IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aecrev/v101y2011i3p329-33.html

Using Artefactual Field Experiments to Learn about the Incentives for Sustainable Forest Use in Developing Economies

Author

Listed:
  • Maarten Voors
  • Erwin Bulte
  • Andreas Kontoleon
  • John A. List
  • Ty Turley

Abstract

We implement a public goods game and a social intervention modeled after a public goods game in rural Sierra Leone near the Gola Forest Reserve. We also collect demographic, economic and forest conservation data on households in the area. We use this data to assess the mapping of social preferences from the artefactual field experiment (AFE) into real world behavior. We find evidence of heterogeneity in shifting factors between the AFE, the field experiment, and conservation outcomes. We also find evidence that social controls like war violence and witchcraft may explain some of this correlation.

Suggested Citation

  • Maarten Voors & Erwin Bulte & Andreas Kontoleon & John A. List & Ty Turley, 2011. "Using Artefactual Field Experiments to Learn about the Incentives for Sustainable Forest Use in Developing Economies," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(3), pages 329-333, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:101:y:2011:i:3:p:329-33
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/aer.101.3.329
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to AEA members and institutional subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bouma, Jetske & Bulte, Erwin & van Soest, Daan, 2008. "Trust and cooperation: Social capital and community resource management," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 155-166, September.
    2. Rustagi, Devesh, 2010. "Conditional Cooperation and Costly Monitoring Explain Success in Forest Commons Management," MPRA Paper 124049, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Steven D. Levitt & John A. List, 2007. "What Do Laboratory Experiments Measuring Social Preferences Reveal About the Real World?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 153-174, Spring.
    4. Edward Miguel, 2005. "Poverty and Witch Killing," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(4), pages 1153-1172.
    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. Ouazad, Amine & Page, Lionel, 2013. "Students' perceptions of teacher biases: Experimental economics in schools," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 116-130.
    2. Cecchi, Francesco & Duchoslav, Jan, 2018. "The effect of prenatal stress on cooperation: Evidence from violent conflict in Uganda," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 35-56.
    3. Matteo M. Galizzi & Daniel Navarro-Martinez, 2019. "On the External Validity of Social Preference Games: A Systematic Lab-Field Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 976-1002, March.
    4. Brosig-Koch, Jeannette & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Kairies-Schwarz, Nadja & Wiesen, Daniel, 2016. "Using artefactual field and lab experiments to investigate how fee-for-service and capitation affect medical service provision," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PB), pages 17-23.
    5. Morone, Piergiuseppe & Caferra, Rocco & D'Adamo, Idiano & Falcone, Pasquale Marcello & Imbert, Enrica & Morone, Andrea, 2021. "Consumer willingness to pay for bio-based products: Do certifications matter?," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    6. Deversi, Marvin & Kocher, Martin G. & Schwieren, Christiane, 2020. "Cooperation in a Company: A Large-Scale Experiment," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 233, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    7. Jon Anderson & Stephen Burks & Jeffrey Carpenter & Lorenz Götte & Karsten Maurer & Daniele Nosenzo & Ruth Potter & Kim Rocha & Aldo Rustichini, 2013. "Self-selection and variations in the laboratory measurement of other-regarding preferences across subject pools: evidence from one college student and two adult samples," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 16(2), pages 170-189, June.
    8. Bouma, Jetske A. & Joy, K.J. & Paranjape, Suhas & Ansink, Erik, 2014. "The Influence of Legitimacy Perceptions on Cooperation – A Framed Field Experiment," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 127-137.
    9. Sandra Polania-Reyes, 2016. "Disentangling Social Capital: Lab-in-the-Field Evidence on Coordination, Networks, and Cooperation," Artefactual Field Experiments 00565, The Field Experiments Website.
    10. Schuch, Esther & Nhim, Tum & Richter, Andries, 2025. "Coordinating on good and bad outcomes in threshold games – Evidence from an artefactual field experiment in Cambodia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 232(C).
    11. Yiwen, Zhang & Kant, Shashi, 2022. "Secure tenure or equal access? Farmers’ preferences for reallocating the property rights of collective farmland and forestland in Southeast China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    12. Voors, Maarten & Turley, Ty & Kontoleon, Andreas & Bulte, Erwin & List, John A., 2012. "Exploring whether behavior in context-free experiments is predictive of behavior in the field: Evidence from lab and field experiments in rural Sierra Leone," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 114(3), pages 308-311.
    13. Tessa Haesevoets & Alain Van Hiel & Kim Dierckx & Chris Reinders Folmer, 2020. "Do multiple-trial games better reflect prosocial behavior than single-trial games?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(3), pages 330-345, May.
    14. Karapetyan, Deanna & d'Adda, Giovanna, 2014. "Determinants of conservation among the rural poor: A charitable contribution experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 74-87.
    15. Ansink, Erik & Bouma, Jetske, 2013. "Framed field experiments with heterogeneous frame connotation," MPRA Paper 43975, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Atsbeha, Daniel Muluwork & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Rickertsen, Kyrre, 2015. "Can prolonged breastfeeding duration impair child growth? Evidence from rural Ethiopia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 46-53.
    17. Cecilia Castaldo & Matilde Giaccherini & Giacomo Pallante & Alessandro Palma, 2024. "Unveiling Shades of Green Food beyond Labels. Evidence from an Online Experiment to Climate Adaptation," CESifo Working Paper Series 11161, CESifo.
    18. Caria, Antonia Stefano & Hassen, Ibrahim Worku, 2013. "The formation of job referral networks: Experimental evidence from urban Ethiopia," IFPRI discussion papers 1282, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    19. Stefan Gehrig & Achim Schlüter & Peter Hammerstein, 2019. "Sociocultural heterogeneity in a common pool resource dilemma," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(1), pages 1-16, January.

