IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/apecpp/v45y2023i2p1008-1024.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do farmers need to be paid to grow milkweed for monarchs or will they volunteer if it is easy enough?

Author

Listed:
  • Tiesta Thakur
  • Terrance Hurley

Abstract

A decline in the monarch butterfly population led the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to acknowledge monarchs should be listed under the 1973 Endangered Species Act. This research evaluates farmer interest in restoring monarch habitat on their non‐cropped acres to help circumvent such a listing. Results suggest that efforts to promote habitat restoration on non‐cropped acres should focus on voluntary participation and make programs as easy as possible through design and technical assistance. The results also suggest that even a successful program can only provide a small fraction of the habitat needed to meet current restoration goals.

Suggested Citation

  • Tiesta Thakur & Terrance Hurley, 2023. "Do farmers need to be paid to grow milkweed for monarchs or will they volunteer if it is easy enough?," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(2), pages 1008-1024, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:apecpp:v:45:y:2023:i:2:p:1008-1024
    DOI: 10.1002/aepp.13290
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13290
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/aepp.13290?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. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2011. "Using Internet in Stated Preference Surveys: A Review and Comparison of Survey Modes," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 5(4), pages 309-351, September.
    2. Uri Gneezy & Aldo Rustichini, 2000. "Pay Enough or Don't Pay at All," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 115(3), pages 791-810.
    3. Chervier, Colas & Le Velly, Gwenolé & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss, 2019. "When the Implementation of Payments for Biodiversity Conservation Leads to Motivation Crowding-out: A Case Study From the Cardamoms Forests, Cambodia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 499-510.
    4. Frey, Bruno S & Oberholzer-Gee, Felix, 1997. "The Cost of Price Incentives: An Empirical Analysis of Motivation Crowding-Out," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(4), pages 746-755, September.
    5. Christopher G. Leggett & Naomi S. Kleckner & Kevin J. Boyle & John W. Dufield & Robert Cameron Mitchell, 2003. "Social Desirability Bias in Contingent Valuation Surveys Administered Through In-Person Interviews," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(4), pages 561-575.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Rico García-Amado, Luis & Ruiz Pérez, Manuel & Barrasa García, Sara, 2013. "Motivation for conservation: Assessing integrated conservation and development projects and payments for environmental services in La Sepultura Biosphere Reserve, Chiapas, Mexico," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 92-100.
    9. Jayson Lusk & F. Norwood, 2010. "Direct Versus Indirect Questioning: An Application to the Well-Being of Farm Animals," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 96(3), pages 551-565, May.
    10. Fisher, Robert J, 1993. "Social Desirability Bias and the Validity of Indirect Questioning," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 20(2), pages 303-315, September.
    11. Spiros Stachtiaris & Andreas C. Drichoutis & Stathis Klonaris, 2013. "Preference reversals in Contingent and Inferred valuation methods," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 40(2), pages 379-404, March.
    12. Narloch, Ulf & Pascual, Unai & Drucker, Adam G., 2012. "Collective Action Dynamics under External Rewards: Experimental Insights from Andean Farming Communities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 2096-2107.
    13. F. Bailey Norwood & Jayson L. Lusk, 2011. "Social Desirability Bias in Real, Hypothetical, and Inferred Valuation Experiments," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(2), pages 528-534.
    14. Johansson, Robert & Effland, Anne & Coble, Keith, 2017. "Falling Response Rates to USDA Crop Surveys: Why It Matters," farmdoc daily, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics, vol. 7, January.
    15. Grant, Tyler J. & Parry, Hazel R. & Zalucki, Myron P. & Bradbury, Steven P., 2018. "Predicting monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) movement and egg-laying with a spatially-explicit agent-based model: The role of monarch perceptual range and spatial memory," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 374(C), pages 37-50.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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).
    2. Oniki, Shunji & Berhe, Melaku & Negash, Teklay & Etsay, Haftu, 2023. "Do economic incentives crowd out motivation for communal land conservation in Ethiopia?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    3. Grillos, Tara & Bottazzi, Patrick & Crespo, David & Asquith, Nigel & Jones, Julia P.G., 2019. "In-kind conservation payments crowd in environmental values and increase support for government intervention: A randomized trial in Bolivia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 1-1.
    4. Lina Moros & Maria Alejandra Vélez & Alexander Pfaff & Daniela Quintero, 2020. "Effects of Ending Payments for Ecosystem Services: removal does not crowd prior conservation out," Documentos CEDE 18590, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Jie, Yun, 2020. "Responding to requests for help: Effects of payoff schemes with small monetary units," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    8. Singh, Neera M., 2015. "Payments for ecosystem services and the gift paradigm: Sharing the burden and joy of environmental care," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 53-61.
    9. Maca-Millán, Stefany & Arias-Arévalo, Paola & Restrepo-Plaza, Lina, 2021. "Payment for ecosystem services and motivational crowding: Experimental insights regarding the integration of plural values via non-monetary incentives," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    10. Lopez-Becerra, E.I. & Alcon, F., 2021. "Social desirability bias in the environmental economic valuation: An inferred valuation approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    11. Alicia Entem & Patrick Lloyd‐Smith & Wiktor ( Vic) L. Adamowicz & Peter C. Boxall, 2022. "Using inferred valuation to quantify survey and social desirability bias in stated preference research," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(4), pages 1224-1242, August.
    12. Moros, Lina & Vélez, María Alejandra & Quintero, Daniela & Tobin, Danny & Pfaff, Alexander, 2023. "Temporary PES do not crowd-out and may crowd-in lab-in-the-field forest conservation in Colombia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    13. Isyaku, Usman, 2021. "What motivates communities to participate in forest conservation? A study of REDD+ pilot sites in Cross River, Nigeria," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    14. Kahsay, Goytom Abraha & Kassie, Workineh Asmare & Beyene, Abebe Damte & Hansen, Lars Gårn, 2022. "Pro-environmental behavior under bundled environmental and poverty reduction goals: Empirical evidence from Ethiopia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    15. 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.
    16. Achilleas Vassilopoulos & Niki Avgeraki & Stathis Klonaris, 2020. "Social desirability and the WTP–WTA disparity in common goods," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(7), pages 6425-6444, October.
    17. Blanco, Esther & Moros, Lina & Pfaff, Alexander & Steimanis, Ivo & Velez, Maria Alejandra & Vollan, Björn, 2023. "No crowding out among those terminated from an ongoing PES program in Colombia," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    18. Simora, Michael, 2017. "The effect of financial compensation on the acceptance of power lines: Evidence from a randomized discrete choice experiment in Germany," Ruhr Economic Papers 729, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    19. De Pril, Julie & Godfroid, Cécile, 2020. "Avoiding the crowding-out of prosocial motivation in microfinance," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 108-117.
    20. Simora, Michael & Frondel, Manuel & Vance, Colin, 2018. "Does financial compensation increase the acceptance of power lines? Evidence from Germany," Ruhr Economic Papers 742, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:apecpp:v:45:y:2023:i:2:p:1008-1024. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2040-5804 .

    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.