IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i2p395-d197555.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Time Preferences between Individuals and Groups in the Transition from Hunter-Gatherer to Industrial Societies

Author

Listed:
  • Yayan Hernuryadin

    (School of Economics and Management, Kochi University of Technology, Kami 782-0003, Japan
    Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, Medan Merdeka Timur No. 16, Jakarta 10110, Indonesia)

  • Koji Kotani

    (School of Economics and Management, Kochi University of Technology, Kami 782-0003, Japan
    Research Institute for Future Design, Kochi University of Technology, Kami 782-0003, Japan
    Urban Institute, Kyusyu University, Fukuoka 819-0395, Japan
    College of Business, Rikkyo University, Tokyo 171-8501, Japan)

  • Yoshio Kamijo

    (School of Economics and Management, Kochi University of Technology, Kami 782-0003, Japan
    Research Institute for Future Design, Kochi University of Technology, Kami 782-0003, Japan)

Abstract

Three societies, namely the hunter-gatherer, the agrarian and the industrial, represent the course of human history of cultural and economic development. In this course, each society exhibits distinct cultures and daily life practices that shape human behaviors and preferences, characterizing temporal actions and consequences at the individual and group levels. We examine individual and group time preferences and their relation across the three societies. To this end, we conduct a field experiment to elicit individual and group discount factors in three societies of Indonesia—(i) the fisheries, (ii) the farming and (iii) the urban societies—as proxies of the hunter-gatherer, agrarian and industrial societies, respectively. We find that both individual and group discount factors are the lowest (highest) in the fisheries (agrarian) society, while those in the urban society are in the middle. We also observe that the determinants of group discount factors differ across societies: members of the lowest and middle discount factors in a group play an important role in determining the group discount factor in the fisheries society, while only the members with the middle discount factor are key in agrarian and urban societies. Overall, our results suggest that individual and group discount factors non-monotonically change as societies transition from fisheries to agrarian and from agrarian to urban and that comparatively shortsighted people (the lowest and middle) are more influential than farsighted people in determining group time preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Yayan Hernuryadin & Koji Kotani & Yoshio Kamijo, 2019. "Time Preferences between Individuals and Groups in the Transition from Hunter-Gatherer to Industrial Societies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-21, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:2:p:395-:d:197555
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/2/395/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/2/395/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shibly Shahrier & Koji Kotani & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2016. "Intergenerational sustainability and the degree of capitalism in the society: A field experiment," Working Papers SDES-2016-10, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Jul 2016.
    2. Sophie Clot & Charlotte Y. Stanton & Marc Willinger, 2017. "Are impatient farmers more risk-averse? Evidence from a lab-in-the-field experiment in rural Uganda," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(2), pages 156-169, January.
    3. He, Haoran & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2017. "Are group members less inequality averse than individual decision makers?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 111-124.
    4. Juan Camilo Cardenas & Jeffrey Carpenter, 2008. "Behavioural Development Economics: Lessons from Field Labs in the Developing World," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(3), pages 311-338.
    5. Steffen Andersen & Glenn Harrison & Morten Lau & E. Rutström, 2009. "Elicitation using multiple price list formats," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 12(3), pages 365-366, September.
    6. Thorkil Casse & Uffe Nielsen & Socrate Ranaivoson & Jean Romuald Randrianamarivo, 2005. "Farmer strategies and forest conservation: a case study from south-western Madagascar," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 32(8), pages 704-716, August.
    7. Shibly Shahrier & Koji Kotani & Makoto Kakinaka, 2016. "Social Value Orientation and Capitalism in Societies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-19, October.
    8. Jeffrey Carpenter & Erika Seki, 2011. "Do Social Preferences Increase Productivity? Field Experimental Evidence From Fishermen In Toyama Bay," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 49(2), pages 612-630, April.
    9. Sutter, Matthias, 2007. "Are teams prone to myopic loss aversion? An experimental study on individual versus team investment behavior," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 97(2), pages 128-132, November.
    10. Glenn W. Harrison & Morten I. Lau & Melonie B. Williams, 2002. "Estimating Individual Discount Rates in Denmark: A Field Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1606-1617, December.
    11. Quang Nguyen & Colin Camerer & Tomomi Tanaka, 2010. "Risk and Time Preferences Linking Experimental and Household Data from Vietnam," Post-Print halshs-00547090, HAL.
