Service delivery and state legitimacy: for better or for worse?

24th November 2015

People’s reactions to the question ‘does better service delivery improve a state’s legitimacy?’ are typically fast, instinctive and often surprisingly emotive. To use Daniel Kahneman’s Thinking, Fast and Slow model, ‘System 1’ thinking kicks in. Of course services support state legitimacy, encouraging citizens to accept the state’s right to rule over them. Can we imagine a legitimate state that doesn’t meet its citizens’ basic human needs?

Services form part of the connecting tissue between states and societies – they are the tangible link between what citizens give the state (taxes) and what they expect in return (wellbeing). State institutions must surely become more legitimate when they produce visible results that improve people’s lives. And greater legitimacy makes it easier for the state to rule without the threat or use of force, so it can devote more capacity to delivering even more and better services. So there is a self-reinforcing virtuous circle between service delivery and state legitimacy – isn’t there?

A huge amount of damage can be done very quickly if service delivery ... is perceived to challenge fundamental social norms

The problem is that, like many intuitions, this is very hard to prove. For one thing, legitimacy is a latent concept that is notoriously difficult to measure (more on this in a new DLP paper). And when we move into Kahneman’s ‘System 2’ thinking – a slower, calculating process – we fetch up against some important challenges to the logic of the service delivery = legitimacy equation. On the few occasions when social science has asked whether services improve legitimacy, the somewhat deflating answer has been an underwhelming “it depends”.

What does it depend on? Whether people perceive that services are distributed fairly, for instance, is just as important as more measurable, objective criteria like net enrolment. It may depend on processes, particularly whether positive relationships are built in the course of co-producing services, and how far bridges are built between divided social groups. Perceptions of procedural fairness, or the existence of grievance mechanisms, may be significant in some contexts. Nor are services a monolithic entity. Different services accrue different levels of political significance, often over a long period of social contract formation, and they may be more or less easily visible or attributable to the state.

The point is this: subjective and historically embedded norms against which different services are judged matter more for legitimacy than objective measures of output.

It is striking that politics is largely absent from the debate about when services influence state legitimacy. Yet citizens’ evaluations of services don’t hang free from the political environment, the nature of the political settlement, ideology, values, leadership, party competition, repression or a host of other concerns. All these things influence their assessment, and affect whether they will grant the state legitimacy or withdraw it. Perceptions of performance, which can be politically engineered, may be as important for state legitimacy as actual performance. Enter that slippery and all-pervading variable of ‘politics’.

We need to ask: “When might services undermine legitimacy?”

There is a further, more serious problem than the shaky ground on which the services = legitimacy intuition seems to stand. It comes from what Kahneman might call its ‘framing effects’. When, as practitioners or researchers, we think about the relationship between service delivery and state legitimacy, we tend to frame it positively as a virtuous circle. This obscures our cognitive capacity to engage with the quite probable alternative proposition – that service delivery might in some circumstances undermine state legitimacy.

A huge amount of damage can be done very quickly if service delivery, or social policy more broadly, is perceived to challenge fundamental social norms. Sri Lanka’s experience with higher education during the 1970s is a good example of this. Uneven access to desired public goods came to symbolise wider inequalities and even the exclusion of certain social groups from the political settlement. It catalysed division and became an aggravating factor in civil war. In other settings, this might happen even where the stated goal is to rectify legacies of inequality in pursuit of social justice.

Challenging entrenched privileges through service redistribution is one route to social conflict, but another is creating unrealistic expectations over the short term. Slow improvement may quickly frustrate citizens in post-conflict situations who have been promised a tangible peace dividend.

Vital public services are often on the front line in conflicts over ‘the rules of the game’. Pakistan’s recent experience with polio immunisation is a particularly stark demonstration of a recurring historical pattern in which services come to symbolise a struggle between the state’s norms and those of competing non-state actors. Services are rarely neutral, technocratic exercises in any social setting, let alone conflict-affected societies.

