Alicia Cooperman

Geographic representation shapes local distributive politics, and local politicians often target specific neighborhoods, influencing whose interests are prioritized in public service delivery. Despite extensive scholarship on distributive politics at higher levels, systematic data on how municipal legislators allocate resources within cities remains limited. In what ways do local politicians engage in distributive politics at the neighborhood scale? We develop a novel dataset of local legislative actions in Brazil, extracted via web scraping from a transparency platform. We use machine learning to categorize the issue and geographic target, and we incorporate electoral and legislator data. In preliminary analyses, we find that pavement or traffic-related services are the most common focus of formal requests and almost always targeted to specific locations. Requests to improve health and education services include broader (municipality-wide) targets but are still directed to specific locations more often than not. Councilors with geographically concentrated vote bases make more targeted requests, while left-leaning legislators do so less frequently. Councilors present more targeted legislative actions at the beginning of their mandates, and those with more concentrated vote bases make relatively more targeted requests than their counterparts in the last two years of their mandate, except in the last election semester. Qualitative interviews help us to understand the institutional processes related to these legislative actions. We advance scholarship on local distributive politics by unpacking how geography mediates political representation and service delivery in local politics.

As citizens face increasing extreme weather risks, they must also make inferences about the causes of the risks and whom to hold accountable – often under significant uncertainty or ambiguity. Actors in power may strategically create or leverage the uncertainty and ambiguity surrounding these events to redirect responsibility and blame. We build on Ulrich Beck’s macro theory about our modern ”risk society” that explores how institutions and actors drive and respond to human-caused risk, including the concept of ”organized irresponsibility,” where institutions collectively confront the large-scale risks they produce while dispersing accountability so broadly that no single actor can be held responsible. We expand Beck’s theory to explicate the sociopolitical context of decision-making under modern risk using the case of climate-induced extreme weather. Here, we propose a descriptive theory of decision-making under organized irresponsibility, in which Beck’s theory of risk society explains how (un)certainty and (ir)responsibility are socially constructed. We integrate a rapidly growing literature in political science, sociology, and psychology on the attributions of cause, blame, and responsibility for complex, disruptive events such as extreme weather. We propose a theoretical framework whereby individuals’ experiences of extreme weather are mediated by conflicting cues from politicians, the media, scientists, and industry, which contribute to their confusion, inaction, and to the societal individualization of risk. This conceptual framework advances our understanding of how individual, structural, social, and ecological factors shape individuals’ interpretations of and responses to complex events in the risk society.

Water system centralization and decentralization have variously been promoted as key to achieving household water security and Sustainable Development Goal 6.1. We argue that the lack of specificity with which scholars and practitioners use the terms centralization and decentralization limits our understanding of different water system configurations and their impacts. In this Primer, we provide a framework for thinking about levels of (de)centralization across three linked system dimensions: infrastructure, governance, and operations and maintenance. We encourage those analyzing water systems to characterize (de)centralization with respect to these multiple dimensions, as well as the system's broader political‐economic and hydro‐climatic contexts. Emphasizing the importance of delineating the scale of analysis, we highlight distinct system configurations and the prevalence of hybridity. Increased specificity about dimensions and scale can clarify how the character of, or changes to, a given system impact users, which is critical to assessing their implications for water security, sustainability, and equity. We conclude with recommendations for future research to analyze the opportunities and challenges associated with different water system configurations. This article is categorized under: Human Water > Water Governance

The U.S. has moved beyond peak water security. Infrastructural degradation, institutional inertia, and climate change are reducing the ability of households and communities to benefit from near-universal safe, adequate, affordable, sustainable water services. Yet, current supply-side research tools, that focus largely on system performance, are not equipped to measure the prevalence and lived experiences of household water insecurity, thus limiting the evidence available to policymakers, utilities, and communities to make decisions about water services. We discuss how demand-side metrics, such as household-level water insecurity scales validated for high-income contexts, such as the U.S., can help stakeholders to better identify local variation in user water issues, guide resource allocation, and improve hazard and disaster response. Targeted infrastructure investments informed by these metrics can enhance water security, reduce reliance on emergency social services, and promote public health and economic vitality. To address 21^st-century water challenges effectively, we must integrate experiential measures into local, regional, and national water assessments.

