Suppr超能文献

有效的社区动员:来自马里的证据。

Effective community mobilization: Evidence from Mali.

作者信息

Alzua Maria Laura, Cardenas Juan Camilo, Djebbari Habiba

机构信息

Universidad Nacional de la Plata - Conicet, CEDLAS and PEP, Argentina.

Universidad de los Andes, Chile.

出版信息

World Dev. 2025 Jun;190:106956. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2025.106956.

Abstract

Experts argue that the adoption of healthy sanitation practices, such as hand washing and latrine use, requires focusing on the entire community rather than individual behaviors. According to this view, one limiting factor in ending open defecation lies in the capacity of the community to collectively act toward this goal. Each member of a community bears the private cost of contributing by washing hands and using latrines, but the benefits through better health outcomes depend on whether other community members also opt out of open defecation. We rely on a community-based intervention carried out in Mali as an illustrative example (Community-Led Total Sanitation or CLTS). Using a series of experiments conducted in 121 villages and designed to measure the willingness of community members to contribute to a local public good, we investigate the process of participation in a collective action problem setting. Our focus is on two types of activities: (1) gathering of community members to encourage public discussion of the collective action problem, and (2) facilitation by a community champion of the adoption of individual actions to attain the socially preferred outcome. In games, communication helps raise public good provision, and both open discussion and facilitated ones have the same impact. When a community member facilitates a discussion after an open discussion session, public good contributions increase, but there are no gains from opening up the discussion after a facilitated session. Community members who choose to contribute in the no-communication treatment are not better facilitators than those who choose not to contribute.

摘要

专家认为,采用健康的卫生习惯,如洗手和使用厕所,需要关注整个社区而非个人行为。按照这种观点,消除露天排便的一个限制因素在于社区为实现这一目标而集体行动的能力。社区的每个成员都承担着通过洗手和使用厕所做出贡献的私人成本,但通过改善健康状况获得的益处取决于其他社区成员是否也选择不露天排便。我们以在马里开展的一项基于社区的干预措施(社区主导的全面卫生,即CLTS)为例进行说明。通过在121个村庄进行的一系列实验,旨在衡量社区成员为当地公共利益做出贡献的意愿,我们研究了在集体行动问题情境下的参与过程。我们关注两种类型的活动:(1)召集社区成员以鼓励就集体行动问题进行公开讨论,以及(2)由社区倡导者推动采取个人行动以实现社会期望的结果。在博弈中,沟通有助于提高公共物品的供给,公开讨论和有引导的讨论都有相同的效果。当一名社区成员在公开讨论会后推动讨论时,公共物品的贡献会增加,但在有引导的讨论会后开启讨论则没有益处。在无沟通处理中选择做出贡献的社区成员并不比选择不做贡献的成员更善于推动讨论。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6352/11923596/eeb9c076f4a1/gr1.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验