATION, AND RESEARCH ACTIVITY: Impact Evaluation of USAID/Peru’s “La Lucha Contra la Influencia de los Intereses Ilegales en Los Procesos Políticos del Perú” DECEMBER 2015 Contract No. GS-10F-0033M/AID-OAA-M-13-00013 This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by NORC at the University of Chicago. The authors’ views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. DRG LEARNING, EVALUATION, AND RESEARCH ACTIVITY: Impact Evaluation of USAID/Peru’s “La Lucha Contra la Influencia de los Intereses Ilegales en Los Procesos Políticos del Perú” Baseline Report (December 2015) Prepared under Contract No.: GS-10F-0033M / AID-OAA-M-13-00013, Tasking N 016 Submitted to: USAID/Peru Submitted by: Aaron Abbarno, Democracy Fellow DRG-L, Principal Investigator Nicole Bonoff, Democracy Fellow DRG-L, Principal Investigator Noam Lupu, NORC Principal Investigator (University of Wisconsin-Madison) David Greenwood-Sanchez, NORC Graduate Research Assistant (University of Wisconsin-Madison) Contractor: NORC at the University of Chicago Attention: Renée Hendley Bethesda, MD 20814 Tel: 301- 634-9489; E-mail: [email protected] DISCLAIMER The authors’ views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. IMPACT EVALUATION OF USAID/PERU’S LUCHA PROGRAM CONTENTS Acronyms .........................................................................................................................ii Tables ............................................................................................................................. iii Figures ............................................................................................................................ iii Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ 1 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................ 2 2. Methodology .............................................................................................................. 5 3. Questionnaire Development and Tablet Programming .............................................. 8 4. Data Collection and Quality Control ........................................................................... 8 5. Data Cleaning ............................................................................................................ 9 6. Key Findings .............................................................................................................. 9 7. Conclusions ............................................................................................................. 21 Annex A, Concept Note ................................................................................................. 23 Annex B, Survey Instrument .......................................................................................... 35 Annex C, Surveyed Localities ....................................................................................... 60 Annex D, Balance Report .............................................................................................. 62 BASELINE REPORT | i IMPACT EVALUATION OF USAID/PERU’S LUCHA PROGRAM ACRONYMS DRG Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance DRG-LER DRG Learning, Evaluation, and Research Activity IDEA International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance IE Impact Evaluation IPSOS Ipsos IRB Institutional Review Board JNE Jurado Nacional de Elecciones LER Learning, Evaluation, and Research Lucha La lucha contra la influencia de los intereses ilegales en los procesos políticos del Perú NORC National Opinion Research Center (NORC at the University of Chicago) ONPE Officina Nacional de Procesos Electorales PAPI Paper-and-Pencil Interviewing USAID United States Agency for International Development USD United States Dollar ($) BASELINE REPORT | ii IMPACT EVALUATION OF USAID/PERU’S LUCHA PROGRAM TABLES Table 1 Impact Evaluation Research Design ............................................................. 6 Table 2 Gender Balance .......................................................................................... 10 Table 3 Educational Attainment ............................................................................... 10 Table 4 Household Assets ....................................................................................... 12 Table 5 Perceptions of Government and the Economy ............................................ 13 Table 6 Perceptions of Economic Change ............................................................... 13 Table 7 Political Knowledge ..................................................................................... 14 Table 8 Correlates of Experiences with Corruption .................................................. 17 Table 9 Tradeoffs in Government Intervention ......................................................... 19 FIGURES Figure 1 Monthly Household Income ........................................................................ 11 Figure 2 Subjective Respondent Wealth .................................................................. 12 Figure 3 Overall Perceptions of Corruption .............................................................. 15 Figure 4 Perceptions of Specific Cases of Corruption .............................................. 15 Figure 5 Experiences with Bribery, by class ............................................................. 16 Figure 6 Experiences with Clientelism, by class ....................................................... 17 Figure 7 Support for Government Intervention to Fight Corruption .......................... 18 Figure 8 Tradeoff between Fighting Corruption and Promoting the Economy, by class ............................................................................................... 19 Figure 9 Political priorities, by class ......................................................................... 20 Figure 10 Tradeoff between Corruption and Economy in a Survey Experiment ....... 21 BASELINE REPORT | iii IMPACT EVALUATION OF USAID/PERU’S LUCHA PROGRAM EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents the findings of the baseline survey for the Impact Evaluation (IE) of La Lucha Contra la Influencia de los Intereses Ilegales en los Procesos Políticos del Perú (hereafter referred to as Lucha Program). The Lucha Program aims to enhance the capacity of Peruvian civil society and state institutions to monitor the selection of candidates for inclusion on party lists and their campaign finance sources to reduce the influence of illegal interests – especially drug trafficking, illegal mining and illegal logging – over elections and political processes in Peru. This report first discusses the background of corruption in Peruvian politics and then presents the Impact Evaluation (IE) design, which consists of a randomized household-level information dissemination campaign. The methodology of the IE is presented including a description of the sampling of villages along with information about the baseline questionnaire development and data cleaning. Results are presented from a 1000 person household survey that took place in the Loreto and Ucayali regions of Peru during Summer 2015. The data suggest that an overwhelming majority of respondents think public employees and officials abuse their power in office, in all forms of public office. Although respondents in the sample generally think that public officials engage in corruption, many seem uninformed about particular politicians’ corrupt practices. Around 14 percent of respondents report being asked to pay a bribe in the last 12 months, likely an underestimate, with the majority reporting these bribes going to police officers. Additionally, wealthier citizens are much more likely to be asked to pay a bribe by a public official. Conversely, poorer citizens are more likely to have received material assistance from political candidates, also known as clientelism, which is consistent with other scholarship. Individuals who were asked to pay a bribe have less confidence in political institutions, are more likely to think corruption is widespread, and feel less political efficacy. On the other hand, participation in clientelism seems to have none of these effects. Citizens are broadly supportive of fighting corruption in both the public and private sectors. However, when forced to consider tradeoffs between policies for fighting corruption and economic growth, only 47 percent of respondents prioritize fighting corruption. Similarly, 46 percent of respondents agreed that public officials who improve the economy should be allowed to engage in corruption. Only 12 percent of respondents identified corruption as the main problem facing the country compared to 32 percent stating crime and security and 29 percent stating the economy. All of these results appear to be conditional on economic class, with poor respondents valuing economic growth over combating corruption more than rich respondents. These findings suggest that anti-corruption may be seen as a “luxury,” something voters can only concern themselves with once they have reached a basic level of economic security. However, these findings provide a clear strategy for anti-corruption