IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v341y2025ics0360544225049679.html

The effects of time preferences on farmers’ energy-saving and emission-reducing behavior of agricultural machinery in a gain-loss dual context: Evidence from rural China

Author

Listed:
  • He, Rui
  • Dai, Yuhang
  • Jin, Jianjun
  • Yan, Jubo
  • Liu, Dan

Abstract

Amid climate change and agricultural modernization, farmers display heterogeneous preferences toward energy-saving and emission-reducing practices in agricultural machinery. However, the role of time preferences within a gain–loss framework remains underexplored. This study employed lottery-based experiments using the Double Multiple Price List and Convex Time Budget methods to measure farmers’ time preferences under dual gain–loss conditions. Boosted regression trees and partial dependency plots were applied to estimate the relative influence and nonlinear marginal effects of time preference parameters on energy-saving behaviors, supplemented by one-at-a-time sensitivity and subgroup analyses to assess model robustness and group heterogeneity. Results show that only 63.50 % of farmers exhibit desirable behaviors. In the gain context, farmers exhibit short-term present bias and a long-term preference for immediate gains, reflecting quasi-hyperbolic discounting; in the loss context, they also show present bias and are inclined to sacrifice present losses to future ones in the long term. Overall, both present bias and subjective discount rates exert significant, directionally consistent nonlinear effects. In the loss context, present bias and subjective discount rate positively influence behavior, contributing 9.54 % and 31.48 %, respectively. Conversely, the gain-context subjective discount rate shows a strong negative effect (−37.39 %), while gain-context present bias, though generally positive (21.59 %), follows a non-monotonic trajectory—first rising, then declining—due to distributional skewness and boundary effects. Heterogeneity analysis reveals distinct patterns across education, income, and household composition. These findings deepen understanding of time preference effects on energy-efficient decisions in rural areas and offer policy insights to enhance energy-saving outcomes in agricultural machinery use across similar global contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • He, Rui & Dai, Yuhang & Jin, Jianjun & Yan, Jubo & Liu, Dan, 2025. "The effects of time preferences on farmers’ energy-saving and emission-reducing behavior of agricultural machinery in a gain-loss dual context: Evidence from rural China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 341(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:341:y:2025:i:c:s0360544225049679
    DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2025.139325
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544225049679
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.energy.2025.139325?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fitzpatrick, Trevor & Mues, Christophe, 2016. "An empirical comparison of classification algorithms for mortgage default prediction: evidence from a distressed mortgage market," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(2), pages 427-439.
    2. Berlinger, Edina & Kiss, Hubert János & Khayouti, Sára, 2022. "Loan forbearance takeup in the Covid-era - The role of time preferences and locus of control," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    3. Michael J. Dixon & Liana Victorino & Robert J. Kwortnik & Rohit Verma, 2017. "Surprise, Anticipation, and Sequence Effects in the Design of Experiential Services," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 26(5), pages 945-960, May.
    4. Julia Ihli, Hanna & Chiputwa, Brian & Winter, Etti & Gassner, Anja, 2022. "Risk and time preferences for participating in forest landscape restoration: The case of coffee farmers in Uganda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    5. Herberholz, Chantal, 2020. "Risk attitude, time preference and health behaviours in the Bangkok Metropolitan Area," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    6. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. Liu, Elaine M. & Meng, Juanjuan & Wang, Joseph Tao-yi, 2014. "Confucianism and preferences: Evidence from lab experiments in Taiwan and China," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 106-122.
    8. Loewenstein, George, 1987. "Anticipation and the Valuation of Delayed Consumption," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 97(387), pages 666-684, September.
    9. Shane Frederick & George Loewenstein & Ted O'Donoghue, 2002. "Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(2), pages 351-401, June.
    10. David Laibson, 2001. "A Cue-Theory of Consumption," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(1), pages 81-119.
    11. Carlsson, Fredrik & He, Haoran & Martinsson, Peter & Qin, Ping & Sutter, Matthias, 2012. "Household decision making in rural China: Using experiments to estimate the influences of spouses," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 525-536.
    12. Wang, Mei & Rieger, Marc Oliver & Hens, Thorsten, 2016. "How time preferences differ: Evidence from 53 countries," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 115-135.
    13. Guan, Lijun & Huang, Zuhui & Jin, Shaosheng, 2022. "Time preference and nutrition label use: Evidence from China," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    14. Nguyen, Quang, 2016. "Linking loss aversion and present bias with overspending behavior of tourists: Insights from a lab-in-the-field experiment," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 152-159.
    15. Zhao, Linhai & Rasoulinezhad, Ehsan, 2023. "Role of natural resources utilization efficiency in achieving green economic recovery: Evidence from BRICS countries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    16. Thaler, Richard, 1981. "Some empirical evidence on dynamic inconsistency," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 201-207.
    17. James Andreoni & Charles Sprenger, 2012. "Estimating Time Preferences from Convex Budgets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(7), pages 3333-3356, December.
