Abstract. The organization of free and fair elections is impossible without detailed individual-level information to verify the eligibility of potential voters, yet many countries democratize with deficient civil registries. With an estimated 850 million people globally lacking legal identity documents, understanding when and how states expand registration to previously excluded populations is an urgent question. Dominant explanations for why states invest in information capacity emphasize fiscal and coercive motives, leaving the democratic origins of legibility under explored. We show that electoral competition can expand registration among previously excluded populations — but only where victory is uncertain enough to make every potential voter count. Under these conditions, political parties have strong incentives to mobilize and register undocumented citizens, concentrating resources where electoral margins are narrow and local networks allow them to identify potential supporters. Newly elected incumbents further use their access to resources to register potential supporters following alternation in power. We leverage sub-national variation during Mexico’s protracted democratic transition to test these claims. Drawing on administrative records of more than 30 million birth registrations and original archival and interview data, we show that adult birth registration was significantly higher in more competitive municipalities and increased markedly following alternation from PRI to opposition government. Our findings demonstrate that democracy can forge information capacity and political inclusion simultaneously, even among populations that have historically had little reason to register.

Abstract. What are the consequences of private provision on citizens’ perceptions of local government performance? Previous literature contends that private provision can diminish perceptions of local government performance, weaken informal mechanisms of accountability, and even lead to decreased perceptions of state legitimacy. However, this literature mostly focuses on NGOs as non-state providers. This paper builds on prior literature to explore the political consequences of the rise of extractive companies, particularly mining companies, as non-state providers in the Global South. Using an original survey experiment, this study investigates whether receiving information about company-sponsored projects affects respondents’ perceptions of their local government performance. I find that respondents receiving information about mining company provision report an increase in the perception of local government underperformance compared to the mining company. Additionally, I find that respondents increasingly prefer to direct their claims for access to basic goods and services to the mining company and not to their local governments. Furthermore, the experiment distinguishes between private and public goods provisions to capture a more complete picture of the extent of private welfare activities carried out by mining companies. I find that the effect of private provision on attitudes is larger when mining companies provide public goods (education, health, and infrastructure projects) instead of private goods (employment, scholarships, and productive projects).

Abstract. Street-vendor evictions have become an increasingly common feature of urban governance across the Global South, yet little is known about the political support for competing public narratives about these policies. While existing research has focused primarily on why governments crack down on or tolerate informal work, we examine how citizens respond to enforcement campaigns. We field a preregistered survey experiment embedded in a nationally representative survey of 2,200 adults in Mexico to estimate the effects of competing media frames surrounding municipal street-vendor evictions. We find that a negative frame emphasizing disorder, insecurity, tax evasion, and unfair competition increases support for a hypothetical mayoral candidate, whereas a positive frame stressing vendors’ vulnerability and rights fails to reduce this support.

Abstract. In recent years, many countries across the Global South adopted biometric technologies as a quick and efficient way to enhance the legibility of their populations. Yet these initiatives remain politically contentious because they increase the state’s capacity for monitoring and surveillance, especially in contexts where the rule of law is weak. This paper analyzes under which conditions citizens support the expansion of legibility through biometric identification. We field a conjoint experiment in a nationally representative online survey of 1,626 respondents in Mexico before the introduction of a new biometric ID meant to replace the current ID system. The experiment presents respondents with a series of hypothetical biometric ID policy packages that vary design features across five domains: implementing institution, social policy, data access, voting, and banking. Our findings show that concerns about privacy and potential government overreach in elections strongly and significantly reduce support for biometric IDs, while linking IDs to social programs increases support. Although concerns over privacy and elections are more pronounced among respondents who disapprove of the incumbent administration and support opposition parties, they are also salient among government supporters. The study sheds light on individuals’ motivations to obtain a biometric ID in the context of an existing functional identification ecosystem. We argue that ID uptake may be limited if the advantages of the new ID are not clearly distinguishable from those offered by existing forms of identification. To increase legibility through new ID programs governments therefore need to offer clear benefits, such as access to social programs, to induce compliance and to convince citizens to set aside their concerns about the downsides of legibility.