IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enscpo/v68y2017icp69-79.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding the black box of communication in a common-pool resource field experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Lopez, Maria Claudia
  • Villamayor-Tomas, Sergio

Abstract

It is well proven that communication enhances cooperation in public goods and common-pool resource experiments. It is less well understood why and how communication affects cooperative behavior and whether that impact is mediated by the sharing of a common context and the individuals’ every day experiences. This paper aims to close this gap by means of a systematic content analysis of communication transcripts from field experiments. The paper analyzes communication statements shared by participants in a series of common-pool resource experiments conducted in rural Colombia. We first classified each statement under two categories: topic and function. Then, we tested hypotheses about the impact of those statements on cooperation depending on (1) their reference to the “field context” and other topic categories; and (2) the “informational”, “disapproval”, or “group solidarity” function of the statements. According to our results, statements that contain references to the context affect cooperation depending on the function of those statements. When the statements fulfill an information role, the effect is negative, but when statements have the function of enhancing group solidarity, the effect is positive. The statements that have the strongest positive impact on cooperation are those fulfilling a disapproval function, particularly when the topic of the messages are the payoffs obtained by the group.

Suggested Citation

  • Lopez, Maria Claudia & Villamayor-Tomas, Sergio, 2017. "Understanding the black box of communication in a common-pool resource field experiment," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 69-79.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:68:y:2017:i:c:p:69-79
    DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2016.12.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901116308826
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.12.002?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 search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wolf, Stephan & Dron, Cameron, 2020. "The effect of an experimental veil of ignorance on intergenerational resource sharing: empirical evidence from a sequential multi-person dictator game," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    2. Ortiz-Riomalo, Juan Felipe & Koessler, Ann-Kathrin & Engel, Stefanie, 2022. "Fostering co-operation through participation in natural resource management. An integrative review," EconStor Preprints 253261, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    3. Rodriguez, Luz A. & Velez, María Alejandra & Pfaff, Alexander, 2021. "Leaders’ distributional & efficiency effects in collective responses to policy: Lab-in-field experiments with small-scale gold miners in Colombia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    4. Raja Rajendra Timilsina & Koji Kotani & Yoshinori Nakagawa & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2023. "Does Being Intergenerationally Accountable Resolve the Intergenerational Sustainability Dilemma?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 99(4), pages 644-667.
    5. Koessler, Ann-Kathrin & Ortiz-Riomalo, Juan Felipe & Janke, Mathias & Engel, Stefanie, 2020. "Structuring communication effectively for environmental cooperation," EconStor Preprints 213607, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    6. Farjam, Mike & Wolf, Stephan, 2021. "If future generations had a say: An experiment on fair sharing of a common-pool resource across generations," SocArXiv 759ks, Center for Open Science.
    7. Ngoma, Hambulo & Hailu, Amare Teklay & Kabwe, Stephen & Angelsen, Arild, 2020. "Pay, talk or ‘whip’ to conserve forests: Framed field experiments in Zambia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    8. Ann-Kathrin Koessler & Juan Felipe Ortiz-Riomalo & Mathias Janke & Stefanie Engel, 2021. "Structuring Communication Effectively—The Causal Effects of Communication Elements on Cooperation in Social Dilemmas," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 79(4), pages 683-712, August.

    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:enscpo:v:68:y:2017:i:c:p:69-79. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/environmental-science-and-policy/ .

    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.