📍 Study Setting and Puzzle
East Jerusalem is a context in which most Palestinians contest the Israeli state's legitimacy. That contestation shapes how civilians interact with state institutions, but engagement varies across different goods, services, and institutions. The central puzzle is how perceptions of the state's "right to rule" translate into everyday decisions about whether to claim state-provided goods and services.
🔎 How the evidence was gathered
- 55 in-depth interviews conducted in East Jerusalem.
- Original observational data collected across multiple state sectors.
- An experimental survey administered to a representative sample of East Jerusalemites.
📈 Key Findings
- Engagement with each state good, service, or institution depends on sector-specific perceptions of state legitimacy (the perceived right to rule).
- Civilians avoid interacting with goods, services, and institutions that explicitly affirm the state's claim to monopolized sovereign rule.
- Avoidance is selective rather than total: essential goods and services continue to be used even when the state’s legitimacy is contested.
- The same individual can make different engagement choices across sectors, demonstrating that claim-making is sector-level and context-dependent.
💡 Why it matters
This study empirically shows that legitimacy assessments operate at the sector level, not only at the level of generalized support or opposition. The findings deepen understanding of citizen claim-making by highlighting that people manage competing priorities—withholding engagement where interactions affirm sovereignty while still accessing essential needs—thereby shaping state-society relations in contested territories.
