IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/pubfin/v45y2017i1p68-96.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Protecting the Environment

Author

Listed:
  • Samantha De Martino
  • Florence Kondylis
  • Astrid Zwager

Abstract

The role of extrinsic versus intrinsic motivation in environmental decisions remain unresolved. We exploit data from a lab-in-the-field experiment to analyze the role of extrinsic and intrinsic incentives in shaping individual demand for a payment for environmental services (PES) program in São Paulo, Brazil. The lab-in-the-field experiment is a theoretical incentive program that offers annual payments to landholders in vulnerable watersheds for either conserving and/or restoring trees surrounding springs on their land to preserve and improve local water quality. Our findings suggest that, in contrast with predictions from rational choice theory, individuals’ responses to incentives are not monotonic. Landholders who took part in our lab-in-the-field experiment were randomly assigned to four offer levels and asked a double-bounded contingent valuation question to elicit a willingness to accept value. Landholders were less likely to accept the higher offers compared to the lowest offers. Given that the rational choice model fails to fully account for the role of incentives in shaping demand for PES, we then look at the interaction of the randomized incentive offers and individuals’ initial intrinsic motivations. We find that, while high monetary incentives crowd in demand of progovernment landholders, they crowd out demand of proenvironment and prosocial landholders. Overall, we find much evidence of heterogeneous responses.

Suggested Citation

  • Samantha De Martino & Florence Kondylis & Astrid Zwager, 2017. "Protecting the Environment," Public Finance Review, , vol. 45(1), pages 68-96, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:pubfin:v:45:y:2017:i:1:p:68-96
    DOI: 10.1177/1091142115604352
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1091142115604352
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1091142115604352?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J., 1996. "Altruism in Anonymous Dictator Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 181-191, October.
    2. Zanella, Matheus A. & Schleyer, Christian & Speelman, Stijn, 2014. "Why do farmers join Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) schemes? An Assessment of PES water scheme participation in Brazil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 166-176.
    3. Sierra, Rodrigo & Russman, Eric, 2006. "On the efficiency of environmental service payments: A forest conservation assessment in the Osa Peninsula, Costa Rica," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 131-141, August.
    4. Rios, Ana R. & Pagiola, Stefano, 2009. "Poor household participation in payments for environmental services in Nicaragua and Colombia," MPRA Paper 13727, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Kerr, John & Vardhan, Mamta & Jindal, Rohit, 2012. "Prosocial behavior and incentives: Evidence from field experiments in rural Mexico and Tanzania," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 220-227.
    6. Stefano Pagiola & Ana Rios & Agustin Arcenas, 2010. "Poor Household Participation in Payments for Environmental Services: Lessons from the Silvopastoral Project in Quindío, Colombia," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(3), pages 371-394, November.
    7. Rodrigo Arriagada, 2009. "Payments for environmental services and their impact on forest transition in Costa Rica," Working Papers 200907, Latin American and Caribbean Environmental Economics Program, revised Oct 2009.
    8. Vollan, Bjørn, 2008. "Socio-ecological explanations for crowding-out effects from economic field experiments in southern Africa," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 560-573, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chan, Kai M.A. & Anderson, Emily & Chapman, Mollie & Jespersen, Kristjan & Olmsted, Paige, 2017. "Payments for Ecosystem Services: Rife With Problems and Potential—For Transformation Towards Sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 110-122.
    2. Hao Wang & Sander Meijerink & Erwin van der Krabben, 2020. "Institutional Design and Performance of Markets for Watershed Ecosystem Services: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-26, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jones, Kelly W. & Muñoz Brenes, Carlos L. & Shinbrot, Xoco A. & López-Báez, Walter & Rivera-Castañeda, Andrómeda, 2018. "The influence of cash and technical assistance on household-level outcomes in payments for hydrological services programs in Chiapas, Mexico," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 208-218.
    2. Cranford, Matthew & Mourato, Susana, 2014. "Credit-Based Payments for Ecosystem Services: Evidence from a Choice Experiment in Ecuador," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 503-520.
    3. Benra, F. & Nahuelhual, L. & Felipe-Lucia, M. & Jaramillo, A. & Jullian, C. & Bonn, A., 2022. "Balancing ecological and social goals in PES design – Single objective strategies are not sufficient," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    4. Ito, Junichi & Feuer, Hart N. & Kitano, Shinichi & Komiyama, Midori, 2018. "A Policy Evaluation of the Direct Payment Scheme for Collective Stewardship of Common Property Resources in Japan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 141-151.
    5. Neuteleers, Stijn & Engelen, Bart, 2015. "Talking money: How market-based valuation can undermine environmental protection," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 253-260.
    6. Schomers, Sarah & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Payments for ecosystem services: A review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 16-30.
    7. Paunić, Alida, 2016. "Brazil, Preservation of Forest and Biodiversity," MPRA Paper 71462, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Kolinjivadi, Vijay & Charré, Simon & Adamowski, Jan & Kosoy, Nicolás, 2019. "Economic Experiments for Collective Action in the Kyrgyz Republic: Lessons for Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 489-498.
    9. Midler, Estelle & Pascual, Unai & Drucker, Adam G. & Narloch, Ulf & Soto, José Luis, 2015. "Unraveling the effects of payments for ecosystem services on motivations for collective action," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 394-405.
    10. Handberg, Øyvind Nystad & Angelsen, Arild, 2019. "Pay little, get little; pay more, get a little more: A framed forest experiment in Tanzania," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 454-467.
    11. Rode, Julian & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Krause, Torsten, 2015. "Motivation crowding by economic incentives in conservation policy: A review of the empirical evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 270-282.
    12. Brent, Daniel A. & Friesen, Lana & Gangadharan, Lata & Leibbrandt, Andreas, 2017. "Behavioral Insights from Field Experiments in Environmental Economics," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 10(2), pages 95-143, May.
    13. Jones, Kelly W. & Powlen, Kathryn & Roberts, Ryan & Shinbrot, Xoco, 2020. "Participation in payments for ecosystem services programs in the Global South: A systematic review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    14. Kaczan, David J. & Swallow, Brent M. & Adamowicz, W.L. (Vic), 2019. "Forest conservation policy and motivational crowding: Experimental evidence from Tanzania," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 444-453.
    15. Pham, Van Truong & Roongtawanreongsri, Saowalak & Ho, Thong Quoc & Tran, Phuong Hanh Niekdam, 2021. "Can payments for forest environmental services help improve income and attitudes toward forest conservation? Household-level evaluation in the Central Highlands of Vietnam," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    16. d'Adda, Giovanna, 2011. "Motivation crowding in environmental protection: Evidence from an artefactual field experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 2083-2097, September.
    17. Ruggiero, Patricia G.C. & Metzger, Jean Paul & Reverberi Tambosi, Leandro & Nichols, Elizabeth, 2019. "Payment for ecosystem services programs in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest: Effective but not enough," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 283-291.
    18. Rode, Julian & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Krause, Torsten, 2013. "Economic incentives for biodiversity conservation: What is the evidence for motivation crowding?," UFZ Discussion Papers 19/2013, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    19. R A Arriagada & E O Sills & P J Ferraro & S K Pattanayak, 2015. "Do Payments Pay Off? Evidence from Participation in Costa Rica’s PES Program," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    20. Ma, Zhao & Bauchet, Jonathan & Steele, Diana & Godoy, Ricardo & Radel, Claudia & Zanotti, Laura, 2017. "Comparison of Direct Transfers for Human Capital Development and Environmental Conservation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 498-517.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:pubfin:v:45:y:2017:i:1:p:68-96. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.