Output Sharing Among Groups Exploiting Common Pool Resources
AbstractMany economic decisions are susceptible to either free-riding, or excessive rivalry or overextraction. Equally sharing output in partnerships introduces a free-riding incentive which may offset the latter. We conduct a laboratory experiment to assess the performance of output sharing in partnerships by introducing equal-sharing subgroups of size one, four and six into a twelve-person common pool resource (CPR) environment. Group members are either unchanging throughout a 15 period session (the partners treatment), or randomly reassigned each decision round (the strangers treatment). Group size significantly affects effort. Aggregate effort reflects the Nash equilibrium predictions. The first best solution is achieved when resource users are privately extracting from the CPR and equally sharing their output with the socially optimal number of partners. The strangers treatment does not significantly affect aggregate effort. Total payoff distribution, however, is more equitable for strangers than for partners.
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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by McMaster University in its series McMaster Experimental Economics Laboratory Publications with number 2004-05.
Length: 32 pages
Date of creation: May 2004
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4M4
Phone: (905) 525-9140 ext. 22765
Fax: (905) 521-8232
Web page: http://www.mcmaster.ca/economics/
More information through EDIRC
Other versions of this item:
- Stephen Schott & Neil Buckley & Stuart Mestelman & R. Andrew Muller, 2002. "Output Sharing Among Groups Exploiting Common Pool Resources," Department of Economics Working Papers 2002-06, McMaster University.
- NEP-EXP-2004-11-07 (Experimental Economics)
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.:
- Andreoni, James, 1988. "Why free ride? : Strategies and learning in public goods experiments," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 291-304, December.
- Isaac, R Mark & Walker, James M, 1988. "Communication and Free-Riding Behavior: The Voluntary Contribution Mechanism," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 26(4), pages 585-608, October.
- Joseph Farrell and Suzanne Scotchmer., 1986.
Economics Working Papers
8616, University of California at Berkeley.
- Hackett Steven & Schlager Edella & Walker James, 1994. "The Role of Communication in Resolving Commons Dilemmas: Experimental Evidence with Heterogeneous Appropriators," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 99-126, September.
- Kenneth S. Chan & Stuart Mestelman & Rob Moir & R. Andrew Muller, 1998.
"Heterogeneity and the Voluntary Provision of Public Goods,"
Department of Economics Working Papers
1998-04, McMaster University.
- Kenneth Chan & Stuart Mestelman & Robert Moir & R. Muller, 1999. "Heterogeneity and the Voluntary Provision of Public Goods," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 5-30, August.
- Smith, Vernon L, 1985. "Experimental Economics: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(1), pages 264-72, March.
- Andereoni, J., 1988. "Why Free Ride? Strategies And Learning In Public Goods Experiments," Working papers 375, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
- Andreoni,J. & Croson,R., 1998.
"Partners versus strangers : random rematching in public goods experiments,"
11, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
- Andreoni, James & Croson, Rachel, 2008. "Partners versus Strangers: Random Rematching in Public Goods Experiments," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, Elsevier.
- James Andreoni & Rachel Croson, 2001. "Partners versus Strangers: Random Rematching in Public Goods Experiments," Levine's Working Paper Archive 563824000000000132, David K. Levine.
- Parzival Copes, 1986. "A Critical Review of the Individual Quota as a Device in Fisheries Management," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 62(3), pages 278-291.
- Kenneth S. Chan & Stuart Mestelman & R. Andrew Muller, 1998.
"Voluntary Provision of Public Goods,"
McMaster Experimental Economics Laboratory Publications
1998-02, McMaster University.
- Stuart Mestelman, 2004.
"Partners and strangers in non-linear public goods environments,"
McMaster Experimental Economics Laboratory Publications
2004-02, McMaster University.
- Stuart Mestelman, 2004. "Partners and strangers in non-linear public goods environments," Department of Economics Working Papers 2004-02, McMaster University.
- Yamamoto, Tadashi, 1995. "Development of a Community-Based Fishery Management System in Japan," Marine Resource Economics, Marine Resources Foundation, vol. 10(1).
- Croson, Rachel T. A., 1996. "Partners and strangers revisited," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 25-32, October.
- Brown, Gardner, Jr, 1974. "An Optimal Program for Managing Common Property Resources with Congestion Externalities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(1), pages 163-73, Jan.-Feb..
- Matthew J. Baker & Kurtis Swope, 2004. "Sharing, Gift-Giving, and Optimal Resource Use Incentives in Hunter-Gatherer Society," Departmental Working Papers 8, United States Naval Academy Department of Economics.
- Martin D. Heintzelman & Stephen W. Salant & Stephan Schott, 2005. "Partnerships: A Potential Solution to the Common-Property Problem but a Problem for a Antitrust Authorities," Levine's Working Paper Archive 784828000000000040, David K. Levine.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.