    18. Li, Bo & Gao, Yuting, 2024. "Impact and transmission mechanism of digital economy on agricultural energy carbon emission reduction," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    19. Bonan, Jacopo & LeMay-Boucher, Philippe & Scott, Douglas, 2022. "Can hypothetical measures of time preference predict actual and incentivised behaviour? Evidence from Senegal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    20. Oberrauch, Luis & Kaiser, Tim, 2022. "Cognitive ability, financial literacy, and narrow bracketing in time-preference elicitation," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    21. Mao, Hui & Zhou, Li & Ying, RuiYao & Pan, Dan, 2021. "Time Preferences and green agricultural technology adoption: Field evidence from rice farmers in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    22. Luo, Zhen-hao & Xie, Bin & Tong, Yi-kun & Zhao, Zi-hao & Zheng, Bo-wen & Chen, Zhou-yang & Wen, Chang-kai, 2024. "Energy-saving drive control strategy for electric tractors based on terrain parameter identification," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 376(PA).
    23. Abrahamse, Wokje & Steg, Linda, 2009. "How do socio-demographic and psychological factors relate to households' direct and indirect energy use and savings?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 711-720, October.
    24. David Laibson, 1997. "Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 443-478.
    25. Paul A. Samuelson, 1937. "A Note on Measurement of Utility," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 4(2), pages 155-161.
    26. Kuang, Foyuan & Jin, Jianjun & He, Rui & Wan, Xinyu & Ning, Jing, 2019. "Influence of livelihood capital on adaptation strategies: Evidence from rural households in Wushen Banner, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    27. Bernedo Del Carpio, María & Alpizar, Francisco & Ferraro, Paul J., 2022. "Time and risk preferences of individuals, married couples and unrelated pairs," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    28. Werthschulte, Madeline & Löschel, Andreas, 2021. "On the role of present bias and biased price beliefs in household energy consumption," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    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. Jindrich Matousek & Tomas Havranek & Zuzana Irsova, 2022. "Individual discount rates: a meta-analysis of experimental evidence," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 318-358, February.
    2. Aurélien Baillon & Owen O'Donnell & Stella Quimbo & Kim van Wilgenburg, 2022. "Do time preferences explain low health insurance take‐up?," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 89(4), pages 951-983, December.
    3. Faralla, Valeria & Novarese, Marco & Ardizzone, Antonella, 2017. "Framing Effects in Intertemporal Choice: A Nudge Experiment," MPRA Paper 82086, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Cheung, Stephen L. & Tymula, Agnieszka & Wang, Xueting, 2021. "Quasi-Hyperbolic Present Bias: A Meta-Analysis," IZA Discussion Papers 14625, IZA Network @ LISER.
    5. James Andreoni & Christina Gravert & Michael A. Kuhn & Silvia Saccardo & Yang Yang, 2018. "Arbitrage Or Narrow Bracketing? On Using Money to Measure Intertemporal Preferences," NBER Working Papers 25232, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Ali al-Nowaihi & Sanjit Dhami, 2018. "Foundations for Intertemporal Choice," CESifo Working Paper Series 6913, CESifo.
    7. Teck H. Ho & Noah Lim & Colin Camerer, 2005. "Modeling the Psychology of Consumer and Firm Behavior with Behavioral Economics," Levine's Bibliography 784828000000000476, UCLA Department of Economics.
    8. Paola Manzini & Marco Mariotti, 2007. "Choice over Time," Working Papers 605, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    9. Ali al-Nowaihi & Sanjit Dhami, 2021. "Preferences over Time and under Uncertainty: Theoretical Foundations," CESifo Working Paper Series 9215, CESifo.
    10. Jin, Miao & Li, Jian & Meng, Juanjuan & Sun, Jingwei, 2025. "Background ambiguity and intertemporal choice: An experimental study on the effect of summer vacation," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 94(PB).
    11. Schaewitz, Johannes & Wang, Mei & Rieger, Marc Oliver, 2022. "Culture and Institutions: Long-lasting effects of communism on risk and time preferences of individuals in Europe," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 785-829.
    12. Stefan A. Lipman & Arthur E. Attema, 2024. "A systematic review of unique methods for measuring discount rates," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 69(2), pages 145-189, October.
    13. OUATTARA, Aboudou & DE LA BRUSLERIE, Hubert, 2015. "The term structure of psychological discount rate: characteristics and functional forms," MPRA Paper 75111, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Schilirò, Daniele & Graziano, Mario, 2011. "Scelte e razionalità nei modelli economici: un'analisi multidisciplinare [Choices and rationality in economic models: a multidisciplinary analysis]," MPRA Paper 31910, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Philip Streich & Jack S. Levy, 2007. "Time Horizons, Discounting, and Intertemporal Choice," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 51(2), pages 199-226, April.
    16. Manel Baucells & Silvia Bellezza, 2017. "Temporal Profiles of Instant Utility During Anticipation, Event, and Recall," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(3), pages 729-748, March.
    17. Pavlo R. Blavatskyy, 2023. "Intertemporal choice with savoring of yesterday," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 94(3), pages 539-554, April.
    18. Drouhin, Nicolas, 2020. "Non-stationary additive utility and time consistency," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1-14.
    19. Dorian Jullien, 2018. "Under Risk, Over Time, Regarding Other People: Language and Rationality within Three Dimensions," Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, in: Including a Symposium on Latin American Monetary Thought: Two Centuries in Search of Originality, volume 36, pages 119-155, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    20. Giles W Story & Ivo Vlaev & Peter Dayan & Ben Seymour & Ara Darzi & Raymond J Dolan, 2015. "Anticipation and Choice Heuristics in the Dynamic Consumption of Pain Relief," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-32, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eee:energy:v:341:y:2025:i:c:s0360544225049679. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/energy .

    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.