    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. Matteo M. Galizzi & Daniel Navarro-Martinez, 2019. "On the External Validity of Social Preference Games: A Systematic Lab-Field Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 976-1002, March.
    2. Carina Cavalcanti & Andreas Leibbrandt, 2017. "A glance into the willingness to reduce overfishing: Field evidence from a fishnet exchange program," Monash Economics Working Papers 09-17, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    3. Bouma, Jetske & Reyes-García, Victoria & Huanca, Tomas & Arrazola, Susana, 2017. "Understanding conditions for co-management: A framed field experiment amongst the Tsimane’, Bolivia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 32-42.
    4. Bluffstone, Randy & Dannenberg, Astrid & Martinsson, Peter & Jha, Prakash & Bista, Rajesh, 2020. "Cooperative behavior and common pool resources: Experimental evidence from community forest user groups in Nepal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    5. Rawadee Jarungrattanapong & Suparee Boonmanunt, 2020. "Collective action and other-regarding behavior: an assessment of games vs reality in Thailand," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 22(4), pages 485-507, October.
    6. Andrej Gill & Florian Hett & Johannes Tischer, 2022. "Time Inconsistency and Overdraft Use: Evidence from Transaction Data and Behavioral Measurement Experiments," Working Papers 2205, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    7. Jon Anderson & Stephen Burks & Jeffrey Carpenter & Lorenz Götte & Karsten Maurer & Daniele Nosenzo & Ruth Potter & Kim Rocha & Aldo Rustichini, 2013. "Self-selection and variations in the laboratory measurement of other-regarding preferences across subject pools: evidence from one college student and two adult samples," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 16(2), pages 170-189, June.
    8. Johannes Abeler & Daniele Nosenzo, 2015. "Self-selection into laboratory experiments: pro-social motives versus monetary incentives," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(2), pages 195-214, June.
    9. Pol Campos-Mercade & Claes Ek & Magnus Soderberg & Florian H. Schneider, 2025. "Social Preferences and Environmental Externalities," CESifo Working Paper Series 11895, CESifo.
    10. Freya Harrison & Claire El Mouden, 2011. "Exploring the Effects of Working for Endowments on Behaviour in Standard Economic Games," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(11), pages 1-6, November.
    11. Gatiso, Tsegaye T. & Vollan, Björn & Nuppenau, Ernst-August, 2015. "Resource scarcity and democratic elections in commons dilemmas: An experiment on forest use in Ethiopia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 199-207.
    12. Handberg, Øyvind Nystad & Angelsen, Arild, 2015. "Experimental tests of tropical forest conservation measures," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 346-359.
    13. Nguyen, Quang, 2009. "Do fishermen have different preferences?: Insights from an experimental study and household data," MPRA Paper 16012, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Jack, B. Kelsey, 2009. "Upstream-downstream transactions and watershed externalities: Experimental evidence from Kenya," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1813-1824, April.
    15. Stephen V. Burks & Daniele Nosenzo & Jon Anderson & Matthew Bombyk & Derek Ganzhorn & Lorenz Goette & Aldo Rustichini, 2015. "Lab Measures of Other-Regarding Preferences Can Predict Some Related on-the-Job Behavior: Evidence from a Large Scale Field Experiment," Discussion Papers 2015-21, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    16. Gill, Andrej & Hett, Florian & Tischer, Johannes, 2022. "Time inconsistency and overdraft use: Evidence from transaction data and behavioral measurement experiments," SAFE Working Paper Series 347, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    17. Toke R. Fosgaard, 2018. "Cooperation stability: A representative sample in the lab," IFRO Working Paper 2018/08, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    18. Juan Camilo Cárdenas, 2009. "Experiments in Environment and Development," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 157-182, September.
    19. Gill, Andrej & Hett, Florian & Tischer, Johannes, 2022. "Time inconsistency and overdraft use: Evidence from transaction data and behavioral measurement experiments," Discussion Papers 18/2022, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    20. Bouma, Jetske & Ansink, Erik, 2013. "The role of legitimacy perceptions in self-restricted resource use: A framed field experiment," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 84-93.

    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:aea:aecrev:v:101:y:2011:i:3:p:329-33. 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: Michael P. Albert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeaaaea.html .

    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.