Periodic Reporting for period 4 - POAB (The Psychology of Administrative Burden)
Okres sprawozdawczy: 2023-08-01 do 2024-01-31
The burdens of dealing with administrative rules and practices when applying for government benefits or services are a fact of life around the world. Administrative rules serve to ensure that only those entitled to benefits and services will receive them and that all are treated equally. Also, such as compulsory meeting attendance at public offices are commonly implemented to incentivize unemployed people to find a job.
While administrative rules serve legitimate purposes, there are reasons to believe that they in some cases have severe negative consequences for the individuals facing them and for society more broadly. If rules are very complicated or demanding, people may abstain from applying for government benefits for which they are eligible. Either because they do not understand them, do not have the resources to comply with them, or because they consider them too stressful or stigmatizing. This, in turn, may have detrimental consequences for their health and trust in government. In light of the potential importance of such burdens for millions of people and for the effectiveness of benefit programs, we know surprisingly little about the conditions that give rise to experiences of burden. Such knowledge is of utmost importance to create smarter and more flexible systems to the benefit of both individuals and society at large.
The POAB project expands our knowledge about how, for whom, and under what conditions administrative rules and practices give rise to experiences of burden. It does so by answering the following questions:
1) To what extent do administrative rules have different impacts on people?
2) What can be done to reduce experiences of burden?
3) Under what conditions do policymakers and the public support burdensome administrative rules and practices?
4) How can we measure people's experiences of and their support for burdens?
The project finds that even small hassles may be associated with measurable experiences of burdens. We find that the effects of such experiences have lasting effects on people's lives, but also that not all people are affected in the same way. While people of high age, less education, and less good health (mental and physically) are detrimentally affected by hassles and demands, more resourceful individuals may benefit from having to live up to demands. This is because demands in for instance unemployment policies for the resourceful individuals incentivize a behavior (seeking jobs) that benefit them in the longer run.
While administrative rules serve legitimate purposes, there are reasons to believe that they in some cases have severe negative consequences for the individuals facing them and for society more broadly. If rules are very complicated or demanding, people may abstain from applying for government benefits for which they are eligible. Either because they do not understand them, do not have the resources to comply with them, or because they consider them too stressful or stigmatizing. This, in turn, may have detrimental consequences for their health and trust in government. In light of the potential importance of such burdens for millions of people and for the effectiveness of benefit programs, we know surprisingly little about the conditions that give rise to experiences of burden. Such knowledge is of utmost importance to create smarter and more flexible systems to the benefit of both individuals and society at large.
The POAB project expands our knowledge about how, for whom, and under what conditions administrative rules and practices give rise to experiences of burden. It does so by answering the following questions:
1) To what extent do administrative rules have different impacts on people?
2) What can be done to reduce experiences of burden?
3) Under what conditions do policymakers and the public support burdensome administrative rules and practices?
4) How can we measure people's experiences of and their support for burdens?
The project finds that even small hassles may be associated with measurable experiences of burdens. We find that the effects of such experiences have lasting effects on people's lives, but also that not all people are affected in the same way. While people of high age, less education, and less good health (mental and physically) are detrimentally affected by hassles and demands, more resourceful individuals may benefit from having to live up to demands. This is because demands in for instance unemployment policies for the resourceful individuals incentivize a behavior (seeking jobs) that benefit them in the longer run.
The POAB project has developed new theory and key concepts throughout the project period. In addition to the theoretical work, the project members have exploited data from public registers and executed a series of large-scale surveys and in depth interviews with recipients of social and unemployment benefits, citizens in general, and elected policymakers. The aim of the surveys and interviews have been to invent solid measures of experiences of burden and to provide answers to the research questions above. Some main results from the project are:
1) It is commonly assumed that compliance demands may lead to increased stress and autonomy loss among people receiving government benefits. However, previous research has not been able to disentangle the influence of being exposed to such demands from that of being on benefits or being poor. We provide unprecedented causal evidence on this matter in a series of papers and demonstrate that the content of compliance demands matter for benefit recipients' experiences.
2) We test factors linking administrative rules to citizen experiences of administrative burden. We focus on factors such as self-efficacy (the feeling of being able to navigate administrative systems), deservingness (whether others are considered deserving of help), scarcity (a lack of financial resources), emotions, and physical and mental health. Combined, the research offers evidence of how and why administrative rules have different consequences for different groups of people.
3) We find that the way rules are communicated influence how burdensome they are experience to be. The usage of bureaucratic language increases the burden of learning about and complying with rules as well as the stress and autonomy loss associated with doing so.
