IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1811.01081.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Decision-making in Livestock Biosecurity Practices amidst Environmental and Social Uncertainty: Evidence from an Experimental Game

Author

Listed:
  • Scott C. Merrill

    (Department of Plant and Soil Science, University of Vermont)

  • Christopher J. Koliba

    (Department of Community Development and Applied Economics, University of Vermont)

  • Susan M. Moegenburg

    (Department of Plant and Soil Science, University of Vermont)

  • Asim Zia

    (Department of Community Development and Applied Economics, University of Vermont)

  • Jason Parker

    (School of Environment and Natural Resources, The Ohio State University at Mansfield)

  • Timothy Sellnow

    (Nicholson School of Communication, University of Central Florida)

  • Serge Wiltshire

    (Department of Food Systems. University of Vermont)

  • Gabriela Bucini

    (Department of Plant and Soil Science, University of Vermont)

  • Caitlin Danehy

    (Department of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, University of Vermont)

  • Julia M. Smith

    (Department of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, University of Vermont)

Abstract

Livestock industries are vulnerable to disease threats, which can cost billions of dollars and have substantial negative social ramifications. Losses are mitigated through increased use of disease-related biosecurity practices, making increased biosecurity an industry goal. Currently, there is no industry-wide standard for sharing information about disease incidence or on-site biosecurity strategies, resulting in uncertainty regarding disease prevalence and biosecurity strategies employed by industry stakeholders. Using an experimental simulation game, we examined human participant's willingness to invest in biosecurity when confronted with disease outbreak scenarios. We varied the scenarios by changing the information provided about 1) disease incidence and 2) biosecurity strategy or response by production facilities to the threat of disease. Here we show that willingness to invest in biosecurity increases with increased information about disease incidence, but decreases with increased information about biosecurity practices used by nearby facilities. Thus, the type or context of the uncertainty confronting the decision maker may be a major factor influencing behavior. Our findings suggest that policies and practices that encourage greater sharing of disease incidence information should have the greatest benefit for protecting herd health.

Suggested Citation

  • Scott C. Merrill & Christopher J. Koliba & Susan M. Moegenburg & Asim Zia & Jason Parker & Timothy Sellnow & Serge Wiltshire & Gabriela Bucini & Caitlin Danehy & Julia M. Smith, 2018. "Decision-making in Livestock Biosecurity Practices amidst Environmental and Social Uncertainty: Evidence from an Experimental Game," Papers 1811.01081, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2019.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1811.01081
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1811.01081
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sujoy Chakravarty & Jaideep Roy, 2009. "Recursive expected utility and the separation of attitudes towards risk and ambiguity: an experimental study," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 66(3), pages 199-228, March.
    2. Astrid Dannenberg & Andreas Löschel & Gabriele Paolacci & Christiane Reif & Alessandro Tavoni, 2015. "On the Provision of Public Goods with Probabilistic and Ambiguous Thresholds," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 61(3), pages 365-383, July.
    3. Lata Gangadharan & Veronika Nemes, 2009. "Experimental Analysis Of Risk And Uncertainty In Provisioning Private And Public Goods," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 47(1), pages 146-164, January.
    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. Glen Morris & Shawn Ehlers & John Shutske, 2023. "U.S. Small-Scale Livestock Operation Approach to Biosecurity," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-10, November.

    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. Boun My, Kene & Ouvrard, Benjamin, 2019. "Nudge and tax in an environmental public goods experiment: Does environmental sensitivity matter?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 24-48.
    2. Vesely, Stepan & Wengström, Erik, 2017. "Risk and Cooperation: Experimental Evidence from Stochastic Public Good Games," Working Papers 2017:3, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    3. Schuch, Esther & Dirks, Simone & Nhim, Tum & Richter, Andries, 2021. "Cooperation under social and strategic uncertainty – The role of risk and social capital in rural Cambodia," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    4. Vincent Théroude & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2017. "Cooperation in a risky world," Working Papers 1704, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    5. Bilancini, Ennio & Boncinelli, Leonardo & Nardi, Chiara & Pizziol, Veronica, 2024. "Cooperation is unaffected by the threat of severe adverse events in public goods games," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    6. Björk, Lisa & Kocher, Martin & Martinsson, Peter & Nam Khanh, Pham, 2016. "Cooperation under risk and ambiguity," Working Papers in Economics 683, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    7. Peter John Robinson & W.J.W. Botzen & F. Zhou, 2019. "An experimental study of charity hazard: The effect of risky and ambiguous government compensation on flood insurance demand," Working Papers 19-19, Utrecht School of Economics.
    8. Anne Corcos & François Pannequin & Sacha Bourgeois-Gironde, 2012. "Aversions to Trust," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 78(3), pages 115-134.
    9. Lohse, Johannes & Goeschl, Timo & Diederich , Johannes, 2014. "Giving is a question of time: Response times and contributions to a real world public good," Working Papers 0566, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    10. Ye-Feng Chen & Shu-Guang Jiang & Marie Claire Villeval, 2015. "The Tragedy of Corruption. Corruption as a social dilemma," Working Papers 1531, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    11. Freundt, Jana & Lange, Andreas, 2021. "On the voluntary provision of public goods under risk," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    12. Duersch, Peter & Römer, Daniel & Roth, Benjamin, 2013. "Intertemporal stability of ambiguity preferences," Working Papers 0548, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    13. Billur Aksoy & Silvana Krasteva, 2020. "When does less information translate into more giving to public goods?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(4), pages 1148-1177, December.
    14. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Horst Zank, 2023. "Source and rank-dependent utility," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 75(4), pages 949-981, May.
    15. Caleb A. Cox & Brock Stoddard, 2021. "Common-Value Public Goods and Informational Social Dilemmas," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 13(2), pages 343-369, May.
    16. Calford, Evan M., 2020. "Uncertainty aversion in game theory: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 720-734.
    17. Béatrice Boulu-Reshef & Samuel H. Brott & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2017. "Does Uncertainty Deter Provision of Public Goods?," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 68(5), pages 785-791.
    18. Théodora Dupont-Courtade, 2012. "Insurance demand under ambiguity and conflict for extreme risks: Evidence from a large representative survey," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 12020, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    19. Yehuda Izhakian, 2012. "Ambiguity Measurement," Working Papers 12-01, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    20. He, Ying & Dyer, James S. & Butler, John C. & Jia, Jianmin, 2019. "An additive model of decision making under risk and ambiguity," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 78-92.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:1811.01081. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.