IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/enreec/v29y2004i2p231-252.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Collective versus Random Fining: An Experimental Study on Controlling Ambient Pollution

Author

Listed:
  • Francisco Alpízar
  • Till Requate

    ()

  • Albert Schram

Abstract

This paper presents an experimental study oftwo different pollution compliance games:collective vis-à-vis random fining as ameans to regulate non-pointpollution. Using samples from both Costa Ricancoffee mill managers and Costa Rican students,we find that the two games perform equivalentlybut, although they lead to efficient outcomesthrough Nash play in the majority of cases, theobserved frequency of Nash play is lower thantheoretically predicted. Moreover, we rejectthe hypothesis that managers and studentsbehave equally. Off the equilibrium, managerstend to over-abate, whereas students tend tounder-abate. This result suggests theimportance of considering subject pooldifferences in the evaluation of environmentalpolicies by means of experiments, particularlyif those policies involve certain forms ofmanagement decisions. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Suggested Citation

  • Francisco Alpízar & Till Requate & Albert Schram, 2004. "Collective versus Random Fining: An Experimental Study on Controlling Ambient Pollution," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 29(2), pages 231-252, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:29:y:2004:i:2:p:231-252
    DOI: 10.1023/B:EARE.0000044608.66145.0c
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/B:EARE.0000044608.66145.0c
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Spraggon, John, 2002. "Exogenous targeting instruments as a solution to group moral hazards," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(3), pages 427-456, June.
    2. Beattie, Jane & Loomes, Graham, 1997. "The Impact of Incentives upon Risky Choice Experiments," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 155-168, March.
    3. Herriges Joseph A. & Govindasamy Ramu & Shogren Jason F., 1994. "Budget-Balancing Incentive Mechanisms," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 275-285, November.
    4. Smith, Vernon L, 1982. "Microeconomic Systems as an Experimental Science," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(5), pages 923-955, December.
    5. Bengt Holmstrom, 1982. "Moral Hazard in Teams," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 13(2), pages 324-340, Autumn.
    6. Xepapadeas, A. P., 1991. "Environmental policy under imperfect information: Incentives and moral hazard," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 113-126, March.
    7. Friedman,Daniel & Sunder,Shyam, 1994. "Experimental Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521456821, May.
    8. Cunningham, William H & Anderson, W Thomas, Jr & Murphy, John H, 1974. "Are Students Real People?," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 47(3), pages 399-409, July.
    9. Kritikos Alexander S., 1993. "Environmental Policy under Imperfect Information: Comment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 89-92, July.
    10. Starmer, Chris & Sugden, Robert, 1991. "Does the Random-Lottery Incentive System Elicit True Preferences? An Experimental Investigation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(4), pages 971-978, September.
    11. Nalbantian, Haig R & Schotter, Andrew, 1997. "Productivity under Group Incentives: An Experimental Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(3), pages 314-341, June.
    12. Segerson, Kathleen, 1988. "Uncertainty and incentives for nonpoint pollution control," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 87-98, March.
    13. Plott, Charles R, 1982. "Industrial Organization Theory and Experimental Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 20(4), pages 1485-1527, December.
    14. Starmer, Chris, 1999. "Experimental Economics: Hard Science or Wasteful Tinkering?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(453), pages 5-15, February.
    15. Binmore, Ken, 1999. "Why Experiment in Economics?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(453), pages 16-24, 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. Francois Cochard & Anthony Ziegelmeyer & Kene Boun My, 2005. "The Regulation of Nonpoint Emissions in the Laboratory: A Stress Test of the Ambient Tax Mechanism," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2005-37, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
    2. Gaston Giordana & Marc Willinger, 2013. "Regulatory instruments for monitoring ambient pollution," Chapters,in: Handbook on Experimental Economics and the Environment, chapter 7, pages 193-232 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Sandrine Spaeter & François Cochard & Anne Rozan, 2006. "Prevention and Compensation of Muddy Flows: Some Economic Insights," Working Papers of BETA 2006-29, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    4. Mourad Ali & Patrick Rio, 2009. "Deterrence vs. Efficiency To Regulate Nonpoint Source Pollution," Working Papers 09-22, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised Dec 2009.
    5. Waichman, Israel & Requate, Till & Siang, Ch'ng Kean, 2010. "Pre-play communication in Cournot competition: An experiment with students and managers," Economics Working Papers 2010-09, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    6. Pushkarskaya, Helen N., 2006. "Schemes to Regulate Non-Point Water Pollution: Making Sense of Experimental Results," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21111, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    7. Anastasios Xepapadeas, 2011. "The Economics of Non-Point-Source Pollution," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 3(1), pages 355-373, October.
    8. Reichhuber, Anke & Camacho, Eva & Requate, Till, 2009. "A framed field experiment on collective enforcement mechanisms with Ethiopian farmers," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(05), pages 641-663, October.
    9. Spraggon, John M. & Oxoby, Robert J., 2010. "Ambient-Based Policy Instruments: The Role of Recommendations and Presentation," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 39(2), April.
    10. Francois Cochard & Anthony Ziegelmeyer & Kene Boun My, 2004. "Regulation of Nonpoint Emissions under Limited Information: A Stress Experimental Test of the Ambient Tax Mechanism," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2003-33, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
    11. Colson, Gregory & Menapace, Luisa, 2012. "Multiple receptor ambient monitoring and firm compliance with environmental taxes under budget and target driven regulatory missions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 390-401.
    12. repec:eee:jeeman:v:86:y:2017:i:c:p:48-67 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Waichman, Israel & Requate, Till & Siang, Ch'ng Kean, 2008. "Managers and Students Playing Cournot: Experimental Evidence from Malaysia," Economics Working Papers 2008-19, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    14. Vossler, Christian A. & Suter, Jordan F. & Poe, Gregory L., 2013. "Experimental evidence on dynamic pollution tax policies," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 101-115.
    15. Waichman Israel & Requate Till & Siang Ch'ng Kean, 2010. "A Cournot Experiment with Managers and Students: Evidence from Germany and Malaysia," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-17, April.
    16. Kene Boun My & Francois Cochard & Anthony Ziegelmeyer, 2007. "On the Acceptability of the Ambient Tax Mechanism: An Experimental Investigation," Jena Economic Research Papers 2007-081, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    17. François Cochard & Marc Willinger & Anastasios Xepapadeas, 2005. "Efficiency of Nonpoint Source Pollution Instruments: An Experimental Study," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(4), pages 393-422, April.
    18. Cason, Timothy N. & Gangadharan, Lata, 2013. "Empowering neighbors versus imposing regulations: An experimental analysis of pollution reduction schemes," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 469-484.
    19. Suter, Jordan F. & Vossler, Christian A. & Poe, Gregory L. & Schulze, William D. & Segerson, Kathleen, 2006. "An Experimental Exploration of a Voluntary Mechanism to Reduce Nonpoint Source Water Pollution with a Background Threat of Regulation," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21416, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    20. Waichman, Israel & Requate, Till & Siang, Ch’ng Kean, 2014. "Communication in Cournot competition: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1-16.
    21. Suter, Jordan F. & Vossler, Christian A. & Poe, Gregory L., 2009. "Ambient-based pollution mechanisms: A comparison of homogeneous and heterogeneous groups of emitters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1883-1892, April.
    22. James Shortle & Richard D. Horan, 2013. "Policy Instruments for Water Quality Protection," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 5(1), pages 111-138, June.

    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:kap:enreec:v:29:y:2004:i:2:p:231-252. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.