The lesson is that we may do harm to legitimacy when we support the allocation of vital public services in fragile or conflict-affected states. Exploring and understanding this better is hardly on the agenda, yet the avowed international goal is to support legitimate institutions.

Surely, then, it's time not only to question our intuition about the positive contribution of service delivery, but to dare to reverse it. We need to ask: “When might services undermine legitimacy?” We may discover that our ‘System 1’ intuition is more than misguided – that, in fact, it is a diversion. The ‘do no harm’ principle demands that all of us in the field of development should understand how services may affect legitimacy and stability, for better and for worse.

A new collaborative action research project is applying this perspective, looking at how municipal services can support, or at least not undermine, social stability in those parts of Lebanon and Jordan coping with a massive influx of Syrian refugees.

Image: North Darfur (UN Photo/Albert González Farran)


Leave a comment

The views expressed in Opinions posts are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of DLP, the Australian Government or DLP's partner organisations.


Claire Mcloughlin

Claire Mcloughlin

Claire is a senior researcher with DLP and GSDRC, based at the University of Birmingham's International Development Department. Her research focuses on the politics of basic services and their effects on state-building processes. She is currently researching the relationship between service provision and state legitimation in conflict-affected situations.

Read more

Related items

The inclusiveness test: making change work

Institutions that are inclusive of the broader population - and not just of elites - are an integral part of peaceful, prosperous and resilient states. Guest post for openDemocracy.

Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal4th November 2015

Bringing Political Economy Analysis in from the cold

Once seen as a 'transformative' tool to change donor thinking, does much PEA now do little to help staff think and work politically?

Opinion by Jonathan Fisher6th May 2014

Medellin - more than a miracle

Bad news sells. And for news editors looking for horror stories to recycle, Colombia's second largest city used to be a reliable source.

Opinion by Cheryl Stonehouse4th March 2014

Being 'there': Bermuda Triangulation

Fieldwork in fragile places - Part 2: Data difficulties. Adapting methodology to 'messy' contexts.

Opinion by Suda Perera6th November 2014

Developmental leadership: putting inclusiveness first

Only through putting inclusiveness first can fragile states begin to break the dysfunctional societal and institutional patterns that hold back change.

Opinion by Seth D. Kaplan24th September 2015

Research methods and marshalling messy data: Dear Diary

The useful role a research diary can play in the assimilation and ordering of qualitative data. 

Opinion by Suda Perera2nd September 2015

Service delivery and state legitimacy: For better or for worse?

DLP research fellow Claire Mcloughlin challenges the widely held assumption that there is a self-reinforcing 'virtuous circle' between service delivery and state legitimacy. 

Opinion by Claire Mcloughlin24th November 2015

It's all about inclusion, but how?

Shifting the focus of development intervention from form to the actual practice and distribution of power. (Guest post for the World Bank Governance for Development blog)

Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal6th April 2016

Masculinity and sexual violence in India

The brutal rape and murder in December 2012 of a 23-year-old student in a Delhi bus has been the catalyst for rapidly evolving activism against sexual violence in India.

Opinion by Martin Rew16th September 2015

Security and justice – the mismatch between policy and practice

What hinders more politically nuanced security and justice programming?

Opinion by Shivit Bakrania21st July 2014

‘Crows who come in search of dollars’: NGO legitimacy in conflict zones

Do political dynamics affect NGO legitimacy more than performance?

Opinion by Oliver Walton19th August 2014

Using aid to strengthen Parliaments: fix the car, or worry about the driver?

Parliaments have always been treated as the poor cousins of democracy assistance efforts. (Guest post for From Poverty to Power)

Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal24th November 2014

Inclusive political settlements: who and what gets included?

DLP hosted a day-long high level introductory workshop on political settlements in June. This post introduces a series that showcases the contributions of researchers, policymakers and practitioners.

Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal13th July 2015

Different development: walk the talk

The argument for asset-based approaches to development programming and practice that value communities' capacity, skills and knowledge.

Opinion by Gillian Fletcher14th April 2015

How to find surprising development successes

How mixed methods can unearth cases of positive deviance.

Opinion by Caryn Peiffer16th April 2018

Corruption: unpacking the black box of political will

New thinking on the reasons why individuals engage in corruption - including the pragmatic calculation that, right or wrong, corruption may be the only solution to pressing difficulties. 

Opinion by Heather Marquette12th January 2015

Education, development, and the problem with consensus

Why rethink the international consensus on 'quality basic education for development'?

Opinion by Michele Schweisfurth7th April 2014

How does politically informed programming shape development outcomes?

A new 'thinking and working politically' community of practice aims to develop practical guidance for development practitioners based on evidence of what works in politically smart programming.

Opinion by Mark Robinson29th January 2016

Politics shape services; and services shape politics

How governance and sector specialists can help each other understand the politics of service delivery

Opinion by Richard Batley19th June 2014

The challenge of realising Pacific democracies' development potential

Bringing to the fore some of the unique problems faced by the Pacific region.

Opinion by Julien Barbara8th July 2016

Ghana's democracy is driving great progress in health and education

We still don't know whether democracy drives development - or vice versa. Guest post for The Guardian

Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal18th March 2015

Politics - the problem and solution to poor services?

One of the most influential and enduring World Development Reports ever produced – Making Services Work for Poor People – is a decade old this year.

Opinion by Claire Mcloughlin13th March 2014

Corruption research: Hunting for glimmers of light in the gloom

Why it can be hard to start a conversation with the people who might know what really works in the fight against corruption.

Opinion by Caryn Peiffer25th July 2017

Elections: transformational, or blunt tools of representation?

How do we explain the profound dissatisfaction with the quality of representation now manifest in democracies everywhere?

Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal8th September 2016

Somaliland's route to peace

Have donors overlooked the role played in development by secondary education? Reflections on new research on peacebuilding in Somaliland. 

Opinion by Sarah Phillips12th December 2013

Where do inclusive institutions come from? Lessons from Asia

Societies with more inclusive institutions are more peaceful and more resilient, and tend to be better governed - but how do they get there?

Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal27th February 2017

Our money, our projects: Demand-driven community development

Emerging lessons from the Central Land Council’s community development program to strengthen Aboriginal people’s participation in mainstream Australia.

Opinion by David Ross15th April 2016

Beyond perceptions of corruption?

Corruption is hard to define without straying into the subjective. It's also difficult to build robust methodologies to investigate it.

Opinion by Caryn Peiffer5th February 2015

DRCongo: where a decade of failed democracy has exposed the electoral fallacy

It takes more than a fairly-won election to guarantee that the elected will put their citizens first, rather than themselves. (Guest post for Africa at LSE)

Opinion by Suda Perera19th December 2016

Being 'there': Reflections on fieldwork in the DRC

Fieldwork in fragile places - Part 1: The security dilemma. Staying safe while collecting the data that matters. 

Opinion by Suda Perera5th November 2014

Parliamentary strengthening: the IDC report

Parliaments - and the political parties that populate them - are the institutions people trust least. Guest post for ODI's Shaping Policy for Development blog.

Opinion by Tam O'Neil9th February 2015

Higher education in the post-2015 agenda: proof that it matters

Taking stock of recent research evidence that shows how higher education can feed into political stability and civil engagement.

Opinion by Susy Ndaruhutse11th September 2014

Decentralisation and the potential for corruption in PNG

Guest post for Devpolicy on findings from a DLP-supported study on decentralisation and service provision.

Opinion by Grant Walton30th June 2017

Why are Africa's poor more likely than the rich to pay a bribe for public services?

The poor aren't simply 'easy targets' - they necessarily come into contact with corrupt state officials more often.

Opinion by Caryn Peiffer19th January 2017