    12. Jerzy Osiński & Adam Karbowski, 2017. "Delaying rewards has greater effect on altruism when the beneficiary is socially distant," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(2), pages 1-8, February.
    13. Philip Grossman & Catherine Eckel, 2015. "Loving the long shot: Risk taking with skewed lotteries," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 195-217, December.
    14. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & Benjamin Enke & David B. Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2017. "Global Evidence on Economic Preferences," NBER Working Papers 23943, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & Benjamin Enke & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2018. "Global Evidence on Economic Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(4), pages 1645-1692.
    16. Maribeth Coller & Melonie Williams, 1999. "Eliciting Individual Discount Rates," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 2(2), pages 107-127, December.
    17. Laurent Denant-Boemont & Enrico Diecidue & Olivier l’Haridon, 2017. "Patience and time consistency in collective decisions," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(1), pages 181-208, March.
    18. Johnson, Ayana Elizabeth & Saunders, Daniel Kaiser, 2014. "Time preferences and the management of coral reef fisheries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 130-139.
    19. Eric Duquette & Nathaniel Higgins & John Horowitz, 2012. "Farmer Discount Rates: Experimental Evidence," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(2), pages 451-456.
    20. Yang, Xiaojun & Carlsson, Fredrik, 2016. "Influence and choice shifts in households: An experimental investigation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 54-66.
    21. Giorgio Coricelli & Enrico Diecidue & Francesco D. Zaffuto, 2018. "Evidence for multiple strategies in choice under risk," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 193-210, April.
    22. Silvia Ferrari & Francisco Cribari-Neto, 2004. "Beta Regression for Modelling Rates and Proportions," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(7), pages 799-815.
    23. Steffen Anderson & Glenn Harrison & Morten Lau & Rutstrom Elisabet, 2007. "Valuation using multiple price list formats," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(6), pages 675-682.
    24. Quang Nguyen, 2011. "Does nurture matter: Theory and experimental investigation on the effect of working environment on risk and time preferences," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 245-270, December.
    25. Mas-Colell, Andreu & Whinston, Michael D. & Green, Jerry R., 1995. "Microeconomic Theory," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195102680.
    26. Tomomi Tanaka & Colin F. Camerer & Quang Nguyen, 2010. "Risk and Time Preferences: Linking Experimental and Household Survey Data from Vietnam," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 557-571, March.
    27. Ling Huang & Martin D. Smith, 2014. "The Dynamic Efficiency Costs of Common-Pool Resource Exploitation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(12), pages 4071-4103, December.
    28. Ekeland, Ivar & Karp, Larry & Sumaila, Rashid, 2015. "Equilibrium resource management with altruistic overlapping generations," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 1-16.
    29. Ambrus, Attila & Greiner, Ben & Pathak, Parag A., 2015. "How individual preferences are aggregated in groups: An experimental study," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 1-13.
    30. 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.
    31. Jacob M. Montgomery & Brendan Nyhan & Michelle Torres, 2018. "How Conditioning on Posttreatment Variables Can Ruin Your Experiment and What to Do about It," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 62(3), pages 760-775, July.
    32. Gillet, Joris & Schram, Arthur & Sonnemans, Joep, 2009. "The tragedy of the commons revisited: The importance of group decision-making," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(5-6), pages 785-797, June.
    33. Thomas Åstebro & José Mata & Luís Santos-Pinto, 2015. "Skewness seeking: risk loving, optimism or overweighting of small probabilities?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 78(2), pages 189-208, February.
    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. Alvin Slewion Jueseah & Dadi Mar Kristofersson & Tumi Tómasson & Ogmundur Knutsson, 2020. "A Bio-Economic Analysis of the Liberian Coastal Fisheries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-21, November.
    2. Strulik, Holger & Werner, Katharina, 2023. "Renewable resource use with imperfect self-control," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 778-795.
    3. Shimada, Hideki & Honda, Tomonori, 2022. "What drives households’ choices of residential solar photovoltaic capacity?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    4. Timilsina, Raja R & Kotani, Koji & Nakagawa, Yoshinori & Saijo, Tatsuyoshi, 2021. "Concerns for future generations in societies: A deliberative analysis of the intergenerational sustainability dilemma," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    5. Naoko Nishimura & Nobuhiro Inoue & Hiroaki Masuhara & Tadahiko Musha, 2020. "Impact of Future Design on Workshop Participants’ Time Preferences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-25, September.