4) We develop, validate and test predictors of a measure of burden tolerance (the extent to which people are supportive of administrative burdens).
These and other findings have been disseminated to:
1) The wider public through press releases and regular updates on social media and the project webpage.
2) To policymakers and civil servants through the participation in the work of three central government commissions in Denmark and through meetings and workshops with the US federal government.
3) The scientific community through 29 published articles, book chapters, and books, scientific workshops organized by the project, invited research presentations, and regular conference participation.
1) It is commonly assumed that compliance demands may lead to increased stress and autonomy loss among people receiving government benefits. However, previous research has not been able to disentangle the influence of being exposed to such demands from that of being on benefits or being poor. We provide unprecedented causal evidence on this matter in a series of papers and demonstrate that the content of compliance demands matter for benefit recipients' experiences.
2) We test factors linking administrative rules to citizen experiences of administrative burden. We focus on factors such as self-efficacy (the feeling of being able to navigate administrative systems), deservingness (whether others are considered deserving of help), scarcity (a lack of financial resources), emotions, and physical and mental health. Combined, the research offers evidence of how and why administrative rules have different consequences for different groups of people.
3) We find that the way rules are communicated influence how burdensome they are experience to be. The usage of bureaucratic language increases the burden of learning about and complying with rules as well as the stress and autonomy loss associated with doing so.
4) We develop, validate and test predictors of a measure of burden tolerance (the extent to which people are supportive of administrative burdens).
These and other findings have been disseminated to:
1) The wider public through press releases and regular updates on social media and the project webpage.
2) To policymakers and civil servants through the participation in the work of three central government commissions in Denmark and through meetings and workshops with the US federal government.
3) The scientific community through 29 published articles, book chapters, and books, scientific workshops organized by the project, invited research presentations, and regular conference participation.
The POAB project has significantly re-shaped the understanding of administrative burden by:
1) offering a new behavioral theory of the causes and consequences of citizens' experiences of administrative burden.
2) providing evidence of how administrative rules causally influence the mental well-being of citizens and benefit recipients and how increased experiences of burden in extension has detrimental consequences for people’s job motivation and trust in government.
3) demonstrating that people are differently affected by administrative rules and practices. The project finds that factors such as people's health, administrative self-efficacy, perceived deservingness, and the extent to which they experience resource scarcity contribute to their experiences of burden. Notably, the project finds that the very same administrative rules and demands may have positive long-term consequences for resourceful individuals while simultaneously having detrimental long-term health consequences for the least resourceful.
4) offering evidence of how other factors than the demands imposed by rules and regulations contribute to the experience of burden.
5) showing that communication of rules and demands influence whether they are considered burdensome by target groups. Communication of rules therefore is an important tool for governments and public authorities to consider to reduce burdens. Likewise, the role of frontline workers in helping citizens to navigate the system is key to reduce the experience of burdens.
6) inventing the concept of 'burden tolerance' and exploring its antecedents.
7) developing validated cross-national measurements of 'burden experiences and 'burden tolerance'.
Together, these contributions have brought the study of administrative burdens to a completely new level by integrating behavioral science into the study of administrative burden, by offering causal evidence of common untested propositions, and by creating new research agendas by means of new concepts.
1) offering a new behavioral theory of the causes and consequences of citizens' experiences of administrative burden.
2) providing evidence of how administrative rules causally influence the mental well-being of citizens and benefit recipients and how increased experiences of burden in extension has detrimental consequences for people’s job motivation and trust in government.
3) demonstrating that people are differently affected by administrative rules and practices. The project finds that factors such as people's health, administrative self-efficacy, perceived deservingness, and the extent to which they experience resource scarcity contribute to their experiences of burden. Notably, the project finds that the very same administrative rules and demands may have positive long-term consequences for resourceful individuals while simultaneously having detrimental long-term health consequences for the least resourceful.
4) offering evidence of how other factors than the demands imposed by rules and regulations contribute to the experience of burden.
5) showing that communication of rules and demands influence whether they are considered burdensome by target groups. Communication of rules therefore is an important tool for governments and public authorities to consider to reduce burdens. Likewise, the role of frontline workers in helping citizens to navigate the system is key to reduce the experience of burdens.
6) inventing the concept of 'burden tolerance' and exploring its antecedents.
7) developing validated cross-national measurements of 'burden experiences and 'burden tolerance'.
Together, these contributions have brought the study of administrative burdens to a completely new level by integrating behavioral science into the study of administrative burden, by offering causal evidence of common untested propositions, and by creating new research agendas by means of new concepts.