Social Excuse Mechanism in Transnational Transfers
Migrants who try to restrict or condition remittance funds risk signaling a lack of trust to their home households, which can generate social friction or resentment. Consequently, senders require a socially acceptable pretext that attributes transfer restrictions to an external entity's policy rather than personal distrust.
Picture this
Imagine wanting to give a relative a gift certificate instead of cash so they buy groceries, but feeling awkward imposing that restriction yourself. If the card issuer automatically triggers a small donation to a local community center whenever the gift certificate is chosen, you can blame the bank's promotional rule for your choice, protecting your personal relationship.
What the evidence says
Providing a social excuse resulted in a 36.35 € increase in remittances under education labeling compared to private information (102.7 €), but across all 28 information treatment tests, 23 showed no statistically significant differences (e.g., p = 0.127 for equality of labeling effects across information treatments).
- Who
- N = 167 Filipino migrant workers in Rome randomly assigned to the Social Excuse treatment (out of N = 501 total study participants).
- How
- Randomized controlled experiment where recipient households were informed of sender choices, but senders choosing committed options were told a community organization donation would be made to provide a plausible social excuse.
What to do
Frame formal remittance restrictions using third-party institutional mandates to minimize interpersonal conflict between senders and recipients.
From the source
"This was to provide the household with a social excuse for using EduPay."
Directing remittances to education with soft and hard commitments: Evidence from a lab-in-the-field experiment and new product take-up among Filipino migrants in Rome