    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. Yayan Hernuryadin & Koji Kotani & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2020. "Time Preferences of Food Producers: Does “Cultivate and Grow” Matter?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 96(1), pages 132-148.
    2. 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).
    3. 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.
    4. Jonathan Chapman & Erik Snowberg & Stephanie Wang & Colin Camerer, 2018. "Loss Attitudes in the U.S. Population: Evidence from Dynamically Optimized Sequential Experimentation (DOSE)," NBER Working Papers 25072, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Kureishi, Wataru & Paule-Paludkiewicz, Hannah & Tsujiyama, Hitoshi & Wakabayashi, Midori, 2021. "Time preferences over the life cycle and household saving puzzles," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 123-139.
    6. Thomas Meissner & Xavier Gassmann & Corinne Faure & Joachim Schleich, 2023. "Individual characteristics associated with risk and time preferences: A multi country representative survey," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 66(1), pages 77-107, February.
    7. Timilsina, Raja R. & Kotani, Koji & Nakagawa, Yoshinori & Saijo, Tatsuyoshi, 2022. "Intragenerational deliberation and intergenerational sustainability dilemma," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    8. Kureishi, Wataru & Paule-Paludkiewicz, Hannah & Tsujiyama, Hitoshi & Wakabayashi, Midori, 2020. "Time preferences over the life cycle," SAFE Working Paper Series 267, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2020.
    9. Eckel, Catherine & Johnson, Cathleen & Montmarquette, Claude, 2013. "Human capital investment by the poor: Informing policy with laboratory experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 224-239.
    10. Yayan Hernuryadin & Koji Kotani & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2018. "Individual time preferences of married couples in a fisheries society," Working Papers SDES-2018-5, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Aug 2018.
    11. Pablo Brañas-Garza & Diego Jorrat & Antonio M. Espín & Angel Sánchez, 2023. "Paid and hypothetical time preferences are the same: lab, field and online evidence," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(2), pages 412-434, April.
    12. Wu, Haixia & Ge, Yan & Li, Jianping, 2023. "Uncertainty, time preference and households’ adoption of rooftop photovoltaic technology," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    13. Zexuan Wang & Ismaël Rafaï & Marc Willinger, 2023. "Does age affect the relation between risk and time preferences? Evidence from a representative sample," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 90(2), pages 341-368, October.
    14. Lloyd-Smith, Patrick & Adamowicz, Wiktor & Entem, Alicia & Fenichel, Eli P. & Rouhi Rad, Mani, 2021. "The decade after tomorrow: Estimation of discount rates from realistic temporal decisions over long time horizons," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 158-174.
    15. Dániel Horn & Hubert János Kiss, 2020. "Time preferences and their life outcome correlates: Evidence from a representative survey," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-26, July.
    16. Dawoon Jung & Tushar Bharati & Seungwoo Chin, 2021. "Does Education Affect Time Preference? Evidence from Indonesia," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 69(4), pages 1451-1499.
    17. Aida Isabel Tavares, 2022. "Time and risk preferences among the European seniors, relationship and associated factors," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 92(8), pages 1283-1302, October.
    18. 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).
    19. Liebenehm, S. & Waibel, H., 2014. "Risk and Time Preferences of West African Cattle Farmers," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 49, March.
    20. Tomáš Želinský, 2021. "Intertemporal Choices of Children and Adults from Poor Roma Communities: A Case Study from Slovakia," Eastern European Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(4), pages 378-405, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    discount factors; individuals and groups; fisheries society; farming society; urban society;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics
    • Q0 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General
    • Q2 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation
    • Q3 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products

    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:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:2:p:395-:d:197555. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.