Preferences for government enforcement of a common pool harvest quota: Theory and experimental evidence from fishing communities in Colombia
AbstractWe examine individual harvesters' preferences for government enforcement of a quota imposed on the exploitation of a common pool resource. We develop a model of Nash behavior by identical risk neutral harvesters to explain individual equilibrium preferences for enforcement of an efficient harvest quota. If the quota is not enforced well, we demonstrate that individual harvesters will always prefer increased enforcement—either increased monitoring or increased penalties—of the quota. We conduct a test of this theoretical result with data from framed common pool resource experiments conducted in artisanal fishing communities in three regions of Colombia. Subjects were given the opportunity to express their preferences for enforcement by voting on two levels of enforcement of a harvest quota, with and without communication. The two enforcement strategies involved the same probability that the government would audit individual harvesters, but differed in the level of the penalty for noncompliance. Contrary to theory, individuals voted for the lower inefficient penalty about 80% of the time and groups implemented this weaker enforcement strategy over 90% of the time. Giving subjects the opportunity to vote on the enforcement strategy did not lead to more efficient harvests, nor did allowing subjects to communicate before voting.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Ecological Economics.
Volume (Year): 77 (2012)
Issue (Month): C ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon
Common pool resources; Field experiments; Enforcement; Regulation; Voting;
Other versions of this item:
- Maria Alejandra Velez & John K. Stranlund & James J. Murphy, 2012. "Preferences for government enforcement of a common pool harvest quota: Theory and experimental evidence from fishing communities in Colombia," Working Papers 2012-02, University of Alaska Anchorage, Department of Economics.
- C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
- D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
- Q20 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - General
- Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Alm, James & McClelland, Gary H & Schulze, William D, 1999. "Changing the Social Norm of Tax Compliance by Voting," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 141-71.
- Elinor Ostrom, 2010.
"Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems,"
American Economic Review, American Economic Association,
American Economic Association, vol. 100(3), pages 641-72, June.
- Ostrom, Elinor, 2009. "Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems," Nobel Prize in Economics documents, Nobel Prize Committee 2009-4, Nobel Prize Committee.
- Feld, Lars P & Tyran, Jean-Robert, 2002. "Tax Evasion and Voting: An Experimental Analysis," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(2), pages 197-222.
- Matthias Sutter & Stefan Haigner & Martin Kocher, .
"Choosing the carrot or the stick? ? Endogenous institutional choice in social dilemma situations,"
2008-07, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, University of Innsbruck.
- Matthias Sutter & Stefan Haigner & Martin G. Kocher, 2010. "Choosing the Carrot or the Stick? Endogenous Institutional Choice in Social Dilemma Situations," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 77(4), pages 1540-1566.
- Sutter, Matthias & Haigner, Stefan & Kocher, Martin G., 2010. "Choosing the Carrot or the Stick? Endogenous Institutional Choice in Social Dilemma Situations," Munich Reprints in Economics, University of Munich, Department of Economics 18193, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
- Cornes, Richard & Sandler, Todd, 1983. "On Commons and Tragedies," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 787-92, September.
- Jean-Robert Tyran & Lars P. Feld, 2006.
"Achieving Compliance when Legal Sanctions are Non-deterrent,"
Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 108(1), pages 135-156, 03.
- Jean-Robert Tyran & Lars P. Feld, 2005. "Achieving Compliance when Legal Sanctions are Non-Deterrent," CREMA Working Paper Series 2005-17, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
- Vyrastekova,J. & Soest,D. van, 2002.
"Centralized common pool management and local community participation,"
335, Bielefeld University, Center for Mathematical Economics.
- Jana Vyrastekova & Daan van Soest, 2003. "Centralized Common-Pool Management and Local Community Participation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(4), pages 500-514.
- Ostrom, Elinor, 2006. "The value-added of laboratory experiments for the study of institutions and common-pool resources," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 149-163, October.
- Maria Alejandra VÃ©lez & John K. Stranlund & James J. Murphy, 2005.
"What Motivates Common Pool Resource Users? Experimental Evidence from the Field,"
Working Papers, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Department of Resource Economics
2005-4, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Department of Resource Economics.
- Velez, Maria Alejandra & Stranlund, John K. & Murphy, James J., 2009. "What motivates common pool resource users? Experimental evidence from the field," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 485-497, June.
- Bischoff, Ivo, 2007. "Institutional choice versus communication in social dilemmas--An experimental approach," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 20-36, January.
- Magdalena Margreiter & Matthias Sutter & Dennis Dittrich, 2005. "Individual and Collective Choice and Voting in Common Pool Resource Problem with Heterogeneous Actors," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 32(2), pages 241-271, October.
- Glenn Harrison & John List, 2004.
Artefactual Field Experiments
00058, The Field Experiments Website.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.