How do citizens hold local politicians accountable? I argue that citizens, especially through neighborhood associations, can use bloc voting as a bottom-up, grassroots strategy to pressure politicians for public services. Politicians monitor polling station voting, and communities switch allegiance if politicians do not deliver. I measure the perceived and actual relationships between community characteristics, bloc voting, and water access—an essential resource prone to political manipulation. I analyze an original household survey and conjoint experiment merged with electoral data in rural Brazil, and qualitative interviews illustrate theoretical mechanisms. Bloc voting is more likely in communities with high trust and participation, and bloc voting improves water access for association members. However, this strategy is only worthwhile for communities that can demonstrate their vote at their polling station. In contrast to top-down explanations of bloc voting, I highlight the interaction of collective action and electoral institutions for accountability and public service provision.

Centralized water infrastructure has, over the last century, brought safe and reliable drinking water to much of the world. But climate change, combined with aging and underfunded infrastructure, is increasingly testing the limits of—and reversing gains made by—this approach. To address these growing strains and gaps, we must assess and advance alternatives to centralized water provision and sanitation. The water literature is rife with examples of systems that are neither centralized nor networked, yet meet water needs of local communities in important ways, including: informal and hybrid water systems, decentralized water provision, community‐based water management, small drinking water systems, point‐of‐use treatment, small‐scale water vendors, and packaged water. Our work builds on these literatures by proposing a convergence approach that can integrate and explore the benefits and challenges of modular, adaptive, and decentralized (“MAD”) water provision and sanitation, often foregrounding important advances in engineering technology. We further provide frameworks to evaluate justice, economic feasibility, governance, human health, and environmental sustainability as key parameters of MAD water system performance.This article is categorized under: Engineering Water > Water, Health, and Sanitation Human Water > Water Governance Engineering Water > Sustainable Engineering of Water

Neighborhood-based organizations (NBOs) can be powerful political actors, shaping policy outcomes and strengthening accountability. Whose voices do they elevate, and to what extent might they reduce or exacerbate local socio-political inequality? While some NBOs may strengthen social capital and facilitate political participation for marginalized groups, others have been active forces in segregating communities. Their dueling roles are especially salient in a context of climate change, where NBOs play a key role in facilitating or preventing neighborhood-scale policies for climate change adaptation and hazard mitigation. We develop a framework of neighborhood-based organizations and their role in shaping service provision, adaptation planning, and disaster response, and we present preliminary survey data from a nationally representative U.S. sample. We distinguish between property owners associations (e.g. homeowners associations) and residential voluntary associations (e.g. neighborhood or community associations), and discuss how different types of NBOs interact with policymakers in complex institutional environments throughout the Global North and South, with implications for equity of climate adaptation and resilience.

The COVID-19 pandemic in the United States was characterized by a partisan gap. Democrats were more concerned about this novel health threat, more willing to socially distance, and more likely to support policies aimed at mitigating the spread of the virus than Republicans. In cross-sectional analyses of three nationally representative survey waves in 2020, we find that adverse experience with COVID-19 is associated with a narrowing of the partisan gap. The mean difference between Republicans and Democrats in concern, policy support, and behavioral intentions narrows or even disappears at high levels of self-reported adverse experience. Reported experience does not depend on party affiliation and is predicted by local COVID-19 incidence rates. In contrast, analyses of longitudinal data and county-level incidence rates do not show a consistent relationship among experience, partisanship, and behavior or policy support. Our findings suggest that self-reported personal experience interacts with partisanship in complex ways and may be an important channel for concern about novel threats such as the COVID-19 pandemic. We find consistent results for self-reported experience of extreme weather events and climate change attitudes and policy preferences, although the association between extreme weather and experience and climate change is more tenuous.

Emergency spending is often exempt from campaign period restrictions and procurement guidelines, making it attractive for opportunistic politicians, but natural disasters are seen as outside political business cycles. However, droughts are frequent but challenging to measure, so politicians can leverage discretion for electoral gain. This paper analyzes electoral cycles, term limits, and partisan targeting around municipal drought declaration in Northeast Brazil. Two sources of exogeneity (rainfall shocks, electoral calendar) isolate the effect of non-climatic factors on drought declarations. I find that drought declarations, which trigger relief, are more likely in mayoral election years. Incumbents are more likely to win re-election if they declare a drought in the election year, during below or even above average rainfall. The results are consistent with interviews suggesting voters reward competent mayors and mayors trade relief for votes. This study highlights the interaction between distributive and environmental politics, which has increasing consequences due to climate change.