Search

This study assesses the impact of different types of evidence about the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines (anecdotal vs. statistical) on reducing vaccine hesitancy, while examining their complementarity with the communicator of this evidence (scientists vs. politicians).

While the world faces unprecedented COVID-19 case numbers, vaccination rates in many countries are stagnating. A differentiated understanding of the concerns of the unvaccinated population seems urgently needed to design successful communication strategies. We conducted an original survey experiment among 2,100 unvaccinated respondents from Germany where a substantial population share remains unvaccinated. Guided by the elaboration likelihood model, this paper has two objectives: First, it explores by means of a latent class analysis how unvaccinated individuals might be characterised by their attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination. The results suggest three different subgroups: Vaccination opponents, sceptics and those receptive to be vaccinated. Second, we investigate to what extent (i) communicators (scientists/politicians) can employ (ii) varying types of evidence (none/anecdotal/statistical) to improve vaccination intentions across these subgroups. While vaccination opponents seem largely unreachable, sceptics value information by scientists, particularly if supported by anecdotal evidence. Receptives seem to instead value statistical evidence from politicians.

Der Meinungsmonitor Entwicklungspolitik 2022 umfasst zwei Themenblöcke: Im ersten Teil werden zentrale Einstellungen der Bevölkerung zu Entwicklungspolitik untersucht. Behandelt werden unter anderem die generelle Unterstützung für staatliche Entwicklungszusammenarbeit (EZ), die Einstellung zu verschiedenen Motiven für EZ sowie die Einschätzung ihrer Wirksamkeit. Besondere Aufmerksamkeit gilt Einstellungen zu Demokratie und Demokratieförderung. Im zweiten Teil steht das entwicklungspolitische Engagement im Fokus: einerseits nicht-monetäres Engagement wie informations- und kommunikationsbezogene Aktivitäten, organisationsbezogenes Engagement und politische Partizipation, andererseits monetäres Engagement wie Spenden an entwicklungspolitische Organisationen und nachhaltiger Konsum. Ergänzt wird der zweite Teil durch einen Gastbeitrag, in dem die verschiedenen Engagementformen zu einer Typologie zusammengefasst und Einflussfaktoren auf den Wechsel zwischen Engagementtypen im Zeitverlauf analysiert werden. In beiden Teilen werden die Indikatoren für Einstellungen und Engagement (längsschnittlich) dargestellt und auf Unterschiede zwischen verschiedenen Bevölkerungsgruppen hin untersucht. Abschließend werden Implikationen für staatliche und zivilgesellschaftliche entwicklungspolitische Akteure zur Strategie-, Kommunikations- und Bildungsarbeit sowie zur Förderung des entwicklungspolitischen Engagements formuliert.

This policy brief summarises the findings of the DEval Opinion Monitor for Development Policy 2021. It investigated which partner countries the general public perceives as particularly worthy of support and what socioeconomic and political characteristics of the countries are associated with this perception.

The DEval Opinion Monitor 2021 examines five key questions: (1) How often and in what way does the media report on the topic of development policy? (2) What impact do arguments for and against development cooperation used in the media have on the general public’s attitude towards the topic? (3) What impact does information on the effectiveness of development cooperation projects have on attitudes towards the topic? (4) What role do moral arguments and various foundations of morality play in attitudes towards the topic? (5) What expectations do citizens have of development cooperation? The report also explores how public opinion on development policy and on specific development policy measures has developed during the coronavirus pandemic. Therefor, the DEval Opinion Monitor 2021 gives development policy decision-makers feedback on the general public’s attitudes to development policy. The publication follows the Opinion Monitor for Development Policy 2018 and the Opinion Monitor for Development Policy 2019, which examined attitudes towards development cooperation and sustainable development in Germany (2018) and media use with a focus on international reporting and global poverty (2019).

The COVID-19 pandemic poses a global health, economic and political threat for developed and developing countries alike. However, the latter are less well prepared. Tackling the pandemic and its effects requires global cooperation and the provision of development assistance to countries in need. Yet, support for development assistance among donor publics might be dampened by individual health-related and economic worries as well as decreasing trust in government during the pandemic. Against this backdrop, we investigate the effect of pandemic-induced worries on public support for providing assistance to developing countries as well as the moderating role of moral considerations and trust in government. Drawing on the aid attitudes and welfare state support literature and based on survey data for Germany provided by the COVID-19 Snapshot Monitoring (COSMO) project collected in April 2020 (N = 1,012), our regression models show that on average neither health-related nor economic worries go along with less support for providing assistance to developing countries affected by the pandemic. However, we find a significant interaction between health-related worries and trust in government: For those with high levels of trust in government the effect of healthrelated worry on support for development assistance is positive, whereas it is negative for those with low levels of trust. We conclude that for the moment there is no need for concern as neither form of worry correlates negatively with support for development assistance. However, garnering support for global solidarity remains an important task for policy-makers in developed countries. When the epicenter of the pandemic moves to the developing world and at the same time the consequences of the lockdowns become manifest in donor countries and trust in government decreases, public support for global solidarity may wane., This is a preprint of: Schneider, S. H., Eger, J., Bruder, M., Faust, J., & Wieler, L. H. (2021). Does the COVID-19 pandemic threaten global solidarity? Evidence from Germany. World Development, 140, 105356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105356

Gezielte fakten- und evidenzbasierte Kommunikation zu Entwicklungspolitik, Entwicklungszusammenarbeit und globaler nachhaltiger Entwicklung benötigt verlässliche empirische Informationen zum Mediennutzungsverhalten der Bevölkerung. Hierzu zählen generelle Mediennutzung, Nachrichtenquellen (insbesondere zu internationalen Themen) und Kontaktpunkte zum für die Entwicklungspolitik zentralen Thema "weltweite Armut", aber auch Vertrauen in die Medien, die Wahrnehmung der medialen Berichterstattung sowie Unterschiede zwischen entwicklungspolitischen Einstellungstypen. Der vorliegende Bericht stellt Akteuren im staatlichen und zivilgesellschaftlichen Entwicklungsbereich diese Informationen zur Verfügung.

Die Bewältigung der Corona-Pandemie erfordert internationale Solidarität und Zusammenarbeit - insbesondere mit Entwicklungsländern. Inwiefern jedoch unterstützt die Bevölkerung dieses Engagement? Daten des COVID-19 Snapshot Monitoring (COSMO) von April bis Juni 2020 zeigen, dass die Bevölkerung ein verstärktes entwicklungspolitisches Engagement Deutschlands zur Bekämpfung der Corona-Situation befürwortet. Sie hat jedoch Vorbehalte gegenüber Schuldenerlassen für Entwicklungsländer sowie Hilfe für die Wirtschaft und Geflüchtete vor Ort.

The Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) has launched an Emergency COVID-19 Support Programme in order to strengthen health care systems and ensure sufficient nutrition in developing countries. This policy brief addresses the question to what extent the general public supports these measures for combating the coronavirus pandemic and the associated consequences.

The paper focuses on an important dimension of donor aid allocation, which has largely been neglected in the empirical literature: the need orientation of donors when deciding on the sectoral composition of their recipient country portfolios. Employing sector-specific need indicators in logit and zero-one inflated beta estimations our results show that the degree of need orientation of donors depends on the sector. While in the sectors of governance, transport, environment protection, sexually transmitted diseases control including HIV/AIDS and emergency response, the analysis clearly points to a need-based allocation of resources, it is striking that need considerations seem not to play a role in the health and water and sanitation sectors. Remarkably, we find evidence for donor coordination within countries, in that donors took other donors’ sector activities into account when deciding on the sectoral composition of their country portfolios., Discussion Paper